Honestly, the thing that bugs me about public blockchains is how naive they are. Everything's out there, forever every wallet, every transfer, every time you moved money and how much. Fine if you're some anonymous trader flipping tokens at 2am. Not fine if you're a company doing payroll, or a fund settling a trade, or a bank moving basically anything, because now your ledger is also just... telling everyone your business. Suppliers can back into your margins. Competitors can watch your treasury like a live feed. This isn't some edge case people worry about, it's just what happens when "transparent" is the whole design.
So naturally people go looking for privacy tools, and most of them end up breaking something else instead. Mixers make you look like you're hiding something even when you're not great, now you look like a money launderer for using basic financial privacy. And the fully private chains swing too far the other way: they hide things from the one person who's actually supposed to see them, the auditor, the regulator. So you're stuck picking between total exposure and total opacity, and neither one is really usable if you're an actual regulated business.
What Dusk is going for is the annoying middle ground private by default, but with some kind of key that lets the right person see the right thing when they need to. It's a nice idea on paper. But I don't think the hard part was ever the cryptography. The hard part is getting some compliance officer at a bank to actually trust a disclosure system they didn't build, can't fully audit themselves, and have never seen fail (or succeed) in the real world.
I'm not sold yet. Small validator set, a use case that only really matters if institutions show up, and institutions move slowly on purpose. I'd want to see one real bond issuance or securities settlement actually live on it, and stay there, before I'd call this anything more than a good idea waiting for its first believer.
#dusk @Dusk
$DUSK
$DEBIT
$BTR
So naturally people go looking for privacy tools, and most of them end up breaking something else instead. Mixers make you look like you're hiding something even when you're not great, now you look like a money launderer for using basic financial privacy. And the fully private chains swing too far the other way: they hide things from the one person who's actually supposed to see them, the auditor, the regulator. So you're stuck picking between total exposure and total opacity, and neither one is really usable if you're an actual regulated business.
What Dusk is going for is the annoying middle ground private by default, but with some kind of key that lets the right person see the right thing when they need to. It's a nice idea on paper. But I don't think the hard part was ever the cryptography. The hard part is getting some compliance officer at a bank to actually trust a disclosure system they didn't build, can't fully audit themselves, and have never seen fail (or succeed) in the real world.
I'm not sold yet. Small validator set, a use case that only really matters if institutions show up, and institutions move slowly on purpose. I'd want to see one real bond issuance or securities settlement actually live on it, and stay there, before I'd call this anything more than a good idea waiting for its first believer.
#dusk @Dusk
$DUSK
$DEBIT
$BTR
