S E L E N E
12.2k Posts
S E L E N E
Square Verified+Turning Volatility Into Opportunity 📈🚀
667 Kuzatilmoqda
32.6K+ Followers
28.4K+ Liked
Postlar
Portfel
Barchasi
Iqtiboslar
Jonli
PINNED
Babylon’s recent progress made me look beyond the headline numbers.
Faster vault creation is obviously a better user experience, but speed can change user behavior too. When entering a vault becomes almost frictionless, participation can rise without necessarily telling us whether users are committed for the long term.
The same applies to redemption mechanics. A three-day waiting period may seem insignificant during normal market conditions, but its impact becomes much more relevant when liquidity tightens, rates increase, or multiple users exit simultaneously. Small costs can quickly become meaningful when margins are already thin.
Then there’s the Baby question.
Bitcoin provides the economic security, but governance remains with BABY holders and delegates. That separation is understandable from a protocol-design perspective, yet it creates an important distinction between contributing capital to the network and having influence over its direction.
For me, the next phase isn’t just about attracting more BTC.
It’s about proving that BTC participation, protocol activity, and $BABY demand can reinforce each other sustainably.
#baby
@BabylonLabs_io
$ASMLB
Can Babylon turn BTC growth into sustainable $BABY demand?
Faster vault creation is obviously a better user experience, but speed can change user behavior too. When entering a vault becomes almost frictionless, participation can rise without necessarily telling us whether users are committed for the long term.
The same applies to redemption mechanics. A three-day waiting period may seem insignificant during normal market conditions, but its impact becomes much more relevant when liquidity tightens, rates increase, or multiple users exit simultaneously. Small costs can quickly become meaningful when margins are already thin.
Then there’s the Baby question.
Bitcoin provides the economic security, but governance remains with BABY holders and delegates. That separation is understandable from a protocol-design perspective, yet it creates an important distinction between contributing capital to the network and having influence over its direction.
For me, the next phase isn’t just about attracting more BTC.
It’s about proving that BTC participation, protocol activity, and $BABY demand can reinforce each other sustainably.
#baby
@BabylonLabs_io
$ASMLB
Can Babylon turn BTC growth into sustainable $BABY demand?
Yes, via utility
Maybe, with ecosystem growth
Not yet
5 hr(s) left
JUST IN : The Fed will inject $8.6 billion into the market this week.
The Fed has now added $212 billion to the economy since ending QT last December.
#FedRateDecisions
The Fed has now added $212 billion to the economy since ending QT last December.
#FedRateDecisions
$HOME
Entry: 0.00730 – 0.00734
Stop Loss: 0.00715
Tp1: 0.00755
Tp2: 0.00780
Tp3: 0.00810
$HOME
$HD
#Home
Entry: 0.00730 – 0.00734
Stop Loss: 0.00715
Tp1: 0.00755
Tp2: 0.00780
Tp3: 0.00810
$HOME
$HD
#Home
$PEPE
Entry: 0.00000291 – 0.00000294
TP1: 0.00000296
TP2: 0.00000300
TP3: 0.00000305
Stop Loss: 0.00000287
$VIC
#PEPE
Entry: 0.00000291 – 0.00000294
TP1: 0.00000296
TP2: 0.00000300
TP3: 0.00000305
Stop Loss: 0.00000287
$VIC
#PEPE
$WBETH
Entry: 2,048.00 – 2,055.00
TP1: 2,062.00
TP2: 2,069.00
TP3: 2,080.00
Stop Loss: 2,035.00
$WBETH
$VIC
#WBETH
Entry: 2,048.00 – 2,055.00
TP1: 2,062.00
TP2: 2,069.00
TP3: 2,080.00
Stop Loss: 2,035.00
$WBETH
$VIC
#WBETH
$VIC
Entry: 0.05850 – 0.05930
TP1: 0.06200
TP2: 0.06500
TP3: 0.06745
Stop Loss: 0.05500
$NVDA.US
#VIC
Entry: 0.05850 – 0.05930
TP1: 0.06200
TP2: 0.06500
TP3: 0.06745
Stop Loss: 0.05500
$NVDA.US
#VIC
VIC+21,25%
NVDAUS-0,06%
The more I look into @BabylonLabs_io the more I think the real challenge isn’t simply making BTC useful.
It’s doing that without slowly adding back the trust assumptions Bitcoin was designed to avoid.
Native BTC borrowing is a good example. Keeping BTC on Bitcoin instead of wrapping it or moving it through another layer sounds straightforward but the complexity doesn’t disappear. It moves into verification recovery liquidity and how the system handles failures.
The same applies to Babylon’s storage and evidence design. Cutting the data size is useful, but smaller storage doesn’t automatically mean stronger integrity. What really matters is whether the index can still be checked, recovered, and kept consistent when something goes wrong.
That’s the part I’m watching most closely.
For me, the bigger innovation isn’t adding more BTCFi features. It’s reducing unnecessary trust while keeping the system practical enough for real users.
#baby
$BABY
$BICO
It’s doing that without slowly adding back the trust assumptions Bitcoin was designed to avoid.
Native BTC borrowing is a good example. Keeping BTC on Bitcoin instead of wrapping it or moving it through another layer sounds straightforward but the complexity doesn’t disappear. It moves into verification recovery liquidity and how the system handles failures.
The same applies to Babylon’s storage and evidence design. Cutting the data size is useful, but smaller storage doesn’t automatically mean stronger integrity. What really matters is whether the index can still be checked, recovered, and kept consistent when something goes wrong.
That’s the part I’m watching most closely.
For me, the bigger innovation isn’t adding more BTCFi features. It’s reducing unnecessary trust while keeping the system practical enough for real users.
#baby
$BABY
$BICO
Lower trust assumptions
100%
⚡ Easy & fast liquidity
0%
verification & recovery
0%
2 Ovozlar • Voting closed
The more I look at Babylon, the more interesting the liquidity side becomes.
Native BTC collateral sounds simple on paper keep Bitcoin where it belongs, make it useful, and avoid the wrapped-asset headache.
But then the market tells a slightly different story.
Babylon’s TVL is sitting around $2.61B, yet it has fallen roughly 19% over the last week.
At the same time, $BABY is doing about $6.2M in daily volume, with only around 13% coming from DEXs.
So roughly 87% of the trading activity is still happening through centralized exchanges.
And that creates an interesting question.
You can build a collateral system where Bitcoin doesn’t need to leave its native environment but the market around the protocol can still depend heavily on centralized liquidity.
That doesn’t invalidate TBV.
If anything, it makes the distinction clearer.
@BabylonLabs_io
Trustless custody and trustless liquidity are two different problems.
The borrowing side is where things get really interesting for BTC holders.
Instead of selling Bitcoin whenever liquidity is needed, the possibility becomes keep the BTC exposure and unlock liquidity against it.
That could change the mindset from:
BTC is something I hold.
to:
BTC is capital I can actually use.
But for that thesis to fully mature, I think the industry has to solve more than just the collateral layer.
The next question is where the liquidity, pricing and market activity around that collateral ultimately settle.
Because making BTC trustless is one challenge.
Making the entire economic loop trustless is another.
$HOME
#baby
Native BTC collateral sounds simple on paper keep Bitcoin where it belongs, make it useful, and avoid the wrapped-asset headache.
But then the market tells a slightly different story.
Babylon’s TVL is sitting around $2.61B, yet it has fallen roughly 19% over the last week.
At the same time, $BABY is doing about $6.2M in daily volume, with only around 13% coming from DEXs.
So roughly 87% of the trading activity is still happening through centralized exchanges.
And that creates an interesting question.
You can build a collateral system where Bitcoin doesn’t need to leave its native environment but the market around the protocol can still depend heavily on centralized liquidity.
That doesn’t invalidate TBV.
If anything, it makes the distinction clearer.
@BabylonLabs_io
Trustless custody and trustless liquidity are two different problems.
The borrowing side is where things get really interesting for BTC holders.
Instead of selling Bitcoin whenever liquidity is needed, the possibility becomes keep the BTC exposure and unlock liquidity against it.
That could change the mindset from:
BTC is something I hold.
to:
BTC is capital I can actually use.
But for that thesis to fully mature, I think the industry has to solve more than just the collateral layer.
The next question is where the liquidity, pricing and market activity around that collateral ultimately settle.
Because making BTC trustless is one challenge.
Making the entire economic loop trustless is another.
$HOME
#baby
Trustless BTC collateral
43%
Decentralized $BABY liquidity
29%
Both are equally important
28%
7 Ovozlar • Voting closed
Ko‘proq kontentni ko‘rish uchun tizimga kiring