MR_JACK 22

Quand je pense à Walrus, je ne commence pas par des jetons ou des tableaux de bord ou des schémas techniques. Je commence par une personne. Quelqu'un assis tranquillement avec un fichier qui a de l'importance pour lui. Peut-être des années de recherche. Peut-être une œuvre d'art. Peut-être des souvenirs. Quelque chose qui porte un effort, une émotion et du temps. Quelque chose qu'ils ne veulent pas perdre. Quelque chose qu'ils ne veulent pas contrôlé par quiconque.

Walrus commence justement là.

Le moment où un fichier entre dans le réseau Walrus, il cesse d'être un objet statique pour devenir un processus vivant. Il n'est pas simplement téléversé. Il est transformé. Grâce au codage par effacement, le fichier est mathématiquement redessiné en de nombreuses fragments. Chaque fragment est incomplet en lui-même. Aucun d'entre eux ne révèle l'intégralité. Pourtant, ensemble, ils contiennent tout. Ces fragments sont répartis entre des fournisseurs de stockage indépendants répartis dans le réseau. Aucune machine unique ne détient le fichier. Aucun acteur unique ne le contrôle. Aucun dysfonctionnement unique ne peut l'effacer.

Je vais décrire Dusk de la manière dont je l'expliquerais à un ami fatigué des querelles liées aux blockchains mais toujours curieux de savoir à quoi pourrait ressembler une infrastructure sérieuse. Dusk a commencé en 2018 avec une cible claire : une finance régulée qui respecte tout de même la confidentialité. Cette cible semble simple jusqu'à ce que l'on s'arrête vraiment sur ce qu'elle exige. Les marchés régulés nécessitent une responsabilité. Ils ont besoin de règles pouvant être prouvées. Ils exigent des traces d'audit. En même temps, les marchés ont aussi besoin de discrétion, car la confidentialité n'est pas un luxe en finance. C'est la norme. Les traders protègent leurs stratégies. Les institutions protègent leurs positions. Les émetteurs protègent les informations sensibles sur les actionnaires. Les personnes protègent leur vie. Dusk repose sur l'idée que la confidentialité et l'auditabilité n'ont pas à être des ennemies. Elles peuvent être deux facettes du même système si l'architecture est honnête et si la cryptographie est traitée comme une infrastructure fondamentale plutôt que comme un simple ornement.

Im going to walk through Dusk the way I would explain it to a friend who cares about real finance and real privacy and does not want another loud crypto story. Dusk began in 2018 with a simple direction. Build a layer 1 for regulated financial infrastructure where privacy is not an afterthought and auditability is not a sacrifice. That sounds like a slogan until you follow the mechanics in practice and see how the chain is shaped around that tension. Dusk tries to make two truths live together. People deserve confidentiality. Regulators and institutions still need provable rules and accountable records. The design is basically an attempt to make that coexist without forcing everyone into full transparency or full opacity.

The easiest way to feel Dusk is to start at the base layer and stay there long enough to understand what it is protecting. A chain is useful when it can settle value. Settlement means the network agrees on what happened and when it is final. Dusk emphasizes a settlement foundation called DuskDS. The idea is to keep the settlement floor stable and let execution environments evolve above it. That modular separation matters because regulated systems hate constant rewrites. They want predictable rules. They want upgrade paths that do not feel like a gamble. So Dusk treats settlement like bedrock and treats application execution like something that can be improved without constantly disturbing the ground beneath it.

Inside that settlement floor you meet the real personality of the system. Dusk uses a proof of stake design aimed at fast finality. The current framing describes a consensus approach built for deterministic settlement that can fit market expectations. Older descriptions talk about committee style agreement that prioritizes near instant settlement goals. I do not need to obsess over names to understand the emotional intent. The intent is simple. When a transfer lands it should feel done. Not mostly done. Not done unless a reorg happens. Just done. That is the kind of boring certainty institutions tend to love and users quietly benefit from too.

Then you get to how value actually moves. This is where Dusk becomes easier to picture because it does not pretend every transaction should be treated the same way. It offers two transaction models that act like two gears you can shift between depending on the situation. One gear is transparent. One gear is shielded. The transparent model is called Moonlight. It behaves like an account based system where balances and transfers can be observed on chain. This is useful when visibility is part of the job. Think treasury operations. Think disclosures. Think internal controls where teams want an obvious trail.

The shielded model is called Phoenix. It is built around notes and confidential transfers where ownership and amounts are not automatically exposed to every observer. Phoenix is designed so value can move without giving away the entire shape of a participants financial life. That matters in finance because information is power. If you reveal positions you reveal vulnerability. If you reveal counterparties you reveal relationships. If you reveal timing you reveal intent. Private rails reduce the free information that adversaries would love to harvest.

The part that makes this feel real is not just that both modes exist. It is that the system is designed to route them coherently. Dusk describes a transfer mechanism that supports both transparent and obfuscated transactions at the settlement level. This is important because it stops privacy from being a bolt on feature. It makes privacy a first class citizen of settlement. It also means you can use transparency when you need it and use confidentiality when you need it and not pretend one moral stance fits every workflow. If It becomes a moment where auditors require a clear view then the public mode exists. If It becomes a moment where confidentiality is essential for safety or fair trading then the shielded mode exists.

Now let us slow down and walk through a real world path where value is created step by step. Imagine a regulated issuer that wants to tokenize an asset. The first pain is not issuance. The first pain is onboarding and eligibility. Regulated finance runs on permissioning. Who is allowed to participate. Who is allowed to hold. Who is allowed to trade. Dusk points toward a privacy preserving compliance approach through an identity layer called Citadel. Citadel is described as a zero knowledge KYC framework where users and institutions control what they share. The point is not to avoid checks. The point is to prove required claims without dumping unnecessary personal data everywhere.

This changes the emotional texture of onboarding. Instead of repeating the same identity exposure across many platforms a participant can satisfy requirements through selective proof. That is a gentler future. It respects the fact that identity data is sensitive. It respects the fact that data leaks are common. It respects that a person should be able to participate in legitimate markets without feeling like they are trading their privacy away just to be allowed in.

After onboarding comes issuance. The asset is represented on chain and now it must move. Some movement should be visible. That is where Moonlight is useful. Some movement should stay private. That is where Phoenix is useful. This is not about hiding crime. This is about normal confidentiality that markets have always relied on. In traditional finance you do not publish every client portfolio. You do not publish every negotiation. You do not publish every position size in real time. Public blockchains accidentally made those things trivial to observe. Dusk tries to fix that without losing the ability to prove legitimacy when asked.

Now imagine trading. Trading is where privacy stops being philosophical and becomes defensive. Public intent can be exploited. Visible balances can be exploited. Visible relationships can be exploited. A shielded rail helps reduce front running pressure and reduces the advantage of watchers who live off extracting information from others. When a system protects intent it can create fairer conditions. It also lowers stress. People do not realize how much psychological pressure comes from being constantly observable until they experience a system where they are not.

Then comes reporting and auditing. This is the test that matters for regulated use. A real institution will ask how compliance is satisfied. How audit trails are supported. How investigations can happen when required. Dusk tries to keep this door open through the idea of selective disclosure. You keep most things private by default. You can reveal specific facts when the process requires it. That is how privacy and accountability can coexist. They’re not enemies in a mature design. They are two constraints that shape a better tool.

Above the settlement layer Dusk also tries to meet developers where they are. That is where DuskEVM enters. It is an execution environment that aims to offer EVM compatibility so builders can use familiar tools. This is a practical move because developer friction kills ecosystems. Yet there is an honest tradeoff here. DuskEVM has been described as inheriting a seven day finalization period from the OP Stack today and that is framed as temporary with future upgrades aiming for faster finality. This is important because it forces clarity. Builders must know which guarantees apply where. If you need the strongest settlement certainty right now you design with that in mind. If you can tolerate the current execution layer constraints you use the EVM layer for composability and development speed.

This modular plan also explains why Dusk feels like an infrastructure project more than a trend. It is trying to build something that can host institutional grade applications. Compliant DeFi. Tokenized real world assets. Systems that must survive legal review and operational stress. That world rewards patience. It rewards careful specs. It rewards boring reliability. It punishes flashy shortcuts. We’re seeing more of the industry admit that regulated adoption will not be viral. It will be procedural. It will be slow. It will be full of checklists. Dusk is built as if that is normal because it is.

Now let us talk about progress in a grounded way. Dusk has a long timeline. It was founded in 2018 and has continued to refine the stack across multiple phases. It has described mainnet milestones and a rollout that moved toward operational mode in early 2025 alongside a bridge contract for token migration. That is the kind of milestone that matters because it turns architecture into operation. It turns theory into something people can actually use.

On the economic and network side Dusk documentation describes an initial token supply of 500000000 DUSK with additional emissions over time up to a maximum supply of 1000000000 DUSK. It also describes staking parameters that indicate a running proof of stake network. A minimum stake of 1000 DUSK. A maturity period described as 4320 blocks which is roughly about 12 hours under a 10 second block time assumption. These details are not emotional but they matter because they show the network is designed to be operated and not only discussed.

If you want a simple exchange reference point without turning the story into a list of venues you can look at Binance for a market snapshot. That is enough for most readers. The deeper story is not where it trades. The deeper story is whether the architecture can carry real financial workflows without breaking privacy or breaking accountability.

Now I want to be honest about risks because that is part of humanizing any serious system. Privacy tech attracts extra scrutiny. That is not unfair. If a system claims confidentiality it must prove it. It must be audited. It must be explained clearly. Misunderstanding can destroy trust quickly. The good side of this pressure is that it forces rigor. It forces clean documentation. It forces careful upgrades. Facing this early can build long term strength because you develop the habit of proving rather than promising.

Complexity is another risk. Multiple layers create edges. Edges create places where people can misinterpret finality and security. Two transaction models create places where users can misuse privacy and accidentally leak information through behavior. Key management and proof systems create operational burdens. None of this is fatal. It is simply real. The strength comes from treating complexity as a cost you manage instead of a cost you deny.

Adoption pace is also a risk. Regulated markets do not adopt quickly. They need partners. They need audits. They need procurement. They need internal sign off. That pace can feel quiet. Yet once adoption happens it can be durable. That is why infrastructure projects often look slow before they look inevitable.

Now let me paint the future with warmth because that is where this story really lives. If Dusk works the way it hopes to work the impact will be quiet. It will not feel like a revolution. It will feel like fewer humiliations. Fewer systems asking for more data than they need. Fewer participants forced to expose their holdings just to use a market. Fewer opportunities for predatory watchers to exploit visible intent. More people willing to participate because they can prove compliance without losing dignity.

It can also expand access in subtle ways. Tokenization can reduce friction. On chain settlement can reduce reconciliation cost. Privacy preserving compliance can reduce the social cost of participation. When your identity is not constantly on display you feel safer. When your assets are not constantly observable you feel safer. When your compliance status can be proven without oversharing you feel safer. Safety is not a marketing feature. It is the condition that allows normal people to show up.

They’re building toward that kind of normal. A system where regulated finance can exist on chain without turning every user into a public record. A system where institutions can satisfy rules and still respect confidentiality. A system where privacy and auditability can sit at the same table without one trying to erase the other.

I’m ending with something simple. I hope Dusk keeps choosing the hard path of clarity and rigor. If It becomes the kind of dependable backbone that regulated markets can trust then the change will not be loud. It will be steady. It will be the kind of progress you notice only when your day feels calmer and your participation feels safer and you realize the system finally respects the fact that privacy is part of being human.

#Dusk @Dusk $DUSK

I’m going to walk through Dusk the way I would explain it to a friend who wants the truth without the noise. Dusk started in 2018 with a simple but difficult promise. Build a layer one that can support regulated finance while still respecting privacy. That sounds like a contradiction until you look at how the system is designed. Dusk does not try to hide everything. It tries to hide what should stay private while still proving what must be proven. That balance is the reason the architecture can feel quietly serious instead of loud.

At the center is how Dusk decides what is true on the chain. The Dusk whitepaper describes a privacy preserving leader selection method called Proof of Blind Bid and a consensus approach called Segregated Byzantine Agreement also called SBA. The goal is near instant finality so the chain can behave like settlement rather than a suggestion. In regulated markets that difference is not cosmetic. Finality is the moment the story stops changing. It is when ledgers can close. It is when risk systems can breathe.

Here is how it functions in practice in a way that you can actually picture. A round begins and block producers compete to propose the next block. In many Proof of Stake systems the world can see who is staking and how much. That visibility can become a target map. Dusk tries to remove the target map without removing accountability. With Proof of Blind Bid a participant submits a blind bid that stays confidential. Then they compute a score and create a proof that the score is valid. The network can verify the proof without learning the sensitive stake details that would expose patterns. They’re not asking anyone to trust them. They are letting the chain verify them. Binance research describes this same idea as anonymous staking that still lets the network select a leader and confirm finality through SBA.

If you slow that down even more it becomes a simple rhythm. Someone proves they are eligible. They propose a block. Then the committee side of SBA helps the network converge on one outcome. That convergence is the emotional core of why Dusk aims at finance. Finance needs agreement that does not wobble. It needs a chain that can say yes and mean it.

Now we step into the part that makes Dusk feel grounded in the real world. Dusk supports two native transaction models. Moonlight is public and account based. Phoenix is shielded and note based using zero knowledge proofs. Both settle on the same chain. Both are not separate worlds. They are two ways of moving value on the same settlement layer. Dusk documentation describes this plainly and that clarity matters because it tells you they are not hiding complexity behind slogans.

This dual model design is not an aesthetic choice. It is a survival choice. Real integrations sometimes need transparency. Some environments need balances that are visible and easy to index. Some workflows require account style logic that existing systems understand. At the same time real markets also need discretion. Positions can be sensitive. Intent can be weaponized. Privacy can be the difference between fair participation and being hunted. Dusk refuses to choose one extreme. It offers two lanes and it treats the bridge between them as a first class feature.

Phoenix is the lane you choose when you want privacy to protect intent. It is not secrecy for secrecy. It is the ability to move without turning every move into a public performance. The Phoenix repository describes Phoenix as the transaction model used by Dusk and it highlights an architecture aimed at obfuscated transactions and confidential smart contracts. That is the important detail. Phoenix is not only about sending value quietly. It is about enabling application behavior without forcing users into full public exposure.

Moonlight is the lane you choose when transparency is required. Think of it as the clean bright path that helps integration. This is the lane that can fit easier into systems that expect account balances and straightforward transfers. Dusk documentation frames Moonlight as the public model on the same settlement layer. The point is not that Moonlight is better. The point is that Moonlight makes the chain usable in contexts where public accounting style flows are expected.

The bridge is where Dusk stops being theoretical and becomes a lived system. In Dusk July 2024 engineering updates the team describes an updated conversion system where a convert function can atomically swap DUSK between the Phoenix and Moonlight models. It also states that the user can prove ownership of either the account or address being converted between. In the same update Dusk explains that the Transfer Contract and Stake Contract were extended to support Moonlight balances. This is not glamorous. It is the kind of plumbing that makes the user experience feel coherent. It turns two lanes into one road.

You can see why this mattered by looking at how the team talked about earlier friction. A 2024 issue in the Rusk repository describes how transferring DUSK between Moonlight and Phoenix used to require deploying a contract and doing multiple transactions. The issue argues for doing it in a single elegant transaction. That is a small sentence that carries a big truth. They are listening to the pain points where users would feel them.

Now let me walk through real world value creation slowly and step by step. Imagine a regulated issuer or venue that wants to move assets on chain. They need auditability. They need controls. They need settlement that finalizes. They also need confidentiality because in financial markets not everything should be public by default. Dusk offers a path where public flows can exist in Moonlight for integrations and reporting. Private flows can exist in Phoenix for discretion and safety. Then the bridge allows switching without leaving the chain. This is the part that can quietly change how financial products behave. Not by shouting about disruption but by reducing operational friction.

Step one is simple participation. A user or institution holds value in Moonlight when they need public account style handling. Step two is intention. When discretion matters they convert into Phoenix. Step three is action. They transact in a shielded model that reduces information leakage. Step four is integration. When transparency is required again they convert back. If It becomes normal to treat privacy as a mode rather than an exception then markets can become less predatory. We’re seeing the foundations of that idea in how Dusk treats the conversion path as core infrastructure.

The design choices make sense when you remember the time and the target audience. Dusk was built through years where regulation around crypto assets was evolving quickly. A chain that wants institutional usage cannot ignore that reality. Dusk chose to build privacy into consensus leadership selection and into transaction models while still supporting a transparent lane. That choice increases complexity. Complexity is a risk. It expands the surface area that must be audited. It increases the number of edge cases. Yet it also creates resilience. It allows the chain to serve different requirements without forcing one model to bend until it breaks.

Now let us anchor this story with progress signals that are hard to hand wave. Dusk announced its mainnet rollout and provided a specific operational schedule. The announcement states the rollout began December 20 2024. It also states the mainnet cluster was scheduled to produce its first immutable block on January 7 2025. Early deposits were scheduled for January 3 2025. This is the kind of dated operational writing that makes a project feel real because it ties ambition to a calendar.

Token fundamentals also matter because incentives are the heartbeat of Proof of Stake. Dusk documentation states an initial supply of 500000000 DUSK. It also states a total emitted supply of 500000000 DUSK over 36 years to reward stakers. The maximum supply is stated as 1000000000 DUSK combining initial supply and emissions. This long emission tail is designed to support long lived security rather than short lived bursts.

For a current public snapshot CoinMarketCap lists a circulating supply of 486999999 DUSK and a max supply of 1000000000 DUSK along with live market data that updates continuously. These numbers can shift as circulation changes yet they provide a grounded reference point.

Now the honest part. Dusk carries risks. Regulation can keep moving. A chain designed for regulated finance must adapt again and again. That can slow timelines and force redesigns. Complexity is another risk. Dual transaction models plus conversion logic plus privacy preserving leader selection is not simple. It demands strong engineering discipline and careful audits. Adoption is a third risk. Institutions do not adopt because a whitepaper is elegant. They adopt when integrations are smooth and operations are predictable.

But this is also where early struggle becomes strength. When a team improves conversion because users need it. When they extend core contracts to support Moonlight balances. When they publish clear rollout schedules and engineering updates. That behavior builds the kind of trust that does not come from marketing. It comes from facing the hard edges early. It comes from refusing to pretend the world is simpler than it is.

I also want to keep the emotional lens open because finance is not only numbers. It is stress. It is fear. It is the weight of being watched. A privacy aware settlement layer can reduce that weight. Not by enabling wrongdoing but by letting ordinary participants protect themselves from unnecessary exposure. When privacy is selective and provable it can support both dignity and oversight. That is the quiet philosophy beneath Dusk. Prove what must be proven. Protect what should not be public forever.

So when I look forward I do not imagine Dusk winning by shouting. I imagine it winning by disappearing into the background as good infrastructure does. A world where issuing and settling regulated assets is less expensive. A world where participation is broader because the rails are simpler. A world where confidentiality is normal when it is appropriate. A world where auditability is available when it is required. If It becomes real at scale then the biggest impact may be simple relief. People can transact without feeling hunted. Institutions can settle without unnecessary friction. Builders can create applications where privacy is a tool rather than a hack.

I’m ending with something gentle because that feels like the right tone for what Dusk is trying to be. They’re building a bridge between privacy and compliance rather than choosing a fight. We’re seeing the pieces come together through mainnet milestones and through practical engineering improvements that focus on usability. If Dusk keeps shipping patiently and keeps respecting both human dignity and institutional reality then the future it points toward can be calm. Quiet. And hopeful.

#Dusk @Dusk $DUSK

Je vais vous expliquer cela comme une promenade calme à travers un système qui souhaite être fiable plutôt que bruyant. Walrus est un réseau de stockage de blobs décentralisé conçu par Mysten Labs, qui fonctionne en parallèle avec Sui. La façon la plus simple de le garder en tête est la suivante : Sui agit comme couche de coordination où les règles de propriété et les preuves peuvent exister dans un endroit que les applications font déjà confiance. Walrus agit comme couche de stockage où les octets réels sont conservés sur de nombreux nœuds indépendants. Walrus a été introduit dans une préversion destinée aux développeurs en juin 2024, et Mysten a plus tard indiqué que la préversion stockait déjà plus de 12 TiB de données, ce qui est un véritable signe que les développeurs l'utilisaient réellement, et non seulement en parlant de lui.

Je vais vous expliquer cela comme un guide que vous pouvez tenir entre vos mains, plutôt qu'un rapport que vous feuilletez rapidement et oubliez. Walrus est le plus facile à comprendre lorsque l'on part de la douleur qu'il cherche à apaiser. Les grands fichiers sont la partie des applications modernes qui ont tendance à disparaître. Un lien se brise. Un conteneur est supprimé. Un compte fournisseur est gelé. Une équipe déploie un NFT, un jeu ou un article de recherche, et des années plus tard, les données sont perdues. Ce n'est pas à cause de malveillance. Parce que le web est fragile par défaut. Walrus est conçu pour réduire cette fragilité en traitant les grandes quantités de données comme une entité de premier plan, pouvant être stockées sur un réseau et suivies selon des règles claires, vérifiables et renouvelables.

Je vais vous expliquer Dusk comme je le ferais à un ami, tard le soir, quand le bruit a disparu et qu'il ne reste que les vraies questions. Qu'est-ce que c'est vraiment. Comment ça fonctionne exactement. Pourquoi quelqu'un de sérieux dans le domaine de la finance réglementée choisirait-il cela. Et quel est le coût de construire à la fois la confidentialité et la responsabilité au même endroit, sans transformer l'une ou l'autre en mensonge.

Le crépuscule a commencé par une tension simple que la plupart des blockchains ignorent ou acceptent comme dommage collatéral. Les marchés financiers ont besoin de confidentialité car les stratégies, les contreparties et les soldes peuvent être dangereux s’ils sont exposés. Les marchés financiers ont également besoin de conformité car des lois existent et les institutions ne peuvent pas prétendre qu’elles n’existent pas. Dusk se décrit comme une couche 1 axée sur la confidentialité, conçue pour les applications financières, et positionne son design autour de la finalité des règlements et d'une confidentialité stricte des données, de manière à correspondre à ce que les marchés régulés exigent.

Je vais raconter cette histoire lentement et honnêtement parce que Walrus n'est pas quelque chose qui se révèle à travers des résumés rapides. Cela ressemble davantage à quelque chose que l'on comprend au fil du temps, comme on apprend à faire confiance à un endroit ou à une routine. La plupart des gens stockent des données chaque jour sans y penser. Les photos, les documents, les souvenirs, les fichiers créatifs sont tous placés quelque part, invisibles. Il y a toujours un espoir silencieux que rien ne se casse et que rien ne change. Walrus commence avec cet espoir et cherche à le renforcer.