Alizé BTC

Dusk was founded in 2018, but the real beginning of the project happened earlier, in the form of a question that kept resurfacing among its creators. Why did blockchain feel so promising, yet so disconnected from how real finance works? On one side, there was traditional finance, slow but trusted, governed by rules, audits, and accountability. On the other side, there was crypto, fast and open, but often careless about privacy, regulation, and long-term stability. The gap between these worlds was not small, and most projects tried to jump over it rather than build a bridge. Dusk chose to build the bridge.

At the idea stage, Dusk was never about creating another speculative chain or chasing short-term attention. I’m convinced the team understood early that serious financial systems are not built on excitement alone. They are built on trust, predictability, and legal clarity. Banks, asset issuers, and institutions were curious about blockchain, but curiosity does not equal adoption. They needed privacy to protect clients, transparency to satisfy regulators, and systems that could evolve with changing laws. Dusk started from the assumption that regulation is not going away, and that ignoring it would only keep blockchain locked in a niche.

This assumption shaped everything. Instead of building on top of another blockchain, Dusk became a layer 1. That decision was not about control for its own sake, but about responsibility. Privacy, compliance, and auditability cannot be reliably bolted on later. They must live at the base layer, where rules are enforced consistently. By owning the foundation, Dusk could design a system where confidentiality and verification coexist naturally.

The network uses privacy-preserving cryptography to solve one of finance’s oldest problems in a new way. In traditional systems, regulators gain trust by seeing everything, while users lose privacy. In many blockchains, users gain transparency, but institutions lose confidentiality. Dusk rejects this false choice. Transactions and smart contracts can remain private while still being provably valid. This means the network can confirm that rules are followed without exposing sensitive data. It is not secrecy for secrecy’s sake. It is selective disclosure, where the right information reaches the right parties.

Validators play a key role here. They secure the network and confirm transactions without needing to view private details. This is essential for regulated financial activity. If validators had full visibility into confidential data, institutions would never participate. By separating verification from exposure, Dusk creates a trust model that aligns with real-world finance.

Smart contracts on Dusk are designed with these realities in mind. Developers do not have to fight the system to meet compliance needs. Tokenized real-world assets, regulated financial products, and compliant DeFi applications can exist directly on-chain. This is particularly important for assets like securities, bonds, or funds, where privacy and auditability are legal requirements, not optional features. When people talk about access or liquidity in the broader crypto space, Binance is often mentioned simply because it is widely recognized, but Dusk itself is focused on being the infrastructure beneath such activity, not the spotlight.

One of the most important ideas behind Dusk is modularity. Financial systems do not stand still. Laws change, markets evolve, and new risks emerge. A rigid blockchain would slowly become obsolete or unsafe. Dusk separates core functions so they can be upgraded without breaking the entire system. This allows the network to adapt to future regulatory frameworks, new cryptographic techniques, and emerging financial products. They’re designing for decades, not cycles.

Understanding whether Dusk is succeeding requires looking beyond price movements or online attention. Adoption in regulated finance is slow by nature. Real success shows up in quieter ways. Institutions experimenting without fear of exposure. Developers building applications that would be impossible on fully transparent blockchains. Assets being issued on-chain that comply with existing legal frameworks. Network stability, validator participation, and smooth upgrades matter more here than viral growth.

We’re seeing increased interest in tokenized real-world assets across the industry, but many projects underestimate the complexity involved. Compliance is not a checkbox. It is an ongoing process that requires careful design and constant adaptation. Dusk’s approach, while slower, is better aligned with how finance actually works.

Still, the path is not without risk. Regulation is both the reason Dusk exists and one of its biggest challenges. Laws differ across regions and can change unpredictably. A system built for compliance must remain flexible without losing its guarantees. There is also the challenge of complexity. Privacy-preserving systems are harder to understand, audit, and develop on. If tooling, documentation, and education do not keep pace, adoption could slow.

Market cycles are another factor. When speculation dominates, infrastructure projects often fade into the background. If It becomes all about short-term gains again, projects focused on long-term foundations may struggle for attention and funding, even if their work is essential.

Despite these challenges, the long-term vision for Dusk is clear and compelling. The goal is not to overthrow traditional finance, but to quietly upgrade it. Imagine a future where issuing a regulated financial instrument on-chain feels normal. Where privacy is expected, not debated. Where compliance is provable without sacrificing user confidentiality. In that future, blockchain is not a rebellion against the system, but a better version of it.

Over time, Dusk could become a backbone for compliant digital finance, supporting ecosystems that blend traditional institutions with decentralized technology. It could enable new financial products that are safer, more transparent to regulators, and more respectful of user privacy than anything that exists today. This is not a promise of overnight transformation. It is a commitment to steady, thoughtful progress.

What makes Dusk stand out is not just its technology, but its attitude. It accepts constraints instead of pretending they do not exist. It treats regulation as a design input, not an enemy. It believes that privacy and accountability can reinforce each other rather than compete.

In a space often driven by noise, Dusk feels intentional. It is built by people who seem to understand that real financial systems are judged not by excitement, but by reliability over time. If you care about where real-world value will move in the coming decade, this kind of work matters. It reminds us that innovation does not need to reject responsibility to be meaningful. Sometimes the most powerful change happens quietly, built piece by piece, with patience and care for the world it aims to serve.

@Dusk #dusk $DUSK

@Vanarchain begins with a quiet but powerful question: why does blockchain still feel so far away from normal life? For years, the technology promised to change gaming, entertainment, ownership, and digital identity, yet most people never stayed long enough to experience those benefits. Wallets were confusing, fees were unpredictable, and the systems felt built for insiders rather than everyday users. The people behind Vanar came into this space with a different background. They were already working with games, entertainment companies, and global brands. They were not dreaming about users in theory. They were watching real players drop off, real partners hesitate, and real products struggle to scale. That experience shaped everything that followed.

The idea behind Vanar was never about creating another fast blockchain just to compete on numbers. It was about creating an L1 that actually fits how the real world works. Games need speed and stability. Brands need trust and control. Users need simplicity without feeling like they are taking a course in crypto. I’m sure that without this grounding, Vanar would have looked like many other projects. Instead, it grew from the belief that blockchain should disappear into the background and let experiences shine.

From the very beginning, the design choices were shaped by mainstream adoption rather than crypto-native habits. Vanar was built to handle large volumes of activity without sudden spikes in cost. This matters when thousands or millions of players interact at the same time inside a game or metaverse environment. It also matters for brands that cannot risk a campaign breaking because network fees suddenly explode. The chain is optimized for predictable performance, because unpredictability kills trust faster than slow growth.

At the heart of the ecosystem sits the VANRY token. VANRY is not positioned as a speculative gimmick but as the economic engine of the network. It is used for transactions, network security, and coordination between applications. By having a shared token across the ecosystem, Vanar avoids fragmenting value and attention. Developers do not need to invent complex token systems from scratch, and users are not forced to juggle dozens of assets just to participate. They’re interacting with one economic layer that quietly supports everything else.

What truly separates Vanar from many L1 projects is that it already runs real products. Virtua Metaverse is often cited, but its importance goes deeper than branding. Virtua acts as both a consumer-facing world and a laboratory. Inside it, digital collectibles, social interaction, gaming mechanics, and branded experiences all coexist. Every action inside Virtua places demands on the blockchain. That constant pressure reveals what works and what needs improvement. Instead of guessing future needs, Vanar learns from present use.

The VGN games network extends this philosophy to developers. Many studios are curious about Web3 but are overwhelmed by its complexity and risk. VGN offers infrastructure, publishing support, and blockchain integration as one package. This allows developers to focus on making good games instead of wrestling with wallets, smart contracts, and user onboarding. If a player does not even realize they are interacting with blockchain, Vanar considers that a success rather than a failure.

Vanar also stretches into AI, eco-focused initiatives, and brand solutions, but these are not random expansions. They reflect how digital experiences are evolving. AI-driven content requires fast and reliable data handling. Eco initiatives require transparency and verifiable systems. Brands require controlled environments where identity and ownership are respected. Vanar positions itself as a foundation where all these needs can meet without forcing each sector to compromise its standards.

Day to day, the network operates with an emphasis on stability and developer comfort. Validators secure the chain, transactions flow with low latency, and tools are designed to feel familiar. The goal is not to impress with complexity, but to reduce it. We’re seeing that when developers feel safe and supported, they stay longer and build more deeply. That is a stronger signal of success than short-term spikes in attention.

Measuring whether Vanar is succeeding requires looking beyond headlines. Active users inside applications, retention over time, transaction reliability during high-traffic events, and continued interest from brands all matter more than temporary hype. The presence of VANRY on Binance adds accessibility and visibility, but it is only one piece of the picture. The real test is whether users keep showing up when rewards are not the main motivation.

Of course, Vanar faces real risks. Competition among L1 blockchains is intense, especially in gaming and consumer-focused spaces. If Vanar fails to keep its tooling simple as the ecosystem grows, it could lose the very audience it is trying to serve. Regulatory uncertainty remains another challenge. Brands move carefully, and unclear rules can slow adoption even when the technology is ready.

There is also the challenge of focus. Vanar touches many verticals, and the team must continuously ensure that everything connects back to the core mission. If It becomes fragmented, the story weakens. But if each product reinforces the others, the ecosystem grows stronger as a whole.

Looking forward, Vanar’s long-term vision is subtle but ambitious. It aims to become infrastructure that people rely on without talking about it. A blockchain that supports games, virtual worlds, AI systems, and brand experiences in the same way cloud services support today’s internet. When users feel ownership without fear, when developers build without friction, and when brands experiment without risk, Vanar moves closer to that goal.

What makes this project stand out is the sense of care behind it. This is not technology built for attention, but technology built for use. The team’s experience in entertainment and gaming shows in the way decisions are made. They’re not chasing trends. They are responding to patterns they have already lived through.

In the end, Vanar is not promising to change the world overnight. It is offering something quieter and more durable. A blockchain designed to fit into everyday digital life, to support creativity, and to invite the next billions of users without asking them to change who they are. If that vision continues to guide its growth, Vanar may become one of the rare networks that truly bridges Web2 familiarity and Web3 possibility.

@Vanarchain #vanar $VANRY

@Plasma did not start as a quest to build the fastest or flashiest blockchain. It started as a recognition of something slightly uncomfortable but deeply important: stablecoins had already won real-world relevance, yet the infrastructure beneath them still felt improvised. I’m talking about the gap between how people actually use stablecoins and how blockchains were originally designed. Across emerging markets, freelancers, merchants, and families already rely on stablecoins like USDT as day-to-day money. At the same time, banks, payment processors, and financial institutions are cautiously testing them for settlement and treasury operations. We’re seeing a new monetary layer emerge, but it is riding on rails that were never optimized for this purpose. Plasma was born from the belief that stablecoin settlement deserves its own foundation, one designed with intention rather than compromise.

In the earliest idea stage, the Plasma team focused less on technology and more on behavior. How do people use stablecoins when inflation is high and local currencies are unstable? How do institutions think about settlement risk, finality, and neutrality? Research across blockchain data, payment studies, and global remittance flows pointed to the same conclusion: people care about certainty. They want money to arrive quickly, cost predictably little, and not be subject to sudden policy shifts or congestion spikes. Many existing Layer 1 blockchains are powerful, but they treat stablecoins as just another application. Plasma flipped that assumption. It asked what would happen if stablecoins were treated as the primary reason the chain exists.

That decision shaped everything that followed. Plasma chose to be a Layer 1 blockchain because settlement is foundational. Outsourcing finality to another chain adds dependency and uncertainty, which is unacceptable when the goal is to move large volumes of stable value. At the same time, Plasma embraced full EVM compatibility through Reth. This was not a convenience feature; it was a strategic necessity. Developers, payment providers, and financial institutions already understand the Ethereum ecosystem. They’re far more likely to adopt a new chain if their existing tools, smart contracts, and mental models still apply. By combining a familiar execution environment with a purpose-built consensus layer, Plasma positioned itself as both accessible and specialized.

The consensus mechanism, PlasmaBFT, reflects this philosophy. Rather than chasing extreme theoretical throughput, it focuses on fast, deterministic finality. Sub-second finality changes how systems behave. For retail users, it feels closer to handing someone cash than waiting for a block confirmation. For institutions, it reduces settlement risk and simplifies reconciliation. Once a transaction is finalized on Plasma, it is effectively done, not waiting on probabilistic assurances. This matters enormously in payments and finance, where ambiguity creates operational friction and regulatory concern.

One of the most distinctive aspects of Plasma is its stablecoin-centric design. Gasless USDT transfers are not a gimmick; they are a response to real user pain. In many regions, users struggle to understand why they need to hold a volatile token just to send stable money. By abstracting gas or allowing fees to be paid directly in stablecoins, Plasma aligns the user experience with the user’s intent. Stablecoin-first gas further reinforces this alignment. The system is optimized so that stablecoins are not second-class citizens on the network, but the primary unit of economic activity.

Security and neutrality were equally important considerations. Plasma introduces Bitcoin-anchored security as a way to strengthen censorship resistance and long-term trust. Bitcoin remains the most decentralized and politically neutral blockchain, and anchoring Plasma’s state commitments to it provides an external reference that is extremely difficult to alter. This does not mean Plasma inherits Bitcoin’s limitations, but it does inherit some of its credibility. If external pressure or disputes arise, there is a verifiable anchor beyond Plasma’s own validator set. This design choice reflects a long-term mindset. Trust is not only about cryptography; it is about perception, history, and resilience under stress.

As Plasma moved from concept to implementation, the team continuously validated assumptions against data and real-world use cases. Stablecoin volumes, remittance corridors, and on-chain settlement patterns all informed design refinements. The target users were always dual: retail users in high-adoption markets and institutions in payments and finance. These groups have different needs, but they overlap on core requirements like speed, reliability, and cost transparency. Plasma’s architecture aims to serve both without forcing either to compromise excessively.

Measuring whether Plasma is succeeding goes beyond headline metrics. Transactions per second are less meaningful than median finality time during peak usage. Low fees matter, but consistency matters more. Another key signal is behavioral. Are users sending stablecoins multiple times a day without thinking about the underlying chain? Are institutions routing repeat settlement flows through Plasma rather than running isolated pilots? Liquidity, integrations, and ecosystem growth also matter, and if assets or bridges connected to Plasma appear on Binance, it signals a level of operational maturity. Still, the strongest indicator of success is when infrastructure fades into the background and simply works.

Of course, Plasma is not without risks. Regulatory landscapes around stablecoins are evolving, and infrastructure built for stablecoin settlement must remain adaptable. There is also competitive pressure from other fast, low-cost chains that claim similar performance characteristics. Plasma’s response to this is focus. By being unapologetically stablecoin-first, it avoids dilution but accepts that it will not capture every narrative. Bitcoin anchoring introduces dependency on an external system, which adds complexity even as it strengthens neutrality. There is also the challenge of trust-building. They’re asking users and institutions to rely on a new Layer 1 for something as sensitive as money. That trust must be earned over time through reliability and transparency.

Looking ahead, Plasma’s future vision is both ambitious and understated. The goal is not to dominate headlines, but to quietly become a global settlement layer for stable value. Over time, more stablecoins, payment tools, compliance-friendly primitives, and financial services can be built on top of it. If It becomes the default place where stablecoins move at scale, Plasma may be everywhere and nowhere at once, deeply embedded in systems people rely on but rarely name.

What makes Plasma compelling is not just its technical design, but its clarity of purpose. I’m drawn to projects that know what they are not trying to be. Plasma is not chasing every trend. It is responding to a real shift in how money moves around the world. We’re seeing stablecoins evolve from speculative instruments into everyday financial tools. Plasma treats that shift as permanent and designs accordingly.

In the end, Plasma is a bet on maturity. A bet that the next phase of blockchain adoption will value reliability over novelty, and settlement over speculation. If that bet pays off, Plasma could become one of those pieces of infrastructure that future systems assume exists. That is a quiet kind of success, but also the most meaningful kind.
@Plasma #Plasma $XPL

Every meaningful technology story usually begins with a moment of discomfort, the kind that doesn’t go away easily. Walrus starts there. For years, blockchain promised decentralization, freedom, and user control, yet something fundamental stayed broken. Value could move without permission, but data could not. Files, application logic, personal content, and private information were still sitting on centralized servers owned by a handful of companies. I’m talking about a world where decentralized finance depends on infrastructure that can censor, throttle access, change terms, or simply disappear. Walrus emerged from that contradiction, not as a loud rebellion, but as a careful rebuild of what decentralization was always supposed to mean.

The people behind Walrus weren’t chasing novelty. They were responding to a structural weakness that most users had learned to tolerate. They’re not trying to replace cloud storage just for the sake of ideology. They’re trying to align the data layer with the same principles that made blockchains compelling in the first place. From the very beginning, the project treated privacy, resilience, and ownership not as features, but as non-negotiable foundations. If decentralized applications are meant to last, then the data they rely on cannot sit on systems that require trust in centralized actors.

This mindset shaped every design decision that followed. When the team looked for a blockchain to build on, they weren’t interested in hype cycles. They needed a base layer that treated data as a first-class citizen. Sui stood out because of how it handles objects and state. Unlike traditional blockchains that focus almost entirely on token balances, Sui was designed to manage complex data structures efficiently. For a project like Walrus, which deals with large files and persistent application data, that difference mattered deeply.

Sui’s parallel execution model allowed Walrus to scale storage operations without turning them into a bottleneck for the entire network. Fees could stay predictable. Performance could remain stable even as usage increased. Developers wouldn’t need to build awkward workarounds just to store or retrieve data. By choosing Sui, Walrus avoided fighting against its foundation. Instead, it could disappear into the background, which is often the highest compliment infrastructure can receive.

At a technical level, Walrus works by refusing to place full trust in any single participant. When data enters the system, it doesn’t get stored whole in one location. Instead, it is processed through erasure coding, a method that breaks data into fragments and adds redundancy in a mathematically efficient way. These fragments are then distributed across a decentralized network of storage nodes. No single node has enough information to reconstruct the entire file on its own.

This approach accomplishes several things at once. Privacy improves because no participant can see the complete data. Availability improves because the system can recover files even if some nodes go offline or behave unpredictably. Costs stay manageable because redundancy is handled intelligently rather than through brute-force duplication. If you step back, you can see the philosophy at work. Walrus isn’t trying to remove trust by pretending it doesn’t exist. It’s distributing trust so no single failure can take everything down.

Another critical element is blob storage. Instead of forcing data into small, transaction-sized pieces that don’t reflect real-world use, Walrus treats data as large, meaningful objects. This makes the system usable for decentralized applications, enterprise backups, personal archives, and long-term content storage. It starts to feel less like a crypto experiment and more like a decentralized alternative to traditional cloud services. That shift is intentional. If a system can’t be used comfortably, it won’t be used at all.

The WAL token plays a central role in keeping this system honest. It is not there simply to exist or to fuel speculation. Storage providers stake WAL to participate in the network, which means they have real skin in the game. Misbehavior, unreliability, or malicious actions come with consequences. Users pay WAL to store and retrieve data, creating a direct economic relationship between supply and demand. Governance decisions also flow through WAL, allowing the community to influence upgrades, parameters, and long-term direction.

I’m often wary of tokens that promise everything and deliver little. WAL feels different because its value is tied to actual usage. If more people rely on Walrus, demand grows naturally. If the network fails to deliver, the economics reflect that reality. They’re not selling dreams detached from fundamentals. They’re aligning incentives so behavior shapes outcomes. While many people first encounter WAL through Binance, the token’s real purpose only becomes clear when it’s used inside the system rather than traded outside it.

Measuring whether Walrus is succeeding requires looking beyond price charts. The most important signals are structural. Growth in stored data indicates trust. Consistent retrieval speeds and uptime demonstrate whether decentralization is delivering reliability rather than just ideology. A diverse and geographically distributed node network shows resilience. These metrics don’t generate headlines, but they matter far more in the long run.

Developer behavior is another quiet indicator. When builders choose Walrus without heavy incentives or marketing pressure, it suggests the system solves real problems. We’re seeing early experimentation from teams that need private, persistent data storage without relying on centralized servers. These are not flashy announcements, but they are meaningful. They show that the protocol is starting to earn its place rather than rent attention.

Of course, no honest story ignores the risks. Decentralized storage is complex. Incentives must remain balanced or storage providers may leave. If the user experience feels too technical, adoption could stall. Privacy-preserving systems often attract regulatory scrutiny, even when they are built responsibly. Competition is also real.Other decentralized storage networks are improving, and traditional cloud providers are constantly evolving. Walrus has to prove that decentralization is not only principled, but practical.

There is also the challenge of pace. If growth happens too quickly, before the system is fully tested under stress, trust could be damaged by failures. If development slows too much, attention may drift elsewhere.The balance between speed and stability is delicate. It requires patience, discipline, and a willingness to prioritize long-term credibility over short-term hype.

Looking ahead, the future Walrus seems to be aiming for is almost invisible. The best outcome is one where users don’t think about Walrus at all. Their data is simply there when they need it. It’s private. It’s available. It’s under their control. Enterprises could use Walrus quietly as backend infrastructure. Individuals could rely on it for personal storage. Developers could build applications without worrying about censorship, shutdowns, or single points of failure. If It becomes that reliable, it stops being a product and starts being a utility.

We’re seeing early hints of this direction already. The focus remains on fundamentals rather than spectacle. The system is being shaped carefully, with an understanding that infrastructure earns trust slowly and loses it quickly. They’re building something meant to last, not something meant to trend.

In the end, Walrus matters because it addresses problems most people only notice when it’s too late. Loss of data control, erosion of privacy, and dependency on centralized systems often feel abstract until they become personal. Walrus is an attempt to confront those issues before they turn into crises. It doesn’t promise perfection. It promises effort, alignment, and resilience.

What makes the project compelling is its tone. It feels grounded. It feels aware of its limitations. It feels like a group of people who understand that decentralization is not a destination, but a process. If they continue building with care, listening to users, and respecting the complexity of the problem, Walrus could become one of those systems people rely on every day without ever thinking about it.

@Walrus 🦭/acc #walrus $WAL

When I first learned about Dusk what struck me most wasnt just the technology they were building but the thoughtfulness behind it. Theyre not chasing hype or trying to copy what others have done. Theyre quietly designing a system that could fundamentally change how finance works a world where privacy and regulation dont fight each other but coexist naturally. They started in with a simple but powerful idea: traditional finance and blockchain speak different languages, and if we want blockchain to serve regulated markets, we need to build a bridge between them. That idea has guided every decision since.

From the beginning, privacy wasnt just a feature it was a foundation. On many blockchains every transaction is public fine Thats for open cryptocurrencies but in regulated markets exposing everything is unacceptable. Dusk embraced zero knowledge proofs cryptographic tools that allow one to prove something is true without revealing sensitive data. If it becomes widely adopted this could allow banks investors and regulators to verify transactions and compliance without exposing competitive information. Its the kind of elegant solution that makes you stop and think Why hasnt anyone done this before

Dusk is a Layer blockchain built specifically for regulated and privacy focused financial infrastructure. Unlike generic blockchains, it’s designed for real world financial assets like bonds securities and debt instruments. Every decision from transaction design to identity verification revolves around the question of how to give institutions privacy and compliance at the same time. At the heart of the system is Dusk DS which handles settlement and consensus. Once a transaction is confirmed its final eliminating uncertainty and giving institutions the certainty they need. On top of this DuskEVM offers Ethereum compatibility letting developers use familiar tools while integrating privacy features. DuskVM supports applications requiring higher confidentiality allowing for specialized secure smart contracts. This modular design lets each layer do what it does best while keeping the system flexible and robust.

What makes Dusk unique is how they approach compliance. Privacy and regulation arent at odds theyre integrated. Identity and permissioning are built into the protoco enabling KYC and AML verification to happen onchain while keeping sensitive details confidential. Its a balance rarely seen in blockchain giving regulators the visibility they need without compromising the privacy of market participants. The DayBreak public testnet was a milestone letting developers and institutions interact with the network deploy confidential smart contracts, and test tokenized assets in a live environment. Adoption isnt just about technology working its about trust engagement and tangible participation all of which the testnet measures.

Of course challenges remain. Traditional institutions move slowly, and adopting new infrastructure takes time. Zero knowledge proofs are computationally demanding, and regulatory landscapes keep shifting which means Dusk must evolve alongside the law. But despite these hurdles, the vision is clear and compelling. Imagine a world where you can hold a bond in your own wallet as easily as sending cryptocurrency where startups can raise capital without exposing trade secrets and where regulated finance finally meets decentralized innovation.

What makes Dusk remarkable is that it isnt just code or cryptography it’s a humancentered vision for the future of finance. Theyre tackling one of the hardest problems in blockchain: making privacy compliance, and usability work together naturally. If they succeed Dusk could redefine ownership, trust and financial opportunity in the digital age. It’s a future where institutions and individuals share the same infrastructure where finance becomes faster fairer and more secure, and where the bridge between blockchain and regulated markets finally stands solid.
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK