I kept coming back to one number on DUSK: 210M+ DUSK is currently staked, roughly 21% of the 1B maximum supply.
At first, I read that as simple conviction. Then I looked closer: staking is not just passive holding here. DUSK secures the network, while rewards come from both new emissions and transaction fees.
The part that changed my view is the emission curve. 500M DUSK is scheduled over 36 years, with rewards halving every four years. So the incentive supporting today’s stake is designed to shrink over time.
My inference: that makes future network activity more important than the headline staking ratio. If transaction fees eventually have to carry more of the reward burden, what happens if real financial usage doesn’t grow fast enough?
Is the real value in how much $DUSK is staked today, or in whether actual network demand can eventually replace the declining emission subsidy?
@Dusk $DUSK #dusk
At first, I read that as simple conviction. Then I looked closer: staking is not just passive holding here. DUSK secures the network, while rewards come from both new emissions and transaction fees.
The part that changed my view is the emission curve. 500M DUSK is scheduled over 36 years, with rewards halving every four years. So the incentive supporting today’s stake is designed to shrink over time.
My inference: that makes future network activity more important than the headline staking ratio. If transaction fees eventually have to carry more of the reward burden, what happens if real financial usage doesn’t grow fast enough?
Is the real value in how much $DUSK is staked today, or in whether actual network demand can eventually replace the declining emission subsidy?
@Dusk $DUSK #dusk