Scan to download
BTC $66,472.39 -0.90%
ETH $1,940.51 -1.94%
BNB $623.12 -1.40%
XRP $1.42 -4.56%
SOL $81.67 -4.53%
TRX $0.2795 -0.47%
DOGE $0.0974 -3.83%
ADA $0.2735 -4.22%
BCH $433.57 -2.32%
LINK $8.64 -2.97%
HYPE $28.98 -1.81%
AAVE $122.61 -3.42%
SUI $0.9138 -6.63%
XLM $0.1605 -4.62%
ZEC $260.31 -8.86%
BTC $66,472.39 -0.90%
ETH $1,940.51 -1.94%
BNB $623.12 -1.40%
XRP $1.42 -4.56%
SOL $81.67 -4.53%
TRX $0.2795 -0.47%
DOGE $0.0974 -3.83%
ADA $0.2735 -4.22%
BCH $433.57 -2.32%
LINK $8.64 -2.97%
HYPE $28.98 -1.81%
AAVE $122.61 -3.42%
SUI $0.9138 -6.63%
XLM $0.1605 -4.62%
ZEC $260.31 -8.86%

restrict

The Bitcoin network has seen the first block supporting BIP-110, which has sparked controversy over the restriction of on-chain data usage

According to market news, the Bitcoin network has seen the first block supporting the BIP-110 proposal, mined by the Ocean pool. This proposal aims to limit arbitrary non-financial data in blockchain transactions through a temporary soft fork over approximately one year. Supporters believe this can curb "junk" data that occupies block space, protect Bitcoin's role as a robust monetary infrastructure, and alleviate the burden on node operators. The proposal has sparked intense controversy within the community.Critics, including Blockstream CEO Adam Back, warn that intervention at the consensus layer could undermine Bitcoin's credibility, lead to discriminatory treatment of transactions, and violate the principle of transaction capacity neutrality. He also questioned the actual support for the proposal, stating it could increase the risk of blockchain splits.The controversy escalated further when a developer embedded a 66KB image in a Bitcoin transaction to oppose the core claim of BIP-110, demonstrating that a large amount of data can be encoded even without relying on OP_RETURN. This debate highlights the long-standing ideological divide within the Bitcoin community: whether to staunchly defend Bitcoin's pure positioning as a currency or to maintain maximum neutrality regarding arbitrary uses at the base layer.

White House Crypto Council Head: Bitcoin Strategic Reserve Advancement Restricted by Technical Legal Provisions

According to Cointelegraph, Patrick Witt, head of the White House Cryptocurrency Council, stated that the U.S. is still making progress in establishing a strategic Bitcoin reserve, but some "less common legal provisions" are slowing down the process.Currently, several government agencies, including the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), are discussing the legal and regulatory authority issues related to the Bitcoin strategic reserve. Witt pointed out that while the arrangements may seem straightforward on the surface, the differences in statutory authority among different agencies complicate the execution process. Related issues are still being coordinated, and the Bitcoin strategic reserve remains a priority in current policy.Previously, Trump signed an executive order in March 2025 to establish a "strategic Bitcoin reserve" and a "digital asset reserve pool," but the order only allows the inclusion of BTC obtained through judicial forfeiture into the reserve and does not authorize the government to purchase Bitcoin on the open market, which has caused dissatisfaction among some members of the Bitcoin community.Despite the controversies at the policy level, the U.S. government is still exploring potential implementation paths that are compliant and do not increase the fiscal deficit.

The South Korean academic community questions the restriction on the shareholding ratio of major shareholders in CEX: it may be unconstitutional and inconsistent with international practices

In response to the South Korean financial authorities' discussion on limiting the shareholding ratio of major shareholders in virtual asset exchanges to the range of 15% to 20%, several scholars expressed cautious attitudes at the seminar on "The Direction of Institutionalization of Stablecoin Issuance and Trading Infrastructure" held on January 16. Professor Moon Cheol-woo from Sungkyunkwan University's Business School pointed out that forcibly compressing the shareholding ratio of major shareholders may touch upon property rights protection issues, posing a risk of unconstitutionality.He also mentioned that comparing the equity structures of Binance and Coinbase, it is not uncommon globally for founders to maintain a high shareholding ratio, and such restrictive measures may contradict the international trend of emphasizing responsible management.Additionally, Professor Kim Yoon-kyung from Incheon University believes that directly intervening in the equity structure through ratio limits is too radical and may weaken the industry's innovation and development momentum. Several experts at the meeting suggested that regulatory authorities could guide equity dispersion and compliant development by strengthening the qualification review of major shareholders and improving IPO-related systems, rather than adopting mandatory divestiture arrangements.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.