C I R U S

Most data marketplaces today are built around platforms, not protocols. A central entity collects data, controls access, sets rules, and decides how value is distributed. Developers can build on top of these systems, but they never fully control them. Ownership, trust, and monetization stay locked inside the platform.
Walrus changes this foundation. It gives developers the tools to build data marketplaces where trust comes from verification, not intermediaries, and where users can participate directly in the value created by their data.
Start with verifiable data, not listings
Traditional marketplaces begin with listings and metadata. Walrus-based marketplaces begin with data commitments.
When a dataset is uploaded to Walrus, it is committed cryptographically. That commitment defines exactly what the data is at a specific point in time. For developers, this becomes the anchor of the marketplace. Every listing, access rule, or payment references a dataset commitment rather than a mutable file.
This solves a core problem immediately. Buyers don’t need to trust the marketplace operator or the seller’s description. They can independently verify that the data they’re accessing matches the original commitment.
Separate ownership from access
A key design principle when building on Walrus is separating ownership from access.
Data owners don’t give up control when they participate in a marketplace. Instead, they grant access under specific conditions. Developers can build logic that allows datasets to be accessed temporarily, version by version, or under usage constraints, while ownership remains with the creator.
This is what makes sustainable monetization possible. Data can be reused without being permanently surrendered, and value can be captured repeatedly as demand grows.
Use versioning to create differentiated products
Walrus treats every dataset update as a new version rather than an overwrite. This opens up powerful design options for developers.
A marketplace can offer:
* historical snapshots of datasets
* access to the latest version only
* full version histories for research or compliance use
Different consumers value different views of data. AI developers may want long-term historical series. Analysts may want clean snapshots. Applications may want only fresh data. Versioning allows one dataset to support multiple products without duplication.
Build trustless verification into the buying flow
In a Walrus-based marketplace, verification doesn’t happen behind the scenes. It becomes part of the user experience.
Before or during purchase, consumers can verify dataset integrity directly against Walrus commitments. This removes disputes about data quality and reduces the need for centralized moderation.
For developers, this means fewer edge cases and less reliance on manual trust enforcement. The protocol does the heavy lifting.
Monetization without centralized custody
Walrus doesn’t dictate how monetization works. That’s up to the marketplace logic developers design.
What Walrus provides is the ability to monetize without taking custody of the data itself. Payments can be tied to access rights, versions, or usage periods. Revenue flows directly to data owners according to transparent rules.
This keeps marketplaces lightweight. They coordinate value exchange without becoming data custodians.
Why this matters for AI-driven demand
AI systems are rapidly increasing demand for high-quality, trustworthy data. At the same time, data providers want clearer guarantees around attribution, usage, and compensation.
Walrus sits between these two needs.
Developers can build marketplaces where AI models train on verifiable datasets, prove which data they used, and compensate data providers automatically. This creates a cleaner loop between data creation and data consumption.
Building data marketplaces on Walrus is less about creating another platform and more about designing economic flows around verified data. The protocol handles integrity and availability. Developers focus on access rules, pricing, and user experience.
When trust moves from intermediaries to infrastructure, marketplaces become more open, more composable, and more fair. That’s the real opportunity Walrus unlocks for developers.

@Walrus 🦭/acc #walrus $WAL

Mūsdienu finanšu sistēmas, DeFi protokoli un AI vadīti aģenti visi paļaujas uz vienu lietu, ko bieži ņem par pašsaprotamu: tirgus dati. Cenas, likmes, likviditātes stāvokļi un vēsturiskie attēli veido lēmumus, kuru vērtība ir miljardiem. Tomēr lielākā daļa orākulu plūsmu un tirgus attēlu šodien dzīvo sistēmās, kur datos var veikt pārrakstīšanu, kavēšanos vai selektīvu slēpšanu.
Šī ir plaisa, ko Walrus ir paredzēts aizvērt.
Walrus neaizvieto orākulus. Tas nostiprina to, kas notiek pēc datu ražošanas, padarot orākulu plūsmas un tirgus attēlus pastāvīgus, pārbaudāmus un atkārtoti izmantojamus laika gaitā.

Kā AI sistēmas pāriet no rīkiem uz aktoriem, ekonomikas struktūra ap tām sāk mainīties. Mēs vairs nerunājam par modeļiem, kas atbild uz jautājumiem pēc pieprasījuma. Mēs runājam par aģentiem, kas sarunājas, veic darījumus, optimizē un pieņem lēmumus nepārtraukti. Šajā pasaulē visvērtīgākais ieguldījums nav aprēķini vai algoritmi. Tas ir uzticami dati.
Šeit Walrus klusi kļūst par pamatu.
Walrus nav pozicionēts kā AI produkts. Tas netrenē modeļus vai veic secinājumus. Tā vietā tas risina dziļāku problēmu, ar kuru galu galā saskaras katra AI vadītā ekonomika: kā padarīt datus uzticamus, verificējamus un ekonomiski izmantojamus lielā apmērā, bez centrālas kontroles.

For years, blockchain has promised to modernize financial markets. Faster settlement, fewer intermediaries, lower costs. On paper, it sounds obvious. Yet despite all the experimentation, traditional securities settlement has not moved onto public blockchains in any meaningful way. This isn’t because institutions are slow or resistant to change. It’s because public ledgers, by design, clash with how securities markets actually function.
This is exactly the gap Dusk Network was built to address.
To understand why, you first need to understand how securities settlement works in the real world, not how crypto imagines it should work.
Settlement is about finality, not visibility
In equity and bond markets, settlement is the moment when ownership legally changes hands. Cash moves, securities are delivered, obligations are closed, and risk is removed from balance sheets. This process handles trillions of dollars in value every single day across global markets.
What matters most in settlement is not transparency. It’s finality, accuracy, and legal enforceability.
Public blockchains emphasize visibility. Every transfer is observable. Every balance can be tracked. While this works for speculative trading, it creates problems the moment assets represent regulated securities.
Settlement systems are trusted precisely because they are discreet. Ownership registries are not public websites. Transfer instructions are not broadcast in real time. Market participants rely on controlled access, not global observability.
Public ledgers invert this model.
Why public visibility becomes a risk
Securities markets operate under strict confidentiality rules. Shareholder lists, trade sizes, counterparties, and settlement flows are sensitive information. Exposing them publicly creates multiple risks.
If ownership data is public, companies violate confidentiality obligations.
If trade flows are visible, strategies leak.
If settlement activity can be tracked, counterparties can be identified and exploited.
These aren’t hypothetical concerns. They are reasons institutions avoid public ledgers entirely for post-trade infrastructure.
Public blockchains assume that transparency equals trust. In regulated markets, transparency at the wrong level destroys trust.
Settlement involves more than transfers
Another misconception is that settlement is just about moving tokens from one address to another. In reality, securities settlement is deeply tied to compliance.
Every settlement event must align with:
• Know-your-customer and counterparty rules
• Reporting and audit requirements
• Legal ownership records
• Jurisdiction-specific regulations
On public ledgers, this logic sits outside the chain. Data is exported. Reports are generated manually. Compliance becomes a patchwork layered on top of infrastructure that was never designed for it.
This fragmentation increases cost, complexity, and legal uncertainty.
Why retrofitting public chains doesn’t work
Many projects attempt to solve this by adding privacy layers, permissioned environments, or side systems to public blockchains. While these approaches help at the margins, they rarely solve the core issue.
If the base layer exposes all state by default, privacy becomes an exception rather than the rule. Over time, systems become fragile, fragmented, and hard to govern.
Settlement infrastructure cannot afford that fragility. When trillions are at stake, the system must behave predictably under stress.
How Dusk approaches settlement differently
Dusk starts from the assumption that securities settlement must be private, auditable, and enforceable at the same time.
Instead of broadcasting every detail publicly, Dusk allows settlement to occur with controlled visibility. Ownership can change without being publicly exposed. Transactions can remain confidential while still being provable. Auditors and regulators can access what they need without the market seeing everything.
This mirrors how settlement already works today, while bringing it on-chain.
By designing privacy and compliance into the infrastructure itself, Dusk removes the need for constant off-chain reconciliation and workarounds.
Why this matters for capital efficiency
Traditional settlement delays lock up capital. When trades take one or two days to finalize, institutions must hold buffers to manage counterparty risk. This ties up enormous amounts of money that could otherwise be deployed.
On-chain settlement promises to reduce this friction, but only if it can meet regulatory requirements. Public ledgers fail here because they trade discretion for speed.
Dusk aims to deliver both.
Faster settlement with legal finality, without exposing sensitive data, improves capital efficiency without introducing new risks.
The real barrier isn’t technology, it’s alignment
The biggest obstacle to moving securities settlement on-chain isn’t performance. It’s alignment with how markets are structured.
Public ledgers were designed for open participation and radical transparency. Securities markets are designed for controlled participation and structured disclosure.
Dusk aligns with the latter.
By respecting confidentiality, auditability, and enforceability from the start, it creates an environment where settlement can move on-chain without breaking the rules that markets depend on.
My take
Traditional securities settlement hasn’t avoided public blockchains by accident. It has avoided them because they expose too much, too broadly, and too permanently.
Dusk recognizes that settlement doesn’t need more visibility. It needs better structure.
By building infrastructure that mirrors how regulated markets actually operate, Dusk doesn’t try to force securities onto public ledgers. It builds a ledger that securities can realistically use.
That difference is subtle, but it’s exactly why it matters.

@Dusk #dusk $DUSK

Vairums privātuma ķēžu izklausās līdzīgas uz virsmas. Tās runā par konfidencialitāti, slēptajiem atlikumiem, anonīmajām pārskaitījumiem un nulles zināšanu pierādījumiem. Pirmajā mirklī DUSK var viegli tikt grupēts šajā kategorijā. Praksē, tomēr, DUSK darbojas ļoti atšķirīgā virzienā.
Atšķirība nav tajā, cik daudz datu ir slēpti.
Atšķirība ir tajā, kāpēc tie ir slēpti, kurš var tiem piekļūt un kā tas iederas reālajās finanšu sistēmās.
Privātuma ķēdes bieži sākas no lietotāja.
DUSK sākas no tirgus.

Kad cilvēki dzird “privātums” kriptovalūtās, viņi bieži iedomājas noslēpumainību. Kad viņi dzird “atbilstība”, viņi iedomājas ierobežojumus. Reālajā finansē neviens no šiem interpretācijām nav precīzs. Privātums un atbilstība nav abstrakti jēdzieni vai politiskas pozīcijas. Tie ir operatīvi prasības, kas nosaka, kā nauda faktiski pārvietojas katru dienu.
Šis ir konteksts, kurā tika izstrādāta Dusk Network.
DUSK modeļa pamatā nav kriptogrāfija vai ideoloģija. Tas sākas no reāliem finanšu darba plūsmām, kas jau pastāv, jau pārvieto milzīgu vērtību un jau darbojas stingros noteikumos. DUSK izpratne nozīmē izprast, kā šīs darba plūsmas darbojas šodien un kāpēc lielākā daļa blokķēdju cīnās, lai tās atbalstītu.

No eksperimentiem līdz cerībām
Lielākā daļa blokķēžu ir radītas eksperimentēšanai. Agrīnie lietotāji sagaida nestabilitāti, nepilnīgu rīku komplektu un gadījuma neveiksmes. Šī pacietība ir pagaidu greznība. Attīstoties tīkliem, cerības mainās. Lietotāji pārtrauc piedot izsistēm. Iestādes pārtrauc tolerēt neskaidrību. Sistēmas, kas kādreiz izdzīvoja tikai uz inovāciju rēķina, pēkšņi tiek vērtētas pēc uzticamības, paredzamības un operatīvās skaidrības.
Plasma šķiet ir izstrādāta ar šo pāreju prātā. Tās identitāte kā stabilā monētu norēķinu ķēde atspoguļo izpratni, ka Web3 vairs nav tikai eksperiments. Stabilās monētas jau ir iestrādātas globālajos finanšu plūsmās. Tās ikdienā izmanto indivīdi un uzņēmumi, kuriem ir mazāk svarīga ideoloģija un vairāk svarīgi rezultāti. Izskatās, ka Plasma ir sākusi no šīs realitātes, nevis no abstraktiem blokķēdes ideāliem.