Four_iv
--
The reason why Dusk Foundation is betting on Digital Trust.
The Future Crypto Arms Race is Not Speed It is Selective Disclosure. The reason why Dusk Foundation is betting on Digital Trust.
Crypto took years to pursue the radical transparency. The next step can be reserved regarding something less loud--and much more practical: the privacy that can be demonstrated to be justified. Dusk Foundation is creating a world in which confidentiality and compliance co-exist and trust is something you can verify without having to reveal everything.
Even though you may never have owned crypto, a well-known issue.
I would like to begin with a narrative that is not based on trading charts and memes.
One of the founders I will refer to as Marta owns a mid-sized manufacturing company in Europe. She is not seeking to go on-chain just because it is fashionable. She's drowning in process.
Banks want clean reporting. The suppliers desire quicker payment. A prospective investor would desire to know that the ownership regulations are binding. And its most important bit is GDPR - ensuring that sensitive information does not go in the wrong place.
Marta does not require a blockchain that transforms company finances into a Drama.
Something much more specific she needs:
a system in which there is privacy of data, yet credibility when it counts.
That conflict, privacy versus verification is precisely the spot that Dusk Foundation has been quietly developing.
Digital trust does not revolve around extreme openness.
The initial philosophy of crypto was to consider transparency as an ethical imperative. As all is evident, the reasoning went, the system must be just.
The real markets do not operate in such a way.
In regulated finance, there is a reason behind the control of information. The disclosures are limited, timed and scoped. Excess transparency may open the door to manipulation, front-running or even risk. The lack of transparency is the violation of compliance.
The very idea of Dusk Foundation is all too practical:
Privacy is not the future and neither is regulation. It is regulation privacy in a design.
Dusk orients itself as infrastructure to regulated markets, which desire to go-on-chain without making every transaction raw data. No secrecy, it is secrecy, but rather auditable confidentiality.
It is a slight change--and a significant one.
Why this discussion should come to a head now.
There are two trends that are hitting one another at the moment.
To begin with, tokenization is on the rise. Institutions are not experimenting anymore. They are questioning, what are production-ready systems--systems capable of dealing with actual assets, actual liabilities and actual supervision.
Second, Europe is not becoming even weaker in regulatory terms. Such frameworks as MiCA help to realize that the fix later compliance is no longer possible.
Get those combined and you find you have another requirement:
blockchain infrastructure internalized, rather than externalized.
Dusk is not just concerned with privacy being compliance-conscious. It is a straight answer to the direction that the capital and institutions are actually taking.
Whatever the Dusk is building--no jargon.
At a high level, the structure of Dusk is that of a modular system:
A consensus, data, and settlement base layer (DuskDS).A development execution environment (DuskEVM) that is compatible with Ethereum to save developers the burden of re-educating themselves.
The fact that EVM compatibility is a more important thing than one would like to acknowledge. Most of these serious projects fail not due to bad tech, but due to the painful integration. Well-known tooling reduces the impediment to actual adoption.
The distinguishing factor, which can be verified: privacy.
Hedger, the privacy engine of Dusk, is meant to allow confidential transactions at the same time that a proof can be made in compliance and auditing.
Practically this is to be understood:
There does not need to be publicity on transaction details.The counterparties and regulators can also ensure that the rules are upheld.You are not subject to the extremes of being fully exposed or black boxes.
One of the least glamorous but most required design objectives in crypto is this concept, which is auditable privacy.
What this is significant to real individuals.
Public blockchains presented a novel form of the risk that most of their users never consented to participate in: financial surveillance.
Patterns are created when the wallets can be linked. Salaries, savings, spending habits, business relationships, it can all be traced. To individuals, that is a concern of safety. It is a competitive one to the businesses.
Privacy in this case does not refer to concealing of wrongfulness. It is not making economic activity routine a fixed instrument of societal accountability.
The coming of dusk implies that you do not need to decide between advanced infrastructure and the rudimentary financial judgement.
The market angle that is not well considered by most people.
This is the unpleasant fact:
Distribution is also regulation.
When a system is actually capable of supporting controlled issuance, settlement, and conforming cash flows, it has become applicable to a considerably broader audience - one that is not interested in stories about crypto, but who are interested in risk, rules, and reputation.
That is why the partnerships of Dusk speak volumes:
Co-operation with NPEX, directed towards regulated digital securities.Collaborate with Quantoz Payments and NPEX to introduce a MiCA compliant digital euro instrument (EURQ) to Dusk.
These are not consumer DeFi experiments. Institutionalized issues, they are: regulated assets, compliant settlement, and legal digital money.
When Dusk succeeds, its success will not manifest itself in the glitzy measures first. It will manifest itself silently - when regulated flows begin selecting on-chain rails without sounding compliance alarms.
A note on the token economics
The token model by Dusk is deliberately long term:
500 million initial supplyThere is a potential supply of 1 billion maximum in several decades.Spread of emissions over some 36 years.Stakeholdering as a fundamental security tool.
Of course that does not mean value. The token economics will only be effective when the network is used. However, the design is not without purpose: this is infrastructure to be permanent and not a temporary experiment.
The question of whether usage, fees, and institutional participation ever become the sustainable value is one which is open-ended--and one which is sincere.
The questions which still count.
Despite the promise, Dusk still has to jump through several obstacles:
Is it possible to create privacy friendly applications without friction?Can institutions have confidence in auditable privacy under natural circumstances?Will adoption proceed rapidly in a slow conservative market?
None of these are trivial. But they are the correct battles to be struggling with.
Looking ahead
Crypto The following stage is unlikely to be characterized by the fastest or loudest.
It can be characterized by the person who responds to a less resounding question:
Is it possible to take real financial activity on-chain without compromising the privacy, safety or legality?
Dusk Foundation is placing its bet on the fact that trust is grounded in moderation- not extremes. Privacy by default. Openness on right grounds. Compliance, not nailed on, but ingrained.
Whether that vision comes to pass, the blockchains of the next decade could be the most crucial; and hopefully they will be a lot less like experiments: more like a infrastructure that people use without consciously thinking of it.
$DUSK
{future}(DUSKUSDT)
#dusk @Dusk_Foundation
Crypto took years to pursue the radical transparency. The next step can be reserved regarding something less loud--and much more practical: the privacy that can be demonstrated to be justified. Dusk Foundation is creating a world in which confidentiality and compliance co-exist and trust is something you can verify without having to reveal everything.
Even though you may never have owned crypto, a well-known issue.
I would like to begin with a narrative that is not based on trading charts and memes.
One of the founders I will refer to as Marta owns a mid-sized manufacturing company in Europe. She is not seeking to go on-chain just because it is fashionable. She's drowning in process.
Banks want clean reporting. The suppliers desire quicker payment. A prospective investor would desire to know that the ownership regulations are binding. And its most important bit is GDPR - ensuring that sensitive information does not go in the wrong place.
Marta does not require a blockchain that transforms company finances into a Drama.
Something much more specific she needs:
a system in which there is privacy of data, yet credibility when it counts.
That conflict, privacy versus verification is precisely the spot that Dusk Foundation has been quietly developing.
Digital trust does not revolve around extreme openness.
The initial philosophy of crypto was to consider transparency as an ethical imperative. As all is evident, the reasoning went, the system must be just.
The real markets do not operate in such a way.
In regulated finance, there is a reason behind the control of information. The disclosures are limited, timed and scoped. Excess transparency may open the door to manipulation, front-running or even risk. The lack of transparency is the violation of compliance.
The very idea of Dusk Foundation is all too practical:
Privacy is not the future and neither is regulation. It is regulation privacy in a design.
Dusk orients itself as infrastructure to regulated markets, which desire to go-on-chain without making every transaction raw data. No secrecy, it is secrecy, but rather auditable confidentiality.
It is a slight change--and a significant one.
Why this discussion should come to a head now.
There are two trends that are hitting one another at the moment.
To begin with, tokenization is on the rise. Institutions are not experimenting anymore. They are questioning, what are production-ready systems--systems capable of dealing with actual assets, actual liabilities and actual supervision.
Second, Europe is not becoming even weaker in regulatory terms. Such frameworks as MiCA help to realize that the fix later compliance is no longer possible.
Get those combined and you find you have another requirement:
blockchain infrastructure internalized, rather than externalized.
Dusk is not just concerned with privacy being compliance-conscious. It is a straight answer to the direction that the capital and institutions are actually taking.
Whatever the Dusk is building--no jargon.
At a high level, the structure of Dusk is that of a modular system:
A consensus, data, and settlement base layer (DuskDS).A development execution environment (DuskEVM) that is compatible with Ethereum to save developers the burden of re-educating themselves.
The fact that EVM compatibility is a more important thing than one would like to acknowledge. Most of these serious projects fail not due to bad tech, but due to the painful integration. Well-known tooling reduces the impediment to actual adoption.
The distinguishing factor, which can be verified: privacy.
Hedger, the privacy engine of Dusk, is meant to allow confidential transactions at the same time that a proof can be made in compliance and auditing.
Practically this is to be understood:
There does not need to be publicity on transaction details.The counterparties and regulators can also ensure that the rules are upheld.You are not subject to the extremes of being fully exposed or black boxes.
One of the least glamorous but most required design objectives in crypto is this concept, which is auditable privacy.
What this is significant to real individuals.
Public blockchains presented a novel form of the risk that most of their users never consented to participate in: financial surveillance.
Patterns are created when the wallets can be linked. Salaries, savings, spending habits, business relationships, it can all be traced. To individuals, that is a concern of safety. It is a competitive one to the businesses.
Privacy in this case does not refer to concealing of wrongfulness. It is not making economic activity routine a fixed instrument of societal accountability.
The coming of dusk implies that you do not need to decide between advanced infrastructure and the rudimentary financial judgement.
The market angle that is not well considered by most people.
This is the unpleasant fact:
Distribution is also regulation.
When a system is actually capable of supporting controlled issuance, settlement, and conforming cash flows, it has become applicable to a considerably broader audience - one that is not interested in stories about crypto, but who are interested in risk, rules, and reputation.
That is why the partnerships of Dusk speak volumes:
Co-operation with NPEX, directed towards regulated digital securities.Collaborate with Quantoz Payments and NPEX to introduce a MiCA compliant digital euro instrument (EURQ) to Dusk.
These are not consumer DeFi experiments. Institutionalized issues, they are: regulated assets, compliant settlement, and legal digital money.
When Dusk succeeds, its success will not manifest itself in the glitzy measures first. It will manifest itself silently - when regulated flows begin selecting on-chain rails without sounding compliance alarms.
A note on the token economics
The token model by Dusk is deliberately long term:
500 million initial supplyThere is a potential supply of 1 billion maximum in several decades.Spread of emissions over some 36 years.Stakeholdering as a fundamental security tool.
Of course that does not mean value. The token economics will only be effective when the network is used. However, the design is not without purpose: this is infrastructure to be permanent and not a temporary experiment.
The question of whether usage, fees, and institutional participation ever become the sustainable value is one which is open-ended--and one which is sincere.
The questions which still count.
Despite the promise, Dusk still has to jump through several obstacles:
Is it possible to create privacy friendly applications without friction?Can institutions have confidence in auditable privacy under natural circumstances?Will adoption proceed rapidly in a slow conservative market?
None of these are trivial. But they are the correct battles to be struggling with.
Looking ahead
Crypto The following stage is unlikely to be characterized by the fastest or loudest.
It can be characterized by the person who responds to a less resounding question:
Is it possible to take real financial activity on-chain without compromising the privacy, safety or legality?
Dusk Foundation is placing its bet on the fact that trust is grounded in moderation- not extremes. Privacy by default. Openness on right grounds. Compliance, not nailed on, but ingrained.
Whether that vision comes to pass, the blockchains of the next decade could be the most crucial; and hopefully they will be a lot less like experiments: more like a infrastructure that people use without consciously thinking of it.
$DUSK
{future}(DUSKUSDT)
#dusk @Dusk_Foundation
إخلاء المسؤولية: تتضمن آراء أطراف خارجية. ليست نصيحةً مالية. يُمكن أن تحتوي على مُحتوى مُمول. اطلع على الشروط والأحكام.
120