There's a small detail in how Dusk prices gas that I think says more about the protocol's philosophy than it first appears.
You pay gas in DUSK, priced in LUX, and the final fee depends on the gas actually used — not the limit you set.
But here’s the interesting part: if a transaction runs out of gas and reverts, the consumed gas still costs you.
At first, that feels harsh.
Then I look at it from the network’s side.
The transaction failed, but the computation didn’t magically disappear. Validators still processed it, resources were consumed, and someone has to account for that work.
That makes me think Dusk is pricing execution, not outcomes.
A failed transaction can be useless to me while still being real work for the network.
And that distinction is easy to miss.
Maybe the better question isn’t “Why did I pay when it failed?”
It’s “Should computation ever be free just because the final result wasn’t what I wanted?”
That’s a much bigger conversation about blockchain economics than gas fees alone.
@Dusk_Foundation #dusk $DUSK
$BTW
$PORTAL
You pay gas in DUSK, priced in LUX, and the final fee depends on the gas actually used — not the limit you set.
But here’s the interesting part: if a transaction runs out of gas and reverts, the consumed gas still costs you.
At first, that feels harsh.
Then I look at it from the network’s side.
The transaction failed, but the computation didn’t magically disappear. Validators still processed it, resources were consumed, and someone has to account for that work.
That makes me think Dusk is pricing execution, not outcomes.
A failed transaction can be useless to me while still being real work for the network.
And that distinction is easy to miss.
Maybe the better question isn’t “Why did I pay when it failed?”
It’s “Should computation ever be free just because the final result wasn’t what I wanted?”
That’s a much bigger conversation about blockchain economics than gas fees alone.
@Dusk_Foundation #dusk $DUSK
$BTW
$PORTAL