@Dusk_Foundation A country's founding constitution exists the moment the country does — nobody votes it into being after the fact, it's simply there at day one, and everything else gets built referencing it.
Dusk's genesis contracts work the same way. Dusk's own architecture materials describe two: the stake contract, tracking which provisioners are staking, recording rewards, and enabling stake, unstake, and reward-withdrawal actions; and the transfer contract, handling both Moonlight (public) and Phoenix (shielded) transfers, paying gas, and acting as the entry point for transaction execution directly on DuskDS.
That foundational role extends further than DuskDS alone, though the exact mechanism differs by layer. DuskEVM, per Dusk's own docs, moves DUSK for gas through its own bridge to Dusk's L1, ultimately settling back to DuskDS — a related but distinct path from the transfer contract's direct role in native DuskDS transactions. Both roads lead back to the same base layer; they aren't identical mechanisms. #dusk
Self-critique: the constitution-analogy has a real limit worth naming. A country's constitution can be formally amended through a defined process. What I haven't found documented is whether Dusk's genesis contracts follow an equivalent, clearly-specified amendment path, or whether "genesis" here functionally means permanent-by-design — a real governance-question given how much of Dusk's expanding multilayer stack now depends on these same two contracts staying correct. $DUSK
DUSK should be evaluated on whether that ambiguity gets clarified before these contracts ever need updating under real pressure, not after.
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Dusk's genesis contracts work the same way. Dusk's own architecture materials describe two: the stake contract, tracking which provisioners are staking, recording rewards, and enabling stake, unstake, and reward-withdrawal actions; and the transfer contract, handling both Moonlight (public) and Phoenix (shielded) transfers, paying gas, and acting as the entry point for transaction execution directly on DuskDS.
That foundational role extends further than DuskDS alone, though the exact mechanism differs by layer. DuskEVM, per Dusk's own docs, moves DUSK for gas through its own bridge to Dusk's L1, ultimately settling back to DuskDS — a related but distinct path from the transfer contract's direct role in native DuskDS transactions. Both roads lead back to the same base layer; they aren't identical mechanisms. #dusk
Self-critique: the constitution-analogy has a real limit worth naming. A country's constitution can be formally amended through a defined process. What I haven't found documented is whether Dusk's genesis contracts follow an equivalent, clearly-specified amendment path, or whether "genesis" here functionally means permanent-by-design — a real governance-question given how much of Dusk's expanding multilayer stack now depends on these same two contracts staying correct. $DUSK
DUSK should be evaluated on whether that ambiguity gets clarified before these contracts ever need updating under real pressure, not after.
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Permanent by design
Should have amendment path
13 hora(s) restante(s)