Shafin-

Plasma is the experience that the crypto world has absorbed
the ability to create an accountant-friendly system and not a trader-friendly
one.

The majority of new chains promote speed, low prices, and
larger ecosystem. Plasma is more serious and silent: it is focused on
developing stable-coin rails that would be able to support the real-world
activity. It implies that the chain must be predictable, durable to abuse, and
conformable enough to be regulated by law-abiding firms and easy enough to not
require an everyday user to master gas. By interpreting Plasma in that way, it
no longer appears to me like another Layer-1 but, instead, a payments system
that is, however, based on the blockchain.

Fee charges are not the actual issue that Plasma is solving,
but rather operational friction.

Stablecoins are already in operation: daily, people send
USDT across the borders. The problem is the operations tax that envelops such
transfers. Users must have different gas tokens, they fear congestion and
support services must justify to someone why he cannot send $10 since they only
have 0.23 of gas. Plasma considers that a failure of the product, and not a
failure of the user.

The solution by Plasma is a protocol-managed, chain-native
relayer/paymaster which renders the transfers of USDT gasless. The Relayer API
regulates the size: it only sponsors direct transfers of stablecoins. The scope
helps Plasma to make free transfers sustainable and avoid spamming. It also
enforces identity-conscious restrictions and harsh guidelines of sponsorship to
prevent abuse rather than implying that free gas is magically harmless.

Zero-fee can only be believable when you tell how and who to
pay to prevent abuse.

Several projects offer a promise of zero fees as though the
validators will pass through it. The docs and FAQ of plasma give a picture of
reality: the protocol has a managed paymaster to pay the gas in transfers of
USDT to ensure that users do not always need native tokens. The structure is to
make micropayments, remittance and business frictionless.

The philosophy behind the products is implicitly evident,
the target market of Plasma is not intended to be a group of crypto-native
users who enjoy complexity. Rather, it is centered on payment flows in which
the sender is not supposed to know anything about which network he/she is on.
That simplicity is an attribute, not an injury in payments.

The compliance strategy of Plasma is not a privacy theater,
it provides actual, ship ready privacy.

In contrast to the crypto privacy discussion that is usually
divided into the extreme of transparency and complete secrecy, Plasma is formed
in the middle. It is user-friendly in terms of composing confidential data yet
auditable to the extent of real businesses.

The purported Confidential Payments documents of the chain
render the purpose and the scope clear: they facilitate the transfers under the
guarantee of secrecy without the introduction of new wallets, made-to-order
tokens, and alterations to the fundamental EVM functionality. They note that it
is not a complete privacy chain and it is a lightweight and opt-in feature.

The fact that framing is important, since it describes the
reality of institutions: not only must they be privy to customer and trade
data, but they must also have audit trails, monitoring, and governance. The
approach taken by Plasma is rather a product to be implemented, rather than
argued.

The Elliptic relationship informs you of the client that
Plasma is developing.

To understand how serious a chain is about regulated
adoption, the thing that you should consider is its integrations rather than
its tweets. Plasma collaborated with Elliptic to provide AML, KYC and KYT
coverage provided throughout the network, under real time monitoring and
scalable compliance.

This is a critical point of view: compliance is not a
bolt-on. It is considered by plasma as a first-class requirement of stable-coin
rails. A plausible compliance narrative is a necessity and not a luxury on the
part of a digital dollar mover. Payment firms and fintechs that are required to
pass audits are putting their money on the line.

Liquidity-at-genesis is not hype it is the veiled
requirement of usefulness of stable-coins.

The majority of the chains are launched, followed by
pursuing liquidity. Plasma flips that order. In its mainnet beta announcement,
it reported that the network becomes live on September 25, 2025, together with
XPL, and that there is $2B of stablecoins active in the first act of over 100
DeFi partners.

This is not merely important because the impressive number
is required by payment systems to act in a predictable manner. When liquidity
is thin, merchants/wallets/neobanks experience slippage, unreliable rates, and
a poor user experience. The liquidity-first position of plasma eliminates the
initial vulnerability and allows using the chain in practice right away.

Plasma One announces that it is distribution rather than
ideology that is end.

Even an ideal chain cannot work if it is never touched by
the users. The solution to the distribution front by Plasma is Plasma One: a
stable-native neobank product to save, spend, transfer, and earn money.

The page of plasma one clearly mentions that it is a fintech
product, not a bank. In effect, the plastica One Card is a Visa acceptance card
that is licensed by Signify Holdings and used to make real-world purchases.

What I noticed is that it puts their users in a security
state: it does not require seeds but has access to hardware-powered keys and
introduces instant card freezing, spending, and real-time alerts, and even
retains self-custody of digital dollars.

This is not mere marketing but it also addresses the largest
UX pain in crypto. Self-custody puts power into the hands of the users but seed
phrases are a nightmare to mainstream adoption. When properly implemented,
hardware-based key flows will make self-custody the new device security and not
a paper backup.

The reason why the "payments stack" narrative is
the one that should be more important than the L1 narrative.

When I make a step further, Plasma will be more like a full
payments system, a gasless transfer of USDT, a compliance layer to regulated
participants, a verifiable opt-in confidentiality system, and a consumer
surface (Plasma One) that converts stablecoins into spendable money.

This contextualization of the so-called stablecoin-native
contracts is important. It isn’t a gimmick. It claims that stablecoins are the
main product and the rest are there to make them play like actual money.

The appealing aspect of Plasma is that it is open to
trade-offs. Plasma maintains its scope unlike the other projects that are
promising to offer solutions to all. Gasless sponsorship includes only
particular stablecoin transactions, privacy is a choice and not complete
privacy, and compliance is also embedded in the program, rather than an
after-market feature. This kind of discipline is not common in crypto, but
typically an indicator that the developer cares about reliability and not
applause.

The big bet: the stablecoins will succeed by becoming
uninteresting. The internet became successful not due to flashy routers but
they became invisible. The architecture of plasma is of this kind: one can
transfer digital dollars with barely any thought on the part of the user,
provide the institutions with the required monitoring and controls, and convert
the on-chain value into spending in the real world through a card that is
compatible with the present language of the world.

In case the Plasma is successful, the result will not be a
meme cycle. It will be the silent stabilization of stablecoins as being normal,
since the rail beneath them has finally started to act like a normal
infrastructure.

#plasma @Plasma

$XPL

Dusk is not constructing a privacy coin but fair markets
Majority of the citizens believe in privacy chain as a secret. Dusk Network desires something different. It is developing infrastructure in the market that allows real trading to occur without exposing any data that would destroy fairness. Trades in regular markets remain confidential until the time they settle. With publicity of trades before settlement, big traders might be picked off, little traders might be imitated and the markets might become very unpredictable. That is what a lot of open blockchains resemble nowadays.
After many years of development, the mainnet of Dusk was launched on 7 January 2025, and the project positioned it as the beginning of an open financial system in which you can never share sensitive information but still be able to prove something when you need to. It is not the aspect of concealing everything. The idea is to conceal the right things such as positions, order sizes and identities and still be able to provide proofs to be audited, rules and settlement.
This paper takes a new perspective of Dusk: market fairness. Not privacy because privacy, but privacy as the aspect that is lacking in making on-chain markets a first come first served game.
The actual issue: information leakage makes markets games.
In a normal public blockchain, the market information disseminates all over. When trades are in an open mempool, individuals can observe them, replicate them, leapfrog them or push the price in their direction. Your plan even when you are not engaging in bad things becomes exposed. That renders serious trading prohibitive. It also drives institutions backward to the privacy systems.
The bet made by Dusk is straightforward: in order that you have regulated assets and stablecoin reserves, and large trades can occur on-chain, you must have a chain where the intention of all is not revealed by default. Privacy in this case is not a philosophical feature. It is market hygiene.
Two forms of transactions: open when you please, private when you have to.
The settlement layer of Dusk maintains two types of transactions over the same network one transparent and the other shielded. Simply put, it implies that the chain is capable of supporting the activities in which it is helpful to be open, and also support the activities in which it is necessary to maintain secrecy to ensure that the markets are not biased.
The shielded model employs the zero-knowledge style proofs to ensure that the network is still able to check the reality that funds are legitimate and not spent twice yet still remain unaware of the sender, receiver and the amount of money being transferred. Simultaneously, the approach of Dusk allows managing the methods of information disclosure in the future, when they can be demanded by a regulator, auditor, or counterparty. This evidence where it counts is what is at the heart of the way Dusk attempts to serve finance without transforming the chain into a surveillance machine.
It is not just fairness of traders. It's also about validators
The second place of market manipulation is the one of people who build blocks. The validators in most proof-of-stake systems are publicly identifiable and are easy to attack. Provided you can find validators, you can bully them, bribe them, censure them, or put them under observation.
The consensus system of Dusk has a leader selection concept, which is a blind-bid: block producers place bids in a form that is not visible during the selection process to help discourage the practice of watching or gaming the process. This is explained in the consensus design work of Dusk (Proof-of- Blind Bidding into their agreement process). What matters more than the buzzwords is that Dusk attempts to make it less predictable and less visible - predictability gives attack surfaces, so that predictability has a detrimental effect on it.
A system that is less prone to bullying is obtained when you combine private transactions and a consensus process whereby public targeting is minimized. In the case of regulated finance, that is important. When markets are pressure riddled, then they are unreliable.
Lightspeed: Ethereum-style applications, and reconciled on Dusk.
One of the key reasons why privacy chains fall is because the developers do not relocate. Dusk attempts to eliminate that barrier with a Solidity-compatible execution layer (Lightspeed / DuskEVM) to allow Solidity developers to run in the usual way, but the settlement transpires on the base chain at Dusk.
This is important to fairness, as it allows builders to write the apps that look normal in the market, but in balances, trade flow, and sensitive logic, apply privacy features where they are needed. That is, Dusk does not request the world to study an entirely new stack in order to achieve confidential markets.
The underestimated article: official market statistics, not guesses of the crowd.
Markets still require reliable inputs even in the case of private execution, in particular, regulated markets. Market data and price feeds are not ornamentation. Settlement, margin, reporting, and basic truth all are based on them.
This is why the reason why Dusk adopted Chainlink standards is a bigger concern than it seems. Dusk announced that it is integrating Chainlink CCIP, and DataLink and Data Streams, namely to transfer regulated securities on-chain using verified exchange data.
In simple words:
Dusk is telling you, you cannot trust random oracles and vibes, to give you compliant markets. You must have official grade data pipes.
DataLink is positioned as official exchange data delivered on-chain and Data Streams as low latency updates to trading grade applications. It is a new axis most individuals overlook: Dusk is attempting to establish not only personal markets, but high-integrity markets.
Bridges do not only provide access but determine the circulation of liquidity.
Dusk regards interoperability as being fundamental to the market. Physical assets and liquidity do not remain in one chain. Ecosystems spread their capital and users and strategies.
Therefore, the key to Dusk lies in the cross-chain interoperability. We will also endeavor to ensure the portability of assets using CCIP-style messaging and standards without forming risky and improvised bridges. In practice, Dusk has the ability to be a secret settlement node and other chains can provide different sources of liquidity and applications.
It is a solid institutional story: Find a place to settle, to be safe and obedient; make a connection where there already is capital.
Hyperstaking: transforming staking to programmable finance.
One more insidious change of infrastructure is hyperstaking-stake abstraction. Instead of human beings performing the process of staking manually, smart contracts can perform the process of staking, unstaking, and reward routing automatically.
The utilities of practice are automated staking pools, liquid staking models, and turnkey yield solutions which serve as real financial infrastructure, not hobbyist. Dusk has core building blocks, despite not being about staking, automation, rules, and predictable behavior.
Institutions should have stable systems and not the ad hoc click and hope solutions.
Why this matters now
Dusk holds the view that public chains fail in the markets not due to openness, but that of being too transparent. The market becomes an extraction machine of strategies when all the actions can be seen in advance when they are made. Dusk maintains confidentiality when it is necessary and gives any proofs when it is required by law and trust.
The introduction of the 2025 mainnet provided the groundwork. New elements, such as EVM compatibility, official data rails based on Chainlink standards and strong interoperability position, make Dusk more closely resemble a scalable finance platform.
Conclusion
One should not consider Dusk as a privacy coin with a new set of features, but a chain that recreates the market structure on on-chain finance. It conceals what should not be disclosed to ensure the fairness of the market, it gives evidence where it is stipulated according to the law, it does not depend on weak bridges with the rest of the crypto environment.
Dusk will bring more than just private transactions in case it is successful. What will be found is the creation of markets, which are functioning in a way similar to real markets: where information is not being weaponised on a daily basis, and the ability to comply is not being added after the damage has been done. # @Dusk

Majority of the citizens believe in privacy chain as a
secret. Dusk Network desires something different. It is developing
infrastructure in the market that allows real trading to occur without exposing
any data that would destroy fairness. Trades in regular markets remain
confidential until the time they settle. With publicity of trades before
settlement, big traders might be picked off, little traders might be imitated
and the markets might become very unpredictable. That is what a lot of open
blockchains resemble nowadays.

After many years of development, the mainnet of Dusk was
launched on 7 January 2025, and the project positioned it as the beginning of
an open financial system in which you can never share sensitive information but
still be able to prove something when you need to. It is not the aspect of
concealing everything. The idea is to conceal the right things such as
positions, order sizes and identities and still be able to provide proofs to be
audited, rules and settlement.

This paper takes a new perspective of Dusk: market fairness.
Not privacy because privacy, but privacy as the aspect that is lacking in
making on-chain markets a first come first served game.

The actual issue: information leakage makes markets games.

In a normal public blockchain, the market information
disseminates all over. When trades are in an open mempool, individuals can
observe them, replicate them, leapfrog them or push the price in their
direction. Your plan even when you are not engaging in bad things becomes
exposed. That renders serious trading prohibitive. It also drives institutions
backward to the privacy systems.

The bet made by Dusk is straightforward: in order that you
have regulated assets and stablecoin reserves, and large trades can occur
on-chain, you must have a chain where the intention of all is not revealed by
default. Privacy in this case is not a philosophical feature. It is market
hygiene.

Two forms of transactions: open when you please, private
when you have to.

The settlement layer of Dusk maintains two types of
transactions over the same network one transparent and the other shielded.
Simply put, it implies that the chain is capable of supporting the activities
in which it is helpful to be open, and also support the activities in which it
is necessary to maintain secrecy to ensure that the markets are not biased.

The shielded model employs the zero-knowledge style proofs
to ensure that the network is still able to check the reality that funds are
legitimate and not spent twice yet still remain unaware of the sender, receiver
and the amount of money being transferred. Simultaneously, the approach of Dusk
allows managing the methods of information disclosure in the future, when they
can be demanded by a regulator, auditor, or counterparty. This evidence where
it counts is what is at the heart of the way Dusk attempts to serve finance
without transforming the chain into a surveillance machine.

It is not just fairness of traders. It's also about
validators

The second place of market manipulation is the one of people
who build blocks. The validators in most proof-of-stake systems are publicly
identifiable and are easy to attack. Provided you can find validators, you can
bully them, bribe them, censure them, or put them under observation.

The consensus system of Dusk has a leader selection concept,
which is a blind-bid: block producers place bids in a form that is not visible
during the selection process to help discourage the practice of watching or
gaming the process. This is explained in the consensus design work of Dusk
(Proof-of- Blind Bidding into their agreement process). What matters more than
the buzzwords is that Dusk attempts to make it less predictable and less
visible - predictability gives attack surfaces, so that predictability has a
detrimental effect on it.

A system that is less prone to bullying is obtained when you
combine private transactions and a consensus process whereby public targeting
is minimized. In the case of regulated finance, that is important. When markets
are pressure riddled, then they are unreliable.

Lightspeed: Ethereum-style applications, and reconciled on
Dusk.

One of the key reasons why privacy chains fall is because
the developers do not relocate. Dusk attempts to eliminate that barrier with a
Solidity-compatible execution layer (Lightspeed / DuskEVM) to allow Solidity
developers to run in the usual way, but the settlement transpires on the base
chain at Dusk.

This is important to fairness, as it allows builders to
write the apps that look normal in the market, but in balances, trade flow, and
sensitive logic, apply privacy features where they are needed. That is, Dusk
does not request the world to study an entirely new stack in order to achieve
confidential markets.

The underestimated article: official market statistics, not
guesses of the crowd.

Markets still require reliable inputs even in the case of
private execution, in particular, regulated markets. Market data and price
feeds are not ornamentation. Settlement, margin, reporting, and basic truth all
are based on them.

This is why the reason why Dusk adopted Chainlink standards
is a bigger concern than it seems. Dusk announced that it is integrating
Chainlink CCIP, and DataLink and Data Streams, namely to transfer regulated
securities on-chain using verified exchange data.

In simple words:

Dusk is telling you, you cannot trust random oracles and
vibes, to give you compliant markets. You must have official grade data pipes.

DataLink is positioned as official exchange data delivered
on-chain and Data Streams as low latency updates to trading grade applications.
It is a new axis most individuals overlook: Dusk is attempting to establish not
only personal markets, but high-integrity markets.

Bridges do not only provide access but determine the
circulation of liquidity.

Dusk regards interoperability as being fundamental to the
market. Physical assets and liquidity do not remain in one chain. Ecosystems
spread their capital and users and strategies.

Therefore, the key to Dusk lies in the cross-chain
interoperability. We will also endeavor to ensure the portability of assets
using CCIP-style messaging and standards without forming risky and improvised
bridges. In practice, Dusk has the ability to be a secret settlement node and
other chains can provide different sources of liquidity and applications.

It is a solid institutional story: Find a place to settle,
to be safe and obedient; make a connection where there already is capital.

Hyperstaking: transforming staking to programmable finance.

One more insidious change of infrastructure is
hyperstaking-stake abstraction. Instead of human beings performing the process
of staking manually, smart contracts can perform the process of staking,
unstaking, and reward routing automatically.

The utilities of practice are automated staking pools,
liquid staking models, and turnkey yield solutions which serve as real
financial infrastructure, not hobbyist. Dusk has core building blocks, despite
not being about staking, automation, rules, and predictable behavior.

Institutions should have stable systems and not the ad hoc
click and hope solutions.

Why this matters now

Dusk holds the view that public chains fail in the markets
not due to openness, but that of being too transparent. The market becomes an
extraction machine of strategies when all the actions can be seen in advance
when they are made. Dusk maintains confidentiality when it is necessary and
gives any proofs when it is required by law and trust.

The introduction of the 2025 mainnet provided the
groundwork. New elements, such as EVM compatibility, official data rails based
on Chainlink standards and strong interoperability position, make Dusk more
closely resemble a scalable finance platform.

Conclusion

One should not consider Dusk as a privacy coin with a new
set of features, but a chain that recreates the market structure on on-chain
finance. It conceals what should not be disclosed to ensure the fairness of the
market, it gives evidence where it is stipulated according to the law, it does
not depend on weak bridges with the rest of the crypto environment.

Dusk will bring more than just private transactions in case
it is successful. What will be found is the creation of markets, which are
functioning in a way similar to real markets: where information is not being
weaponised on a daily basis, and the ability to comply is not being added after
the damage has been done.

#Dusk
@Dusk_Foundation

The majority of crypto-discussions are noisy with arguments on the purity of decentralization, TPS wars, and slick features. However, something more basic is the actual slayer of usage, cost uncertainty. Maybe you have ever constructed some type of building on a chain where charges can vary between nearly free and why is this costing me 18 dollars in one day? Your app is blamed by the users. Helpdesk inundated. Your team can’t budget. Unless you build automated jobs, bots, background tasks, AI agents, random fees put hard stops in.
The essence of vanar is nearly banal: stabilize the base price of transaction - make it stable, predictable, manageable by a builder in a spreadsheet and rely on it.
The gas market tax of the invisible hand corrects the most beneficial apps.
It is reasonable to consider gas auctions: when you compare blockspace to holiday airline seats, the highest bidder gets in. That prototype is inhuman to applications that look into the future. Micropayments, streaming payments, in-game moves, social apps, machine-to-machine automation, all prefer doing thousands of transactions a day when they are not bidding.
Even the average fee is not the worst aspect. It’s the uncertainty. In a fee market that goes on the spiral, minor motions cease to have meaning. A $0.05 action becomes a $2 action. Users do not care why - they leave. The ecosystem is then changed to fewer, larger transactions, which is precisely the opposite of what mass adoption should be.
Vanar is attempting a reverse of that, not hype, but a protocol-level architecture: fixed fees to a fiat value.
The fixed-fee model by Vanar: pegged to a USD target, controlled at the protocol level.
According to the documentation provided by Vanar, a system progressively maintains user-facing costs at stable fiat levels, to be more precise, aiming at $0.0005 per transaction. This is not “fixed in VANRY.” It translates it as this act will cost approximately this many dollars, even when token prices get changed.
To do so, Vanar releases a USD/VANRY price mechanism (a token) and claims that the protocol changes the price periodically, based on market information. It also authenticates the market price in a variety of sources, i.e., DEXs, CEXs, data providers, i.e., the number is not being provided by a single compromised feed.
Such a design choice is more than it seems. In regular chains, your commission is nothing but a weather report. In the model of Vanar, the fee is nearer to a posted price - a toll road, which is not going to start charging 50x due to a rise in traffic.
Why not a fairness talk is good enough why not FIFO ordering?
The model of transaction-processing is also a part of the fee model at Vanar: the First-In-First-Out (FIFO) model. On gas auction chains, order taking is transformed into a marketplace. People pay to jump the line. That brings in the whole set of strategies front-running, bidding wars, priority games all of which are not requested by the normal users.
FIFO is an unobtrusive sentence: You only do not need to play games to be part of it. Practically, it renders the inclusion of transactions more of a service, rather than a casino. This ordering philosophy is important, in case your app is to be payment infrastructure. It simplifies the prediction, explanation and auditing of outcomes.
Predictable charge is not merely a win in terms of UX, it is an anti-spam weapon, provided that it is created rightly.
At this point appears a just rebuttal: "When charges are small and constant, will not spam be cheap? The solution that Vanar proposes is to introduce predictability to tiering, such that day-to-day transactions are cheap, and abusive behavior is costly. The framing of the model by the community and ecosystem posts is that cheap to use normally, and expensive to use in large spamming.
This is significant in the sense that spam protection is normally handled independently of pricing. But they’re linked. When a chain is interested in low fees, it should design what occurs in case somebody floods the system. Tiering fundamentally is: We do subsidize normal life, but not attacks.
Put simply, Vanar is attempting to make a fee landscape that would seem like a city: walking is pleasant, there is normal traffic, but in the event that you attempt to drive a hundred trucks through a narrow street at the same time, you will pay a fee to disrupt the traffic.
The more profound justification of this model to the Vanar agent economy story.
This is the broader perspective that is not generic: machines are most concerned with predictable fees, rather than the vast majority of humans. Humans can pause and decide. Machines act continuously.
Suppose that Vanar is right in his more general thesis that autonomous agents will make payments, revise state, pay small debts, and do compliance tests automatically, then machine budgeting must be supported by the chain. Agents do not work well when one of the core costs has become irrational. In which case, a USD-pegged fee structure is a prerequisite to the role of an agent future, rather than the agent future, nice to have.
It is also the reason why the design is more fintech than crypto. Fintech systems are still alive, as they are capable of quoting costs, predicting costs and explaining costs. The fee model by Vanar attempts to inject some sense of normalcy with on-chain execution.
Slow release, heavy-validator, and designed with the aim of maintaining the network: the token emissions and incentives.
The other aspect of fee stability is: in case users pay small fees, who protects the chain? In the documentation provided by vanar, there will be a long-term emission plan based on block rewards; the average rate of inflation is given over a long period, and harsher initial emissions are mentioned to promote the development of the ecosystem and initial staking rewards.
The whitepaper and materials also outline a token allocation where validator rewards are considerably higher, and other sections of the allocation are dedicated to the development and community incentives, and it specifically states that the team does not have any token allocation.
The choice of a token model is subjective. In terms of concept, the strategy of Vanar is operation continuity and network incentives which enables the chain to act as infrastructure.
What most people fail to appreciate is the pricing that can be relied upon by the builders.
Vanar fee strategy is not so cheap, but its primary advantage is that it is predictable.
The price of a product can be determined by a builder. A team may assure an experience to a user. Costs can be forecasted by a finance department. It can be understood even by non- crypto partners. The docs by Vanar explain fixed fees as an instrument of accurate cost predictions, budgets, and predictable behavior in peak seasons.
This is important since the subsequent round of adoption will not be by crypto enthusiasts, but by individuals who do not enjoy complexity but require a stable means of value and data transfer.
The actual challenge: is Vanar able to remain consistent and at the same time, be strong?
A fixed-fee model will pass or fail on the detail of implementation. The system (price-update) should be robust. The tiering must be in a way that prevents spam and does not negatively affect honest high volume apps. The chain should be able to last when under tension. It should be demonstrated that the network is credible in its measuring of market price and the frequency of updates since it lies on the trust contract with the builders. The token-price feed is described on the docs of Vanar as multi-source-validated, an encouraging fact, as on single-source the truth is a frequent cause of failure.
Should Vanar win, it will provide a luxury in crypto the assurance that real product can be constructed without the fear of touching the base layer.
What is so good about Vanar that makes him worth watching.
A number of chains have an ambitious goal to be the future. Vanar is in search of usability, the future of infrastructure. An experiment that has predictable charges, a reasonable costs of ordering, and unaffordable attack costs silently turns experiments into consistent systems. This is not spin, it is preparation in design. The discipline of designing is what survives when the market is no longer cheering but is requiring reliability.
@Vanarchain-1
$VANRY

Fratelli/Sorelle, mi sono svegliato al mattino e ho controllato $WAL per primo dopo aver bevuto caffè... Oggi è sceso un po' di nuovo, il prezzo oscilla tra ~$0.091-$0.095 (l'ho visto su CoinMarketCap + CoinGecko ~$0.092-0.094, un calo del -3% al -6% in 24 ore, capitalizzazione di mercato ~$146M-$152M). Il volume è buono ~$15M-$18M, ma è sceso del -25%+ la scorsa settimana. Tutti dicono che il mercato ribassista + la pressione di vendita è aumentata dopo la fine della campagna.
Ma penso che sia una reazione eccessiva. Walrus è un progetto di Mysten Labs, costruito sopra Sui per lo stoccaggio/decentralizzato di blob. I dati di addestramento del modello AI, grandi file video/imagine, media NFT – tutto può essere memorizzato on-chain a costi molto bassi, protetto da una prova di disponibilità. Nell'era degli agenti AI + monetizzazione dei dati, progetti come DePIN + Storage stanno diventando sempre più utili. ওর

Cross-border dollar flows have historically been slow, costly, and fragmented. Traditional payment channels rely on multiple layers of intermediaries, have limited operating hours, are geographically constrained, and settlement delays can last for hours or even days. Even in today's digital world, global dollar flows still bear the marks of the analog era. Plasma's vision stems from a simple belief: the flow of digital dollars should be as fast as the internet, not as slow as traditional finance.
Plasma aims to be the infrastructure layer for the global digital dollar flow. Unlike universal blockchains that view stablecoins as one of many use cases, Plasma places stablecoins at the core of its design. This shift in priority changes everything. When stablecoins are seen as core infrastructure rather than secondary assets, blockchains can be optimized for reliability, throughput, predictable costs, and continuous settlement, which is exactly what global capital flow requires.
Plasma's vision is about scale. The scale of global dollar flow is vast and continuous: payments, remittances, payroll, capital operations, and inter-institutional settlements never cease. Plasma's design goal is to process thousands of transactions per second without congestion or fee fluctuations. Unlike NFTs, meme coins, or speculative trades competing for block space, Plasma prioritizes stablecoin transfers. This ensures stable performance even during periods of high demand, which is crucial for any system aimed at facilitating global capital flow.
Security is another cornerstone of Plasma. Global dollar flow requires trust, especially in the case of large transactions. Plasma anchors its settlement to Bitcoin, which is currently the most secure and decentralized blockchain. By building on Bitcoin's proven security model, Plasma ensures that stablecoin transactions are ultimately based on a foundation with a long and robust track record. This is particularly important for institutions and enterprises that require strict guarantees of finality and settlement integrity. Plasma's vision also recognizes that global capital flow must be convenient. Full compatibility with the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) allows existing Ethereum-based applications, wallets, and financial tools to be deployed on Plasma without rewriting code. This lowers the threshold for developers and accelerates the development of the ecosystem. At the same time, users benefit from a familiar interface and access to a network optimized for stablecoin activity rather than speculative congestion.
Cost predictability plays a crucial role in Plasma's design. In many blockchains, fees can fluctuate wildly based on unrelated activities, making it unsuitable for everyday payments. Plasma introduces a custom gas model that aligns with stablecoin use cases, achieving predictable, and in some cases even zero-fee transfers. This reflects real-world financial expectations, where users do not consider network fees with each transfer. By eliminating friction in the payment layer, Plasma enables digital dollars to be applicable for everyday and large-scale applications.
Beyond individual transactions, Plasma's vision also extends to institutions, fintech platforms, and global enterprises. Stablecoins are increasingly being applied in cross-border settlements, capital management, and on-chain liquidity. Plasma provides an environment that enables these activities to occur continuously, transparently, and at scale. Shielded transactions further ensure financial privacy when necessary, balancing transparency and caution in regulatory and enterprise application scenarios.
Plasma's goal is not to replace all blockchains or financial systems. Its aim is more specific, and therefore more powerful. Plasma is committed to becoming the default settlement channel for digital dollars, achieving seamless operation around the clock and globally, eliminating any boundaries or unnecessary friction. By combining Bitcoin-level security, stablecoin-prioritized architecture, scalable performance, and compatibility with the EVM, Plasma looks to the future, where global dollar transfers will be as easy, instant, reliable, and always online as sending data.
@Plasma #Plasma #xpl

Many crypto initiatives discuss the idea of taking
real-world assets on-chain, yet most of the readers are not aware of what it
actually looks like in practice. Real markets are not just dealings. They need
documents of issues, investors, transfer limitations, corporate practices,
settlement regulations, reporting obligations, and protection of liability. In
case any of these items are not present, the asset is not really a tokenized
one; it is just a token that has disguised itself as a security.

Privacy is not the most outstanding contribution made by
Dusk. It provides a blockchain in which the regulations are stored within each
asset, and sensitive data are not disclosed. The emphasis puts Dusk nearer to
market infrastructure compared to the usual DeFi.

The chain is a privacy blockchain, which is regulated
finance, and it is meant to take institutional workflows to the blockchain
without compromising compliance or performance.

The aspect that most people overlook is the angle of asset
standard: XSC is meant as the template of the contract regulating securities.

A lot of chains compete to lure issuers using illusory
sales. The evening lures them with a strict criterion.

The Confidential Security Contract (XSC) by Dusk is a
structure of developing and issuing privacy-enabled tokenized securities. This
is important since securities are not mere tokens; they have regulations on
ownership, transfer, and on how the dividends or votes will be paid out or the
redemption.

The even greater insight is that compliance is not an
external process only. You minimize off-chain enforcement by coding rules of
transfer and disclosure into asset contract logic. The compliance rules coexist
within the protocol layer, and not an add-on as indicated in the messaging of
Dusk.

Consider that XSC will be like ERC-20, except that it
contains privacy and solid regulations designed into the core.

Why this is important: regulated markets are based on
privacy and not publicity.

Equity markets do not publish the balance of all investors
and their wallet address. Complete disclosure by default would make
surveillance be on a strategic position.

According to the Dusk system of confidential securities,
asset-level confidentiality rather than transfers-only confidentiality is
required to get serious issuers and investors on-chain. It is not the crypto
promise of everything always open that it has.

That is why Dusk continues to insist on the markets in which
the asset can be exchanged and stored on-chain and the sensitive information is
maintained. It is not all about secrecy as an end in itself, it is about the
privacy inherent in normal finances, and yet providing the necessary proofs.

The infrastructure aspect: Dusk has a modular stack, where
DuskDS is the bottom

Another interesting change in the documentation is the
documentation of the architecture as being modular.

They introduce DuskDS as the settlement, consensus as well
as data-availability layer to the layer of several execution environments.
DuskVM and DuskEVM are constructed using it. It is an institutional approach
rather than a technical choice.

Organisations do not wish to put all their eggs in one
virtual machine. Their desires are permanent settlement and adherence at the
base, engines of executions capable of evolving with the change of tools. This
is provided by DuskDS, along with some fundamental constituents such as Rusk
(node implementation) and Kadcast (networking) as well as transfer and staking
genesis contracts.

Speaking of the most recent addition to Dusk, this modular
strategy is a good indication: they are constructing a financial platform, and
not a one-purpose chain.

Security is not an advisory, rather a necessity

Reliability in the context of DeFi culture is usually not a
requirement until something goes wrong. Such tolerance is not tolerated in
institutional systems. Buggy validator or a deployment failure is not an
inconvenience, but a legal and operational crisis.

The operator documentation of Dusk explains that slashing is
an actual punitive mechanism with the threat of receiving less stake by
submitting invalid blocks or going dead. The network update describes slashing
hard and soft which is meant to discourage unproductive behavior.

Such a change takes Dusk out of the rubric of friendly
staking and into the realm of professional responsibility. It is structured to
penalize low performance, which fits the target market of Dusk: the financial
processes which cannot withstand unreliable infrastructure.

The long-term security planning, not the hype.

The documentation which Dusk provides is grounded in one of
the most sensible ways, its supply plan.

They declare an initial supply of 500M DUSK (previously an
ERC-20/BEP-20 token before the migration), with additional 500M issued over 36
years due to staking rewards and the maximum supply is 1 billion DUSK.

You may like inflation or not, the form is clear: Dusk will
fund its security long, not short and aggressive bursts. That is what
constitutes a market infrastructure. The stock exchanges and settlement systems
do not operate on a twelve week cycle, but on a twenty-five year basis.

In case Dusk really wants to host controlled issuance and
secondary trading, its security model should not be isolated to a specific hype
cycle. An extended emission plan conveys that clearly.

The angle of adoption that is real: the concept of
controlled exchange partnerships are not a desirable good but an end.

The most practical advancement of Dusk in the real world is
its association with controlled securities markets.

In March 2024, it was announced by VentureBeat that Dusk and
the Dutch Exchange NPEX are working together to establish a blockchain-based
securities exchange which will be regulated and be interested in tokenized
securities. A year later, in April 2025, Dusk announced it would collaborate
with 21X, which was granted a DLT-TSS license under the European regulations,
allowing an all-tokenized securities market, and the partnership is packaged as
regulation-oriented.

Such collaborations are significant as they represent the
messiness of the regulated adoption: the purchase of licenses, the negotiation
of exemptions, and the interaction with the real market players. It is not just
the launch of a dApp and the expectation of liquidity to emerge. The adoption
is being done slowly, in a procedural manner, and based on credibility.

In this case, assuming Dusk is successful, it will probably
do so by treading along orthodox paths: controlled venues, compliant issuers of
assets and settlement processes that may not appear to be exciting, but gets
the actual value moving.

You may have a real-life image in the form of a personal
bond that you can issue on-chain and have the list of investors that is not on
the internet.

Suppose that it is a small or medium-sized company wishing
to issue a bond. In conventional finance, a list of investors remains
confidential, coupon payments are made on a regular basis, transfers can only
take place among qualified individuals, regulators may demand records and
accountants may check accounting.

The direction of the company Dusk, dubbed as the direction
towards confidential securities, should enable the entire workflow to be native
to a blockchain environment. The asset can have embedded compliance rules
provided using a security contract standard, such as XSC. The network has a
base layer that is designed based on the settlement and compliance requirements
to offer finality and reliability and also offer various execution environments
based on the application requirements.

It is that mix that is the actual new story to tell. Dusk is
not attempting to put everyone nameless.

It is attempting to enable regulated issuance and trading
in-chain without transform all those sensitive details into entertainment and
make them public.

The actual question of future is easy; will the ecosystem
create the market products in support of the infrastructure?

Dusk has numerous features that go hand in hand with what
projects purport to desire: a place in regulated finance, a security token
standard story, a modular architecture story, a staking enforcement mechanism
and partnerships to compliant marketplaces.

The next stage now is the performance, the only thing that
matters: actual products, actual issuance, actual trading, actual settlement.

When Dusk can assist institutions and issuers to issue
assets acting like real securities, where privacy is needed, provable when
policy requires proving, then it ceases to be a crypto privacy project and is a
rarer animal: a blockchain which resembles financial infrastructure.

It is more difficult than following trends, but it is the
type of path that is more likely to be long-lasting if it succeeds.

#dusk k  $DUSK @Dusk_Foundation

Hundreds of crypto projects are sworn to be open,
permissionless and decentralized in the beginning. In real systems that must
process payments and comply as well as business-grade uptime, that assurance
usually fails when subjected to the initial stress test. Vanar Chain chooses
another way. Its main premise is that individuals embrace a network when it
seems to be stable initially and then the decentralization increases slowly by
slowly. It is not as romantic, but it is corresponding to the scaling of the
internet, cloud and fintech.

The Vanar design is a trust ladder. It starts with a few
known reliable individuals across the globe who undergo trials and are trusted,
and as their track record increases, more people are granted access. Most
chains adopt the approach of claiming to practice progressive decentralization,
but Vanar makes it part of its consensus documentation.

The most significant technical aspect that people overlook:
Vanar is not gambling on stake

Majority of the networks make security into one measure: the
capital locked. Vanar has recorded a hybrid configuration in which Proof of
Authority, which is ruled over or supplemented by Proof of Reputation, is
deployed. In the first phase, Vanar Foundation operates validators, and in the
second phase, there are outsourced validators, who enter through a reputation
system.

This is evident in this worldview: capital is not the only
indicator. A second security primitive is reputation. The chain poses a
question in simple language as follows: Who has demonstrated over time that he
acts well, rather than Who can purchase the most influence nowadays? This is
not necessarily superior but it does seek to minimise widespread failure modes,
like short-term capture, rented stake, or one that rents and returns without
penalty.

The reasons why a PoA-PoR trail can be sensible to pay and
to do business.

When you seek to drive actual business, the actual problems
are downtime, lack of predictable end-of-the-line and disordered validator
behaviour - not ideology. Proof of Authority has been frequently critiqued in
crypto culture as being more permissioned, but it provides the stability of
operations in a network as it is still young. According to the documentation by
Vanar, the network begins with foundation-validators, followed by the
introduction of many more validators with Proof of Reputation.

The main issue is that PoA is not necessarily good. Vanar is
aimed at ensuring that behavior of an enterprise-grade is the rule of thumb as
the network expands. This is consistent with the partners and uses that it
markets, particularly, payments-focused positioning.

The silent growth strategy is the compatibility strategy.

The largest cemetery of web3 is not the chains but the time
of developer. Even mighty technology is deficient when constructors need to
rewrite all that to move. The practical benefit of Vanar is that it is
compatibility-oriented, which allows teams to ship faster. Vanar positions
itself as infrastructure to Web3 applications without highlighting it is
accessible to general builders and not specialists.

The issue of compatibility is that the ecosystems are
created in that manner. Rather than compelling developers to study a new stack,
it allows them to take with them what they already have and then progressively
embrace the new powers of the network. In case Vanar AI and data layers are the
long-run differentiator, compatibility is the short-run intermediary that opens
the doors to the actual apps.

The most interesting detail about Neutron is not how many
times it is compressed, it is the storage model.

Vanar frequently describes Neutron as a complete on-chain
programmable seed system, including such claims as 25MB to 50KB with semantic,
heuristic, and algorithmic layers.

However, there is a more subtle touch in the documentation.
Neutron seeds are kept off-chain performance and flexible and may be anchored
to on-chain to verify, assert ownership and integrity over time.

That difference matters. It reveals that Vanar is not after
the pure on-chain purity. Rather, it seeks a pragmatic architecture: store
heavy data in a place that it can move quickly, but store sufficient
cryptographic fact on-chain to verify, own and use it reliably. More
realistically, this hybrid model is simpler to embrace than attempting to move
everything on-chain and assume that there are no performance tradeoffs.

By compliance, what Kayon means to say is that it is a
software layer and not a manual one

Kayon is a reasoning layer with support of natural-language
blockchain queries, discovery and compliance automation between Neutron,
blockchains and enterprise backends.

The angle that is worth paying attention to: Vanar stack
views compliance as something that can be encoded, asked and replayed. Within
the majority of systems, compliance is still a human workflow, checklist, or a
back-office process. Vanar is trying to create a world where compliance is
inductive through the data itself since the data is organized, verifiable and
queryable. That’s not just “AI on‑chain.” It transforms governance and verification into a
surface that is programmable.

In the unlikely event that Vanar is successful, it would be
applied in the most banal places such as dispute resolution, audit trails,
payment checks, and enterprise reporting. It is good to be boring since budgets
reside there.

Staking is not yield earning, it is a component of security.

A portal run by Vanar makes staking look like a rewarding
and security-enhancing strategy in the network. The good point is that Vanar
wants the participants to regard staking as an understandable, obvious thing to
do: stake, support the network, get rewarded. This is something crypto users
are accustomed to and, more generally, it can be related to a future in which
reputation has a greater weight with the validators. One of the many signals
that a network can use to strike a balance between trust, performance and
decentralization is staking.

The point is in the development of the system. In case the
network indeed increases the validator accessibility depending on reputation
indicators over time, the staking will become not a matter of pure capital
domination but rather of a long-term consistence.

Ecosystem building: Vanar silently develops distribution
using builders.

Most chains discuss ecosystems, but the truth is, do they
open avenues to allow project builders to deliver on them. The Kickstart page
by Vanar features projects and perks to builders, which is a rather
straightforward but nonetheless effective indicator that it is attempting to
get teams on board and simplify the process of launching on the chain.

This is important as new infrastructure does not normally
succeed because of being technically flawless. It triumphs because it
simplifies building of actual products by builders. An effective ecosystem
strategy is not a thousand partners. It is a vicious circle: developers create,
users come, users feed-back enhances the stack and the chain gains credibility
through usage.

The best reason to listen: Vanar is constructed towards
systems that should be self-explaining.

Crypto has a trust problem. AI has a trust problem. The
trust problem becomes twice as much. It is a system capable of answering
questions of the why kind that Vanar is after, particularly with organized
Seeds and reasoning layers. Why was a payment approved? Why did a rule trigger?
Why was a document a valid one? Such explanations are not luxury in the reality
world. They are used to separate a demo and a deployable system.

Vanar architecture is dragged towards that world: verifiable
data, logic that can be reused and considerate of uptime and subsequently
decentralization.

The real bet Vanar is making

Vanar is optimistic that the coming stage of Web3 will not
seem so much speculative experimentation, but something resembling the
invisible infrastructure. It implies predictable validation, readable data,
logic that is compliant, and tooling that can be utilized by the builders. It
is a gamble to normalize blockchain to the industries that transfers the
highest value.

In case you want a casual method of evaluating it, do not
ask whether it sounds exciting. Inquire whether it helps to make real systems
less frictional. Vanar is endeavoring to establish a chain of trust, one step
at a time, and that is a solemnly based, and out of the ordinary approach in
the marketplace which tends to soar idealism with engineering.

#vanar   $VANRY
@Vanarchain-1

 

 

Cross-border dollar flows have historically been slow, costly, and fragmented. Traditional payment channels rely on multiple layers of intermediaries, have limited operating hours, are geographically constrained, and settlement delays can last for hours or even days. Even in today's digital world, global dollar flows still bear the marks of the analog era. Plasma's vision stems from a simple belief: the flow of digital dollars should be as fast as the internet, not as slow as traditional finance.
Plasma aims to be the infrastructure layer for the global digital dollar flow. Unlike universal blockchains that view stablecoins as one of many use cases, Plasma places stablecoins at the core of its design. This shift in priority changes everything. When stablecoins are seen as core infrastructure rather than secondary assets, blockchains can be optimized for reliability, throughput, predictable costs, and continuous settlement, which is exactly what global capital flow requires.
Plasma's vision is about scale. The scale of global dollar flow is vast and continuous: payments, remittances, payroll, capital operations, and inter-institutional settlements never cease. Plasma's design goal is to process thousands of transactions per second without congestion or fee fluctuations. Unlike NFTs, meme coins, or speculative trades competing for block space, Plasma prioritizes stablecoin transfers. This ensures stable performance even during periods of high demand, which is crucial for any system aimed at facilitating global capital flow.
Security is another cornerstone of Plasma. Global dollar flow requires trust, especially in the case of large transactions. Plasma anchors its settlement to Bitcoin, which is currently the most secure and decentralized blockchain. By building on Bitcoin's proven security model, Plasma ensures that stablecoin transactions are ultimately based on a foundation with a long and robust track record. This is particularly important for institutions and enterprises that require strict guarantees of finality and settlement integrity. Plasma's vision also recognizes that global capital flow must be convenient. Full compatibility with the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) allows existing Ethereum-based applications, wallets, and financial tools to be deployed on Plasma without rewriting code. This lowers the threshold for developers and accelerates the development of the ecosystem. At the same time, users benefit from a familiar interface and access to a network optimized for stablecoin activity rather than speculative congestion.
Cost predictability plays a crucial role in Plasma's design. In many blockchains, fees can fluctuate wildly based on unrelated activities, making it unsuitable for everyday payments. Plasma introduces a custom gas model that aligns with stablecoin use cases, achieving predictable, and in some cases even zero-fee transfers. This reflects real-world financial expectations, where users do not consider network fees with each transfer. By eliminating friction in the payment layer, Plasma enables digital dollars to be applicable for everyday and large-scale applications.
Beyond individual transactions, Plasma's vision also extends to institutions, fintech platforms, and global enterprises. Stablecoins are increasingly being applied in cross-border settlements, capital management, and on-chain liquidity. Plasma provides an environment that enables these activities to occur continuously, transparently, and at scale. Shielded transactions further ensure financial privacy when necessary, balancing transparency and caution in regulatory and enterprise application scenarios.
Plasma's goal is not to replace all blockchains or financial systems. Its aim is more specific, and therefore more powerful. Plasma is committed to becoming the default settlement channel for digital dollars, achieving seamless operation around the clock and globally, eliminating any boundaries or unnecessary friction. By combining Bitcoin-level security, stablecoin-prioritized architecture, scalable performance, and compatibility with the EVM, Plasma looks to the future, where global dollar transfers will be as easy, instant, reliable, and always online as sending data.
@Plasma$XPL #Plasma

Plasma looks different but when?

It believes in the fees as user experience debt rather than
revenue. The transfers of USDT are also subsidized by protocol paymasters, and
the users do not need to operate with gas tokens. At the internal level, XPL
obtains both governance and validators, and only when staking is done,
inflation is activated. The addition of the USDT0 support, a Bitcoin-backed
security model, and initial custody development, like Cobo, will be leaving
behind the status of a just another chain

#plasma    $XPL @Plasma

各
我这几天一直在研究 $WAL（Walrus）。这是一个基于 Sui 的去中心化存储项目，由 Mysten Labs 团队（也是 Sui 的开发者）打造。它面向人工智能数据市场，支持链上存储大型文件、blob 数据和可编程数据——所有这些都是前沿技术。
现在，WAL 代币可以用于存储支付。当你上传数据时，系统会通过某种机制将其稳定地转换为法币，从而避免价格波动。此外，它还通过质押来保障网络安全，并设有治理机制。总供应量为 50 亿枚，目前流通量约为 15-16 亿枚。采用通缩模型和销毁机制——长期来看前景良好。
目前价格在 0.09-0.11 美元之间波动（24 小时内与市场同步下跌 10-15%），但看看交易量——每天的交易额高达 1000 万至 2000 万美元。市值约 1.4 亿至 1.5 亿美元，位列前 200 名。已在币安上线，此前曾进行过空投。
我认为，结合人工智能、DePIN 和 Sui 生态系统，Walrus 在 2026 年将大有可为。它有潜力与 Filecoin/Arweave 竞争，但 Sui 的速度和低成本优势将使其更胜一筹。
正在进行研究或计划逢低买入的朋友，现在就去 walrus.xyz 看看，仔细阅读其代币经济模型。我已经建立了空头头寸，并采取了定投策略。你们怎么看？$WAL 会暴涨还是暴跌？
#Walrus $WAL @WalrusProtocol

Dusk does not utilize generic blockchains, instead focusing
on a carefully chosen set of building blocks to allow for compliant, privacy
preserving and high performance financial applications.....Dusk is an
architected blockchain built from scratch with the goal of implementing real
world financial infrastructure. Every component supports the overall
architecture of the blockchain and is built specifically for its assigned job
on the blockchain.

Privacy as a Core Architectural Principle

The Dusk Network's primary and essential feature is Privacy.
While the sender, recipient, and amount transferred in every transaction are
kept private by default and are not recorded publicly on-chain. Privacy is
accomplished through native zero-knowledge proof primitives that are integrated
into the protocol itself.

The primary concern with respect to Privacy on Dusk is that
it provides a selective rather than total trade off - The Dusk Network has a
functionality of ‘Selective Disclosure’, whereby when information is to be
validated by an Authorised Third Party (for example, a Regulator or Auditor),
the chosen information can be validated without having to disclose that
information publicly, thereby allowing Dusk to meet regulatory obligations and
account for User Confidentiality.

 2 . The DUSK Native
Asset

DUSK serves as a base unit of value and provides many uses
beyond just simple value exchange. It provides both the exclusive economic
asset of the network as well as providing security to the network. In addition
to being used for staking and paying transaction fees, it is also used in the
consensus mechanism of the network and creates the proper alignment between
network security and economic incentives.

With one single and privileged asset, Dusk prevents
fragmented security frameworks and provides a clean and auditable economic
system. This helps Dusk create strong Sybil resistance and guarantees the
long-term viability of Dusk's ecosystem as a result.

 3 . Consensus and
Network Security

A consensus mechanism is an essential part of Dusk. Dusk’s
consensus mechanism is a privacy-preserving proof-of-stake mechanism with
cryptographic leader selection - rather than public visibility. The block
proposal process has a unique set of rules that allows for the generation of
blocks without exposing the names of proposed block generators, thereby
protecting them against targeted attacks, censorship, and front-running.

The DUSK tokens are staked by those that participate in the
consensus to guarantee security for the network using committee based agreement
to allow finality (settlement) to happen quickly with solid Byzantine fault
tolerance. Therefore, the network will be able to support the requirements
needed by financial-grade applications.

 4 . Smart Contracts
and the Rusk Virtual Machine

The Rusk VM (Rusk Virtual Machine) is responsible for
executing smart contracts on Dusk and was created especially to enable
zero-knowledge proof-based verification and allow developers to create
applications that can validate intricate conditions without disclosing any of
the underlying data.

Rusk is quite different from conventional virtual machines
because it creates a direct integration between cryptographic verification and
execution logic. As a result of this direct integration, private DeFi,
compliant asset issuance and secrecy in financial workflows can all be
maintained in a deterministic and secure manner while achieving full usage
efficiency.

 5 . Transaction Model
and State Management

Dusk operates a privacy-preserving transaction model which
allows for accurate balance accounting without the use of the public ledger.
The transfer of assets remains in a pending state until the recipient expressly
accepts it; thereby avoiding any premature changes in balances and guaranteeing
accuracy of those balances.

The state transitions that occur through Dusk's
protocol-level contracts are tightly regulated, thereby minimising systemic
risks and allowing for simplified verification. The structure of these
transactions increases their auditability while maintaining confidentiality.

 6 . Compliance by
Design

The fact that Dusk has a foundation built on its
compliance-aware architecture is one of its most important and distinguishing
features; Dusk was designed to be able to work with many regulatory frameworks
– for example, when it comes to security token issuance, lifecycle management,
and institutional reporting responsibilities.

Dusk, through use of selective disclosure and cryptographic
attestations, can allow for compliance in a manner that does not compromise
either decentralization or privacy; therefore, it has an almost exclusive
capability to connect traditional financial institutions and the blockchain.

 7 . Interoperability
and Extensibility

The Dusk Network is designed for interoperability with other
blockchain ecosystems. By utilizing trusted or trust-minimized interoperability
solutions, Dusk can act as a privacy-preserving sidechain or execution layer
for existing Layer-1 networks.

The extensibility of the Dusk Network allows for a large
variety of applications to be hosted on the network, while still maintaining
its primary focus of confidential, compliant finance.

The components that form the Dusk Network are not simply a
collection of distinct features but rather they work together as part of a
unified structure to create a complete solution. All the elements (privacy,
consensus, smart contracts, compliance, and incentivisation) have been
interwoven into one cohesive purpose-built system.

Through creating these components in a native form rather
than as a type of extension or add-on, Dusk has created a Blockchain platform
designed to support the 'real money' Financial Markets in a secure and private
manner at scale.

@Dusk $DUSK #dusk