🔬 Deep Analysis of RGB Smart Contracts: From Handwritten AluVM Assembly to Learning Contractum We have fully completed the end-to-end process of the RGB20 contract on RGB v0.11 and v0.12, using real code to answer the frequent questions from the community: 1、How should the RGB contract be written? 2、What are the core differences between the implementation of v0.11 and v0.12 smart contracts? 3、What is the next-generation smart contract language Contractum? This article is a practical learning and verification note for developers and protocol researchers. 📖 Full text: 💻 Demonstration code repository:

We're excited to share a new milestone on @monad 1️⃣ Money can now move privately on @monad mainnet 2️⃣ Users truly own their onchain data — for the first time 👉

tl;dr: @lukedashjr decided to use a testnet4 block hash as the random beacon to pick BIP-110-chain's new PoW function. An absolutely batshit decision. It's clearly possible to manipulate that by just mining blocks with the right hash. Mining a testnet4 block has a trivial cost. So mining one with a specific last byte in the block hash – thus forcing a particular PoW choice – also has a trivial cost. When Zcash did something similar for a trusted setup, they picked a Bitcoin block in the future, and they specified that the block hash would in turn be re-hashed 2⁴² times¹ to ensure that absolutely no-one could possibly pick the value in advance (that's a 2-3 weeks of sequential computation). There's two possibilities here: 1) Luke is incompetent. 2) Luke is malicious, and is trying to pick a specific PoW. The possibilities are not exclusive. 1)

After reviewing this article carefully, I find it quite interesting. It reminds me of a past discussion among friends about secure BTC storage： Some argued hardware wallets are superior, recommending options such as Ledger, Jade and OneKey. Others believed a standalone iPhone works best and offers greater security. This proposal combines both approaches. It also designs a simple script that leverages pre-signed transactions to enable flexible spending. After thorough consideration, I have several suggestions regarding this scheme: ▪️For ordinary users, the solution may overemphasize the complexity of pre-signed transactions. The examples include arrangements like "monthly spending", which leads to a large volume of pre-signed transactions. In reality, most people have no need for monthly spending setups unless managing large treasury vault. Their priority lies in long-term BTC custody. Daily expenses will most likely be simplified through asset allocation, making the workflow far less complicated under such scenarios. ▪️The fund strategy needs annual reset. To prevent regular users from abandoning the solution due to excessive complexity, this step must be supported via streamlined user interactions. Naturally, this is less of an issue for large treasury management, as such treasuries inherently require ongoing strategy administration. Overall, I believe this scheme offers valuable insights, especially for individual self-custody of BTC. Of course, it faces numerous challenges, including hardware compatibility, security concerns surrounding mobile devices, and the creation of simplified workflows for pre-signing strategies. In principle, if we aim to implement more flexible strategies, it may indeed hold true that we require covenants as @notgrubles said before. #BTC# #custody# #covenants# #ANZEN#

There is a critical vulnerability being actively exploited on BTCPay Server, which can result in the loss of funds. Please update your BTCPayServer to 2.4.2 by going to Admin Dashboard -> Server -> Maintenance -> Update & verify the 2.4.2 version string in the footer. If you are unable to update right away, turn off your BTCPay Server to prevent unauthorized access until you can update.

@bodhicitta777 @Vladcostea @gladstein @HRF @fedibtc @blksresearch @Blockstream yes client-side validation was something @peterktodd and i were thinking about some years back, had a 4 hr voice call on the topic. @dr_orlovsky even has confidential transactions added in it for RGB assets.

Why JIT Liquidity + Splice Are Critical for Atomic Swaps @BitlightLabs has released the latest update on staying in sync with Lightning development progress, while also introducing several new features planned for future support. @rgbstashlabs provides an in-depth explanation of two key features from this roadmap, along with further context on their significance for Stash Labs products such as RLSP, and Flash Dex. 🔥 Two Core Capabilities Explained: • JIT liquidity for RGB: just-in-time RGB asset channel opening • Splice for RGB: dynamic capacity adjustment of RGB asset channels Building on our RLSP + Atomic Swap capabilities, is about to launch native asset swap trading. However, the current RGB Lightning Network pipeline has key pain points: When a user completes a $RGB buy order via RLN and RLSP, two channels must be opened sequentially: ✅ User opens a BTC channel to pay BTC to the RLSP ✅ RLSP opens a BTC/RGB composite channel to deliver $RGB to the user Three Major Drawbacks of the Current Model: 1⃣ Dual channel opening requires waiting for Bitcoin mainnet block confirmations — typically 6 confirmations — resulting in extremely high transaction latency. 2⃣ Channel capacity is fixed. Once the balance is insufficient for the next transaction, the old channel must be closed and a new one rebuilt — a costly process with high fees and a fragmented user experience. 3⃣ The current model is completely unable to support high-frequency continuous trading scenarios like FlashDex perpetual contracts, severely limiting the RGB ecosystem's trading experience. 🚀 JIT Liquidity | On-Demand RGB Channel Opening JIT (Just-In-Time) liquidity — the core principle is to create on demand, with no pre-lockup required: ▸ Users don't need to pre-fund or manually create RGB asset channels; ▸ When initiating a $RGB receive/swap request, the RLSP instantly generates a virtual off-chain channel — no immediate on-chain settlement needed; ▸ After the first transaction is completed, it is automatically anchored on-chain and converted into an official RGB Lightning channel. 💡 Core Value: • Zero-barrier entry to RGB asset swaps — no idle capital lockup. • Dramatically reduced transaction wait times, eliminating mainnet block confirmation delays. • Enables users to complete $RGB transactions as seamlessly as Lightning BTC, while maximizing RLSP capital efficiency. 🛠 Splice for RGB | Dynamic Capacity Adjustment for RGB Asset Channels Built on the Lightning Network's native Channel Splicing technology, allowing RGB asset channels to be resized without closing or rebuilding: ▸ Splice-in (expand): Add BTC/RGB assets directly to an existing channel; ▸ Splice-out (shrink): Withdraw idle funds from the channel as needed; ▸ The channel remains uninterrupted throughout — no trading pauses required. Only the funding transaction is updated via signatures, requiring a single on-chain confirmation. 💡 Core Value: • Permanently eliminates the old pattern of "close and reopen a channel when the balance runs out". • Seamlessly supports high-frequency continuous trading, enabling FlashDex perpetual contract scenarios. • Significantly reduces on-chain fees from repeatedly opening/closing channels, improving capital turnover and utilization. 🔗 Synergy of Three — Redefining the Atomic Swap Experience • RLSP + Atomic Swap: Powers the underlying asset swap logic. • JIT: Solves the "0 to 1" problem — no pre-built channels, instant trade initiation. • Splice: Solves the "1 to N" problem — dynamic channel scaling to support high-frequency continuous trading. With JIT + Splice landing together, the current pain points of RGB channels — high latency, cumbersome workflows, and the inability to support high-frequency trading — will be fully resolved. This lays a solid infrastructure foundation — high performance, low barriers, and high liquidity — for upcoming Atomic Swap and ecosystem derivatives trading. 🚀 It is worth noting that these two features will not affect the launch timeline — they serve purely as a leap forward in user experience.