#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
At some point I got tired of reading about Dusk's privacy architecture and just wanted to know how many people are actually using the chain day to day.
That number is harder to find than it should be, and once I did find it, it wasn't flattering. Daily active addresses hit what got reported as a 20-month high recently, and the peak was still only a few hundred addresses in a day. Not a few hundred thousand. A few hundred. That's the high point, not a normal week.
I don't think this disproves the privacy thesis by itself. NPEX settling tokenized securities through Dusk's infrastructure is real, and that kind of institutional flow doesn't necessarily show up as retail wallet activity anyway. Regulated finance moves through a small number of large transactions, not thousands of small ones. So the comparison isn't perfectly fair.
But it does mean the "public chain for private finance" story is still mostly running on one or two visible examples, not broad usage across many participants. The architecture for privacy exists. The proof that a wide range of people or institutions actually need it, at scale, doesn't yet.
Institutional volume and public network activity are two different signals, and right now only one of them is showing up in the data. I'd want to see the other one move before treating either as confirmation.
$LA
$ACE
At some point I got tired of reading about Dusk's privacy architecture and just wanted to know how many people are actually using the chain day to day.
That number is harder to find than it should be, and once I did find it, it wasn't flattering. Daily active addresses hit what got reported as a 20-month high recently, and the peak was still only a few hundred addresses in a day. Not a few hundred thousand. A few hundred. That's the high point, not a normal week.
I don't think this disproves the privacy thesis by itself. NPEX settling tokenized securities through Dusk's infrastructure is real, and that kind of institutional flow doesn't necessarily show up as retail wallet activity anyway. Regulated finance moves through a small number of large transactions, not thousands of small ones. So the comparison isn't perfectly fair.
But it does mean the "public chain for private finance" story is still mostly running on one or two visible examples, not broad usage across many participants. The architecture for privacy exists. The proof that a wide range of people or institutions actually need it, at scale, doesn't yet.
Institutional volume and public network activity are two different signals, and right now only one of them is showing up in the data. I'd want to see the other one move before treating either as confirmation.
$LA
$ACE