AbdullRauf

GIVEAWAY ALERT 🧧
We're giving away 2000 gifts to our Square Family as a huge thank you for your support!
To Enter:
✅ Follow
✅ Share this post
✅ Comment "666 !"
Random winners will be selected. Good luck, everyone! 🚀

At first I assumed regulated finance could not move on-chain because regulators would never allow it. The rules were too strict. The systems were too closed. Blockchain was too open.

Then the numbers appeared. More than €200 million in confirmed issuance through NPEX, a regulated Dutch exchange working with Dusk. That did not look like resistance. It looked like the opposite.

What held me was the quieter realization underneath. Regulators were not the main blocker. Infrastructure was. When the rails could support eligibility, settlement, and controlled disclosure, the regulatory path became usable. The permission was not granted after the fact. It became possible because the design finally matched the requirements.

What I still cannot settle is how far this stays local. NPEX is a Dutch venue. Whether this model expands beyond Europe or remains a regional experiment is still open.

When regulated finance moves on-chain, does blockchain become more regulated, or does finance become more free?

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk

go

go

At first I assumed confidential meant hidden from everyone. Encrypted data, no visibility, the transaction exists but nobody outside can read it. Hedger works differently. The transaction data is encrypted and externally opaque. Authorized regulators can still audit it. The encryption is not a wall. It is a door with a guest list. What I kept sitting with is the phrase authorized regulators. That phrase does a lot of work quietly. It decides who is on the list. It decides how someone gets added. It presumably decides how someone gets removed. None of that is the cryptography. All of that is governance. The technical privacy is real. The governance privacy is a different question entirely. You are not invisible inside Hedger. You are selectively visible to a set of parties @Dusk and its partners have defined. That might be exactly the right design for regulated finance. It is also not what most people mean when they hear the word confidential. When privacy means hidden from everyone except the people who matter to the system, who decides who matters?

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk

At first I assumed a fixed one-billion supply was the strongest signal in the $TMX design. Spent time with the actual unlock schedule and realized the more important number is the float.

Only about 200 million is expected to circulate at the start. Investor tokens alone release roughly 11.67 million per month after the cliff. Add team and advisor unlocks and the monthly linear flow can reach around 17.67 million. Scheduled dilution is normal. The real test is whether real demand and protocol revenue absorb the new supply faster than it arrives.

The 150 million team allocation equals 75 percent of the initial circulating supply. Team plus investors together total 430 million more than twice the day-one float. That changes how the phrase “fixed supply” lands. Scarcity on paper is one thing. What becomes sellable and when is another.

I am watching the free float and the speed at which it expands more than the headline billion. Supply discipline is not only what exists eventually. It is what becomes available when.

#termmax @TermMax