![Best Times to Post on YouTube in 2025 [Research]](https://www.hubspot.com/hubfs/best-time-to-post-youtube.jpg)
Bitcoin rollups may be closer than we think
The post Bitcoin rollups may be closer than we think appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. July proved to be a banner month for efforts to scale Bitcoin using zero-knowledge proofs. First, StarkWare demonstrated a STARK verifier on Bitcoin’s Signet test network on July 17. Then last week at the Bitcoin 2024 conference in Nashville, two competing teams behind BitcoinOS and BitVMX verified zk proofs on Bitcoin mainnet. Both make use of BitVM, or “Bitcoin Virtual Machine,” an approach to create Turing-complete Bitcoin contracts without the need for a soft fork. Read more: Bitcoin research expands on design space for smart contracts A key difference between the two approaches is the degree of trustless execution, according to L2 Iterative Ventures’ Weikeng Chen, who worked on the STARK verifier with StarkWare. “BitVM has a trust assumption that still requires [a multisignature scheme],” Chen told Blockworks. “This assumption can be removed if we have OP_CAT.” The distinction is similar to that between optimistic and zk, or validity rollups, on Ethereum. Even though the BitcoinOS and BitVMX teams are verifying zk proofs, they’re doing so within a BitVM. Compared to a future version of Bitcoin with OP_CAT, they’re quite different trust models, Willem Schroe, Botanix Labs founder, agreed. Botanix Labs is building a decentralized proof-of-stake layer-2 using BTC, called Spiderchain. “BitVM allows you to run any type of code, and the trust assumption to run any type of code is optimistic,” Schroe told Blockworks. “So now you can say, ‘With an optimistic fraud proof assumption of the BitVM, we can verify a zk proof in the BitVM.’” Rootstock Labs worked with Sovereign Labs on BitVMX. BitcoinOS, of which Sovryn — not to be confused with Sovereign Labs — is one implementation, is a framework for interoperable rollups. There’s “no clear winner,” according to Chen, because even if OP_CAT gets added to Bitcoin, “the BitVM approach is much cheaper to…
The post Bitcoin rollups may be closer than we think appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com.
July proved to be a banner month for efforts to scale Bitcoin using zero-knowledge proofs. First, StarkWare demonstrated a STARK verifier on Bitcoin’s Signet test network on July 17. Then last week at the Bitcoin 2024 conference in Nashville, two competing teams behind BitcoinOS and BitVMX verified zk proofs on Bitcoin mainnet. Both make use of BitVM, or “Bitcoin Virtual Machine,” an approach to create Turing-complete Bitcoin contracts without the need for a soft fork. Read more: Bitcoin research expands on design space for smart contracts A key difference between the two approaches is the degree of trustless execution, according to L2 Iterative Ventures’ Weikeng Chen, who worked on the STARK verifier with StarkWare. “BitVM has a trust assumption that still requires [a multisignature scheme],” Chen told Blockworks. “This assumption can be removed if we have OP_CAT.” The distinction is similar to that between optimistic and zk, or validity rollups, on Ethereum. Even though the BitcoinOS and BitVMX teams are verifying zk proofs, they’re doing so within a BitVM. Compared to a future version of Bitcoin with OP_CAT, they’re quite different trust models, Willem Schroe, Botanix Labs founder, agreed. Botanix Labs is building a decentralized proof-of-stake layer-2 using BTC, called Spiderchain. “BitVM allows you to run any type of code, and the trust assumption to run any type of code is optimistic,” Schroe told Blockworks. “So now you can say, ‘With an optimistic fraud proof assumption of the BitVM, we can verify a zk proof in the BitVM.’” Rootstock Labs worked with Sovereign Labs on BitVMX. BitcoinOS, of which Sovryn — not to be confused with Sovereign Labs — is one implementation, is a framework for interoperable rollups. There’s “no clear winner,” according to Chen, because even if OP_CAT gets added to Bitcoin, “the BitVM approach is much cheaper to…
What's Your Reaction?
