The long-term crypto market has been pulled between two extremes—on one end, complete on-chain transparency, where every asset can be tracked clearly; on the other, the monopoly of privacy by centralized finance. This divide has persisted for a long time until someone started seriously bridging the gap.



Many people initially became interested in $DUSK simply because of labels like "privacy," "compliance," and "institutional friendliness." But those who delve deeper into its technical architecture will find that this is not just about adding another privacy chain, but about building an infrastructure for the next-generation financial system that can both protect privacy and meet compliance requirements.

Think about the reality of traditional finance—companies do not disclose all transaction details, and individuals are even less likely to agree to have their assets and identities permanently recorded on a public ledger. Yet most blockchains face a dilemma: either replace privacy with transparency or sacrifice compliance for anonymity. There is no third way.

Until now. Through cryptographic techniques like zero-knowledge proofs, Dusk Network has achieved what seemed impossible—making the entire process of asset issuance, transfer, and settlement both privacy-preserving and verifiable and auditable. What does this change?

It means that real-world assets (RWA) can circulate on-chain without being forced to choose between compliance and privacy. Financial instruments like securities, bonds, and funds can operate on the blockchain while satisfying both needs.

From a broader perspective, this opens a door. Institutional-grade applications are no longer trapped in the dilemma of "being fully exposed or violating regulations." Companies can participate in blockchain economic activities without revealing trade secrets. Personal assets can also be truly protected.

The question is, can this "both fish and bear's paw" solution really be implemented? The technical feasibility has already been validated. What remains is the market’s acceptance of this new paradigm and the speed of regulatory framework development. Once these variables are aligned, the long-neglected privacy needs might finally be truly recognized in the blockchain world.
DUSK-2,59%
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 8
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
SchrodingerWalletvip
· 12h ago
Basically, it's about walking a tightrope between transparency and privacy. It sounds good, but can it really be implemented? Zero-knowledge proofs have been hyped for so long, but it always feels like a lot of noise with little substance. Compliance + Privacy + Institutions—can this triangle really be self-consistent? I'm a bit skeptical. Dusk, another chain claiming to solve problems—hope it won't repeat the same mistakes. RWA on-chain to protect privacy? Nice words, but the key is what regulators think. I've heard this logic many times before. Do you remember how it ended? Institution-friendly is one thing, but for ordinary people to actually play around—that's real skill.
View OriginalReply0
ProofOfNothingvip
· 21h ago
Zero-knowledge proofs are easy to talk about, but when it comes to actually using them, you realize how difficult or easy it is... Anyway, I'll get on board first and see.
View OriginalReply0
airdrop_whisperervip
· 21h ago
Zero-knowledge proofs sound impressive, but whether they can be practically implemented depends on whether regulators are willing to accept them.
View OriginalReply0
SelfStakingvip
· 21h ago
Oops, finally someone is seriously filling this gap. I was wondering why there's always a back-and-forth between transparency and privacy. Zero-knowledge proofs sound ambitious, but can they really make institutions willingly go on-chain? Honestly, I'm a bit skeptical. Can compliance and privacy truly coexist? It sounds like a pie in the sky; regulators need to follow up on this. This is the real way to go, saving us from having to choose between one or the other every time, which is exhausting. Only those who deeply understand the architecture know that it's not just another privacy chain; it's about building infrastructure-level stuff.
View OriginalReply0
SocialAnxietyStakervip
· 21h ago
Zero-knowledge proofs sound very advanced, but it's probably still a while before they can be practically used.
View OriginalReply0
CommunityWorkervip
· 21h ago
Zero-knowledge proofs sound impressive, but can they really be adopted by the mainstream? I doubt it. --- So basically, it's using cryptography to fool both ends. Whether it can truly be implemented depends on whether regulators are happy. --- Wait, isn't this just trying to balance privacy and compliance? The question is, do institutions really trust it? --- The technical feasibility has been verified; what's left is whether the market will buy into it... It sounds like just another "revolutionary" promise. --- RWA on-chain indeed requires this kind of solution, but it seems like it will take a long time before it really gets moving. --- I've heard many win-win solutions, but in the end, they all turn into one side getting scammed. Can't $DUSK be different? --- It mainly depends on whether regulations can keep up; otherwise, even the best technology is useless. --- Can corporate privacy and audit transparency really be satisfied at the same time? I'm a bit skeptical that it's an ideal scenario.
View OriginalReply0
SatoshiChallengervip
· 21h ago
Alright, once again the claim that zero-knowledge proofs can cure all diseases [sneer]. Ironically, every time I hear statements like "perfect balance," history teaches me to pay tuition fees. Data shows: the last project claiming to solve privacy + compliance now has a liquidation rate of 98%. Objectively speaking, this logic has been cycling since 2017; just change the technical terms and keep hyping. Interesting, will institutions really abandon their existing compliance systems for a single chain? I doubt it. Technical feasibility ≠ market reality; these two are always separated by an invisible chasm. Let's see in half a year how much remaining enthusiasm there is for this "next-generation infrastructure."
View OriginalReply0
ColdWalletGuardianvip
· 21h ago
Sounds appealing, but will the institutions actually willing to wait that long to make a purchase...
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)