There's something genuinely compelling about how native cross-chain solutions could reshape Bitcoin's movement patterns—it feels like a genuine departure from what we're working with today.
No wrapper tokens cluttering the picture. No custodians sitting in the middle. Just actual native asset movement between chains.
Once you really grasp that architecture, you can't help but notice how inefficient the current setup actually is. The friction becomes obvious.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
5 Likes
Reward
5
3
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ForkThisDAO
· 10h ago
ngl Native cross-chain has been talked about for so long, but the real implementation still depends on technological breakthroughs... But on the other hand, the idea of cutting out middlemen is indeed satisfying.
View OriginalReply0
SerumSqueezer
· 11h ago
To be honest, when a truly native cross-chain solution comes out, this wrapper token thing should be phased out... The efficiency is incredibly poor.
View OriginalReply0
IntrovertMetaverse
· 11h ago
Damn, native cross-chain technology can really make a difference. No need for a bunch of shitcoins as middlemen—that's awesome.
There's something genuinely compelling about how native cross-chain solutions could reshape Bitcoin's movement patterns—it feels like a genuine departure from what we're working with today.
No wrapper tokens cluttering the picture. No custodians sitting in the middle. Just actual native asset movement between chains.
Once you really grasp that architecture, you can't help but notice how inefficient the current setup actually is. The friction becomes obvious.