#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Tokenizing an asset is the easy part.
I used to think the main breakthrough in RWA was simply putting a real-world asset on-chain.
But looking deeper, I realized that putting the asset on-chain doesn’t automatically put the market around it on-chain.
That’s what makes #Dusk approach to native issuance interesting to me.
Instead of treating blockchain as just a digital record for an existing asset, native issuance is about designing the asset and its financial workflow around on-chain infrastructure from the start.
For regulated markets, that distinction matters.
If the asset is on-chain but the market around it still depends on disconnected systems, how much has actually changed?
For me, that’s a more interesting question than simply asking whether an asset can be tokenized.
What matters more for RWA adoption?
• Asset on-chain
• Financial workflow on-chain
• Both equally
• Still too early
@Dusk_Foundation $DUSK #dusk
Tokenizing an asset is the easy part.
I used to think the main breakthrough in RWA was simply putting a real-world asset on-chain.
But looking deeper, I realized that putting the asset on-chain doesn’t automatically put the market around it on-chain.
That’s what makes #Dusk approach to native issuance interesting to me.
Instead of treating blockchain as just a digital record for an existing asset, native issuance is about designing the asset and its financial workflow around on-chain infrastructure from the start.
For regulated markets, that distinction matters.
If the asset is on-chain but the market around it still depends on disconnected systems, how much has actually changed?
For me, that’s a more interesting question than simply asking whether an asset can be tokenized.
What matters more for RWA adoption?
• Asset on-chain
• Financial workflow on-chain
• Both equally
• Still too early
@Dusk_Foundation $DUSK #dusk