2026-01-21 11:22:35

There is a concept in medicine called targeted therapy. Unlike traditional chemotherapy, which is like a "carpet bombing"—killing both good and bad cells—it can precisely lock onto the biological markers of cancer cells, directly attacking the lesion and protecting healthy tissue to the greatest extent.

When applied to our financial system, the question arises.

How does traditional finance do it? To prevent opacity and fraud risks, they layer on multiple safeguards: banks, clearinghouses, custodians—one after another. KYC/AML processes are so lengthy that everyone gets annoyed, settlement cycles often take several days, and audit fees are exorbitant. In simple terms, this is like performing a "indiscriminate chemotherapy" on the financial system—using complex intermediaries and procedures to eliminate trust deficits. The result is a bloated, inefficient system with prohibitively high costs.

Blockchain has tried a different approach. It advocates for complete transparency—put all data on-chain—so that no one dares to cheat. It sounds ideal, but the problem is: total transparency means losing business secrets and exposing personal financial privacy. In medical terms, this is like treating fraud while simultaneously burning the "healthy organization" of privacy.

So the real question is: can we develop a "targeted therapy" for the financial system? One that can accurately identify and eliminate fraud risks while protecting legitimate business and personal privacy?

Dusk Network’s design philosophy, in a sense, is an attempt at such precision medicine. It does not pursue extreme transparency or stronger anonymity but aims to establish a mechanism that can distinguish between "benign privacy" and "malignant fraud"—like molecular probes, precisely locating problematic cells and administering targeted treatment. This is a very interesting direction.

DUSK-0.46%

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.

7 Likes

Reward
7
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SatoshiHeir

· 3h ago

It should be noted that although the metaphor of this "targeted therapy" is ingenious, there is a fundamental paradox in its technical essence—how can one achieve precise differentiation between "benign" and "malignant" in a fully decentralized environment? Essentially, this still requires some form of authority structure for judgment.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeGazer

· 3h ago

The analogy of targeted therapy is indeed brilliant. The traditional financial processes are so cumbersome that they end up harming oneself more than the enemy. Regarding the trade-off between privacy and transparency, Web3 has been taking extremes—either full exposure or complete hiding, with no middle ground. The idea behind Dusk is interesting, but how many projects can truly be implemented? Let's wait and see.

View OriginalReply0

NFTDreamer

· 4h ago

The analogy of targeted therapy is brilliant; both traditional finance and blockchain have indeed gone to extremes. Finding the balance between privacy and security is the key, and Dusk's approach is quite interesting. The "bulky" financial system really needs to be reformed, but not at the expense of privacy. The KYC process has long needed optimization; it's so annoying. How to precisely combat fraud while preserving privacy—sounds simple, but how to do it? Traditional finance layers on restrictions, while blockchain goes all the way to the end; it's hilarious, no one has found that balance point. This approach is much more reliable than simply pursuing anonymity or transparency. Can't privacy and trust be both achieved? Dusk is trying to see.

View OriginalReply0

SchrodingerAirdrop

· 4h ago

The analogy of targeted therapy is brilliant; traditional finance is really like high-dose chemotherapy, damaging normal tissues as well. This is the kind of work Web3 should be doing—precise targeting of fraud without harming privacy. Dusk's approach is indeed interesting; it's much more realistic compared to those all-or-nothing solutions. Finally, someone understands that not all privacy should be shattered. Balancing the middle layer is really difficult, but this direction is correct.

View OriginalReply0

Ser_Liquidated

· 4h ago

The analogy of targeted therapy is excellent; traditional finance indeed kills a thousand enemies while damaging itself by eight hundred. However, Dusk's idea still sounds idealistic. Can privacy and transparency truly be perfectly balanced? In recent years, blockchain has dared to boast about everything, but reality often proves it wrong... right? Traditional finance is bloated to death, but at least it won't write your account balance on the chain for the whole world to see. The key is how to define "benign privacy" and "malicious fraud." Basically, it's a matter of power. This idea is fresh and innovative, but it still feels like you need to experience it yourself to know if it's reliable.

View OriginalReply0

Lonely_Validator

· 4h ago

The idea of targeted treatment really hits the mark, but the bunch of intermediaries in traditional finance are truly killing the good guys. It's a good idea, but can Dusk really distinguish between "benign" and "malicious"? It still feels like a pseudo-proposition. Fully transparent mechanisms indeed destroy privacy, but won't this mechanism's costs revert back to the traditional financial system? Speaking of which, blockchain was originally meant to eliminate middlemen. Now, a new mechanism has to be created to balance things out, which is a bit ironic. If privacy is well protected, could it instead become a new tool for money laundering? Does Dusk consider this?

View OriginalReply0

WalletDoomsDay

· 4h ago

This analogy of targeted therapy is really brilliant; traditional finance's KYC/AML approach is like using a cannon to kill a mosquito. Balancing privacy and security is the key; you can't sacrifice one entirely. The fully transparent approach of blockchain makes me uncomfortable; exposing all business secrets—who dares to use it? Dusk Network's logic sounds good, but how exactly do they identify "benign privacy"? Honestly, it's about wanting both fish and bear's paw—how to break this dilemma? I've always wondered why it has to be a choice—either no privacy at all or all risks. This framework seems decent; it depends on whether the execution can keep up. Can we really design a solution that prevents fraud and protects privacy at the same time? I'm a bit skeptical. Feels like just making big promises; where are the concrete cases?

View OriginalReply0