let's say a user has an offchain utxo (leaf or vutxo) and wants to do some crazy shit
to support this, flashnet uses an intent model where users send funds to an address controlled by validators. if intent is valid, the validators take a key share and pass it to the flashnet signer. if m-of-n validators pass the key share for the intent, the signer executes the transaction
arkade extends their virtual mempool to support co-signing for more complex scripts. i.e., the arkade signer is able to sign off on things more complex than bitcoin scripts. a user needs to co-sign this execution, but model requires an honest signer for all offchain actions (like any out-of-round transaction)
flashnet is an "at execution" custody risk. after execution, (in most scenarios) a user returns to a statechain model, meaning they have a pre-signed exit path for their utxo
arkade has users remain in a "preconfirmed" state during all of this execution. post-execution, they can participate in a settlement transaction on bitcoin to gain full self-custody of their funds
both models use TEEs for signing execution
in flashnet, m-of-n validators need to collude and/or the TEE signer needs to be compromised to steal user funds
in arkade, the TEE needs to be compromised and previous owners within a specific vtxo tx chain need to collude with the TEE
i don't know which is better - just a different approach
In good news, @januszgrze posted on X about the differences between Arkade and Flashnet, which helps a little with understanding what is going on: