When I re-traced the transaction lifecycle of @Dusk , what made me pause wasn’t how fast “finality” is—it was this: when does a state start being considered “definitively determined,” such that the financial system treats it as already certain?
Following the official process, I found that there’s a threshold between executed and the final settlement. “err:null” indicates execution succeeded. Transactions that enter an accepted block can still be reverted before they’re finalized. Only once they’re finalized does the state become a permanently determined on-chain state.
Looking at Succinct Attestation, the flow is Proposal, Validation, and finally Ratification carried out by another committee. After Ratification, the block gains deterministic finality. What truly matters to me is that Dusk separates “execution completed” from “state finally determined.”
This also explains why Dusk separates execution from settlement: DuskVM handles native L1 contract execution, while DuskDS is responsible for consensus, settlement, and finality. For financial assets, producing a result is only the first step—the key is when that result becomes a definitive state that later steps can rely on.
The official integration requirements use finalized as the accounting boundary. If a transaction is recorded as “funds received” during the accepted phase, and the block later reverts, the business may need to reverse entries—possibly even to handle subsequent transfers. Waiting until finalized only costs time; recording early can cost the entire bookkeeping repair.
So when I look at $DUSK , what I care about isn’t how quickly you get confirmation, but when assets and payments enter a settlement state that can be relied on. For a financial system, the value of finality isn’t just making waiting predictable—it’s providing a clear moment when the business can stop waiting.
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Following the official process, I found that there’s a threshold between executed and the final settlement. “err:null” indicates execution succeeded. Transactions that enter an accepted block can still be reverted before they’re finalized. Only once they’re finalized does the state become a permanently determined on-chain state.
Looking at Succinct Attestation, the flow is Proposal, Validation, and finally Ratification carried out by another committee. After Ratification, the block gains deterministic finality. What truly matters to me is that Dusk separates “execution completed” from “state finally determined.”
This also explains why Dusk separates execution from settlement: DuskVM handles native L1 contract execution, while DuskDS is responsible for consensus, settlement, and finality. For financial assets, producing a result is only the first step—the key is when that result becomes a definitive state that later steps can rely on.
The official integration requirements use finalized as the accounting boundary. If a transaction is recorded as “funds received” during the accepted phase, and the block later reverts, the business may need to reverse entries—possibly even to handle subsequent transfers. Waiting until finalized only costs time; recording early can cost the entire bookkeeping repair.
So when I look at $DUSK , what I care about isn’t how quickly you get confirmation, but when assets and payments enter a settlement state that can be relied on. For a financial system, the value of finality isn’t just making waiting predictable—it’s providing a clear moment when the business can stop waiting.
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
