This is a segment of the 0xresearch newsletter. Subscribe to read full editions.
Bitcoin is a stupid base layer. In its native scripting environment, calculation is stateless, which means that each transaction is independently validated without built-in memory of previous events or intermediate results. This limits Bitcoin to simple, one -off logic such as multisig, timelocks or a basic dominant contract.
True Bitcoin Layer -2 (L2) networks need Stateful calculation on Bitcoin, where Starware’s newly proposed ColliderervM arrives.
The idea is to have Bitcoin complex calculation between transactions validated, something that was thought not so long ago that it requires a new soft fork upgrade. While he is still in the early phases of development, ColliderVM joins a growing class of Trust-Geminimalized L2 brugarchitectures that try to circumvent the current stalemate around new Bitcoin top codes such as CTV or Cat. No forks required.
CollidervM builds on ideas from BITVM2 and Starware’s earlier colliders’cript, using Hash-Collision based on Hash-Collision to pass on data on Bitcoin transactions. This makes it “at least X10,000 more efficient” than colliderscript, according to Starware co-founder Eli Ben-Sasson.
But as BitVM maker Robin Linus noted, that may not be as impressive as it sounds, because “Colliderscript is impractically slow.”
CollidervM avoids the fraudstaten that are central to BitVM2. That means that operators are not forced to pay recordings in advance while waiting for fraudsters who expire. Instead, calculation on validity is based and immediately verified on Bitcoin.
“See this as step two on the trip to deliver [zk validity proofs]”Ben-Sasson told Blockworks.
The assessment is costs. As Bitcoin -Pijpen Maker Misha Komarov says: “It requires about 30 hours of the entire Bitcoin network hahash rate compute to spend one covenant. [That] results in a cost of millions of dollars [he estimates $40m] Per TX. “
Ben-Sasson acknowledges that ColliderervM is still expensive and is not ready for Prime Time. “The new research published is important because it shows that it works – not that it is financially viable,” he said.
However, the capital efficiency and simplicity of ColliderervM, without the need for spectators or interactive challenge protocols, can appeal to developers who are frustrated by the complexity of BITVM2.
Linus herself is looking forward to further Bitcoin -upgrades. “CTV is great for BITVM,” he said, especially when they are combined with CSFs to “eliminate the existential honesty assumption” and simplify bridge logic. ColliderervM, on the other hand, bypasses the need for CTV fully but at the expense of feasibility in practice, for the time being. That could change with the arrival of specialized hardware.
In the meantime, Pijpen represents an alternative approach and a preference from the co-founder Willem Schroé of Botanix Labs. According to him, BitVM is ‘too complex’ and colliderervm is ‘brilliant, but energy-intensive’. Blowjobs are “very simple, very clean, but very theoretical and may not work.”
Komarov agrees. “Pipes are, compared to this hash collision trick, much more experimental from a theoretical point of view,” he told Blockworks. “But once they work, they are much cheaper.”
Schroé has a strong view of the bridge verification room. Regardless of which approach first becomes production, he thinks they are doing something crucial: they show that users want covenant behavior.
“Bitcoin Core doesn’t even think about it,” said Schroé. “But blowjobs and collider enable you to show that question.”
