Bitcoin's Taproot Upgrade Sparks Debate Over Network Transactions

According to Cointelegraph, the Taproot upgrade, implemented by Bitcoin developers, has sparked controversy over its impact on the network. Bitcoin Core developer Jimmy Song criticized the upgrade for not considering the 'social attack surface' that allowed nonfinancial transactions, such as Ordinals and BRC-20s, to flood the network. Song expressed disappointment in a video, stating that Taproot failed to deliver on its promised privacy and security features. He highlighted the complexity of Schnorr signatures and Script Paths Spend features, which were expected to improve multisig efficiency but instead complicated the process. Song's remarks come amid a growing divide among Bitcoin enthusiasts regarding transaction validation on the network. Some, like Adam Back and Luke Dashjr, advocate for Bitcoin to remain a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, as originally intended by Satoshi Nakamoto. Others, including Bitcoin Ordinals leader Leonidas, have embraced Taproot for creating applications like Ordinals and Runes, arguing against transaction censorship. In June, over 30 Bitcoin Core developers agreed to remove the 80-byte limit on the OP_RETURN function, allowing more data to be stored onchain. However, concerns about a potential reversal of this update have led some to consider using Bitcoin Knots instead. Despite his criticisms, Song has not entirely dismissed the potential benefits of Taproot, suggesting it could still contribute to Bitcoin's development. Meanwhile, Leonidas argues that Ordinals and Runes have bolstered Bitcoin's security by generating over $500 million in transaction fees, addressing concerns about the network's decreasing mining block subsidy. However, reliance on these fees has been inconsistent, with daily fees from Ordinals inscription ranging from $3,060 to $537,400 in 2025, according to Dune Analytics data. The highest recorded fee was $9.99 million on December 16, 2023.