So it's better to download from what ?

I agree that financial transaction will likely price out most of the spam in the long term, and block size are static so no storage issue, but the problem isn't there, the problem is in the UTXO set, which inscription such as ordinal creates multiple non used UTXO which nodes need to keep in RAM (so RAM cost are going significantly higher, so node cost more overtime. So I believe one of the most important things is to remove at the consensus level exploit that permit inscriptions to save UTXO set (which is what BIP-110 is mostly doing) now is BIP-110 the good approach, maybe not but at least its working in the good direction.

Agreed that this is not ideal and its a risk on bitcoin stability (assuming the BIP-110 fork is initially a minority chain), but in your opinion, what should we do about UTXO bloat (which is a risk on decentralization) ?

OK, I see the double spend reorg risk now, that would indeed be bad, but if BIP-110 would initially get accepted by most miners (55% signaling I believe) would you consider that as the ideal scenario ? (Since BIP-110 limits adjustment seams better for the protocol overall)

But won't BIP-110 valid tx always be included in both chain ?

But it will only reverse "invalid" (relative to BIP-110 consensus rules) tx, most likely spam, not normal tx, correct ?

Which international airport is the closest ?

How is that gay ?

Don't cook with aluminum, it's toxic

Link ?