Why does every cross-chain solution demand you surrender trust? Bridge relayers, intermediaries, validators—they're all single points of failure waiting to happen. When you *have* to believe in third parties, the entire architecture is compromised.
The fix is elegant but often overlooked: native assets stay on their chains. Execution unfolds according to pure logic, no guesswork. Settlement isn't a promise—it's mathematically enforced before anything moves.
This is what deterministic swaps look like. Take BTC ↔ ETH flows as an example. Both sides execute simultaneously. No wrapped tokens. No faith required. Just cryptographic certainty.
The question isn't whether trustless swaps are possible. It's why we've tolerated the alternative for so long.
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.
10 Likes
Reward
10
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GasWaster
· 12-27 15:57
ngl this is what the on-chain experience should be like. Those still using bridging solutions, what are they thinking? They're just gambling that the intermediaries won't run away.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-4745f9ce
· 12-27 12:53
Well said, finally someone speaks frankly. Those bridges are always being hacked, isn't it because there are too many middlemen? And now you're still expecting me to trust relayers... Wake up.
View OriginalReply0
MetaverseHomeless
· 12-27 12:45
To be honest, these cross-chain solutions are all nonsense, just middlemen making a profit... Trustless is the right way, it should have been like this a long time ago.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropHunter007
· 12-27 12:35
Speaking of which, this trustless swap sounds awesome, but can it really be implemented? Currently, those bridging solutions are all full of pitfalls...
View OriginalReply0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
· 12-27 12:35
It should have been like this a long time ago. The era of middlemen making a profit margin should end, and mathematics doesn't lie.
View OriginalReply0
0xSleepDeprived
· 12-27 12:34
Honestly, today's cross-chain solutions are getting worse and worse. Always trying to make me believe in some middlemen. I just want to ask, how come you haven't been hacked yet?
Trustless swaps: the only way forward
Why does every cross-chain solution demand you surrender trust? Bridge relayers, intermediaries, validators—they're all single points of failure waiting to happen. When you *have* to believe in third parties, the entire architecture is compromised.
The fix is elegant but often overlooked: native assets stay on their chains. Execution unfolds according to pure logic, no guesswork. Settlement isn't a promise—it's mathematically enforced before anything moves.
This is what deterministic swaps look like. Take BTC ↔ ETH flows as an example. Both sides execute simultaneously. No wrapped tokens. No faith required. Just cryptographic certainty.
The question isn't whether trustless swaps are possible. It's why we've tolerated the alternative for so long.