Spent an hour testing DUSK's confidential transaction flow last week and noticed something the docs don't emphasize: the privacy-preserving path isn't the default, it's the advanced option you have to actively choose. $DUSK #dusk @Dusk Network markets itself on regulatory-compliant privacy for institutions, but the actual UX funnels most users toward standard transparent transactions first, with the zero-knowledge tooling sitting one layer deeper, requiring more setup and more understanding of what you're opting into. That's not a flaw exactly, it's a sequencing choice, and it tells you who the current build is really for: developers and institutional integrators comfortable navigating that extra layer, not retail users clicking through in thirty seconds. The technology being sound doesn't mean the path to using it is short. I kept thinking about how many privacy-focused chains make this same bet, that the sophisticated users arrive first and the simpler onramps get built later once there's enough usage to justify them. Whether that ordering is a resourcing reality or a deliberate go-to-market decision isn't obvious from the outside. Either way, the gap between what's possible on DUSK and what's easy on DUSK is where adoption will actually be decided.