#dusk $DUSK
I initially thought Dusk was solving a simple problem: how to keep financial activity private onchain.
Then I looked at the market around it roughly $0.06, a ~$30M market cap and only a few million dollars in daily volume and the design started looking more interesting to me.
Because Dusk is not really trying to make finance invisible.
It’s trying to make it selectively visible.
A bank shouldn’t have to expose every position, balance or trading pattern just because it uses a public ledger. But regulators and auditors still need proof that certain rules were followed.
That’s where confidential execution, ZK proofs and selective disclosure fit together.
And here’s the contradiction I keep coming back to:
The better selective disclosure works, the more important the disclosure authority becomes.
If a regulator needs one piece of information, who decides whether it can be revealed? Who enforces that decision? Who can change the rules later?
So Dusk may be reducing one trust problem excessive transparency while creating a different one around control of visibility.
I don’t think that automatically makes the design weaker. Maybe that trade-off is unavoidable if regulated capital is ever going onchain.
But with current usage still relatively small, the bigger question for me is whether Dusk can prove this model in practice.
Does controlled transparency become the feature that brings institutions in, or the boundary where decentralization starts getting compromised?
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK
I initially thought Dusk was solving a simple problem: how to keep financial activity private onchain.
Then I looked at the market around it roughly $0.06, a ~$30M market cap and only a few million dollars in daily volume and the design started looking more interesting to me.
Because Dusk is not really trying to make finance invisible.
It’s trying to make it selectively visible.
A bank shouldn’t have to expose every position, balance or trading pattern just because it uses a public ledger. But regulators and auditors still need proof that certain rules were followed.
That’s where confidential execution, ZK proofs and selective disclosure fit together.
And here’s the contradiction I keep coming back to:
The better selective disclosure works, the more important the disclosure authority becomes.
If a regulator needs one piece of information, who decides whether it can be revealed? Who enforces that decision? Who can change the rules later?
So Dusk may be reducing one trust problem excessive transparency while creating a different one around control of visibility.
I don’t think that automatically makes the design weaker. Maybe that trade-off is unavoidable if regulated capital is ever going onchain.
But with current usage still relatively small, the bigger question for me is whether Dusk can prove this model in practice.
Does controlled transparency become the feature that brings institutions in, or the boundary where decentralization starts getting compromised?
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK
