Bitcoin Layers has been acquired by @blockspace. Our founder, Janusz, will be joining Blockspace as an advisor as a part of the transaction. The integration will enable Bitcoin Layers to expand its onchain data suite and revamp its research platform.

.@BitcoinLayers is implementing a minimum standard to be considered a bitcoin layer. Merlin Chain, Bsquared Network, Core, Bitlayer, BOB, Rollux, BEVM, Libre, and Fractal do not currently meet these standards, and will be moved to the alternative chains category if changes are not made by June 30th. Projects now must be bitcoin native or bitcoin sidesystems to be considered bitcoin layers. All bitcoin layers must have at minimum an official, federated two-way peg and operator set where operators are disclosed. Additionally, we define the sidesystem category as blockchains that meet one or more of the following: -are BTC-denominated -are secured by native BTC -rely on bitcoin for consensus -rely on bitcoin for transaction finalization -support interactions with L1 scripts or PSBTs Bitcoin native protocols are those by which users can exit the system unilaterally. Statechains, Arks, and the Lightning Network can provide this to users. Some use cases warrant sidesystem designs. Others, bitcoin native. Still, the ecosystem should hold projects more accountable for shortcomings related to security and trust-minimization. Our work is to ensure users are informed about the trust assumptions related to the use of BTC in offchain environments. This call to action is the first step towards pushing projects to improve their designs and make their systems more secure for users.

There are a lot of “Bitcoin L2” lists out there. Some with looser definitions than others. But what are L2s? And what are all the projects listed on our website? A 🧵 on why we call these protocols "Layers" 👇

Our initial protocol assessment on @coreDAO is complete. In relation to #Bitcoin, Core is a sidechain with an enshrined #BTC bridge. Its validators participate in a novel consensus mechanism, Satoshi Plus. #BTC users trust these validators when interacting with Core.

Many people have been trying to determine what is, and what isn’t, a #Bitcoin L2. Today, we’re releasing our initial framework on how we will define and analyze risk for Bitcoin scaling protocols.

Bitcoin L2s that claim their BitVM-based bridge is "trustless" are being dishonest in their marketing.

V1 of the @BitcoinLayers website has officially shipped 🎉 Check out our site for the latest reviews on #Bitcoin L2s, sidechains, and more.

The @BitcoinLayers ecosystem map - August, 2024. Below you can find projects listed on the Bitcoin Layers website. So, what’s their relationship with Bitcoin?

Our initial review of the Internet Computer Protocol is complete. ICP is a network of subnet blockchains. Its relationship with #Bitcoin is that of a sidechain. Users trust the operators of a specific subnet when minting and burning ckBTC tokens, a bitcoin-backed synthetic.

An intro to zkCoins "The next evolution of encrypted money" @januszg_ is joined by @robin_linus, @liam_eagen, and @lightcoin to discuss zkCoins, a novel protocol that will improve user privacy for bitcoin payments. zkCoins is a client-side validated protocol that leverages zero-knowledge proofs for scalability and obscuring the transaction graph, giving users near-perfect privacy. The original idea behind zkCoins was improving the trust assumptions related to ecash protocols, which are custodial by nature. Combined with bridging solutions like BitVM2, zkCoins can enable users to transact bitcoin privately with minimized trust assumptions. When compared to solutions like Zcash, Aztec, and other privacy-preserving protocols, zkCoins has an advantage that users only need to validate their own state. There is no need to verify all transactions in the entire system, which further supports scalability. The recording dives into the zkCoins design, how it compares to ecash and other privacy-preserving protocols, and the future development roadmap. Full episode available below 👇

#Bitcoin is free and open-source. Research platforms should be too! Today, we’re releasing the Bitcoin Layers website and risk frameworks under the MIT License:

We're roasting all of the #Bitcoin "L2s" tomorrow 🔥 @AlpenLabs, @citrea_xyz, @botanix, and more will be joining. Event is co-hosted with @build_on_bob. Tomorrow night @ The Ord House. Registration below.

BitVM2 Explained with Alexei Zamyatin We brought on @alexeiZamyatin, @build_on_bob co-founder and co-author of the BitVM2 paper, to discuss BitVM2 and what it means for Bitcoin L2s and sidechains. The conversation highlighted the current state of Bitcoin bridges, the BitVM Bridge design and how it supports permissionless challenging, and plans for future R&D. Full discussion available on X. Listen below 👇

Our protocol assessment on @Stacks has been completed. While Stacks does have a decentralized validator set, it’s not used to support either versions of cross-chain #BTC in the ecosystem. Users trust centralized operators when interacting with #BTC on Stacks.

Announcing INTER_OP: A research event focused on bitcoin scaling, protocol modularity, and interoperability. September 12, 1-5pm. NYC 🗽 Hosted by @BitcoinLayers, @AlpenLabs, & @dba_crypto.

Bitcoin Layers updates 📝 - @bolander72 shipped a new UI - @januszg_ & @VeronikaKuett updated reviews and are drafting research - @redvelvetzip & Justin are adding more data Check out the site with reviews on the following protocols 👇

At @PowSummit, @BitcoinLayers researcher @VeronikaKuett gave a talk on Ark, Shielded CSV, & BitVM. Some say it was the best talk on bitcoin L2s this year. Watch below:

@merlinlayer2, @BSquaredNetwork, @Coredao_Org, @BitlayerLabs, @build_on_bob, @RolluxL2, @BTClayer2, @libreblockchain, and @fractal_bitcoin are encouraged to upgrade their systems and/or improve transparency related to their operator sets.

Talks from Nashville's @BitcoinWildlife event are now live 🔥 The thread below features presentations on STARKs, improved bridge designs, MEV, and more. First, we highlight @weikengchen’s presentation on a Circle STARK verifier in Script 👇

We've been updating our internal dashboards. Here are some findings:

We review a lot of sidechains and rollups. And nearly all of them leverage a federation or custodian(s) to secure user deposits.

The BitVM2 paper dropped today and we’ve got questions. So we’re bringing on @alexeiZamyatin to discuss BitVM2 and cover how it can improve bridging protocols for L2s and more. Scheduled for next Tuesday. Set your reminders below 👇 nitter.app/i/spaces/1YpKklbglgVGj

gm Nashville We’re co-hosting an event with @StarkWareLtd. Discussions will be around STARKs, OP_CAT, MEV, and more. You're not gonna wanna to miss it. Join us 👉 lu.ma/isdjh2w2

The @BitcoinLayers team will be implementing standards related to BTC derivative assets and LST tokens. In our latest blog, @januszg_ outlines reasons for this and shares concerns around current practices and ecosystem transparency:

We have added an initial assessment on @rootstock_io to our website. Rootstock is a merge-mined, EVM-compatible sidechain. It designed to be an application layer for #Bitcoin. Currently, user funds are custodied by a federated, two-way peg known as the Powpeg.

Just because the network is decentralized, doesn't mean the bridge is... Due to the development of numerous wrapped BTC assets, liquid staking tokens, and more, the @BitcoinLayers team has developed an initial framework for analyzing BTC-derivative assets, from bridges and custodial solutions. These assessments will cover: - Custody: analyze who custodies the funds backing the derivative asset - Censorship resistance: see if there is a blacklist or pause function on the contracts associated with the token - Supply issuance: determine the mechanism that triggers the minting of derivative assets - Governance: review how is the token, or bridge, is upgraded and who controls this In addition to this assessment, we will also review if the bridge/token meets the best practices that we suggest. Those include: - Implementing a proof-of-reserves (backed by custodian attestations if applicable) - Publicly disclose the operators who are participating in the set up - Contracts are source viewable and verified - Redemptions are enabled - For LSTs, stake attestations are in place When users interact with BTC-backed tokens, there is a mechanism that secures the BTC that is backing the specific tokenized derivative on the network. There are a number of ways to build these solutions. @nomicbtc sees its top validators managed a weighted multi-sig. @stacks sBTC has a public federation of 14 signers participating in securing its two-way peg. @tbtc_project uses a randomized signer selection process to build the signer sets for its wallets. @coinbase's cbBTC is managed by a custodial provider. Why not just assess these bridges within the network framework? Let's look at @rootstock_io as an example. Rootstock has a public federation securing the BTC backing RBTC, its native gas token. But, BitGo's wBTC has a supply of 238 BTC on the network. Users of these assets have two completely different risk profiles. Therefore we have to look at all implementations of bridges and token wrappers on the various networks we analyze. Even if the most secure two-way peg is implemented, there's nothing stopping other token wrappers from deploying their asset on a given network. We have started reviewing various token wrappers deployed across the networks on our site. These assessments are meant to further supplement our reviews on various execution networks. Whilst we are actively reviewing these projects, we do consider this framework a living document. Community feedback is welcomed and appreciated. For more information on how we plan to analyze bridges and token wrappers, click the link below.

Analyzing censorship resistance for bitcoin layers ✨ A thread on @januszg’s talk from MIT’s Bitcoin Expo:

Some novel use cases on Core exist. Core is EVM-compatible and currently offers a variety of DeFi use cases for coreBTC. #BTC staking is also a part of Satoshi Plus consensus, giving BTC holders an opportunity to earn yield on their #BTC.

A new protocol has been added to the Bitcoin Layers’ website ✨ @MezoNetwork - a federated network serving as an application layer for BTC-backed assets:

Alternatives to the EVM The majority of new Bitcoin sidesystems want to tap into the EVM's network effects. But, some say it's not the most developer friendly. Tomorrow, we're discussing building on the EVM and potential alternatives. Join us 👇 nitter.app/i/spaces/1BdxYEL…

BTC derivative FUD & our latest research nitter.app/i/broadcasts/1gqxvNyEb…

Bitcoin Layers is free and open source 🧡 Many members of the #Bitcoin community have recently asked how they can support the project. If you'd like to get involved, consider checking our contributor page below: github.com/bitcoinlayers/bit…

Independent researcher @januszg_ has received funding from @StarkWareLTD, @AlpenLabs, and @spark to continue contributing to the Bitcoin Layers’ open-source project!

Our review of the Lightning Network is now complete. The Lightning Network is a Layer 2 solution on top of #Bitcoin. It is a network of payment channels that support low-cost payments between counterparties and across the network.

hello, world

New review on Bitcoin Layers ✨ @botanix is a federated sidechain. It is bitcoin-denominated and relies on a consortium of 16 companies to operate the network and manage its official two-way peg:

In short, a BitVM peg-out works as such. - Alice withdraws 1 BTC from bridge - Operator fronts 1 BTC of their own liquidity to cover costs of the peg-out - After completing this request, Operator requests a reimbursement from the bridge contract - If honest, Operator can redeem their funds. If dishonest, a watch tower can submit a fraud proof This is oversimplifying it, but sufficient for our argument.

The team (well, Janusz) had a great week in Hong Kong 🇭🇰 During his keynote at @btc_summit, @januszg_ presented on what people really mean when they say “self-custodial bitcoin L2”. A tl;dr on his talk 🧵

Within this framework, we state that unilateral exit is the primary requirement to make a Bitcoin Layer a “true L2”. This means that users can exit the L2, with their Bitcoin assets, without having to trust a third party to process their withdrawals.

We've found that over 60% of current and upcoming #Bitcoin scaling projects will use the EVM.

BitVM bridges see a set of operators process peg-outs. A set of watchtowers (a.k.a. verifiers) watch these requests to ensure they align with the current state of the L2. If they do not, a fraud proof can be submitted onchain.

New review on Bitcoin Layers ✨ @hemi_xyz is an Ethereum rollup. It anchors its state to bitcoin and supports a number of bitcoin-backed assets:

Within this system, there are a number of additional moving parts. Users must also trust: - Operators being able to satisfy this withdrawal request (via being online and having sufficient capital to front the withdrawal request) - Sidesystem validators not creating malicious private forks attesting to malicious peg outs - Sidesystem data being made available to advance sidesystem state Among other things.

Core has a roadmap that enables more #BTC-native use cases, and its consensus mechanism is permissionless to join. But, users still still trust operators outside of #Bitcoin when using Core and coreBTC.

🤔 Is it #Bitcoin L2 Summer? Time to find out. We're kicking off a weekly series covering the recent wave of new Bitcoin scaling projects. This Thursday we'll discuss L2 tokens and some recent rug pulls... Join us 👉 nitter.app/i/spaces/1jMJgmmAzdgKL

Ethereum has a well-defined “stages” framework for L2s, created by @L2Beat. If you analyzed BitVM-based bridges against this framework, they would not meet stage 1 due to the fact that users cannot circumvent BitVM bridge operators to facilitate their own peg-outs.

Ultimately, we believe we are very early in the Bitcoin scaling journey. We’re looking forward to protocols working towards decentralized and trustless solutions that scale #Bitcoin and enable more use of #BTC.

Another assessment has been added to the site! @build_on_bob is an optimistic rollup on Ethereum that supports #Bitcoin-centric applications. It is built on the OP Stack, and has plans to derive more security from Bitcoin in upcoming releases.

Happy Birthday to me 🎉 To celebrate, an update from @januszg_ — The Bitcoin Layers project is effectively being run by volunteers. Our team is building an app that requires our full attention and we simply don’t have the bandwidth (or funds) to maintain it full-time or part-time consistently. The current core contributor set remains myself, Red, and Mike. But I’ve noticed that our contributions lessen every week as we work on new products. Still: - For token requests to be added to the database, ping @redvelvetzip - For research requests, ping me - For UI tweaks, ping @bolander72 - Or just join our TG chat and request stuff there But note that it’s going to take longer for us to get to things. I’m still going to contribute to it regularly because I care about it (cringe, I know). Some of the claims made in the space are honestly quite unhinged, so it’s good to have something that acts as a watchdog over this new category. But if you don’t trust me, or my opinions (which are 100% infallible may I add), there are a couple of options: - Contribute to it. Everything is open-source and you can submit a PR today (it will take us time to review, however) - Fork it and create your own version. Try to monetize it and succeed where we didn’t - Work with us on creating a grants pool where we can fund independent researchers & devs - Independently fund researchers to work on the site yourself & without our permission - We’re open to hearing more ideas We’re going to experiment with some other ideas to generate some funds for the project. Even if these ideas pan out, most of the profits will go into a grants pool to fund other contributors interested in the project. We may take some to fund infra costs that we incur for maintaining the site and database. This doesn’t mean Bitcoin Layers is sunsetting. Or it’ll never be worked on again. Hell, I've done like 6 projects reviews the past two weeks. We're just letting you all know that things just may be a little slower 🙂 For what it's worth, we never made any money on Bitcoin Layers. Thanks for your support. - Janusz

Private 🌽 & rollups debate 🥷🎙 nitter.app/i/broadcasts/1OwGWNepo…

Our review analyzed Core against four criteria. While #Bitcoin miners can delegate hashrate to Core validators, they do not participate in consensus themselves or permit withdrawals.

There are many projects that identify as Bitcoin Layers. We analyze them against the five different criteria pictured below:

Our initial protocol assessment on @fedimint has been completed. Fedimint supports the development of federated applications on #Bitcoin. #BTC custody is managed by trusted federation members.

Therefore, users trust that: 1) Core validators will not censor their transactions, and will permit withdrawals 2) coreBTC bridge operators will not collude and steal users’ #BTC

You can read our initial assessment here: bitcoinlayers.org/layers/cor…

The company behind #Bitcoin Layers has closed a funding round to support the development of the platform 🧡

Bitcoin fungible tokens 🎉 nitter.app/i/broadcasts/1RDGlyzjL…

In recent announcements, teams are claiming that bridges between Ethereum L2s and BitVM bridges are "trustless". As this thread shows, this is incorrect.

Product update 🛠️ Our reviews will now include deeper analysis on bitcoin scripts, and smart contracts, used by bitcoin layers:

#Bitcoin is the caviar of data availability layers 💰 Limited data availability could see posting rollup data to Bitcoin become costly. This may cause projects to look towards alternative solutions.

For more information on our requirements, see our latest blog: lxresearch.co/starting-to-de…

And this thread ignores the fact that many BitVM bridges will launch with “training wheels” - meaning a centralized admin will have upgrade permissions over the bridge.

L2s are protocols that exist to scale #Bitcoin while also enabling unilateral exit. This means that when you deposit #BTC (or any Bitcoin asset) into the L2, you can withdraw your funds without requiring permission from the scaling protocol's operators.

Currently, we believe the only “true L2s” that exist on Bitcoin today are state channels like lightning and statechains. *ducks* We also believe that other scaling protocols will one day enable unilateral exit. We explain this in our documentation: bitcoin-layers.gitbook.io/bi…

Semantics Sessions returns tomorrow 🗣️ Topic: Many people say Ethereum and its L2s are a testnet. But maybe it's where BTC is most actively used? @januszg_ and @redvelvetzip are breaking it down at 11am Eastern. Join us 👇nitter.app/i/spaces/1DXxydrZqbdJM

The Bitcoin Layers team is heading to Nashville 🤠 Shoot @januszg_ or @redvelvetzip a DM if you want to chat about #Bitcoin scaling. We'll be at the events listed below 👇

Our initial protocol assessment on the Liquid Network is complete. Users primarily trust a group of 15 signers, known as functionaries, with the custody of their #BTC when interacting with the Liquid sidechain.

BitVM bridges seek to have 1-of-N trust assumptions related to their operator sets and 1-of-N unbounded trust assumptions related to their verifiers. But, users must additionally trust the BitVM bridge operator set for liveness and operators of alternative, external protocols to not “trick” the bridge (in most scenarios).

.@redvelvetzip has formally announced he's co-founding the company behind @bitcoinlayers 🧡

Please see our initial risk analysis framework here: bitcoin-layers.gitbook.io/bi…

Our code is completely free and open-source. Did we miss something? Submit a PR so we can review it and add it to the site. Keep us honest! github.com/bitcoinlayers/bit…

The Explore Custody App🔐 Bitcoin Layers will enable users to directly discover custody models for bitcoin L2s and more. Users can search between various network & custody combos. And, they can even find the custody engine behind their favorite apps 📱

In the upcoming Bitcoin Layers website, we will also analyze protocols that do not meet this requirement as the broader community views these protocols as L2s.

Stacks is prioritizing decentralization and lowering the risks users take on when interacting with #BTC on its protocol, but users still have to trust another consensus protocol that is not #Bitcoin. You can find our full risk assessment here: bitcoinlayers.org/layers/sta…

There is a lot of nuance around Bitcoin scaling, and by releasing this framework, we’re working towards standardizing the way the community views scaling protocols. If you have any comments or questions around anything in our framework, please let us know.

Insert “Layers” → the umbrella term for any protocol attempting to scale Bitcoin and add increased functionality for BTC the asset. It’s getting to be a pretty long list of things we need to review 😅 bitcoinlayers.org

an opinion piece from @januszg_ janusz is confused by "hybrid settlement" so he wrote a quick post on rollup settlement and finality POST This is a very random post, but worth covering as a large number of BTC is currently being deployed on Ethereum rollups & L2s. We have done some reviews on Ethereum L2s where we mention the proving system giving users finality guarantees and I’m not sure if that’s correct. As mentioned in a previous post on rollups, the state root is computed by rollup full nodes. Proposers and/or provers then take this state root and post it to the Layer 1 to finalize the bridge contract. Validity bridges finalize upon receiving the state root & proof. Optimistic bridges take 7~ days to finalize assuming a fault proof is not submitted. In short, the proof system is used to secure the bridge. It’s not necessarily used to finalize the rollup. This is confusing because people claim that having a socially enshrined bridge contract makes the corresponding L1 a “settlement layer”. In my opinion, this is incorrect framing - especially from the lens of a BTC user on an Ethereum L2. For example, tBTC uses a custom bridge program to Arbitrum. It is not really secured by the fraud proof system deployed on Arbitrum. If the Arbitrum bridge contract was drained, then tBTC users would be unaffected. If the sequencer quits building blocks, they could simply post their own block to Ethereum signaling that they want to withdraw from the custom bridge back to Ethereum L1 and eventually to bitcoin (assuming tBTC continues to work). Even if a BTC-backed asset is locked in a canonical bridge contract, its security is ultimately from the asset issuer. If wBTC locked in a bridge contract, but the custodian rugs everyone, then the security of the bridge ultimately doesn’t matter. You could argue that users who don’t run their own L2 full node view finality through the lens of a state root/proof being posted to the Ethereum L1. E.g. If social consensus says the L2 is final when the bridge says its final, most BTC-denominated asset users will follow social consensus. I totally get it. But through this lens, finality is ultimately dependent on provers/proposers updating the state of the L1 bridge contract and other light clients. If the system is permissioned, risk of censorship or liveness failures are present. This is still an open question for us, but we will probably give L2s, who socially identity with another base layer, a custom score for finality guarantees. We’re still unsure on how to score “hybrid layer 2s” who have official bridge programs on more than one chain (including bitcoin). Our framework is intentionally vague for these edge cases. We’ll continue to refine it as we continue to research these nuances. It is my opinion that rollups are sovereign networks and viewing them through the lens of a bridge contract is 1) a social definition and 2) subjective to which bridge users leverage. I believe this is also the case for bitcoin rollups. But that’s a post for another day.

Reminder that we are hosting our weekly community call today at 2pm Eastern (US). If you have questions on our risk framework, or how we include projects, consider joining us! Information on the call can be found here: github.com/bitcoinlayers/com…

In practice, no one has been able to create an overcollateralized two-way peg. All live two-way pegs are honest majority federations. BitVM bridges offer us an alternative. That is why it’s so exciting.

Bitcoin Layers update ✨ Here's the latest from our contributors: Research - All alternative L1s and rollups have been given (at minimum) a preliminary review // score 🎉 - An initial review on Hemi has been published. We are reviewing if its bitcoin checkpointing feature is live. The tl;dr is that Hemi is an Ethereum rollup with permissioned operators and governance model. Janusz provided a tl;dr last week (linked below) - Side Protocol’s two-way peg has been reviewed. It consists of 21 signers participating in a TSS scheme - Alternative L1s Tron & Sonic have been added to the sites. Tron has a wrapped BTC supply of 17,685. Sonic has 1700~ - We’ll be peeping Second’s Ark implementation on Signet here soon 👀 Data - We’re continuing to add various tokens across a number of new networks. These networks will be added to the site soon Frontend - We have a new PR open to add a “more” section to the site. This section will contain reviews on user-facing protocols that might not fit our definition of a layer. For example, Lava Loans Need a layer or BTC-backed token added to the site? DM @januszg_ to get it on his research queue. See you all next week 🤝

.@januszg_ is joining @BitcoinMagazine's weekly show to discuss what is *actually* going on with #Bitcoin "L2s". Are they even better than centralized custodians? Perhaps. Join us to find out why: nitter.app/i/spaces/1RDGllWbwZrGL

So why do we include things that don’t enable unilateral exit? Because the consensus is that people value these protocols for scaling Bitcoin. And people need more tools for understanding the risks and trade-offs of interacting with them.

Dark mode is live ✨🥷✨

We have updated our framework for analyzing implementations of sidechains and #Bitcoin L2s.

We’ve added a “critical” score to our risk assessments. More information in the post below 👇

Why is everyone building on the EVM? In our latest semantics session, @redvelvetzip chatted through the EVM's dominance for Bitcoin Layers and which alternatives might be leveraged down the road. Full recording available below 👇

We will update this map on a regular cadence and release an update on our reviews, projects we’re following, and projects we might have removed from the site. Here’s the latest: lxresearch.co/ecosystem-map-…

Our initial review of @BitlayerLabs is complete. BitLayer’s mainnet v1 is a federated sidechain. They have a group of federated validators operating the network and trusted parties securing the chain's two-way peg with #Bitcoin.

We're hosting a community call to discuss a few of our ongoing project assessments. 🕒 Tomorrow @ 3pm UTC 📍 Our telegram chat Links below 👇

So we got a… list? Yes, @BitcoinLayers has a growing list of over 40+ projects on its website. Projects range from payment channels, rollups, sidechains, and related Bitcoin scaling infrastructure. Bridges are coming soon.

As we’ve mentioned, our position is that the overwhelming majority of these projects are not “L2s”. This is why we use the term “Layers”. nitter.app/BitcoinLayers/status/1… Bitcoin does not have a unified scaling roadmap. There are a plethora of designs being developed to support scaling Bitcoin or provide more use cases for BTC the asset. Protocols like the Lightning Network, Mercury Layer, and Ark can have relatively strong trust assumptions related to custody. Infrastructure protocols, some of which might not be technically “layers”, can support scaling solutions and also help developers build application modules that support new use cases.

We also host weekly community calls and welcome anyone in the Bitcoin community to join the discussion. Our community chat is here: t.me/+8rv-1I2gkmQ4ZmJh

What do sidesystem projects mean when they say "Bitcoin Finality"? Some protocols claim to have “bitcoin finality”. But, for alternative blockchains, bitcoin cannot enforce finality for that system. This means that projects can not directly inherit bitcoin’s double-spend resistance. What projects are saying when they use the term “bitcoin finality” is that their alternative consensus mechanism builds upon checkpoints posted to bitcoin. Bitcoin, in this example, is essentially a bulletin board where protocols post arbitrary data. The interpretation of this data is done by the alternative network of nodes, not bitcoin. The “double-spend resistance” still comes from the alternative network. However, because the network leverages these checkpoints, the network gets some additional benefits that malicious attackers must reorg bitcoin to additionally reorg the alternative network. This is because the networks set up their consensus mechanism in a way that requires block builders to reference the checkpoint posted to bitcoin in a new block proposal. When sidesystem projects say they have “bitcoin finality”, they mean that their own network interprets sets of data that's posted to bitcoin. While checkpointing does provide some security benefits, it should be clear that bitcoin is not the protocol enforcing the rules for sidesystem block production. Bitcoin, relative to the state transitions of an alternative networks, is not a settlement layer.

@ercwl, @waltjsmith, @JeremyRubin, @mikehamilton, and @redvelvetzip discuss if OP_CAT introduces harmful MEV: piped.video/watch?v=HRGx_Y0f…

New review on Bitcoin Layers ✨ @spark is a statechain implementation. It is enables users to transfer UTXOs, offchain, with the help of a federated signing protocol:

ICYMI: @StackingSaunter gave our site a much needed makeover 🧡