#Dusk @Dusk
There is always a gap between "this happened' and "everyone agrees it happened".
You see it when a desk pulls logs after the fact. One system says yes. Another says not yet. Someone starts stitching timelines together... trying to prove a past the system never fully agreed on. That's when arguments start multiplying.
Dusk does not leave that space open. Outcomes are carried through consensus itself attested, ratified and remembered as state. Not reconstructed. Not reinterpreted later.
It is actually not about making things more visible.
It's about making them harder to dispute.
Systems without shared memory keep revisiting the same moment.
Systems like Dusk with it don't linger there.
They just… move.
