Blockstream CEO Adam Back has rejected viral claims that the Bitcoin network will 'fire the miners' in August 2026, calling developer Luke Dashjr's fork plan a separate altcoin. According to latest reports, Back made clear that Bitcoin itself stays untouched, and that the project amounts to a spin-off coin rather than a shutdown of Bitcoin mining. The confusion stems from the heated debate about BIP-110, which has a deadline arriving in early August 2026 but faces minimal support from miners and node operators. Bitcoin runs on special mining computers built for one specific puzzle-solving method, and if someone changed that method, every existing machine would become worthless overnight, creating the basis for the 'fire the miners' speculation.
Blockstream CEO Adam Back dismissed BIP-110 on June 8, calling it technically flawed. He warned that forcing its activation could split Bitcoin into a minority fork. According to reports from CoinDesk, Back argued that the proposal fails on both technical and ecosystem grounds. He contrasted BIP-110 sharply with SegWit, which secured broad developer and ecosystem support, noting that SegWit was activated in 2017 after years of coordination among miners, developers, and node operators. Back also dismissed the spam-reduction argument central to BIP-110's case, stating it simply would not work. To illustrate his stance, he shared an image of a cat sitting inside a blue-tape square labeled 'DEFAULT OP_RETURN LIMIT,' describing it as BIP-110 'in a nutshell.'
Back left little ambiguity about the outcome he expects. He said forcing a user-activated soft fork through without genuine ecosystem backing produces a minority chain, not a real upgrade. As reported by CoinDesk, critics have also accused BIP-110's lead proponent of misrepresenting past events. Back posted the cat image with the label 'DEFAULT OP_RETURN LIMIT' and captioned it 'the 110 contentious fork in a nutshell.' The image captured his view that BIP-110 enforces a boundary that Bitcoin's consensus process does not recognize. Michael Saylor separately flagged BIP-110 as a protocol threat, calling it Bitcoin's biggest self-inflicted risk.
BIP-110 momentum reached a flashpoint in early June, with the proposal would restrict non-monetary data in Bitcoin transactions through a user-activated soft fork (UASF), bypassing miner consensus. According to CoinDesk reports, BIP-110 supporters have drawn parallels to SegWit's activation process, but Back rejected the comparison. The proposal would restrict non-monetary data in Bitcoin transactions, with proponents claiming it would clean up the Bitcoin network. However, Back's rejection of this technical basis has created significant community division. A major selling point for BIP-110 has been the claim that it would reduce transaction spam on the network, yet Back dismissed that argument entirely, stating that the proposal simply would not achieve the intended outcome.
Despite the protocol dispute, Back retained his bullish stance on Bitcoin. On June 9, he identified 'the bitcoin permabulls' as those still fully committed to BTC when asked about market sentiment. As reported by CoinDesk, his bitcoin investment strategy centers on long-term sound money fundamentals, a position the BIP-110 debate highlights rather than undermines. On June 9, he revealed that he purchased additional BTC during the recent dip and believes higher prices are ahead. For now, Bitcoin finds itself balancing two separate conversations: a contentious protocol debate on one side and unwavering long-term conviction from some of its most prominent supporters on the other.
