Wrapping Cryptocurrencies for interoperability sakeUnderstanding TokenCreator/OwnedToken example from Solidity documentationCategorising tokens: is there pros and cons of ERC20 described anywhere & comparison with other subcurrency impl?How excatly Bancor works (for non-economists)how does a lightweight node interact with smart contracts?are the ERC721 smart contracts compatible with Zk-SNARKs?fallback function is accepting more than 2300 gasHow can the cost of changing 2 state variables and emitting 1 event reach 50K gas units?What is a common pattern to work with a large number of complex Things: make a Thing a contract, or a struct in a mapping?Smart contract - require token balance in constructorSolidity 0.5.x - make address array payable

Multi tool use
Multi tool use

How much character growth crosses the line into breaking the character

Global amount of publications over time

Can I sign legal documents with a smiley face?

Freedom of speech and where it applies

Is there a conventional notation or name for the slip angle?

Should I install hardwood flooring or cabinets first?

How should I respond when I lied about my education and the company finds out through background check?

Divine apple island

Create all possible words using a set or letters

Constructing Group Divisible Designs - Algorithms?

Why did the EU agree to delay the Brexit deadline?

How can "mimic phobia" be cured or prevented?

Can somebody explain Brexit in a few child-proof sentences?

Is it improper etiquette to ask your opponent what his/her rating is before the game?

Will adding a BY-SA image to a blog post make the entire post BY-SA?

What is the gram­mat­i­cal term for “‑ed” words like these?

THT: What is a squared annular “ring”?

Is a model fitted to data or is data fitted to a model?

Engineer refusing to file/disclose patents

How do I implement a file system driver driver in Linux?

List of people who lose a child in תנ"ך

Journal losing indexing services

What major Native American tribes were around Santa Fe during the late 1850s?

Ridge Regression with Gradient Descent Converges to OLS estimates



Wrapping Cryptocurrencies for interoperability sake


Understanding TokenCreator/OwnedToken example from Solidity documentationCategorising tokens: is there pros and cons of ERC20 described anywhere & comparison with other subcurrency impl?How excatly Bancor works (for non-economists)how does a lightweight node interact with smart contracts?are the ERC721 smart contracts compatible with Zk-SNARKs?fallback function is accepting more than 2300 gasHow can the cost of changing 2 state variables and emitting 1 event reach 50K gas units?What is a common pattern to work with a large number of complex Things: make a Thing a contract, or a struct in a mapping?Smart contract - require token balance in constructorSolidity 0.5.x - make address array payable













1















How is it possible to standardize bitcoin and wrap it to the ERC20 format, creating smart contracts for Bitcoin. This should make it easier to write smart contracts that integrate bitcoin transfers apparently, but for my understanding this makes no sense since the code bases are alien to each other. Can someone elaborate? this seems rather complex?










share|improve this question


























    1















    How is it possible to standardize bitcoin and wrap it to the ERC20 format, creating smart contracts for Bitcoin. This should make it easier to write smart contracts that integrate bitcoin transfers apparently, but for my understanding this makes no sense since the code bases are alien to each other. Can someone elaborate? this seems rather complex?










    share|improve this question
























      1












      1








      1


      1






      How is it possible to standardize bitcoin and wrap it to the ERC20 format, creating smart contracts for Bitcoin. This should make it easier to write smart contracts that integrate bitcoin transfers apparently, but for my understanding this makes no sense since the code bases are alien to each other. Can someone elaborate? this seems rather complex?










      share|improve this question














      How is it possible to standardize bitcoin and wrap it to the ERC20 format, creating smart contracts for Bitcoin. This should make it easier to write smart contracts that integrate bitcoin transfers apparently, but for my understanding this makes no sense since the code bases are alien to each other. Can someone elaborate? this seems rather complex?







      solidity go-ethereum contract-development contract-design tokens






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 4 hours ago









      NowsyMeNowsyMe

      331418




      331418




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          If you're referring to Wrapped BTC (WBTC), it has nothing to do with the Bitcoin Network. 1 WBTC is equal to 1 BTC purely through a custodial pegging system. To mint a WBTC ERC-20 token, you must lock-up a BTC.



          This lets BTC be 'represented' on the Ethereum blockchain and can be used in different dApps, commonly financial ones.



          If you're familiar with Wrapped ETH (WETH) it is the exact same concept except the process to wrap ETH is trust-less and done on the Ethereum blockchain (b/c ETH is native to the blockchain). The process to wrap BTC is not currently trust-less, you need to send your BTC to BitGo, a Bitcoin custodial exchange.



          Then with the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can do with it whatever you can do with any ERC-20 in smart contracts.




          This should make it easier to write smart contracts that integrate bitcoin transfers apparently,




          With the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can call safeTransferFrom() like with any ERC-20 token. This'll transfer the WBTC to whichever Ethereum address chosen. Now this Ethereum address has 1 WBTC (in this example) but the Bitcoin Network doesn't somehow credit this Ethereum address with 1 BTC. As far as the Bitcoin Network knows, the BTC is still held by BitGo (the BTC exchange you lock-up BTC for WBTC).



          How does this person who just received 1 WBTC get credit with 1 true BTC, and have their ownership of the BTC registered with the Bitcoin Network? They go to BitGo and 'cash-in' their WBTC. The rate will always be 1 WBTC:1 BTC, so BitGo will send their Bitcoin address of choice the 1 BTC.



          Standardizing and wrapping any non-native coin as an ERC-20 on Ethereum doesn't have 'real' interoperability with the other blockchain. As you stated, this would be way more complex than the process I described above, and the process used currently (pegging).



          For true interoperability, as you may be envisioning, check out Cosmos Network. They are trying to build an 'internet of blockchains' and just launched main-net. They standardize blockchains, not tokens/coins, to allow true interoperability (basically so the code bases are the same). I think you'd find the project interesting!



          I hope this answered your question. Here is WBTC's official site where you can read more about the process they use: https://www.wbtc.network/






          share|improve this answer

























          • great answer thanks! spot on

            – NowsyMe
            3 hours ago











          • Awesome, glad to help!

            – savard
            3 hours ago










          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "642"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fethereum.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f68756%2fwrapping-cryptocurrencies-for-interoperability-sake%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2














          If you're referring to Wrapped BTC (WBTC), it has nothing to do with the Bitcoin Network. 1 WBTC is equal to 1 BTC purely through a custodial pegging system. To mint a WBTC ERC-20 token, you must lock-up a BTC.



          This lets BTC be 'represented' on the Ethereum blockchain and can be used in different dApps, commonly financial ones.



          If you're familiar with Wrapped ETH (WETH) it is the exact same concept except the process to wrap ETH is trust-less and done on the Ethereum blockchain (b/c ETH is native to the blockchain). The process to wrap BTC is not currently trust-less, you need to send your BTC to BitGo, a Bitcoin custodial exchange.



          Then with the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can do with it whatever you can do with any ERC-20 in smart contracts.




          This should make it easier to write smart contracts that integrate bitcoin transfers apparently,




          With the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can call safeTransferFrom() like with any ERC-20 token. This'll transfer the WBTC to whichever Ethereum address chosen. Now this Ethereum address has 1 WBTC (in this example) but the Bitcoin Network doesn't somehow credit this Ethereum address with 1 BTC. As far as the Bitcoin Network knows, the BTC is still held by BitGo (the BTC exchange you lock-up BTC for WBTC).



          How does this person who just received 1 WBTC get credit with 1 true BTC, and have their ownership of the BTC registered with the Bitcoin Network? They go to BitGo and 'cash-in' their WBTC. The rate will always be 1 WBTC:1 BTC, so BitGo will send their Bitcoin address of choice the 1 BTC.



          Standardizing and wrapping any non-native coin as an ERC-20 on Ethereum doesn't have 'real' interoperability with the other blockchain. As you stated, this would be way more complex than the process I described above, and the process used currently (pegging).



          For true interoperability, as you may be envisioning, check out Cosmos Network. They are trying to build an 'internet of blockchains' and just launched main-net. They standardize blockchains, not tokens/coins, to allow true interoperability (basically so the code bases are the same). I think you'd find the project interesting!



          I hope this answered your question. Here is WBTC's official site where you can read more about the process they use: https://www.wbtc.network/






          share|improve this answer

























          • great answer thanks! spot on

            – NowsyMe
            3 hours ago











          • Awesome, glad to help!

            – savard
            3 hours ago















          2














          If you're referring to Wrapped BTC (WBTC), it has nothing to do with the Bitcoin Network. 1 WBTC is equal to 1 BTC purely through a custodial pegging system. To mint a WBTC ERC-20 token, you must lock-up a BTC.



          This lets BTC be 'represented' on the Ethereum blockchain and can be used in different dApps, commonly financial ones.



          If you're familiar with Wrapped ETH (WETH) it is the exact same concept except the process to wrap ETH is trust-less and done on the Ethereum blockchain (b/c ETH is native to the blockchain). The process to wrap BTC is not currently trust-less, you need to send your BTC to BitGo, a Bitcoin custodial exchange.



          Then with the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can do with it whatever you can do with any ERC-20 in smart contracts.




          This should make it easier to write smart contracts that integrate bitcoin transfers apparently,




          With the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can call safeTransferFrom() like with any ERC-20 token. This'll transfer the WBTC to whichever Ethereum address chosen. Now this Ethereum address has 1 WBTC (in this example) but the Bitcoin Network doesn't somehow credit this Ethereum address with 1 BTC. As far as the Bitcoin Network knows, the BTC is still held by BitGo (the BTC exchange you lock-up BTC for WBTC).



          How does this person who just received 1 WBTC get credit with 1 true BTC, and have their ownership of the BTC registered with the Bitcoin Network? They go to BitGo and 'cash-in' their WBTC. The rate will always be 1 WBTC:1 BTC, so BitGo will send their Bitcoin address of choice the 1 BTC.



          Standardizing and wrapping any non-native coin as an ERC-20 on Ethereum doesn't have 'real' interoperability with the other blockchain. As you stated, this would be way more complex than the process I described above, and the process used currently (pegging).



          For true interoperability, as you may be envisioning, check out Cosmos Network. They are trying to build an 'internet of blockchains' and just launched main-net. They standardize blockchains, not tokens/coins, to allow true interoperability (basically so the code bases are the same). I think you'd find the project interesting!



          I hope this answered your question. Here is WBTC's official site where you can read more about the process they use: https://www.wbtc.network/






          share|improve this answer

























          • great answer thanks! spot on

            – NowsyMe
            3 hours ago











          • Awesome, glad to help!

            – savard
            3 hours ago













          2












          2








          2







          If you're referring to Wrapped BTC (WBTC), it has nothing to do with the Bitcoin Network. 1 WBTC is equal to 1 BTC purely through a custodial pegging system. To mint a WBTC ERC-20 token, you must lock-up a BTC.



          This lets BTC be 'represented' on the Ethereum blockchain and can be used in different dApps, commonly financial ones.



          If you're familiar with Wrapped ETH (WETH) it is the exact same concept except the process to wrap ETH is trust-less and done on the Ethereum blockchain (b/c ETH is native to the blockchain). The process to wrap BTC is not currently trust-less, you need to send your BTC to BitGo, a Bitcoin custodial exchange.



          Then with the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can do with it whatever you can do with any ERC-20 in smart contracts.




          This should make it easier to write smart contracts that integrate bitcoin transfers apparently,




          With the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can call safeTransferFrom() like with any ERC-20 token. This'll transfer the WBTC to whichever Ethereum address chosen. Now this Ethereum address has 1 WBTC (in this example) but the Bitcoin Network doesn't somehow credit this Ethereum address with 1 BTC. As far as the Bitcoin Network knows, the BTC is still held by BitGo (the BTC exchange you lock-up BTC for WBTC).



          How does this person who just received 1 WBTC get credit with 1 true BTC, and have their ownership of the BTC registered with the Bitcoin Network? They go to BitGo and 'cash-in' their WBTC. The rate will always be 1 WBTC:1 BTC, so BitGo will send their Bitcoin address of choice the 1 BTC.



          Standardizing and wrapping any non-native coin as an ERC-20 on Ethereum doesn't have 'real' interoperability with the other blockchain. As you stated, this would be way more complex than the process I described above, and the process used currently (pegging).



          For true interoperability, as you may be envisioning, check out Cosmos Network. They are trying to build an 'internet of blockchains' and just launched main-net. They standardize blockchains, not tokens/coins, to allow true interoperability (basically so the code bases are the same). I think you'd find the project interesting!



          I hope this answered your question. Here is WBTC's official site where you can read more about the process they use: https://www.wbtc.network/






          share|improve this answer















          If you're referring to Wrapped BTC (WBTC), it has nothing to do with the Bitcoin Network. 1 WBTC is equal to 1 BTC purely through a custodial pegging system. To mint a WBTC ERC-20 token, you must lock-up a BTC.



          This lets BTC be 'represented' on the Ethereum blockchain and can be used in different dApps, commonly financial ones.



          If you're familiar with Wrapped ETH (WETH) it is the exact same concept except the process to wrap ETH is trust-less and done on the Ethereum blockchain (b/c ETH is native to the blockchain). The process to wrap BTC is not currently trust-less, you need to send your BTC to BitGo, a Bitcoin custodial exchange.



          Then with the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can do with it whatever you can do with any ERC-20 in smart contracts.




          This should make it easier to write smart contracts that integrate bitcoin transfers apparently,




          With the ERC-20 version of BTC, you can call safeTransferFrom() like with any ERC-20 token. This'll transfer the WBTC to whichever Ethereum address chosen. Now this Ethereum address has 1 WBTC (in this example) but the Bitcoin Network doesn't somehow credit this Ethereum address with 1 BTC. As far as the Bitcoin Network knows, the BTC is still held by BitGo (the BTC exchange you lock-up BTC for WBTC).



          How does this person who just received 1 WBTC get credit with 1 true BTC, and have their ownership of the BTC registered with the Bitcoin Network? They go to BitGo and 'cash-in' their WBTC. The rate will always be 1 WBTC:1 BTC, so BitGo will send their Bitcoin address of choice the 1 BTC.



          Standardizing and wrapping any non-native coin as an ERC-20 on Ethereum doesn't have 'real' interoperability with the other blockchain. As you stated, this would be way more complex than the process I described above, and the process used currently (pegging).



          For true interoperability, as you may be envisioning, check out Cosmos Network. They are trying to build an 'internet of blockchains' and just launched main-net. They standardize blockchains, not tokens/coins, to allow true interoperability (basically so the code bases are the same). I think you'd find the project interesting!



          I hope this answered your question. Here is WBTC's official site where you can read more about the process they use: https://www.wbtc.network/







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 3 hours ago

























          answered 3 hours ago









          savardsavard

          829




          829












          • great answer thanks! spot on

            – NowsyMe
            3 hours ago











          • Awesome, glad to help!

            – savard
            3 hours ago

















          • great answer thanks! spot on

            – NowsyMe
            3 hours ago











          • Awesome, glad to help!

            – savard
            3 hours ago
















          great answer thanks! spot on

          – NowsyMe
          3 hours ago





          great answer thanks! spot on

          – NowsyMe
          3 hours ago













          Awesome, glad to help!

          – savard
          3 hours ago





          Awesome, glad to help!

          – savard
          3 hours ago

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Ethereum Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fethereum.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f68756%2fwrapping-cryptocurrencies-for-interoperability-sake%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          3S9CTB V0 6yNEId2sJrT3wyy
          HU2NP8f KCsQGR2IuU2kf2unofmTTnjz Hh

          Popular posts from this blog

          What is the result of assigning to std::vector::begin()? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhat are the differences between a pointer variable and a reference variable in C++?What does the explicit keyword mean?Concatenating two std::vectorsHow to find out if an item is present in a std::vector?Why is “using namespace std” considered bad practice?What is the “-->” operator in C++?What is the easiest way to initialize a std::vector with hardcoded elements?What is The Rule of Three?What are the basic rules and idioms for operator overloading?Why are std::begin and std::end “not memory safe”?

          Creating centerline of river in QGIS? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Finding centrelines from polygons in QGIS?Splitting line into two lines with GRASS GIS?Centroid of the equator and a pointpostgis: problems creating flow direction polyline; not all needed connections are drawnhow to make decent sense from scattered river depth measurementsQGIS Interpolation on Curved Grid (River DEMs)How to create automatic parking baysShortest path creation between two linesclipping layer using query builder in QGISFinding which side of closest polyline point lies on in QGIS?Create centerline from multi-digitized roadway lines Qgis 2.18Getting bathymetric contours confined only within river banks using QGIS?