#dusk $DUSK @Dusk Something felt slightly different when I stopped looking at Dusk as a privacy chain and started looking at it as financial infrastructure.
I started looking at a different detail: what happens when the thing being tokenized is not just a coin, but a regulated security with rules attached to its entire lifecycle?
That changes the architecture quite a bit. A security can have ownership restrictions, transfer conditions, disclosure requirements and changes that need to remain verifiable over time. A basic token contract can move balances, but that doesn't necessarily mean it understands the asset.
That is where @Dusk gets interesting to me. Zedger is described as a hybrid privacy-preserving transaction model built around regulatory requirements, using a Sparse Merkle-Segment Tree to keep account information private while still allowing specific state changes to be represented through a public root.
The trade-off is the part I keep thinking about. Institutions may want privacy, but regulators still need enough information to verify what happened. Too much disclosure defeats the purpose; too little makes the system difficult to trust.
So the real question isn't whether regulated assets can move on-chain. It's whether they can move on-chain while revealing exactly what needs to be known, and nothing more. Can @Dusk make that balance practical at scale?
#BinanceSquareFamily
I started looking at a different detail: what happens when the thing being tokenized is not just a coin, but a regulated security with rules attached to its entire lifecycle?
That changes the architecture quite a bit. A security can have ownership restrictions, transfer conditions, disclosure requirements and changes that need to remain verifiable over time. A basic token contract can move balances, but that doesn't necessarily mean it understands the asset.
That is where @Dusk gets interesting to me. Zedger is described as a hybrid privacy-preserving transaction model built around regulatory requirements, using a Sparse Merkle-Segment Tree to keep account information private while still allowing specific state changes to be represented through a public root.
The trade-off is the part I keep thinking about. Institutions may want privacy, but regulators still need enough information to verify what happened. Too much disclosure defeats the purpose; too little makes the system difficult to trust.
So the real question isn't whether regulated assets can move on-chain. It's whether they can move on-chain while revealing exactly what needs to be known, and nothing more. Can @Dusk make that balance practical at scale?
#BinanceSquareFamily