the confirmation count went backward.
that was the Babylon number i was not ready for.
the staking transaction had already been found on Bitcoin. more headers came in. depth was building. i had stopped checking whether the staking UTXO was real and started treating the Bitcoin part as done.
then a reorganization landed and the number got smaller.
i stared at it like that should not be allowed.
confirmed is supposed to be one of those words that only gets more true with time.
my first thought was that some Babylon indexer had gone weird. refresh it. report the transaction again. the UTXO was there yesterday, so surely somebody could just tell Babylon Genesis it was still there.
except a reporter does not get that authority inside Babylon.
the Vigilante Reporter can bring Bitcoin headers and inclusion evidence over. it can say this transaction appeared in this block.
the BTC Light Client still has to decide whether that block belongs to Bitcoin’s canonical history.
and now the shrinking number made sense in the most annoying way.
Babylon’s BTC Light Client follows verified headers under Bitcoin’s PoW rules. depth is counted from the chain that survives. if a reorganization pushes the staking transaction out of that chain, the old inclusion proof does not stay enough just because an indexer remembers it.
the transaction did not change.
the history around it did.
same staking output. same txid. same delegation intent.
but Babylon’s BTC Staking module cannot ignore the new chain. staking confirmation, spends of the output, and even the Bitcoin blocks carrying the timelock forward depend on which headers are canonical now.
i kept looking at the count.
not because i thought the BTC Light Client was wrong anymore.
because it was willing to take certainty back.
an API could keep showing the transaction.
a reporter could submit it again.
but if Babylon’s BTC Light Client no longer finds that UTXO inside the Bitcoin history that won, i am not sure what the old confirmation is supposed to belong to.
@BabylonLabs_io #baby $BABY $BICO $SKYAI
that was the Babylon number i was not ready for.
the staking transaction had already been found on Bitcoin. more headers came in. depth was building. i had stopped checking whether the staking UTXO was real and started treating the Bitcoin part as done.
then a reorganization landed and the number got smaller.
i stared at it like that should not be allowed.
confirmed is supposed to be one of those words that only gets more true with time.
my first thought was that some Babylon indexer had gone weird. refresh it. report the transaction again. the UTXO was there yesterday, so surely somebody could just tell Babylon Genesis it was still there.
except a reporter does not get that authority inside Babylon.
the Vigilante Reporter can bring Bitcoin headers and inclusion evidence over. it can say this transaction appeared in this block.
the BTC Light Client still has to decide whether that block belongs to Bitcoin’s canonical history.
and now the shrinking number made sense in the most annoying way.
Babylon’s BTC Light Client follows verified headers under Bitcoin’s PoW rules. depth is counted from the chain that survives. if a reorganization pushes the staking transaction out of that chain, the old inclusion proof does not stay enough just because an indexer remembers it.
the transaction did not change.
the history around it did.
same staking output. same txid. same delegation intent.
but Babylon’s BTC Staking module cannot ignore the new chain. staking confirmation, spends of the output, and even the Bitcoin blocks carrying the timelock forward depend on which headers are canonical now.
i kept looking at the count.
not because i thought the BTC Light Client was wrong anymore.
because it was willing to take certainty back.
an API could keep showing the transaction.
a reporter could submit it again.
but if Babylon’s BTC Light Client no longer finds that UTXO inside the Bitcoin history that won, i am not sure what the old confirmation is supposed to belong to.
@BabylonLabs_io #baby $BABY $BICO $SKYAI