#dusk $DUSK

@Dusk is built around that exact fault line. Instead of treating privacy and regulation as enemies, it treats them as parallel requirements.

The idea is simple but rare in execution: transactions and positions can remain confidential, while still generating cryptographic proof that rules were followed when oversight is required. Privacy by default. Disclosure only when justified.

This matters because most public blockchains force an impossible choice. Full transparency turns every rebalance into public intelligence. Fully private systems raise alarms for exchanges, custodians, and compliance teams that still need proof of eligibility and lawful transfer. When either side is missing, adoption starts and then stalls.

Dusk’s selective disclosure model is aimed at solving that retention problem. Confidential smart contracts, shielded-style transfers, and zero-knowledge compliance frameworks are not about ideology; they’re about keeping serious users active after audits, reviews, and counterparty checks begin.

This isn’t a price thesis. It’s a market-structure one. If regulated finance needs proof, and markets need discretion, then networks that respect both may outlast narratives.

The question is not whether privacy sounds good but whether compliance and confidentiality, side by side becomes a durable edge.