@Dusk forces a question most crypto markets avoid: what happens when privacy and regulation stop being opposites?
The design choice that matters isn’t zero-knowledge itself, but selective disclosure. Dusk assumes institutions don’t want full opacity or full transparency they want controllable visibility. That changes trader behavior. Liquidity providers price risk differently when positions, collateral, or flows are shielded from competitors but auditable by regulators. You can see this tension in how volume clusters during low-volatility windows rather than breakout phases.
The market is currently obsessed with modular execution layers, yet Dusk’s modularity targets compliance friction, not throughput. That’s a quieter bet, but one aligned with where capital actually struggles to deploy. Funds don’t avoid DeFi because yields are low; they avoid it because exposure is uncontrollable.
Price action reflects this limbo. The chart compresses while on-chain activity stays oddly stable a sign of builders and pilots operating before speculation arrives. Dusk won’t outperform in risk-on euphoria. It moves when regulation stops being a headline and becomes infrastructure.
