Daily Crypto Briefs 
CASABLANCA, August 9, 2026
Bitcoin’s observed main chain passed 100 blocks without BIP-110’s bit-4 signal, reaching block 961,732 at 13:29 UTC Sunday, a direct on-chain gap between the proposal’s stated mandatory window and the headers miners actually produced as BTC traded near $65,023.
The latest mempool.space block record shows the chain had advanced from height 961,632 through 961,732. A review of the public version fields across those 101 blocks found bit 4 unset every time, while the BIP-110 specification assigns that bit to its proposed reduced_data deployment.
The number is a fresh escalation from Daily Crypto Briefs’ 83-block update, published earlier Sunday. Exactly 18 additional main-chain blocks have joined the observed non-signaling run since that report, taking the count past 100; what has not changed is that the data does not establish BIP-110 activation or a competing Bitcoin main chain.
Bitcoin was near $65,023 in the market snapshot used for this report, with a market capitalization near $1.30 trillion, 24-hour trading volume near $12.14 billion and a seven-day gain of about 3%, according to CoinMarketCap’s Bitcoin market page. The Crypto Fear and Greed Index read 31, classified as Fear.
The BIP says the reduced_data bit is included in vbrequired during its mandatory-signaling range. In plain terms, the written proposal calls for miners to mark blocks with bit 4, but that condition was absent from each of the 101 public headers reviewed for this report.
Bitcoin’s BIP-110 Gap Passes 100 Blocks
BIP-110 describes a temporary soft fork that would limit several ways of placing data in new Bitcoin UTXOs, including specified output scripts, data pushes and Taproot constructions. Its stated mandatory-signaling period runs from block 961,632 through 963,647.
The proposal’s scheduled conditions and the live chain are different things. A BIP document, including one listed as Complete in the repository, does not by itself alter the consensus rules that Bitcoin nodes enforce.
The 101-block sample is broader than the opening anomaly covered in the first mandatory-window report. It spans roughly 18 hours of main-chain production and blocks with changing version values, yet none had bit 4 set.
That result remains a narrow but reproducible observation. Anyone can compare the starting height and the current block record, then test the deployment bit in the block-version field; it should not be presented as a measure of every miner’s intentions or every node’s software.
No Bit 4 Still Does Not Prove a Bitcoin Fork
Block headers show what miners placed in a mined block. They do not by themselves determine whether a proposed rule has broad economic support, which client software node operators run, or whether a separate group is enforcing an alternative rule set.
No public evidence reviewed for this update showed failed ordinary Bitcoin transfers, a competing main-chain tip or an activation announcement from Bitcoin Core. Holders therefore have no chain-level instruction to move ordinary BTC balances because of this 101-block observation.
BIP-110 says UTXOs created before activation would be grandfathered. Its more specific discussion of possible risk concerns certain pre-signed Taproot arrangements, rather than a general impairment of existing Bitcoin holdings.
The chain reading should also be kept separate from a pool’s stated position. Daily Crypto Briefs previously covered Foundry’s hashrate-weighted client vote; a vote or stated process and a block’s observed version field are related evidence, but neither alone resolves the wider consensus question.
Block 963,648 Is Bitcoin’s Next BIP-110 Checkpoint
BIP-110 sets a 55% threshold, or 1,109 blocks in a 2,016-block period, and names block 963,648 as its no-later-than lock-in height. It then identifies block 965,664 as the proposed start of its ACTIVE state.
Those heights are parameters in a proposal, not confirmation that Bitcoin will follow the timetable. From the current observed tip, the claimed lock-in checkpoint remains 1,916 blocks away, making later block data, client releases and operator notices more useful than a calendar assumption.
The proposal’s broader debate is about how Bitcoin handles data storage and the tradeoffs that follow from tighter script and witness restrictions. It is not a response to the separate work on cryptographic migration that led to the Bitcoin quantum-readiness consortium.
The next verifiable check is whether later blocks begin carrying bit 4, whether a client publicly enforces corresponding rules, and whether any lock-in claim can be reconciled with the public main chain. Until then, the 101-block run is evidence of what the chain has not signaled, not proof of an activated Bitcoin soft fork.
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 |
| | mempool.space: Bitcoin block 961,732 |
| | CoinMarketCap: Bitcoin market data |
| | Alternative.me: Crypto Fear and Greed Index |
Fact-checked by: Daily Crypto Briefs Fact-Check Desk
Related Articles
Frequently Asked Questions
What does passing 100 BIP-110 non-signaling blocks show?
The main chain had 101 observed blocks from heights 961,632 through 961,732 with BIP-110's bit 4 unset. It is direct evidence about those block headers, not proof that the proposal is active or permanently rejected.
Did Bitcoin activate BIP-110?
No. The observed blocks did not carry the deployment bit that BIP-110 describes for its mandatory window. The report found no public chain evidence of a Bitcoin main-chain split or an activation announcement from Bitcoin Core.
Do Bitcoin holders need to move funds because of BIP-110?
No public chain evidence reviewed for this report showed failed ordinary Bitcoin transfers or a general instruction to move standard BTC balances. BIP-110 describes more limited edge cases involving certain pre-signed Taproot constructions if it were activated.
What BIP-110 height comes next?
BIP-110 names block 963,648 as its no-later-than lock-in height and block 965,664 as its proposed activation height. Those are parameters in the proposal, not confirmation that the network will follow the schedule.