When I was little, my father used to say: Son, think about locking the door first, then bring valuables into the house.
Today BitVM3 is doing exactly that. The intent to exit, meaning the pre-signed tx, comes first. The deposit comes after.
At first I thought BitVM3 was just a cheaper way to run BitVM, just another optimization to make assert and disprove transactions smaller.
But watching how it actually gets used in trustless Bitcoin vaults, I realized the real shift isn't cost. The real shift is sequencing.
Pre-signed transactions mean the exit conditions exist before the deposit does.
Every liquidation path, every reassignment of custody, gets locked in as a signature before a single satoshi moves.
That ordering changes behavior.
Now users aren't trusting an operator's "we'll do it later" promise, they're trusting a transaction that already exists and just hasn't been broadcast yet.
BitVM3 folds verification into a single off-chain garbled circuit, which lowers friction on the way in. But the timelocks on the way out remain the same. Liquidity still has to wait.
This raises the question: was trustless custody ever the hardest problem?
Maybe the harder problem is whether anyone actually wants their capital locked that tightly, in exchange for that much certainty.
As my father would say: Measure the exit twice deposit once.
@BabylonLabs_io #baby $BABY
$KOMA
$1000RATS
Today BitVM3 is doing exactly that. The intent to exit, meaning the pre-signed tx, comes first. The deposit comes after.
At first I thought BitVM3 was just a cheaper way to run BitVM, just another optimization to make assert and disprove transactions smaller.
But watching how it actually gets used in trustless Bitcoin vaults, I realized the real shift isn't cost. The real shift is sequencing.
Pre-signed transactions mean the exit conditions exist before the deposit does.
Every liquidation path, every reassignment of custody, gets locked in as a signature before a single satoshi moves.
That ordering changes behavior.
Now users aren't trusting an operator's "we'll do it later" promise, they're trusting a transaction that already exists and just hasn't been broadcast yet.
BitVM3 folds verification into a single off-chain garbled circuit, which lowers friction on the way in. But the timelocks on the way out remain the same. Liquidity still has to wait.
This raises the question: was trustless custody ever the hardest problem?
Maybe the harder problem is whether anyone actually wants their capital locked that tightly, in exchange for that much certainty.
As my father would say: Measure the exit twice deposit once.
@BabylonLabs_io #baby $BABY
$KOMA
$1000RATS