@Dusk However, if the promise of DUSK is realized, the initial losers don't wear a retail face, but instead a face of compliance intermediaries. So, here, a semblance of pain is threatened by intermediaries such as legacy KYC providers, traditional audit houses, together with reg-tech consultants, whose very existence is a direct consequence of the cost of ambiguity. Yet, the promise of DUSK is brutal in nature, with a promise of selective disclosure, provable compliance, together with a reduction of ‘humans in the loop.’

Case study: Before PSD2 in Europe, banks employed an army of compliance companies to manually settle reports. Once APIs and reporting came in via PSD2, much of this was immediately redundant. No riots. No dissent. Integration done. DUSK aspires to the same quiet kill zone. just in a different way.

The question remains: Why aren’t these players fighting back harder? The reason lies in the nature and timeframe of the threat they pose — it’s technical, and it’s long-term. DUSK doesn’t violate laws; it cuts out friction from them. It’s tricky to effectively lobby against that without admitting one’s inefficiencies in the process. Consider Monero’s case — they received direct bans for removing all visibility from #dusk $DUSK