[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]  Snassy.icp [@SnassyIcp](/creator/twitter/SnassyIcp) on x 1059 followers Created: 2025-06-28 12:23:57 UTC What is the right stack for building fully decentralized applications? Is it BTC? Or ETH? Or the new kid on the block, ICP? To answer this, I think we have to look at how these blockchains are different, and what they are designed to do. BTC is a decentralized pay-once, store-forever transaction database. Runes etc demonstrate that it can be used as a general database, but costs are (or will end up being) prohibitively expensive except for the most valuable use cases (think checksums from valuable data snapshots more than wizard jpgs). In general, the BTC layer is the settlement layer, representing all global value, and all other transactions for all tokens in all other layers eventually boil down to (expensive) settlement transactions in BTC, representing 1,000s or millions of aggregated transactions from the other layers. BTC may not store the entire planet’s value yet, but it is the inexorable direction we’re headed in, just like the Internet swallows all information. ETH is a decentralized pay-once, store-forever general database. It supports compute, but it is expensive and will normally be limited to only what is required to enforce core business rules and consistency in the database. In traditional application architecture terms, you’d put your data and your “stored procedures” in ETH, but not your application code. ICP is a decentralized compute platform. Unlike BTC and ETH it is NOT pay-once, store forever. To keep your application running and its state alive, you have to keep paying gas for it (NB: on ICP the application developer pays the gas, not the user). In return, the gas is cheap so you can comfortably store enough state and run enough compute to power a real application (unlike ETH). But if it is not pay-once, store-forever, is it really a blockchain? Or, put another way, why then are they somehow using blockchains “under the hood” to power this platform? Pay-once, store-forever was the model that we came to know blockchains under, and it is exactly the right model for a global settlement layer. It is also arguably the right choice for a more general database like ETH targeting use cases of very high value data that needs to be etched in stone. Many of the high-value database checksums could go on the Ethereum chain instead of on BTC, and sometimes even whole little databases. And if, for some reason, you have an insatiable urge to etch cat pictures into a forever store, Ethereum would seem a technologically reasonable alternative to BTC for this. But pay-once, store-forever is not the only use case for blockchains, and it is not a core property of the concept. In a blockchain adapted to the global settlement layer, it is, of course, but not more generally speaking. Other properties of decentralized blockchain technology include verifiably, robustness, security, uptime, scalability, composability, censorship resistance, data ownership, cost efficiency, programmability of money, and more - and if a blockchain-based application platform can supply all of this at web scale by sacrificing the pay-once, store-forever checkbox *while* at the same time providing seamless and secure integration with the pay-once, store-forever chains so you can store the parts of your application state that fits that model there, then you have pretty much the perfect platform to complete the BTC+ETH story and provide a place to host the rest of your application that doesn’t fit on BTC/ETH, without sacrificing the decentralized nature (security, verifiability, uptime, etc) of your application stack. ICP is where those valuable databases that store their checksums to ETH would live. It’s also where your frontend and most of your middle tier logic lives. It’s where the application and user state lives. It’s where your shopping cart is stored, and the highly secure e-shop itself, and when you click checkout your purchase order might be stored on Ethereum for posterity (or maybe just a checksum of your order). So the full stack web3 decentralized blockchain stack, in my opinion, looks like this: BTC: your lowest level, final, settled store of monetary value. ETH: your lowest level, final, settled store of permanent data, and procedures to enforce constraints on that data. ICP: The rest. Your application code and data, all layers of it except what goes on BTC and ETH. Note that ICP doesn’t force you to go all-in, it integrates beautifully with web2 such that you can create hybrid applications where components that don’t need the security, verifiability, etc from running on a blockchain-based platform can run exactly the way they currently do. But you certainly can write XXX% on-chain applications on ICP, including ones that integrate seamlessly with BTC and ETH, and many developers already do. So in conclusion, with a BTC/ETH/ICP stack - BEI for short - you have the right tools to build the fully decentralized applications that no other stack gives you today. And as an application developer, I am tremendously excited about all the opportunity this gives me for writing better applications faster. XXXXX engagements  **Related Topics** [icp](/topic/icp) [decentralized](/topic/decentralized) [stack](/topic/stack) [dec decentralized](/topic/dec-decentralized) [coins bitcoin ecosystem](/topic/coins-bitcoin-ecosystem) [coins runes](/topic/coins-runes) [bitcoin](/topic/bitcoin) [coins layer 1](/topic/coins-layer-1) [Post Link](https://x.com/SnassyIcp/status/1938936405981385094)
[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]
Snassy.icp @SnassyIcp on x 1059 followers
Created: 2025-06-28 12:23:57 UTC
What is the right stack for building fully decentralized applications? Is it BTC? Or ETH? Or the new kid on the block, ICP?
To answer this, I think we have to look at how these blockchains are different, and what they are designed to do.
BTC is a decentralized pay-once, store-forever transaction database. Runes etc demonstrate that it can be used as a general database, but costs are (or will end up being) prohibitively expensive except for the most valuable use cases (think checksums from valuable data snapshots more than wizard jpgs).
In general, the BTC layer is the settlement layer, representing all global value, and all other transactions for all tokens in all other layers eventually boil down to (expensive) settlement transactions in BTC, representing 1,000s or millions of aggregated transactions from the other layers. BTC may not store the entire planet’s value yet, but it is the inexorable direction we’re headed in, just like the Internet swallows all information.
ETH is a decentralized pay-once, store-forever general database. It supports compute, but it is expensive and will normally be limited to only what is required to enforce core business rules and consistency in the database. In traditional application architecture terms, you’d put your data and your “stored procedures” in ETH, but not your application code.
ICP is a decentralized compute platform. Unlike BTC and ETH it is NOT pay-once, store forever. To keep your application running and its state alive, you have to keep paying gas for it (NB: on ICP the application developer pays the gas, not the user). In return, the gas is cheap so you can comfortably store enough state and run enough compute to power a real application (unlike ETH).
But if it is not pay-once, store-forever, is it really a blockchain? Or, put another way, why then are they somehow using blockchains “under the hood” to power this platform?
Pay-once, store-forever was the model that we came to know blockchains under, and it is exactly the right model for a global settlement layer. It is also arguably the right choice for a more general database like ETH targeting use cases of very high value data that needs to be etched in stone. Many of the high-value database checksums could go on the Ethereum chain instead of on BTC, and sometimes even whole little databases. And if, for some reason, you have an insatiable urge to etch cat pictures into a forever store, Ethereum would seem a technologically reasonable alternative to BTC for this.
But pay-once, store-forever is not the only use case for blockchains, and it is not a core property of the concept. In a blockchain adapted to the global settlement layer, it is, of course, but not more generally speaking.
Other properties of decentralized blockchain technology include verifiably, robustness, security, uptime, scalability, composability, censorship resistance, data ownership, cost efficiency, programmability of money, and more - and if a blockchain-based application platform can supply all of this at web scale by sacrificing the pay-once, store-forever checkbox while at the same time providing seamless and secure integration with the pay-once, store-forever chains so you can store the parts of your application state that fits that model there, then you have pretty much the perfect platform to complete the BTC+ETH story and provide a place to host the rest of your application that doesn’t fit on BTC/ETH, without sacrificing the decentralized nature (security, verifiability, uptime, etc) of your application stack.
ICP is where those valuable databases that store their checksums to ETH would live. It’s also where your frontend and most of your middle tier logic lives. It’s where the application and user state lives. It’s where your shopping cart is stored, and the highly secure e-shop itself, and when you click checkout your purchase order might be stored on Ethereum for posterity (or maybe just a checksum of your order).
So the full stack web3 decentralized blockchain stack, in my opinion, looks like this:
BTC: your lowest level, final, settled store of monetary value.
ETH: your lowest level, final, settled store of permanent data, and procedures to enforce constraints on that data.
ICP: The rest. Your application code and data, all layers of it except what goes on BTC and ETH. Note that ICP doesn’t force you to go all-in, it integrates beautifully with web2 such that you can create hybrid applications where components that don’t need the security, verifiability, etc from running on a blockchain-based platform can run exactly the way they currently do.
But you certainly can write XXX% on-chain applications on ICP, including ones that integrate seamlessly with BTC and ETH, and many developers already do.
So in conclusion, with a BTC/ETH/ICP stack - BEI for short - you have the right tools to build the fully decentralized applications that no other stack gives you today. And as an application developer, I am tremendously excited about all the opportunity this gives me for writing better applications faster.
XXXXX engagements
Related Topics icp decentralized stack dec decentralized coins bitcoin ecosystem coins runes bitcoin coins layer 1