Who Secures the Dusk Network?
Went digging into Dusk's live explorer data this week and one number stopped me: in the most recent 24h window tracked on The DUDE (duskexplorer.com), only 21 of 252 total transactions used the Phoenix shielded model the rest, 231, ran through Moonlight, the transparent path. That's roughly 8% privacy usage on a chain whose entire pitch is confidential settlement.
Same window: 89 contract calls, a 9.9% failure rate, and an average fee of ~0.0136 DUSK. The failure rate is what made me dig further that's not trivial for a chain this size, and it's worth checking whether it clusters around specific contract calls or is spread evenly across transfer types.
What this tells us, separate from interpretation: on any given day, most DUSK holders moving funds aren't touching the privacy feature at all. That could mean early activity is dominated by exchange-related transfers and staking mechanics rather than the confidential-transaction use case Dusk is built around. It could also just reflect UX friction shielded txs cost more to construct and prove.
I couldn't confirm whether this 8% ratio is typical or a one-day anomaly, since I only pulled a single snapshot and the explorer blocks scripted historical queries.
Why do you think adoption is skewing transparent on a privacy-first chain cost, habit, or something else?
Source snapshot pulled from The DUDE (duskexplorer.com/transactions), an independent Dusk block explorer good for spot-checking, though I couldn't verify the exact block-time of the snapshot since the site blocks automated re-fetching.
@Dusk_Foundation $DUSK #dusk
Went digging into Dusk's live explorer data this week and one number stopped me: in the most recent 24h window tracked on The DUDE (duskexplorer.com), only 21 of 252 total transactions used the Phoenix shielded model the rest, 231, ran through Moonlight, the transparent path. That's roughly 8% privacy usage on a chain whose entire pitch is confidential settlement.
Same window: 89 contract calls, a 9.9% failure rate, and an average fee of ~0.0136 DUSK. The failure rate is what made me dig further that's not trivial for a chain this size, and it's worth checking whether it clusters around specific contract calls or is spread evenly across transfer types.
What this tells us, separate from interpretation: on any given day, most DUSK holders moving funds aren't touching the privacy feature at all. That could mean early activity is dominated by exchange-related transfers and staking mechanics rather than the confidential-transaction use case Dusk is built around. It could also just reflect UX friction shielded txs cost more to construct and prove.
I couldn't confirm whether this 8% ratio is typical or a one-day anomaly, since I only pulled a single snapshot and the explorer blocks scripted historical queries.
Why do you think adoption is skewing transparent on a privacy-first chain cost, habit, or something else?
Source snapshot pulled from The DUDE (duskexplorer.com/transactions), an independent Dusk block explorer good for spot-checking, though I couldn't verify the exact block-time of the snapshot since the site blocks automated re-fetching.
@Dusk_Foundation $DUSK #dusk