2026-01-18 11:26:33

Traditional public blockchains are like attending a financial banquet in a transparent suit—you can see your asset size, transaction history, and even account balances clearly, with no privacy at all.

DUSK operates on a different logic. It appears proper and compliant, fully meeting regulatory requirements, but your true asset information is securely hidden deep within. Others only see a proper surface and cannot see through your real financial background.

What does this mean for institutional investors? It means they can protect their fund sizes from competitors and keep their trading strategies private within a fully compliant framework. Privacy and compliance have never been mutually exclusive—in DUSK, they complement each other.

This is what institutional-grade Web3 infrastructure should look like.

DUSK40.83%

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.

20 Likes

Reward
20
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

AirdropCollector

· 29m ago

The analogy of transparent suits is brilliant, it really hits the nail on the head. Ha, finally someone understands the true meaning of privacy. It's not just about avoiding regulation; it's about how infrastructure should be. This is definitely worth paying attention to, but can DUSK really meet institutional-level demands? Compliance + privacy at the same time? Sounds a bit doubtful... I feel this is the right path for Web3 to take, but unfortunately most people are still stuck in the old mindset of transparent suits. Institutional investors are eyeing this direction, so competition will be fierce later on. That's a valid point, but how is DUSK currently adopted? It still feels niche.

View OriginalReply0

0xDreamChaser

· 3h ago

That analogy of the transparent suit is brilliant. Now I understand why institutions are all playing the privacy card.

View OriginalReply0

DataBartender

· 3h ago

The transparent suit analogy is brilliant; it feels like the current on-chain environment is just nudging in the nude. Balancing privacy and compliance is indeed rare; that's what institutions are after. This logic is more imaginative than just pure anonymous coins. Under a compliant framework, you can still hide your cards. No wonder institutions are starting to look at DUSK. It feels like Web3's true infrastructure should look like this. Hey, if privacy is well handled like this, could it actually make it easier for regulators to target? The transparent suit is hilarious; it's so fitting... Public chains are just like that. Privacy plus compliance sounds great, but can it be technically achieved? Forget it, let's just look at DUSK's data; I don't want to get cut again. It's the urgent need of institutions; this is indeed a pain point.

View OriginalReply0

alpha_leaker

· 3h ago

The analogy of a transparent suit is brilliant, but to be honest, I still have to question DUSK. Will the institutions really buy into it? It still depends on whether the ecosystem can keep up.

View OriginalReply0

PumpStrategist

· 3h ago

The analogy of transparent suits is quite fitting, but I need to clarify the logic behind praising DUSK—I agree that no matter how good privacy is implemented, on-chain data is ultimately traceable. Don't tell me you can't see that at all. What institutions truly care about are compliance costs, not privacy itself. Risk release still needs to be released.

View OriginalReply0

MerkleMaid

· 3h ago

The analogy of a transparent suit is brilliant; you can see through your background at a glance, haha. Privacy compliance can be achieved alongside this—it's something I never thought possible before. That group of institutions must have been waiting for this; no more worries about being copied.

View OriginalReply0

rugged_again

· 3h ago

The transparent suit meme is hilarious, haha, but honestly, DUSK's privacy solution feels a bit overhyped.

View OriginalReply0