Samson Mow Warns Bitcoin Network BIP110 Could Trigger 1% Attack
Samson Mow warns that supporters of BIP110 are pushing for a new "1% attack" model, which could prove that the threshold for attacking the Bitcoin network is extremely low.
He stated that attackers only need to rent about 1% of the hash power and deploy around 3,000 nodes to create significant chaos for exchanges, miners, and holders.
The buyers are supporters seeking to influence the direction of the Bitcoin protocol through on-chain rules, while the sellers are ecosystem participants relying on network stability and confirmation order; the core of this dispute is not the one-time cost of hash power, but whether it sets a precedent for subsequent lower-cost network disruptions.
BIP110 itself is a soft fork proposal attempting to limit arbitrary data writing, but the controversy surrounding it has escalated from "whether to limit spam" to "whether it will trigger chain splits and governance attacks."
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
The historical context of this debate is typical: every time Bitcoin involves tightening protocol boundaries, it quickly evolves from a technical discussion into a governance power struggle, and BIP110 has brought the question of "who should use on-chain space" to the forefront.
From a capital perspective, Mow's core concern is not the direct cost of the attack itself, but that low-cost disturbances will raise the risk control for exchanges, miner strategies, and node operating costs, ultimately turning "maintaining Bitcoin order" into a continuous infrastructure cost.
This is akin to the typical dilemma faced by any public network when encountering low-cost, high-noise behavior: once rules are used to create disturbances, governance must continuously escalate, or marginal attackers will increase.
Essentially, this is a form of regulatory change, but in the context of Bitcoin, it is closer to industry chain restructuring: minor adjustments to protocol rules will redistribute costs and power among miners, nodes, exchanges, and users.
ABAB News · Cognitive Law
Low-cost disturbances are best at raising overall network costs.
The protocol dispute is essentially a struggle for governance power.
Once attacks become cheap, defense will turn into a long-term expense.