I disagree. What do you propose as a justification for the 4 weeks and not another duration? Moreover, there are valid transactions, valid new UTXOs and the valid blocks. Would you suggest that they are subject to confiscation?
I look forward to a reply.
On Sun, Aug 09, 2026 at 08:36:28PM +0200, Greg Tonoski wrote:
> Objection. The Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110 Reduced Data
> Temporary Softfork) has been activated. There are two blocks with the bit 4
> signal (block height 961633) and the estimated 18 000 fully validating
> nodes in the network. I keep running such a node and accepting payments
> even if time interval between blocks is temporarily longer until the next
> difficulty adjustment.
This objection seems straightforward to resolve: BIP 3 requires a 4 week
period before moving a BIP to "closed", and if there is fewer than one
block found per 4 week period, you can expect it will take about 150
years for the difficulty retarget point to be reached.
So I'd suggest don't mark the BIP closed until there's been 18-28 days
(100-150 years to the retarget) since the last BIP110 compliant block
was found.
Cheers,
aj