Is There Demand for BTC-Backed Lending Without Wrapping?

Been holding BTC for ages, always avoided wrapped coins. Just too much trust required.

Security model is key. Users need control over their BTC, not just handing it to lenders.

Babylon's getting close to launch. If they’re doing it, there must be demand. But let’s be real, Bitcoin wasn't built for lending.

Only use what you can afford to lose. Risks are everywhere in lending, so keep it small.

I’m trying to figure out if this native BTC lending can work without adding too much trust. That’s the real question.

Debt is everywhere, but BTC is volatile. Borrowing against it can be risky, just saying.

Tried Babylon's testnet too. My interest is in how collateral works without wrapping BTC.

I only want to hold real Bitcoin. Wrapped stuff is just a hassle for me.

Trust issues with lending platforms are real. Selling BTC is simpler, but some folks want to avoid that.

Always been cautious about lending. Wrapped BTC just adds another layer of risk.

Using BTC as collateral sounds good, but the risks are still there. What's the real gain?

Some say not to sell but borrow instead. I still think HODLing is safer.

Naming native BTC lending is tricky. The DeFi space feels too centralized.

Doesn’t make sense to use BTC as collateral. If you know its value, just hold on.

Borrowing against BTC can avoid taxes, but it seems risky overall.

Trust-minimized? Not sure how that works if you still need third parties involved.

Yeah, Babylon's the one. I’m curious but hesitant. Too many risks involved.

If people are sending BTC to lenders, demand is there. But I'd rather sell if I need cash fast.

I’d consider it if yields are decent. But handing BTC to a third party still feels sketchy.

Babylon's doing its own thing, but I’m skeptical about the whole BTC lending scene.