I keep thinking about the word "trustless" and how much weight Babylon is asking it to carry with its Bitcoin vaults. The pitch is straightforward: lock native BTC in a self-custodial, segregated vault on Bitcoin itself, and let smart contracts on Ethereum or elsewhere read its state through BitVM3-verified proofs. No wrapping, no bridge operator, no custodian holding your keys. That's a real design improvement over WBTC-style models, where solvency depends entirely on one company's honesty. What I don't know yet is how much of that trustlessness survives contact with liquidation. Babylon's own whitepaper leans on whitelisted liquidators and a price oracle to trigger redemptions, and both of those are trust assumptions dressed up in cryptography. The deposit path looks genuinely trust-minimized. The exit path still depends on parties behaving and prices arriving on time. The question is whether starting on Ethereum instead of their own chain reflects real borrower demand or just where liquidity already sits. I am watching whether liquidations get pressure-tested before volume scales past pilot size.
@BabylonLabs_io $BABY #baby