Dusk claims its TPS is over 500, but I looked into the on-chain data—more than 70% of the blocks still have fewer than 2 transactions.
Dusk has been boasting about how great its technology is. TPS over 500, a 40% improvement in zero-knowledge proof generation speed, and the mainnet running stably for over 17 months. It sounds much more reliable than privacy projects that just shout slogans.
But after I went through the on-chain data, I calmed down.
The Dusk mainnet block height has already surpassed 109,000. Technically, the average block time of 2 seconds is definitely not an issue. The problem is block utilization—it's shockingly low. In more than 70% of the blocks, the number of transactions is still under 2. There are often consecutive empty blocks. The daily transaction count barely breaks 1,000. I reviewed a dozen-plus consecutive blocks and found that several blocks had only one transaction, and some were completely empty. The narrative of TPS over 500 is pretty convincing, but the network simply doesn’t have enough transactions to process. @Dusk
Even more painful: the network’s daily average active addresses are fewer than 80. And after deducting a large number of project teams’ own wallets, actual user participation is basically zero. A Layer-1 focused on “institutional-grade financial infrastructure,” yet its daily active users are under 80. Over there, even some random meme coin has several times that. I even checked specifically—some newly launched memecoins have on-chain active addresses in the past 24 hours that are more than ten times Dusk’s. This isn’t a technology problem; it’s a problem of whether anyone is actually using it.
The staking data doesn’t look great either. A 1,000 DUSK staking minimum sounds acceptable, but the official side is vague about the return rate—they only mention something like “geometric-decay release.” Combined with a 4.8-hour lock-up period, the appeal is almost nonexistent. I reviewed the staking data, and the number of addresses genuinely participating in staking isn’t nearly as high as people might imagine.
I’m not saying Dusk’s technology isn’t good. Zero-knowledge proofs do have substance, and the PLONKup optimization really can deliver. But no matter how strong the technology is, it only matters if people use it. The on-chain data right now tells me this: Dusk’s technology is indeed leading—but its network might be the most desolate “highway” I’ve ever seen. The road is built well, but there are no cars running on it. When someday the daily transaction volume breaks ten thousand and active addresses break one thousand, I’ll come back and trust that this road truly has people traveling it. #dusk $DUSK
Dusk has been boasting about how great its technology is. TPS over 500, a 40% improvement in zero-knowledge proof generation speed, and the mainnet running stably for over 17 months. It sounds much more reliable than privacy projects that just shout slogans.
But after I went through the on-chain data, I calmed down.
The Dusk mainnet block height has already surpassed 109,000. Technically, the average block time of 2 seconds is definitely not an issue. The problem is block utilization—it's shockingly low. In more than 70% of the blocks, the number of transactions is still under 2. There are often consecutive empty blocks. The daily transaction count barely breaks 1,000. I reviewed a dozen-plus consecutive blocks and found that several blocks had only one transaction, and some were completely empty. The narrative of TPS over 500 is pretty convincing, but the network simply doesn’t have enough transactions to process. @Dusk
Even more painful: the network’s daily average active addresses are fewer than 80. And after deducting a large number of project teams’ own wallets, actual user participation is basically zero. A Layer-1 focused on “institutional-grade financial infrastructure,” yet its daily active users are under 80. Over there, even some random meme coin has several times that. I even checked specifically—some newly launched memecoins have on-chain active addresses in the past 24 hours that are more than ten times Dusk’s. This isn’t a technology problem; it’s a problem of whether anyone is actually using it.
The staking data doesn’t look great either. A 1,000 DUSK staking minimum sounds acceptable, but the official side is vague about the return rate—they only mention something like “geometric-decay release.” Combined with a 4.8-hour lock-up period, the appeal is almost nonexistent. I reviewed the staking data, and the number of addresses genuinely participating in staking isn’t nearly as high as people might imagine.
I’m not saying Dusk’s technology isn’t good. Zero-knowledge proofs do have substance, and the PLONKup optimization really can deliver. But no matter how strong the technology is, it only matters if people use it. The on-chain data right now tells me this: Dusk’s technology is indeed leading—but its network might be the most desolate “highway” I’ve ever seen. The road is built well, but there are no cars running on it. When someday the daily transaction volume breaks ten thousand and active addresses break one thousand, I’ll come back and trust that this road truly has people traveling it. #dusk $DUSK