Goatseus Maximus price

At the Web3 Summit in Berlin in November 2019, developers and researchers explored how Bitcoin could scale beyond simple transactions while preserving its security model. From those discussions emerged the concept of a Bitcoin-native Layer 2, designed to extend Bitcoin’s utility directly on-chain rather than through wrapped assets or external bridges. The idea was clear and ambitious: build scalable systems secured by Bitcoin itself, let activity generate native yield, and keep every transaction verifiable on the base layer. That vision is now materializing through #GOATNetwork, which brings together real-time proving, decentralized sequencing, and BTC-denominated yield under full Bitcoin security. It transforms the concept of Bitcoin-native scalability into something builders and users can truly experience. At the application layer, @goatup_ GOATUP carries this vision forward as the first native perps platform on GOAT Network, where users can trade over 50 tokens with up to 50x leverage, powered by native #BTC as lossless collateral. It demonstrates how performance, composability, and Bitcoin-level security can thrive together without compromise. Bitcoin’s evolution has always been led by those who build on its foundation and push it further. How do you see Bitcoin-native ecosystems evolving in the years ahead?

How can @arbitrum, @SolvProtocol, and @GOATRollup integrate Ethereum L2 liquidity with Bitcoin's native yield? Overview Arbitrum, Solv Protocol's SolvBTC, and the GOAT network form a loose path that connects step-by-step rather than a single bridge system. SolvBTC moves across multiple chains based on Chainlink's CCIP and a proof of reserves mint-burn design, while Arbitrum operates under an optimistic rollup model with a challenge period of about a week in case of disputes. GOAT claims to be a Bitcoin-native ZK rollup based on BitVM2 that does not modify the Bitcoin main chain, combining zkMIPS and a slashing economy to aim for challenge and settlement within a day. Bridges and Payment Finality Bitcoin is first converted to SolvBTC and then moves to the EVM side via CCIP, a process secured by on-chain proof of reserves. Arbitrum itself operates an interactive fraud-proof procedure in case of disputes based on the assumed consistency of optimistic rollups. GOAT performs challenge-based validation on top of Bitcoin through BitVM2 and aims for a short challenge window by combining with the zkMIPS proof network. As a result, the SolvBTC path offers speed and usability but relies on trust assumptions of custodians and oracles, while the GOAT path provides stricter cryptoeconomic guarantees but has withdrawal delays. Liquidity Routing and MEV Locality Current routing follows a hub-spoke structure with inflows from Bitcoin to SolvBTC, DeFi utilization on Arbitrum, and additional movement to GOAT if necessary. These segments pass through different proposers and relayers, so MEV primarily arises from the order flow of each hop, the gaps in oracle updates, and price discrepancies during bridge waiting times, making atomic execution across chains uncommon. Contrasting Risk, Custody, and Oracle Models SolvBTC adopts a structure where reserves held in regulated custody are monitored and moved via Chainlink's proof of reserves feed and CCIP. In contrast, GOAT aims to secure price data and integrity through a rollup design combined with Bitcoin-native validation, a dual slashing model, and the introduction of DIA oracles. Therefore, SolvBTC's core relies on custody and oracle trust assumptions, while GOAT's core is based on sequencer collateral and challenge-slashing. Differences in Compliance and Accounting SolvBTC facilitates on-chain balance verification and systematic accounting tracking through an ERC-20 wrapper and proof of reserves. Arbitrum provides the EVM side that accommodates these assets and maintains a security model through a fraud-proof system in case of disputes. GOAT offers Bitcoin-based transparency but requires additional procedures to understand both Bitcoin UTXOs and rollup withdrawal paths from an accounting perspective. Key Summary First, current interoperability is accurately understood as a stepwise combination of entering Arbitrum via SolvBTC, connecting to GOAT through a standard EVM bridge, and the return of Bitcoin via GOAT. Second, security and speed are in a trade-off relationship. The SolvBTC path, relying on CCIP, custody, and oracles, is fast and easy to use but has trust assumptions, while the BitVM2-based GOAT path provides stronger native security but comes with challenge and withdrawal delays. Third, order flow and MEV are generally localized to each chain and bridge segment, and atomic execution across all segments is still difficult to observe. Fourth, the clarity of audits and accounting is relatively high in the Arbitrum-Solv segment combined with ERC-20 and proof of reserves, while the GOAT segment requires conservative classification until standards are established.

$BANG on GMPayer has been fully minted on both @MetisL2 and @GOATRollup. What started as a small Proof-of-Concept turned into something bigger. Every $1 mint through GMPayer worked exactly as planned. Thanks to everyone who joined early and helped make it a success.