2026-01-21 06:24:48

Recently, I have spent a lot of time researching the DUSK project. To be honest, I am not attracted by its short-term price surge, but rather by its increasingly clear approach on compliance, privacy, and financial on-chain integration. Many projects on the market shout slogans like RWA, institutional entry, and financial on-chain, but when you really analyze them, you hit a wall: real-world financial assets have never been free. Securities, funds, claims, equity—these are tightly controlled by regulations, audits, and responsibility systems from the moment they are born. On-chain is just an action; the key question is whether the underlying rules allow it.

What makes DUSK different is that it does not bypass these challenges. It does not pretend that regulation disappears, nor does it rely on a "complete anonymity" trick to eat everything. Instead, it straightforwardly admits a reality: to keep financial assets running stably on the chain for the long term, there must be an exit strategy between privacy protection and audit compliance. This perspective is not very popular with current market sentiment, but the fact remains.

Therefore, I began to understand the seemingly slow pace of DUSK. That slowness is not hesitation or powerlessness, but rather a focus on the system itself rather than short-term retail expectations. System reconstruction takes time, but once formed, it results in structural change. DUSK’s fundamental goal is not to overthrow the existing financial system but to enable blockchain to be safely integrated into the current system.

DUSK0,12%

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.

13 Likes

Reward
13
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GasWaster

· 7h ago

Oh no, finally someone dares to speak out about this heartbreaking issue. Most projects are still dreaming away --- Slow is fast, this saying is spot on. You have to play with the system, not against it --- Compliance has always been a hurdle; DUSK choosing not to deceive itself shows some substance --- But honestly, this kind of approach doesn't make quick money, and the market can't handle this set of ideas in the short term --- How to satisfy both privacy and audits at the same time? What seems contradictory is actually the most valuable --- Most projects have been touting RWA for so long, but what’s the result? Still just shouting slogans. DUSK’s approach is truly thinking --- System restructuring sounds big, but the key is actually getting institutions to adopt it. Otherwise, even the most beautiful design is useless --- I'm a bit convinced, but let’s see if they can really walk this path before saying more --- This is the work of builders, not the quick-reacting type that speculators want --- A slow pace sounds nice, but the real test is whether they can withstand the market’s indifference period

View OriginalReply0

GasWaster

· 7h ago

This guy is right, but the problem is, retail investors can't wait that long. --- Honestly, I support this idea, but surviving until that day is the real challenge. --- It's another "system reshaping" story, I've heard it too many times. --- DUSK is so slow that I wonder if they're really working or just waiting for the right moment. --- The compliance route is correct, but I'm worried about ending up caught between two sides and not pleasing anyone. --- Why not just say it directly, they're negotiating with regulatory authorities. --- Choosing between privacy audit options—can this balance really be achieved? --- Compared to the vision, I want to see what actual progress they currently have. --- The more straightforward they are, the less people will hype it, so it's destined to be institutional players' game. --- This is the moment Web3 faces reality; don't blame the project team for being slow.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainDecoder

· 8h ago

According to research, this analysis touches on the fundamental contradiction of the RWA narrative—that is, the inherent tension between regulatory frameworks and on-chain freedom, which warrants in-depth analysis. From a technical perspective, DUSK's trade-off solution between privacy protection and auditability indeed reflects a clear awareness of practical constraints, forming a stark contrast to the utopian promises of most projects. However, it should be noted that whether this "compromising innovation" can garner sufficient market feedback in real institutional applications remains an unverified hypothesis. Interestingly, the project's "slow" pace somewhat confirms the nonlinear nature of institutional change—not a technical issue, but purely constrained by the maturity of regulation. But this also introduces a paradox of risk: will over-adaptation to existing regulatory frameworks turn into a tool of domestication? Overall, DUSK's logic is internally consistent, but the key variable for realizing its value does not lie in technological iteration, but is entirely in the hands of institutional decision-makers. This precisely explains why short-term market reactions may be insufficient to assess its true potential.

View OriginalReply0

MeaninglessApe

· 8h ago

Listen, this guy has said everything I wanted to say. Really, RWA slogans are the easiest to shout, but the real difficulty in connecting to the actual financial system is not technical; it's the policy hurdle. DUSK's approach of directly facing regulation may not seem very sexy in the short term, but think about it—this is the direction long-term players should be looking at. --- Damn, another cognitive trap of "slow equals incompetence." When the day comes that this set of rules is truly implemented, looking back at the current wave of restless projects will seem like a joke. --- Wait, no, this logic is a bit reversed. If we are to accept the existing system, isn't the core selling point of privacy being undermined? Or can these two really be compatible? --- Forget it, I admit I can't understand this project. But just based on the author's way of thinking, it's much smarter than those who only boast about the "decentralization revolution." --- That's quite right, but the market doesn't buy into this. Slow means death—that's the iron law of trading markets. DUSK, unless it can prove that this "slowness" can eventually turn into wealth effects, funds would have already flowed elsewhere.

View OriginalReply0