#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
I found something in Dusk docs that I haven't seen on any other blockchain. Two transaction models running on the same chain.
Moonlight for public account flows. Everything visible. On the record. Phoenix for confidential shielded transfers. Private. Hidden from public view.
Same network. Same settlement layer. You choose which one fits.
At first I thought this was just a privacy feature. Then I started thinking about how regulated institutions would actually use it.
A fund manager rebalancing positions between their own wallets doesn't want that on public display. Competitors would see it. Clients would panic. But the same manager needs their investor distributions fully transparent. Same chain, same wallet, two modes. Phoenix for the internal moves. Moonlight for the public record.
That's not privacy as an escape hatch. It's privacy as a tool. You use it where it makes sense, not everywhere.
I'm still wondering about the regulatory side. When an auditor needs to review Phoenix transactions, how does that work? Selective disclosure? Zero-knowledge proofs that prove compliance without exposing the details?
That's the part I want to understand next. How do you prove something is compliant when you've deliberately hidden the details?
Would you use two transaction modes on the same chain, or does that complicate things too much?
I found something in Dusk docs that I haven't seen on any other blockchain. Two transaction models running on the same chain.
Moonlight for public account flows. Everything visible. On the record. Phoenix for confidential shielded transfers. Private. Hidden from public view.
Same network. Same settlement layer. You choose which one fits.
At first I thought this was just a privacy feature. Then I started thinking about how regulated institutions would actually use it.
A fund manager rebalancing positions between their own wallets doesn't want that on public display. Competitors would see it. Clients would panic. But the same manager needs their investor distributions fully transparent. Same chain, same wallet, two modes. Phoenix for the internal moves. Moonlight for the public record.
That's not privacy as an escape hatch. It's privacy as a tool. You use it where it makes sense, not everywhere.
I'm still wondering about the regulatory side. When an auditor needs to review Phoenix transactions, how does that work? Selective disclosure? Zero-knowledge proofs that prove compliance without exposing the details?
That's the part I want to understand next. How do you prove something is compliant when you've deliberately hidden the details?
Would you use two transaction modes on the same chain, or does that complicate things too much?