Privacy tech has a blind spot nobody really talks about: the moment you outsource the hard part. With DUSK, you can generate transaction proofs locally — slow, hot, but fully private — or send them off to a remote machine that does it fast and cool. Here's the catch though: remote proving isn't invisible, it's outsourced. That remote machine still sees the shape of your transaction. Not the amount, but enough to matter.
Here's my take: convenience is basically just moving your privacy assumptions into someone else's server room. That's fine for a one-off emergency. It's not fine as a default. Once every single proof runs through the same machine, you've quietly built an observer into your everyday routine — and even a well-audited observer is still an observer.
So the real question isn't "does DUSK have ZK proofs." It's who controls your default proving path.
@Dusk #DUSK $DUSK $VELVET $TAC
Here's my take: convenience is basically just moving your privacy assumptions into someone else's server room. That's fine for a one-off emergency. It's not fine as a default. Once every single proof runs through the same machine, you've quietly built an observer into your everyday routine — and even a well-audited observer is still an observer.
So the real question isn't "does DUSK have ZK proofs." It's who controls your default proving path.
@Dusk #DUSK $DUSK $VELVET $TAC
