Upcoming Bitcoin Hard Fork, which chain will you stay on?

[Catenaccio]

If it is not listed on any exchanges then it also has no value, that also means there is no incentive for anyone to bother mining this altcoin.
And logically exchanges are not interested in listing a dead chain (2-4 blocks in 7-8 days => 1000+ blocks behind).

Firstly dead chains.
Secondly no interest on that coin.
Lastly as consequence of such, very low or no trading volume.

Many Bitcoin forks died because of these things.
How Many Bitcoin Forks Are There? You will be surprised!!!
Every major Bitcoin forks.

Why Do So Many Bitcoin Forks Fail?

Reading all of this, you might be surprised that virtually every Bitcoin hard fork has failed to gain any significant level of success, but there are a few reasons why this is the case.

[DaveF]

well according to LukeDashJr - his BIP110 is the "real" Bitcoin not "corecoin" or "spamcoin" as he calls the real Bitcoin.

100% bonafide nut job

Nah, desperate broke scammer.
He lost so much BTC he is now trying anything to get it back.

I mean, as I pointed out in another thread he is a nut job, but it has nothing to do with this.
His personality has caused him to loose money and credibility.

But don't think 110 at this point is anything more then a grift. Heck even if he scams 10% of what he lost that will still get him 20BTC more then enough to not worry about anything for a while.

-Dave

[dim_mak5]

The BIP110 bitcoiners are now saying the btc mining pools are now controlled by Wall St. In the future Wall st can remove the 21million btc cap rule, maybe double it to 42 million bitcoins. Also they saying Wall St can implement CBDC policies into bitcoin like demurrage tax where long term hodlers have to pay tax baked into the main chain protocol and mining pools can be instructed and can censor your bitcoin transactions if instructed by Wall St by not including your btc transactions into the block like sanctioning your bitcoin. For example Sanction countries bitcoin strategic reserves like El Salvador bitcoins if Wall St and USA government does not like El Salvador policies.

If Wall St can do the above to Bitcoin with crashing bitcoin price to $0 then that is truly remarkable and proves Wall St can do anything to humanity by manipulate humanity perception.

Thats what the BIP110 community says or are they just conspiracy theorists and everything all fine nothing to worry about and btc will reach $1 million by 2030?

BIP110 has a chance, that is make their new chain Quantum Resistant ready straight out of the box and prove to all of us that no junk/spam has landed on their hard fork chain after a year by Sep 2027 and only by then they have a chance or they end up dead obsolete too.

[athanred]

can remove the 21million btc cap rule

Sure, of course. Just let them fork.

can implement CBDC policies into bitcoin

Just use signet, it is already deployed. Implementing signet rules on top of any Bitcoin-like network is a soft-fork.

mining pools can be instructed and can censor your bitcoin transactions

Which is exactly what BIP-110 is doing. Now, they can censor so much transactions, that BIP-110 blocks are no longer produced every 10 minutes, but every few days. Did any of the BIP-110 supporters agreed on slowing down the speed of the chain by that much? Or are they just incompetent, to not predict, that if 2.5% of the hashrate is signalling something, then the chain can be 40 times slower, if not more, when you activate it unconditionally?

are they just conspiracy theorists

You can believe in whatever you want. Being your own bank also means making your own decisions. Now, you can decide, if you want to use non-BIP-110 or BIP-110 coins. The choice is yours.

make their new chain Quantum Resistant ready straight out of the box

Good luck. BIP-110 just made that kind of upgrades harder, by blocking big data pushes. I want to see them trying to push new signatures on their chain.

no junk/spam has landed on their hard fork chain after a year

Too late, already produced blocks also contain some spam, for example inside private keys.

[joker_josue]

The BIP110 bitcoiners are now saying the btc mining pools are now controlled by Wall St.

I understand why they say that. Because more and more corporate companies have become involved with Bitcoin, and have even organized themselves to fund the Core developers.

This raises the question: will the developers do anything against those who fund their activities?

But then I raise another question: most developers have been in Bitcoin almost from the beginning, are these funds larger than the BTC they have accumulated in their pockets?  I doubt.

Therefore, I understand the point, but in the end, I think nobody will want to do something that could cause the price of Bitcoin to fall instead of rise. There is more to lose than to gain.

[arwin100]

The BIP110 bitcoiners are now saying the btc mining pools are now controlled by Wall St.

I understand why they say that. Because more and more corporate companies have become involved with Bitcoin, and have even organized themselves to fund the Core developers.

This raises the question: will the developers do anything against those who fund their activities?

But then I raise another question: most developers have been in Bitcoin almost from the beginning, are these funds larger than the BTC they have accumulated in their pockets?  I doubt.

Therefore, I understand the point, but in the end, I think nobody will want to do something that could cause the price of Bitcoin to fall instead of rise. There is more to lose than to gain.

Your point is correct, but Bitcoin core is actually does not work the same as normal organization. Also funding them does not give those companies equal control. Because for what I know every changes they tried to raised or passed this will be reviewed and should be accepted by lots or thousands of independent node operators.

So even if there are companies have big donation it seems that they cannot do anything with the current set up.

Also most of the devs already doing this for long time are heavily invested on the health of Bitcoin. So their goal and what can we say incentive to get, is if they can protect the protocol and not to bend then follow the interest of those companies. 

[dim_mak5]

If I was a evil Wall St Banker this is how I like my Bitcoin:

- Wall St & Governments & Central Banks know fiat is being debased and there is no second best to Bitcoin in the Quantum/Ai age. There was no second best to Gold in the industrial age but Gold just doesn't suit the modern times. They want all the bitcoins and control it without crashing the btc price to $0. If it crashes to $0 then theres no point having it. They want to control BTC like Gold.

- Satoshi said bitcoin is the people's money worldwide separate from state and central banks. There's no 1 bitcoin, there's 100000000 (100million sats) satoshis, it is only bitcoin wallets that gave btc 8 decimal places to bitcoin that is .99999999 + 1 sat = 1.00000000 bitcoin (1 btc). So 21million cap x 100million sats = 2.1 quadrillion sats in total divide by 8 billion people on this planet = Every person on this planet including babies and kids can have 262500 sats or over a quarter of a million sats each. Cleary Satoshi designed bitcoin as currency money for the World not as a rare digital commodity for the rich/elites like michael saylor.
 
- If Wall St take over Bitcoin after getting all the bitcoin plebs and btc hodlers to sell it to them for cheap, they will redesign bitcoin as the Elites money not the peoples money and they can do this by reducing or removing the decimal places. Heck they might even remove the 8 decimal places and make it just 1 bitcoin undividable where only the rich and elite own the bitcoins where 1 bitcoin can be $1million or higher each. Heck if might be worth $100million each and the Wall st will pay slave wages or peanuts to node runners and miners to maintain the network and keep it decentralized because they can afford to like pay node runners like $10 a day to run a bitcoin node for them and people will do it!

- Wall St know there's still a lot cold storage hodlers out there, hodl by the people so only way to get hodlers to sell btc cheap to them is instil fear into them with more hardware wallet hacks or introduce a hodl tax baked into the btc protocol main chain that will get the plebs to hand over their bitcoins then once Wall St have all the bitcoins they will remove the tax coincidentally of course. Or sponsor and campaign Quantum computer threat FUD.

Only way to stop Wall St taking over Bitcoin is the people worldwide start using btc as currency. Get everything priced in sats, taxes can be paid in sats, make sats legal tender, get wages paid in sats at a global level otherwise I am afraid to say that Bitcoin will end up as Elite money for the rich only as a commodity asset not as money currency.

BIP110 guys say they don't care if number goes up, they just care btc being used as its fundamental truth as it was designed to by satoshi and that is worldwide currency being used as a large scale like mastercard and visa. They detest hodling as btc hodling goes against satoshi intentions as btc used as money currency. Only the rich elites want to hodl btc for themselves only not for the people.

Like I said before Bitcoin is like a religion and there will be chain splits like a religion being divided into different sects which is the sad reality because bitcoin is maths and maths is not debatable however code can be manipulated and therefore debatable but pure maths cannot be manipulated.

[pooya87]

Wall St & Governments & Central Banks

Centralized entities and authoritarian regimes attacking Bitcoin is not a new thing. Decentralization is the enemy of centralization and they will always attack it. This is exactly why we need to protect Bitcoin and its principles and protect it from all types of attacks including BIP-110 (ie. an infinitesimal-minority forking without consensus).

BIP110 guys say they don't care if number goes up,

Yeah, the grapes are sour. It's not that they can't get to the grapes

They detest hodling as btc hodling goes against satoshi intentions as btc used as money currency.

What is "money currency" LOL
Currency is a medium of exchange and Money is a currency that is also a store of value. Being store of value means it will be held by people who want to keep their purchase power intact as inflation hits.
Saying "holding is against Satoshi intentions" is like saying "Satoshi didn't want bitcoin to be money" which is obviously wrong.

Like I said before Bitcoin is like a religion and there will be chain splits like a religion being divided into different sects

In a way you are right, just like in religion when some people who don't like following principles try to change things that suits their malicious intentions, in Bitcoin those who don't like principles of it also try to change them to suit their malicious intentions.

But I wouldn't call it split though. A split requires a considerable number of people on both sides. But when one side is an infinitesimal minority, that no longer is a split.

[d5000]

BIP-110 is so "popular" that there is not even a relevant memecoin based on it. The biggest one I found has a market cap of ... 2700 USD (won't link to it, you can search it on pump.fun), and if I'm interpreting it correctly it has zero buy orders at the moment.

Wouldn't it be a nice idea to create a memetoken standard based on the fake private key approach and deploy it on Lukecoin?

[dim_mak5]

Wall St & Governments & Central Banks

Centralized entities and authoritarian regimes attacking Bitcoin is not a new thing. Decentralization is the enemy of centralization and they will always attack it. This is exactly why we need to protect Bitcoin and its principles and protect it from all types of attacks including BIP-110 (ie. an infinitesimal-minority forking without consensus).

BIP110 guys say they don't care if number goes up,

Yeah, the grapes are sour. It's not that they can't get to the grapes

They detest hodling as btc hodling goes against satoshi intentions as btc used as money currency.

What is "money currency" LOL
Currency is a medium of exchange and Money is a currency that is also a store of value. Being store of value means it will be held by people who want to keep their purchase power intact as inflation hits.
Saying "holding is against Satoshi intentions" is like saying "Satoshi didn't want bitcoin to be money" which is obviously wrong.

Like I said before Bitcoin is like a religion and there will be chain splits like a religion being divided into different sects

In a way you are right, just like in religion when some people who don't like following principles try to change things that suits their malicious intentions, in Bitcoin those who don't like principles of it also try to change them to suit their malicious intentions.

But I wouldn't call it split though. A split requires a considerable number of people on both sides. But when one side is an infinitesimal minority, that no longer is a split.

How do we define 'Consensus' when it comes to the bitcoin proof of work network? There's no voting like Proof of Stake cryptos. Does consensus means what centralized algorithmic controlled social media platforms sites say about bitcoin? We get consensus on bitcoin from social media or from 1 guy Michael Saylor or Larry Fink? Can these guys get the bitcoin community to bend over for them in return for more 'Institutional' money poured into the bitcoin marketcap otherwise no 2029-2030 bull market for btc?

2.1 Quadrillion Sats is not money not store of value, it is currency unless up to 6 decimal places are removed from bitcoin to make it a store of value digital commodity. The $usd dollar has 2 decimal places, $0.01 or 1 cent.
Theres is no Bitcoins, there are only Satoshis and 100million Sats is aka 1BTC. BTC ticker should be renamed to SAT with the correct figure 2.1 Quadrillion. Why did programmers for btc wallets put a decimal place in the balance? For convenience?

It is inevitable till the end of time that bitcoin will be divided like a religion. I just hope that divided btc communities don't go to war in the future killing each other and say their btc is the truth. I bet in the future there will be an idea of a second coming of Satoshi who will declare which btc ticker is the true one.

[ultrloa]

BIP-110 is so "popular" that there is not even a relevant memecoin based on it. The biggest one I found has a market cap of ... 2700 USD (won't link to it, you can search it on pump.fun), and if I'm interpreting it correctly it has zero buy orders at the moment.

Wouldn't it be a nice idea to create a memetoken standard based on the fake private key approach and deploy it on Lukecoin?

That BIP 110 never became a real chain on which people can create or start to build a meme coin. So with those thing there's really nothing relevant memecoin will shows up using that chain. Oh by the way is there a relevant memecoin? because what I know all of them are scam.

Yeah maybe its great if they create such standard. But this will only make sense on a chain if many people came and use it. To be fair with Lukecoin it still have a small community, running blocks and small numbers of miners. So there's still a chance that those experiment will be seen by their small supporters.

Also on BIP - 110 it seems that they are creating a noise on empty a vacant hallway https://news.bitcoin.com/featured/bip-110-breakaway-chain-faces-a-long-fight-to-survive

[athanred]

How do we define 'Consensus' when it comes to the bitcoin proof of work network?

The code you are running defines it. If you want to use BIP-110 chain, then of course you can. If nobody pushes it forward, then it is your problem. People can use any code they want. If the chain is too slow, then it is less spammy, isn't it? BIP-110 supporters got exactly what they wanted: spam-resistant chain. And now they want to make it worse, by pushing blocks faster, than they are programmed to appear.

Does consensus means what centralized algorithmic controlled social media platforms sites say about bitcoin?

No. But the value of your coins is somewhat proportional to the size of a group you are in. If you run your code alone, then don't be surprised, if nobody wants to buy any of your coins.

We get consensus on bitcoin from social media or from 1 guy Michael Saylor or Larry Fink?

No, we get them by measuring many things. I don't understand, why BIP-110 supporters thought, that if 2.5% hashrate supports them, then activating new rules is a good idea. But they coded it that way, so they forked, because they wanted to fork unconditionally, even if no miners would mine their chain. So they did.

Many things like hashrate, exchanges support, users support, are measurable. If you activate new rules, without having consensus, then don't be surprised, if you end up on a minority chain. Many people raised that as a risk, and BIP-110 supporters ignored them, so now, they have to face the consequences of ignoring all of that technical feedback.

BTC ticker should be renamed to SAT with the correct figure 2.1 Quadrillion.

You can use it in your client, if you want to.

Why did programmers for btc wallets put a decimal place in the balance? For convenience?

And why the half of the generator point has some low x-value? For historical reasons, as well as many other things we have in use.

I bet in the future there will be an idea of a second coming of Satoshi who will declare which btc ticker is the true one.

Of course. Instead of being your own bank, you want to follow some leader, like a sheep, because you don't know, how to think on your own? Using altcoins is not a crime, just use whatever chain you want, and enjoy it.

[d5000]

That BIP 110 never became a real chain on which people can create or start to build a meme coin.[...]

Yeah maybe its great if they create such standard. But this will only make sense on a chain if many people came and use it.

I think you misunderstood. The idea of the memecoin platform on the BIP-110 chain is to show them their hypocrisy and the impossibility of their "goal".

If their goal is to create a chain where supposedly no memecoin can be created on, and it fills up with memecoin transactions using the BitMEX fake private key technique, then it would be at least very funny. And perhaps then a lot of people would see they were misled by Luke and his friends.

That impossibility to prevent memecoins and other "non-financial transactions" was the whole point from the Core "camp" from the beginning on. They have totally ignored that argument and said that they then would add more filters ("The Cat"). But the BitMEX technique is totally immune to any filter mechanism. And you need only a few bytes for memecoin transactions.

Of course that would only work if they really fork off to another algorithm. Let's see if they have the balls to do that ...

[hd49728]

I think you misunderstood. The idea of the memecoin platform on the BIP-110 chain is to show them their hypocrisy and the impossibility of their "goal".

If their goal is to create a chain where supposedly no memecoin can be created on, and it fills up with memecoin transactions using the BitMEX fake private key technique, then it would be at least very funny. And perhaps then a lot of people would see they were misled by Luke and his friends.

That impossibility to prevent memecoins and other "non-financial transactions" was the whole point from the Core "camp" from the beginning on. They have totally ignored that argument and said that they then would add more filters ("The Cat"). But the BitMEX technique is totally immune to any filter mechanism. And you need only a few bytes for memecoin transactions.

Of course that would only work if they really fork off to another algorithm. Let's see if they have the balls to do that ...

I don't have to worry about meme tokens on any chain because they are useless so they will die with time. It's very natural selection, and they can be minted on Bitcoin blockchain like Ordinals, Runes tried to do, succeeded to hype and attract greedy people, but eventually they are failed projects. There are other more severely failed projects too, and if any thing as Memecoin-platform on BIP-110 chain, let them be because they will die off with time.

Money can flow around from Bitcoin to altcoins, top altcoins to shitcoins like meme tokens but eventually money will return to Bitcoin and money will move from losers to winners in this market. If anyone choose meme tokens on BIP-110 chain, they will surely become losers in a long term.

[athanred]

Of course that would only work if they really fork off to another algorithm.

Well, you can always make a transaction, if your coins are splitted. If it will be confirmed or not, is another story.

And you need only a few bytes for memecoin transactions.

In practice, you can have something around 66% efficiency, if you put your data in your private key, and in a signature nonce. Because then, only signature hash is "random", everything else is just data, and it can scale nicely in a multisig.

Code:

message="Putting data inside private keys"
privkey=50757474696e67206461746120696e736964652070726976617465206b657973
pubkey=02135BC14EC7F19C2E12C615F53E86CF970C764C035F3960DDFCB8B2A51EAA2DA0

message="is unstoppable, even on BIP-110."
privkey=697320756e73746f707061626c652c206576656e206f6e204249502d3131302e
pubkey=0315253DF9839EE7D94919B08BAEBEE66C9F6B89FFA9A1D03A26F04B5910FE5C5F

And then, by using public key 02135BC14EC7F19C2E12C615F53E86CF970C764C035F3960DDFCB8B2A51EAA2DA0 wrapped in any address type, and using r-value of 15253DF9839EE7D94919B08BAEBEE66C9F6B89FFA9A1D03A26F04B5910FE5C5F, you can push that data on their chain. Of course, anyone could try to guess these values, and steal your coins, but if there is enough randomness, then it is impossible to block in practice. Because how would they know in advance, that the public key 02135BC14EC7F19C2E12C615F53E86CF970C764C035F3960DDFCB8B2A51EAA2DA0 contains some ASCII message? They won't.

By the way: I already pushed some message in a similar way. You can try to explore this P2PK input, and try to break it. If you would guess the ASCII message correctly, then you could try to double-spend coins from bc1q78mgsyj6hn3wath0rme6pqsramckwysuml6pw0 on BIP-110 chain, while they are still unconfirmed.

[dim_mak5]

Is there a full independent audit report on the Taproot soft fork that happened on Bitcoin 5 years ago? Taproot was sold to bitcoiners back then as extra privacy and cheaper fees and such however the soft fork was like behind the scenes activated nobody was aware of it as everybody's attention back then was on NFTs, MetaVerses and orange foxes.

Fast-forward to 2026 now and Taproot has hardly taken any market cap share from Privacy Monero XMR. The BIP110 guys are saying it is Taproot that is causing all this Spam/Junk on the bitcoin blockchain.

Can anyone find out the true intention behind Taproot btc update and if there is bad malice intention behind taproot then it can it be uninstalled from the bitcoin network like uninstalling a bad update? Is taproot a discreet trojan horse/backdoor embedded by wall st or government or government agencies into the bitcoin blockchain?

Can someone please explain why soft forks by big players that are allowed to activate during bull markets but soft forks by smaller players are not allowed to activate during bear markets?

If soft/hard forks are decentralized in nature then why do these forks follow a centralized timeline and who decides what month at what block and why only during the peak of the bull or bear market?

For the sake of the bitcoin network this needs to be investigated.

[Dark.Look]

Taproot was sold to bitcoiners back then as extra privacy
and cheaper fees and such however the soft fork was like behind the scenes
activated nobody was aware of it

The one thing you are able to settle yourself without relying on anyone is the timeline. It's all on chain as far as I know.
Five months of public warning in the blocks, as anyone could count for themselves which was block 709632 in november and after it was locked in during the June 2021 signalling period. Here is the audit you requested.
It also resolves the bull market question and it's not about Who. Taproot received about ~98 percent of the blocks announcing for it. bip110 established a new record of 55 and proceeded on about ~2.5. Again the same rule and one of them shot it out.
count the blocks 2021 June and tell me what you get.

[athanred]

Is there a full independent audit report on the Taproot soft fork that happened on Bitcoin 5 years ago?

No, because P2P consensus doesn't work like that. And is there any audit on the 21 million coins limit? We assume BIP-42 is deployed, but who knows, how many altcoins will appear in year 2214. Or how many of them will appear even earlier, when the block reward will be reduced from 0.09765625 BTC to 0.04882812 BTC, and some people will want to bring back half of the satoshi, which will be burned in every block, because of rounding it to the floor.

can it be uninstalled from the bitcoin network like uninstalling a bad update?

Technically, you can run any code you want. If you don't like existing rules, then just change them. If it will push you to the altcoin world, then it is your problem. Some purists already forked again from BIP-110, and some of the coins are now splitted between these chains, for example:

BIP-110: https://mempool.guide/tx/780cd1d3d19139825489cfb1998287de3c2cceb46446c2a71218f05c785a0c84
Bitcoin Purity: https://mempool.bitcoinpurity.org/tx/1d5d2a1dc16faa4f7784966e137e8500e70eebca782709afe017c5a6ea060c0c

So, if you want to disable Taproot, then of course you can. Just make a new chain, where all Taproot outputs are blocked, just like BIP-110 disabled all P2PK outputs, and run it. If people wouldn't use your chain, that would be your problem. You can use whatever chain you want, this is how P2P consensus works in practice.

Is taproot a discreet trojan horse/backdoor embedded by wall st or government or government agencies into the bitcoin blockchain?

Of course, which is why some of the current BIP-110 supporters wanted to activate it unconditionally, just like they tried to do that with BIP-110.

As far as I'm concerned, I would revert the entire network to pre-taproot.

This is funny, because before Taproot, Luke's client forced it to activate. What happened in the meanwhile, that now you want to revert a change, which Luke wanted to push faster than planned?

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/there-are-now-two-taproot-activation-clients-heres-why

Bitcoin Core 0.21.0-based Taproot Client 0.1, for the remainder of this article simply referred to as “Bitcoin Taproot,” is the LOT=true client. Bitcoin Taproot is a software fork of Bitcoin Core 0.21.0, the last major Bitcoin Core release, but with BIP 8 LOT=true activation code added for Taproot. The project is maintained by the pseudonymous community members Bitcoin Mechanic and Shinobi, with Bitcoin Core developer and Bitcoin Knots lead maintainer Luke Dashjr as the project’s most notable and most experienced contributor.

Also, if you read what Luke said about Taproot, before it was activated, then you may be surprised. He wanted to deploy it ASAP, so why now you want to revert it?

See? If Taproot is so bad, then why people like Luke supported it back then, and wanted to force it?

Can someone please explain why soft forks by big players that are allowed to activate during bull markets but soft forks by smaller players are not allowed to activate during bear markets?

You can activate any soft-fork, at any time. It is your problem, if you end up on a minority chain.

If soft/hard forks are decentralized in nature then why do these forks follow a centralized timeline

They don't have to. You can activate new rules at any time. But if you do that without coordinating your users, then you could end up with more than two chains. Your client has to be compatible at least with itself.

and who decides what month at what block and why only during the peak of the bull or bear market?

If you think, that each user should decide about it independently, then just make a textbox, where anyone could pick any timestamp, or a block number. But don't be surprised, if you will have as many chains as users in this case. And then, it will be your problem, to coordinate all of these forks, and process transactions between them properly.

[lixer]

BIP-110 is so "popular" that there is not even a relevant memecoin based on it. The biggest one I found has a market cap of ... 2700 USD (won't link to it, you can search it on pump.fun), and if I'm interpreting it correctly it has zero buy orders at the moment.

Wouldn't it be a nice idea to create a memetoken standard based on the fake private key approach and deploy it on Lukecoin?

That BIP 110 never became a real chain on which people can create or start to build a meme coin. So with those thing there's really nothing relevant memecoin will shows up using that chain. Oh by the way is there a relevant memecoin? because what I know all of them are scam.

Yeah maybe its great if they create such standard. But this will only make sense on a chain if many people came and use it. To be fair with Lukecoin it still have a small community, running blocks and small numbers of miners. So there's still a chance that those experiment will be seen by their small supporters.

Also on BIP - 110 it seems that they are creating a noise on empty a vacant hallway https://news.bitcoin.com/featured/bip-110-breakaway-chain-faces-a-long-fight-to-survive

Almost all of them were scams. I am saying almost, because maybe there is one that I am not aware of, but I have never seen one that is not a scam; all the ones I know were scams. So it is clear that we are seeing something quite terrible and not really something that is going that great at all. We should realise that it is not going to help the world all that much to have something on the Bitcoin chain, considering how clogged it is already.

The simple truth is that Bitcoin isn't something that has a great chain where we could have double the size and still be fine; SOL was used for that, TRX is being used for that, because those chains can take more and more, while Bitcoin can't and the price would go up and we would not be able to afford the fee. This is why we should not have this stuff in there, memecoins or anything else; we should not have it. For a mere moment we have seen what could happen if it was possible, but the reality is that it would not work out for any of us and everyone hated it.

[ABCbits]

Taproot was sold to bitcoiners back then as extra privacy and cheaper fees

And both of them are technically true.

Thanks to the merkle tree structure used for the custom scripts, only a single script is actually revealed when you unlock a P2TR using the script path spend.

So you could construct a script tree with hundreds of different custom locking scripts, but only the custom script you use will be revealed when you unlock it (the rest will only appear as hashes of the original scripts).

This means all the other possible spending conditions of a P2TR are kept private.

However, thanks again to the merkle tree structure used for all the different custom scripts, all of the spending conditions are reduced down to a single 32-byte fingerprint (merkle root). You then only need to reveal a small portion of this tree (merkle path) when you come to unlock the output using your chosen script.

Fast-forward to 2026 now and Taproot has hardly taken any market cap share from Privacy Monero XMR.

Comparing privacy benefit between Taproot and Monero is crazy, see what i quoted above.

The BIP110 guys are saying it is Taproot that is causing all this Spam/Junk on the bitcoin blockchain.

All? spam or adding arbitrary data already possible even without Taproot.

and if there is bad malice intention behind taproot then it can it be uninstalled from the bitcoin network like uninstalling a bad update?

It's theoretically possible. There are few possible approach, such as performing chain split on block height before Taproot is activated with mainnet.