so i was going down the $DUSK rabbit hole this week
not because i care about another compliance chain, but because someone said "regulated privacy" and my brain short-circuited
those two words don't belong together, right?
so i start reading DUSK's documentation
and everyone talks about the zkps, the consensus, the blind signatures. cool tech.
but i kept getting stuck on this one thing
the dispute resolution board
basically a group of law firms that hold keys that can break DUSK's privacy if a court orders it
and i sat there for like 20 minutes just... processing that
because here's the thing
if you're a bank using DUSK, this makes perfect sense. you need someone to call when things go wrong. you need a backstop.
if you're me, sitting in my apartment, this feels weird
like, we spent years building systems where no one can stop a transaction or see what you're doing
and now DUSK is baking lawyers into the protocol
i'm not saying it's bad. i honestly don't know.
but i kept asking myself: what happens when two courts in different countries disagree about a DUSK transaction?
like, what if the drb members are in switzerland and the us and singapore
and they all get different orders about the same transaction
who wins?
i couldn't find an answer in DUSK's docs
maybe it's in there somewhere and i missed it
maybe it's not a problem they think about because DUSK's use case is institutional and those conflicts get handled off-chain
but it's the thing that made me stop scrolling and actually think
DUSK isn't building the same thing as monero or zcash
they're building something that assumes the legal system works
that courts are reasonable
that law firms won't collude
that's a big assumption for a blockchain project
but maybe that's the point of DUSK
regulated privacy isn't about making privacy absolute
it's about making privacy conditional on the law
and that changes who DUSK is for
@Dusk_Foundation #dusk #DUSK $DUSK
not because i care about another compliance chain, but because someone said "regulated privacy" and my brain short-circuited
those two words don't belong together, right?
so i start reading DUSK's documentation
and everyone talks about the zkps, the consensus, the blind signatures. cool tech.
but i kept getting stuck on this one thing
the dispute resolution board
basically a group of law firms that hold keys that can break DUSK's privacy if a court orders it
and i sat there for like 20 minutes just... processing that
because here's the thing
if you're a bank using DUSK, this makes perfect sense. you need someone to call when things go wrong. you need a backstop.
if you're me, sitting in my apartment, this feels weird
like, we spent years building systems where no one can stop a transaction or see what you're doing
and now DUSK is baking lawyers into the protocol
i'm not saying it's bad. i honestly don't know.
but i kept asking myself: what happens when two courts in different countries disagree about a DUSK transaction?
like, what if the drb members are in switzerland and the us and singapore
and they all get different orders about the same transaction
who wins?
i couldn't find an answer in DUSK's docs
maybe it's in there somewhere and i missed it
maybe it's not a problem they think about because DUSK's use case is institutional and those conflicts get handled off-chain
but it's the thing that made me stop scrolling and actually think
DUSK isn't building the same thing as monero or zcash
they're building something that assumes the legal system works
that courts are reasonable
that law firms won't collude
that's a big assumption for a blockchain project
but maybe that's the point of DUSK
regulated privacy isn't about making privacy absolute
it's about making privacy conditional on the law
and that changes who DUSK is for
@Dusk_Foundation #dusk #DUSK $DUSK