Daily Crypto Briefs 
CASABLANCA, Aug. 13, 2026
Bitcoin’s BIP-110 monitor showed a 712-block rejected standard branch with zero observed bit-4 signals late Thursday, passing the 700-block mark after the branch stood at 665 earlier in the day. The monitor listed its regular Bitcoin node at block 962,343 and its BIP-110-enforcing node at 961,635, widening the observed gap to 708 heights.
The result is a material, distinct escalation from Daily Crypto Briefs’ 665-block BIP-110 update. The standard-chain side added 47 blocks, or about 7%, while the enforcing node did not advance, taking the rejected branch across a new round-number threshold without evidence of a Bitcoin-wide service disruption.
At 23:16 Casablanca time, the BIP110 Situation Monitor labeled the standard path a valid rejected fork under the enforcing node’s rules. mempool.space’s public record for block 962,343 matched the standard node’s reported tip hash in the snapshot, independently confirming the regular-chain side of the reading.
Kraken’s Bitcoin market data showed BTC near $63,532 when checked, about 0.2% above its 24-hour open of roughly $63,413. The exchange’s BTC/USD feed showed a 24-hour range of about $62,800 to $63,930 and roughly 997 BTC in volume; Alternative.me’s Crypto Fear and Greed Index was 29, or Fear.
Bitcoin
BTCThe monitor’s signaling scan displayed 712 consecutive standard-chain headers without version bit 4, the deployment bit named in the BIP-110 specification. The proposal describes itself as a “Reduced Data Temporary Softfork” and sets rules for certain new data-carrying output constructions.
That on-chain record is narrower than an industry verdict. It shows what two monitored nodes and the inspected block headers reported at a specific time. It does not establish the preferences of every mining pool, node operator, exchange or business, nor does it show that the shorter history has gained broad economic support.
Bitcoin BIP-110 Monitor Clears the 700-Block Threshold
The headline figure is the length of the standard Bitcoin history that the BIP-110-enforcing node classifies as rejected. It is not exactly the same as the 708-height difference between node tips, because the two histories share some blocks after BIP-110’s mandatory-signaling height before they diverge.
That distinction is important. A rule-enforcing node can reject a growing standard-chain history while regular Bitcoin nodes continue to recognize and extend it. The monitor’s status was “diverged,” not a declaration that either history has become the universally accepted Bitcoin chain.
The 712-block reading changed the story in a concrete way from the 665-block report: the standard chain added 47 blocks after the earlier snapshot, while the enforcing node stayed at 961,635. That differs from a routine price or volume refresh because it crosses the next visible 700-block threshold in an already documented node-rule divergence.
The raw number should still be read with care. The monitor does not publish the data needed to turn the two nodes’ recent block counts into a network-wide hashrate measurement, and its pool labels are block attributions rather than statements of pool policy. A long rejected branch is therefore evidence of the monitored split, not proof that all mining infrastructure has selected one side.
Zero Bit-4 Signals Remain the Central BIP-110 Fact
The zero-signal result is the clearest short-term datapoint. In the monitor’s scan, no standard-chain header carried bit 4 across the 712 inspected blocks. A missing bit means the mined header did not carry that deployment signal; it does not reveal the preferences of every participant behind the block.
The monitor attributed the blocks to 16 listed groups, including Foundry USA, AntPool, F2Pool, OCEAN, ViaBTC, SpiderPool, Luxor, MARA Pool, Binance Pool and Braiins Pool. Its displayed count for every listed group remained zero signals in this snapshot, but the display does not substitute for a formal governance vote or a public operational announcement from those pools.
Bitcoin consensus changes are not decided through one public ballot. Software adoption, validation rules, block production and the choices of exchanges, custodians and users can all affect the practical outcome. The signal scan makes one limited claim verifiable: this monitored standard history has not carried the BIP-110 bit in the window reviewed.
The proposal’s schedule supplies the longer context. It names a no-later-than lock-in height of 963,648 and a proposed activation height of 965,664. As explained in Daily Crypto Briefs’ earlier BIP-110 activation countdown, those are terms in the proposal, not confirmation that the standard chain has locked in or that its rules are active today.
Major Bitcoin Services Show No Broad Migration Signal
No public evidence reviewed for this update showed a general instruction from major exchanges, custodians, wallet providers or payment processors to move normal BTC balances. The reported standard-chain tip remained publicly visible on a separate block explorer, and the monitor did not report a general Bitcoin payment outage.
The latest reading is therefore best understood as an observed technical divergence, not a declaration that ordinary holders face a changed balance or a mandatory action. A service choosing to support a minority history would need to consider deposits, withdrawals, custody controls and chain selection, but no major service-level move was disclosed in the sources reviewed.
It is also separate from Bitcoin’s longer-running discussion about safeguarding old coins against a potential future quantum threat. Daily Crypto Briefs’ coverage of the quantum-wallet rescue debate addresses a different proposal and does not create a current instruction to migrate BTC because of BIP-110.
Fear & Greed Index
Aug. 13, 2026The next checks are specific: a new block on the enforcing history, a bit-4 signal in a standard-chain header, or public support guidance from a major pool or service. Until one of those changes is observed, the verified update is limited to the monitor’s 712-block rejected branch, the 708-height gap and zero recorded signals.
Stay up to date
Get the latest crypto insights delivered to your inbox
Primary sources and further reading
| Source | Title |
|---|---|
| | Bitcoin BIPs: BIP-110 Reduced Data Temporary Softfork |
| | BIP110 Situation Monitor: Live |
| | mempool.space: Bitcoin block 962,343 |
| | Kraken: Bitcoin price and market data |
| | Alternative.me: Crypto Fear and Greed Index |
Fact-checked by: Daily Crypto Briefs Fact-Check Desk
Related Articles
Frequently Asked Questions
What changed in the latest BIP-110 fork update?
The BIP110 Situation Monitor's rejected standard branch rose from 665 blocks to 712, passing the 700-block threshold. The monitor also still showed zero bit-4 signals across the complete scanned window and the same BIP-110-enforcing node height of 961,635.
Does a 712-block BIP-110 branch mean Bitcoin has split for all users?
No. The reading shows two monitored nodes following different histories under different validation rules. It does not by itself show broad exchange, wallet, custodian, payment-provider or miner support for the shorter BIP-110 history.
Did any Bitcoin blocks signal BIP-110?
No. The monitor's scanned 712-block signaling string contained zero bit-4 signals at the time checked. That is an observation about the block headers in its window, not a formal vote or a statement from every miner or node operator.
Do Bitcoin holders need to move BTC because of BIP-110?
No public evidence reviewed for this report showed a general instruction to move normal BTC balances, a broad payment outage or broad service suspensions on the standard Bitcoin chain.