BullionOX

Als ich begann, zu recherchieren, wie Blockchains Privatsphäre bieten könnten, ohne Aufsehen zu erregen, war das Konzept des Dusk Networks für mich nahe daran, Privatsphäre als nachweisbare Verantwortlichkeit zu betrachten, anstatt als Verbergung. Finanzielle Obskurität kann eine potenzielle Quelle für regulatorische Bedenken sein, doch Dusk macht mit Hilfe des Rusk-Protokolls Privatsphäre zu einem Mittel der nachgewiesenen Verantwortung, sodass Handlungen nachweisbar sind, ohne notwendigerweise sichtbar zu sein.

Dies basiert auf der Fähigkeit von Rusk, Zustände zu wechseln, dem Zustand von Dusk. Es führt Transaktionen und Verträge auf deterministische Weise aus, was bedeutet, dass Logik immer auf die gleiche Weise ausgeführt wird, und Zero-Knowledge-Beweise verwendet werden können, um sicherzustellen, dass es korrekt ist, die Details jedoch geheim bleiben. Für Institutionen bedeutet dies, dass die Durchführung eines Handels oder einer Compliance-Prüfung korrekt durchgeführt wurde, obwohl die Salden und Identitäten unbekannt bleiben, und das macht Privatsphäre zu einer Transparenz der Verantwortlichkeit.

Although I initially viewed @Walrus 🦭/acc as a simplistic measure when learning about Sui based projects in 2025, I found it an effective way to move toward actual data ownership in Web3. Storing data centrally such as AWS provides the convenience but no actual control one can manipulate data, erase it or even sell it to the supplier. Walrus rearranges this by turning data into a verifiable and programmable asset that they can own on chain, and whose users have control over their files in an intermediary-free manner.
Walrus also provides first class objects on the Sui blockchain as large unstructured data, also known as blobs. On uploading a blob, it is coded with RedStuff which is a 2-D erasure coding, which makes it up of slivers that are spread out across independent nodes. This decentralization will imply that no single entity is fully in charge of the entire dataset, so there will be no chance of unauthorized changes or takedowns.
In the Move language, ownership is represented in Sui as an object. This object depicts a metadata of the blob such as the Proof of Availability certificate that it is stored and can be accessed. Users are able to move this object through smart contracts, giving it to other users or incorporating it into dApps, such as connecting an NFT to its media blob.
Ownership is promoted by the permissionless aspect of the protocol. Anyone is free to stake $WAL to act as a node; however, the incentives of the network make the network reliable by offering rewards as a result of storage fees, and which are given out at epochs. In WAL, users pay a fixed amount of an amount of money in advance and the rent is paid to nodes which demonstrate availability and this makes the economic incentive and data persistence in line.
The verifiability is strengthening control. Sliver cryptographic commitments enable owners to demonstrate integrity without content discovery, whilst records on the Sui blockchain enable owners to audit node behavior. In case of a failed node, slashing of staked data WAL helps to protect the information of the owner, as negligence is characterized.
To be applied in reality, it implies actual ownership in such applications as personal archives or AI datasets. Contracts provide their owners with an opportunity to extend storage, version data, or to delete blobs, without a central authority. Use with Seal provides privacy, which allows the owner to encrypt blobs, but can still be accessed.
I believe that Walrus enhances the notion of ownership of data by incorporating it in blockchain primitives. It leaves custody models behind and becomes real sovereignty, where data is an asset that users have complete control over, which encourages a more fair Web3.
@Walrus 🦭/acc $WAL #walrus

I have been looking over the token design of a few privacy driven Layer 1s in the recent past and Dusk Network has a token, called , that I have found to be going at a slower pace and with longer horizons. As opposed to most projects, which front load emissions or are highly speculative, Dusk directly corresponds the token economics to sustainable network security and actual use. Let's break it down clearly.
The supply amount of DUSK is set at 500 million tokens. This is the maximum mint that can be done. This supply constraint gives a constant maximum available supply, which matters to long term holders who attach value to scarcity.
The emission plan is distributed in 36 years with the rewards being less and less rewarded. This gradual issue renders the inflation shocks sharp and the ecosystem ample time to grow before most of the supply is released into circulation. The initial emissions are mostly used to support staking and network security, whereas subsequent stages are largely dependent on transaction fees.
All the activities on the network use DUSK as the native gas token. All actions of transactions, smart contracts calls, and storing data are paid in DUSK. This generates minimum demand depending on real network activity. With more usage of both confidential smart contracts and tokenized RWAs, the number of gas used rises, making the token more useful than staking.
Another fundamental role is staking. DUSK is secured in the Proof of Blind Bid consensus in order to engage in block generation and validation. The two sources of rewards are the emissions that continuously take place and a share of the transaction fees collected by stakers. The zero-knowledge proofs of the blind bid system ensure that the amount of stake is confidential, providing an extra privacy protection layer to the incentive system itself.
One of the major mechanisms of long term alignment is fee redistribution. Part of each gas fee is pushed to stakers producing a flywheel effect. The more real financial activity (e.g. tokenized asset issuance or compliant DeFi) takes place, the higher the fees are, so staking becomes more appealing and more inviting to holders of the tokens to lock them instead of selling.
Another utility vector is governance participation. DUSK holders are able to suggest and vote on protocol upgrades, parameter changes and ecosystem initiatives. This role becomes increasingly important as the network is mature enough, and thus community has a direct influence on future development without necessarily having to be controlled centrally.
Since January 2026, DuskEVM, which is live on mainnet, extends utility to EVM compatible confidential contracts. Application developers that build regulated applications will raise the number of transactions, which will subsequently increase gas usage and fees being paid back to stakers.
The general architecture does not make use of short term incentives heavily. It associates token value instead with verifiable network Usage and security. This system promotes a sustainable ecosystem development in place of boom bust cycles.
What is your opinion of such a model of redistribution of fees and a long emission scheme?
Is it more sustainable to DUSK than faster unlocks in projects?
@Dusk $DUSK #dusk

When I started thinking about staking on Walrus from the network's perspective, I realized it's designed to build collective reliability rather than individual gains. Staking $WAL is the foundation that secures data availability across the decentralized storage layer on Sui.
Nodes stake WAL to join storage committees. The amount staked determines how many slivers a node can handle, with higher stake allowing more workload and higher potential rewards. This ties network capacity directly to committed capital.2
Delegation lets WAL holders participate without running nodes. They delegate to operators, earning a share of storage fees. The network benefits as delegation flows to reliable nodes, concentrating stake where performance is proven and improving overall security.
Rewards come from user paid storage fees in $WAL , distributed over epochs based on verified uptime and availability proofs. The more data stored on Walrus, the larger the reward pool, creating a growth flywheel for the network.
Penalties ensure commitment. Failed challenges or low performance reduce epoch rewards. Slashing deducts staked WAL for severe issues, with portions burnt or redistributed. This discourages neglect and protects the network from bad actors.
Sui records all staking, delegation, and penalties as Move objects, providing a transparent, consistent global view. Epoch transitions on Sui reconfigure committees based on updated stake, balancing load without disruption.
From the network angle, approach staking by supporting nodes with strong track records on uptime and challenge success. This strengthens the ecosystem, making Walrus more resilient for long term data needs.
@Walrus 🦭/acc $WAL #walrus

Als ich ursprünglich in die @Walrus 🦭/acc -Integration mit Sui eintauchte, sah ich, wie Move-Smart-Verträge als Rückgrat für die Koordination dezentraler Speicherung dienen. Walrus kümmert sich um die Off-Chain-Datenebene, aber die Move-Sprache von Sui ermöglicht das On-Chain-Management, wodurch das System zusammensetzbar und sicher bleibt, ohne zentrale Koordinatoren.
Bewege Verträge zu Sui-Registrierungen von Knoten und Staking. Knoten setzen ein
über Move-Funktionen, die On-Chain-Objekte erstellen, die die Staking-Beträge und die Delegation verfolgen. Dies gewährleistet eine transparente, unveränderliche Sicht auf die Teilnehmer des Netzwerks.

Ich habe mit Freunden darüber gesprochen, warum Zahlungsbelege in @Plasma noch nicht umsetzbar sind, und ich wollte meine Erklärung in dem Stil geben, den ich normalerweise verwende, wenn wir ein persönliches Gespräch haben, und es muss auf der Grundlage dessen erfolgen, was ich in der aktuellen Aufstellung der Kette gesehen habe und wie die Zahlung tatsächlich funktioniert. Es handelt sich um ein technisches Problem, das für jede echte Adoption relevant ist, insbesondere dort, wo Stablecoins in bestehende Finanz- oder Geschäftsbetriebe integriert werden müssen.
Plasma ist eine Layer-1-Blockchain, die ihr Mainnet-Beta am 25. September 2025 in Betrieb genommen hat und optimiert ist, um Stablecoin-Zahlungen wie USDT zu unterstützen. Das Netzwerk bietet kostenlose Basisübertragungen über das Protokoll Paymaster, unter einer Sekunde Blockzeiten durch den PlasmaBFT-Konsens und eine hohe Durchsatzrate von über 1.000 TPS. Es ist EVM-kompatibel und Entwickler können mit den Tools arbeiten, die sie gewohnt sind, und es geht darum, digitale Dollar kostengünstig und schnell zu bewegen.

The aspect that interested me the most when I first explored the layered design of Dusk Network was the way DuskDS can be used as the basis to balance between execution speed and rock solid settlement. Efficiency mandates the fast processing of the blockchain in finance, whereas institutional trust requires stable settlement to be reached. DuskDS attains this by holding consensus and data availability and harmonizing with execution layers, such as DuskEVM and DuskVM. The heart of this design is the Rusk protocol and this serves as the state transition mechanism that provides balance on the layers.
Rusk deals with the state transitions between execution and settlement, which includes transitions to avoid instability. DuskDS relies on the Succinct Attestation Proof of Stake to reach a consensus, allowing quick finality of blocks, around ten seconds, with normal conditions, by isolating validation to randomly chosen committees. This containment also enables fast attestations and does not overload the network. Rusk will then confirm such transitions, where DuskEVM and DuskVM end up safely on DuskDS.
The EVM compatible implementation layer, named DuskEVM, aims at rapid Solidity contract execution. Rusk fulfills this speed by applying deterministic state transitions prior to settlement in DuskDS. Contracts might run effectively and the private computations are enclosed in zero knowledge proofs, so that the speed of operations does not affect the stable data availability. This is necessary to real world finance, where quick execution cannot lead to a compliant and irreversible settlement.
Piecrust, which is also called DuskVM, is a complement to this architecture that uses WASM based execution optimized in favor of confidential programs. Rusk aligns Piecrust outputs to DuskDS with low latency zero knowledge operations and verifiable and auditable settlement. DuskDS provides long term settlement guarantees that financial institutions can develop fast user facing applications.
This balance is maintained in lightweight zero knowledge circuits as proposed by Rusk in order to keep the cost of this balance down to gas consumption on transitioning and keeping the computational load enclosed. The DUSK token is one of the tokens that can be used to subscribe to this system by staking DuskDS and enabling the execution of Rusk, which aligns the economic incentive with the speed and stability.
In my view, the combination of these layers has Rusk in a particularly good position to coordinate them, and so Dusk is particularly well matched to regulated finance, where the speed of execution must not be at the cost of settlement certainty. It is a design made towards privacy oriented long term financial infrastructure.
What do you think Are the most appropriate ways to trade off speed and stability in the layered architectures?
What do you consider to be the greatest challenge with zero knowledge integrated settlement systems?
@Dusk
$DUSK
#dusk

When I first started researching how Layer 1 blockchains maintain robust security over time, Vanar Chain's approach to validator incentives stood out as thoughtful and aligned with its overall design goals.
It combines a reputation based system with clear economic rewards to encourage reliable participation.
This helps sustain the network's integrity without relying solely on high energy consumption or massive staking requirements.
The focus remains on long term stability through structured incentives.
Vanar Chain employs a hybrid consensus mechanism that primarily uses Proof of Authority (PoA), enhanced by Proof of Reputation (PoR).
In PoR, validator eligibility and performance are influenced by their established reputation within the network.
This differs from pure Proof of Stake models by prioritizing credibility and consistent behavior over sheer token holdings.
Validators must demonstrate reliability to maintain their role, which ties directly into incentive structures.
Block rewards form the primary mechanism for validator incentives.
Validators who actively produce blocks and validate transactions earn newly minted $VANRY tokens as rewards.
This distribution incentivizes participation in securing the network and processing transactions accurately.
The rewards come from protocol defined inflation, with a significant portion of new token supply allocated specifically to validator support.
Staking plays a key complementary role in the ecosystem.
Token holders can delegate their $vanry to trusted validators through a delegated Proof of Stake (dPoS) style mechanism.
Delegators earn a share of the block rewards after the validator's commission is deducted.
This delegation system broadens participation, allowing non technical users to contribute to security while receiving proportional returns.
The allocation of new tokens reinforces these incentives.
According to official documentation, a large share of additional supply goes toward validator rewards, with smaller portions for development and community incentives.
This model encourages validators to act honestly, as misbehavior could harm reputation and reduce eligibility for future rewards.
@Vanarchain provides detailed guides on staking, node setup, and reward mechanics through their official resources.
Overall, these incentives create a self-reinforcing loop.
Reliable validators earn more through reputation gains and block production.
Delegators are motivated to choose trustworthy operators to maximize their returns.
The system sustains security by aligning economic interests with network health, supporting Vanar Chain's focus on practical, AI native applications without compromising decentralization principles.
#vanar