Lately, I’ve been thinking about how new technology often gets the attention, while timing gets ignored.
At first I assumed $DUSK launching an EVM testnet on August 10 was mostly about making things easier for #Ethereum developers. Familiar tools, easier onboarding, more developers experimenting. Simple.
The more I read, the more I think the interesting part might be what Dusk is actually trying to make those developers build.
$DUSK already focuses heavily on privacy for regulated financial applications. Now the idea is to bring more familiar Ethereum tooling into that environment.
That creates an interesting mismatch.
Developers might be ready to build before institutions are ready to use the applications.
Institutions might want privacy before regulators are comfortable with the systems.
And everyone could be waiting for someone else to move first.
I keep coming back to that.
Imagine a developer building infrastructure for tokenized securities. The technology may already support confidential transactions and selective verification. But technology isn't necessarily the bottleneck. The harder part could be getting issuers, institutions, developers, and regulators aligned at roughly the same time.
Maybe that’s true.
Perhaps I’m focusing on the wrong thing.
Still, Dusk’s EVM move feels less like “another EVM chain” and more like an attempt to reduce one barrier while the bigger coordination problem remains.
I’m not sure whether familiar tooling can create demand.
Or whether it only helps once the demand is already there.
#dusk
@Dusk_Foundation
$DUSK
At first I assumed $DUSK launching an EVM testnet on August 10 was mostly about making things easier for #Ethereum developers. Familiar tools, easier onboarding, more developers experimenting. Simple.
The more I read, the more I think the interesting part might be what Dusk is actually trying to make those developers build.
$DUSK already focuses heavily on privacy for regulated financial applications. Now the idea is to bring more familiar Ethereum tooling into that environment.
That creates an interesting mismatch.
Developers might be ready to build before institutions are ready to use the applications.
Institutions might want privacy before regulators are comfortable with the systems.
And everyone could be waiting for someone else to move first.
I keep coming back to that.
Imagine a developer building infrastructure for tokenized securities. The technology may already support confidential transactions and selective verification. But technology isn't necessarily the bottleneck. The harder part could be getting issuers, institutions, developers, and regulators aligned at roughly the same time.
Maybe that’s true.
Perhaps I’m focusing on the wrong thing.
Still, Dusk’s EVM move feels less like “another EVM chain” and more like an attempt to reduce one barrier while the bigger coordination problem remains.
I’m not sure whether familiar tooling can create demand.
Or whether it only helps once the demand is already there.
#dusk
@Dusk_Foundation
$DUSK