Michael Saylor says Bitcoin code is a constitution
Michael Saylor broadened his Bitcoin upgrade fight, arguing on X that rule changes threaten holders’ economic rights.
By Theo Nakamura · Staff Writer
· 3 min read
Michael Saylor bitcoin code comments escalated a fight over Bitcoin upgrades into a bigger argument about who gets to change the network. In a nine-post thread on X on Tuesday, the Strategy executive chairman described Bitcoin’s consensus rules as a kind of constitution and framed attempts to rewrite them as threats to holders’ economic rights.
Consensus rules are the shared rules that Bitcoin nodes use to decide which transactions and blocks count as valid. For investors, the debate matters because protocol changes can affect how Bitcoin is used, what data can be included on-chain, and how much control users have over future transactions.
Saylor wrote on X that Bitcoin “has won” but now must “survive victory,” arguing that its most serious danger comes from internal groups that create reasons to alter the rules and take economic rights. The post drew thousands of views, according to Decrypt.
What did Michael Saylor say about Bitcoin code?
Saylor’s argument was that Bitcoin’s existing rules should be treated as a protected framework rather than a flexible product roadmap. He said factions that change those rules are not improving Bitcoin, but committing what he described as an economic offense against users.
The comments expand Saylor’s earlier criticism of BIP-110, a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal called the “Reduced Data Temporary Softfork.” A Bitcoin Improvement Proposal, or BIP, is a formal proposal for changing or documenting how Bitcoin works. BIP-110 would limit non-financial data, including Ordinals inscriptions, on Bitcoin’s blockchain for roughly one year, according to Decrypt.
Saylor had already taken aim at that proposal last week with a 110-point essay titled “110 Reasons BIP 110 Is a Bad Idea,” Decrypt reported. His latest thread went further by grouping BIP-110 with two other kinds of Bitcoin changes: covenants and larger-block proposals.
Covenants are restrictions that let users set conditions on how Bitcoin can be spent later, similar to smart contract controls. Larger-block proposals seek to increase how much data can fit in each Bitcoin block so the network can process more transactions.
Saylor treated those different proposals as part of the same category. According to Decrypt, he described BIP-110, covenants and bigger blocks as different tools that amount to the same “constitutional offense.”
Where does BIP-110 stand now?
BIP-110 has not reached the support level needed for activation. Decrypt reported that the proposal’s mandatory signaling window opens around August 9 at Bitcoin block 961,632.
Miner signaling is how miners publicly indicate whether they support a proposed rule change. According to the BIP-110 monitor cited by Decrypt, miner support stood at 2.64%, far below the 55% threshold required for activation.
That low support suggests Saylor’s position against BIP-110 has gained the upper hand for now, Decrypt reported. The larger debate he raised is likely to remain familiar in Bitcoin: whether changes aimed at adding features or limiting certain uses protect the network, or weaken the predictability that many holders value.
This story draws on original reporting from Decrypt.
