Michael Saylor Says BIP-110 is the Latest Example of the 'Just Heard About Bitcoin and Want to Fix It' Syndrome
Saylor opposes BIP-110 changes to Bitcoin
Michael Saylor stated that BIP-110 is the latest example of the "just heard about Bitcoin and want to fix it" syndrome.
He emphasized that the core design of Bitcoin is already established, and protocol changes should be minimal, conservative, and only occur when necessary.
His stance is clear: do not fix what is not broken.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
Saylor's statements continue his consistent narrative of Bitcoin as "digital gold."
In his framework, Bitcoin's value does not come from frequent upgrades, but from stable rules that cannot be arbitrarily rewritten.
From a capital perspective, this position helps to continue shaping BTC as a low-change, high-certainty reserve asset.
Once the protocol layer is seen as overly variable, institutional funds will be more concerned about governance risks, upgrade disputes, and narrative drift.
Similar cases can be compared to the preference for central bank independence and rule stability in traditional monetary systems.
The more an asset is treated as a store of value, the more it needs "less rule change" to maintain trust.
Essentially, this is about regulatory change, because the debate is not about a single technical proposal, but about who defines the boundaries of Bitcoin's future, who can push for modifications, and how high the modification threshold is.
Saylor's point is that once the protocol is frequently engineered, it will undermine its most core monetary attributes.
ABAB News · Cognitive Laws
The more stable the rules, the more the asset resembles a reserve.
The more frequently the protocol changes, the harder it is to accumulate trust.
The true moat is to do less.