- Pseudonymous developer Dathon Ohm proposed a Bitcoin soft fork on October 26 aimed at limiting non-transactional data stored on the blockchain.
- The proposal, numbered BIP 444, would restrict OP_RETURN data storage to 83 bytes, significantly less than the 100KB threshold in Bitcoin Core version 30.
- This soft fork could result in a “reactionary fork,” where miners might block illegal content, potentially splitting Bitcoin into two assets.
- Speculation about Ohm’s identity includes figures like Knots lead developer Luke Dashjr and inscription protocol creator Casey Rodarmor, but all have denied involvement.
- The Bitcoin community continues to focus on evaluating the proposal itself rather than the developer’s identity, as Anonymity is common in Bitcoin development.
On October 26, pseudonymous developer Dathon Ohm introduced a soft fork proposal for Bitcoin through a draft Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP). The proposal aims to limit the amount of non-transactional data stored on the blockchain, addressing concerns over illegal or inappropriate content such as child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and classified information appearing in blocks.
Ohm’s BIP 444 draft would impose a maximum OP_RETURN datacarrier size of 83 bytes, a notable reduction compared to the 100-kilobyte threshold set in Bitcoin Core version 30 (v30). OP_RETURN is a script opcode in Bitcoin that allows embedding small amounts of data in transactions. The proposal could lead to a “reactionary fork,” where mining pools refuse blocks containing illegal content, potentially splitting Bitcoin into two separate assets with different market values.
The proposal has gained support from operators of the Knots node software, the second most used Bitcoin node implementation. Knots’ lead developer, Luke Dashjr, a long-time critic of on-chain data considered spam, is widely suspected to be behind Ohm’s identity. Dashjr, however, has publicly denied this claim. His collaborator, Bitcoin Mechanic, echoed the denial, adding that while he is aware of Ohm’s true identity, he will not reveal it.
Community members have speculated on other possible candidates. Casey Rodarmor, creator of the controversial Ordinals protocol, is one such figure, although Ohm’s restrictions would limit the data capacity that benefits Rodarmor’s Ordinals. Other guesses include various Bitcoin developers without concrete evidence. Notably, some have suggested Chris Guida and critic Nick Szabo, who have voiced dissatisfaction with Bitcoin Core v30, as potential candidates.
The Bitcoin community stresses that the identity of developers is less critical than the merit of their proposals. As demonstrated, anonymity does not impede Bitcoin’s evolution if a BIP gains consensus and adoption. The outcome of BIP 444 will depend on its practical impact rather than the unveiling of its author.
For further reading, the original proposal and discussions can be found on the Bitcoin developer mailing list and the BIP draft. Additional commentary about the proposal is available in recent coverage at Bitcoin News.
✅ Follow BITNEWSBOT on Telegram, Facebook, LinkedIn, X.com, and Google News for instant updates.
