#dusk $DUSK @Dusk Dusk calls it a 36-year emission schedule. Half of it lands in year 4.
I almost skipped this one because "36-year schedule" sounds like the boring, slow kind of tokenomics post. it isn't, and I only realized that because I went and checked the number myself instead of trusting the framing.
Dusk's docs lay out the mechanics plainly — 500 million DUSK, the second half of the 1B max supply, gets emitted to stakers over 36 years, geometric decay, 0.5 reduction rate, halving every 4 years. Fine. But "36 years" is doing a lot of quiet work in that sentence, so I ran the actual math instead of taking the framing at face value.
9 halving periods across 36 years, ratio 0.5 each time. Solve for the first term of that series and it lands almost exactly on 250 million — half the entire 36-year emission, gone in the first 4 years. The other 32 years split what's left.
Here's the part that got me to actually trust it: I didn't want to just repeat Dusk's own economic report number, so I pulled a handful of recent blocks off the mainnet explorer myself and checked the reward directly. Landed right around 19.86 DUSK a block — which is what their report claims too. At ~10-second blocks that's about 62.6M DUSK a year. The geometric model, working purely off the supply schedule with zero reference to per-block rewards, predicts ~62.5M/year for this exact window. Two completely separate calculations — one top-down from total supply, one bottom-up from what's actually hitting wallets right now — landing in the same place within rounding error.
Circulating supply sits around 497M DUSK right now (checked CoinGecko today), meaning almost half the total ever supply is already live and mainnet only launched in 2025. Most of us reading this are standing in the steepest 4 years of the curve, not the gentle 36-year tail the phrase implies.
If half your token's ever-emitted supply lands in the first 11% of the timeline, is "36-year emission schedule" the honest way to say that — or just the reassuring one?
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
I almost skipped this one because "36-year schedule" sounds like the boring, slow kind of tokenomics post. it isn't, and I only realized that because I went and checked the number myself instead of trusting the framing.
Dusk's docs lay out the mechanics plainly — 500 million DUSK, the second half of the 1B max supply, gets emitted to stakers over 36 years, geometric decay, 0.5 reduction rate, halving every 4 years. Fine. But "36 years" is doing a lot of quiet work in that sentence, so I ran the actual math instead of taking the framing at face value.
9 halving periods across 36 years, ratio 0.5 each time. Solve for the first term of that series and it lands almost exactly on 250 million — half the entire 36-year emission, gone in the first 4 years. The other 32 years split what's left.
Here's the part that got me to actually trust it: I didn't want to just repeat Dusk's own economic report number, so I pulled a handful of recent blocks off the mainnet explorer myself and checked the reward directly. Landed right around 19.86 DUSK a block — which is what their report claims too. At ~10-second blocks that's about 62.6M DUSK a year. The geometric model, working purely off the supply schedule with zero reference to per-block rewards, predicts ~62.5M/year for this exact window. Two completely separate calculations — one top-down from total supply, one bottom-up from what's actually hitting wallets right now — landing in the same place within rounding error.
Circulating supply sits around 497M DUSK right now (checked CoinGecko today), meaning almost half the total ever supply is already live and mainnet only launched in 2025. Most of us reading this are standing in the steepest 4 years of the curve, not the gentle 36-year tail the phrase implies.
If half your token's ever-emitted supply lands in the first 11% of the timeline, is "36-year emission schedule" the honest way to say that — or just the reassuring one?
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk