#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Honestly I didn't expect to spend my evening reading about token standards on Dusk. But here we are.
I was going through their docs and the whole tokenization vs native issuance thing kept bugging me. Like at first glance they sound the same. Put an asset onchain. Done. Right?
Wrong.
Tokenization is just a wrapper. The real asset still sits somewhere offchain. Custodian holds it. Token tracks it. If the custodian messes up, your token is basically a receipt for a problem.
Native issuance is completely different. The asset is born onchain. The record lives onchain. Issuance, transfers, settlement, everything. No second system running in the background needing reconciliation.
It hit me when I thought about a bond. A tokenized bond still has a custodian, still has offchain settlement, still has two records that need to match. A natively issued bond on Dusk just... exists onchain. One record. One source of truth.
I'm not saying I fully get all the legal stuff. I don't. But the technical difference makes sense. One adds a layer. The other removes it.
That's the part I keep coming back to.
Would you rather hold a token that represents an asset, or the asset itself living onchain?
Honestly I didn't expect to spend my evening reading about token standards on Dusk. But here we are.
I was going through their docs and the whole tokenization vs native issuance thing kept bugging me. Like at first glance they sound the same. Put an asset onchain. Done. Right?
Wrong.
Tokenization is just a wrapper. The real asset still sits somewhere offchain. Custodian holds it. Token tracks it. If the custodian messes up, your token is basically a receipt for a problem.
Native issuance is completely different. The asset is born onchain. The record lives onchain. Issuance, transfers, settlement, everything. No second system running in the background needing reconciliation.
It hit me when I thought about a bond. A tokenized bond still has a custodian, still has offchain settlement, still has two records that need to match. A natively issued bond on Dusk just... exists onchain. One record. One source of truth.
I'm not saying I fully get all the legal stuff. I don't. But the technical difference makes sense. One adds a layer. The other removes it.
That's the part I keep coming back to.
Would you rather hold a token that represents an asset, or the asset itself living onchain?