Recently, I’ve noticed more and more people paying attention to the DUSK chain, and I’ve also taken some time to study it in depth. Frankly, I have mixed feelings about this project, but since today I might as well share both sides of the argument.

First, let’s talk about the positives. DUSK targets a very solid demand — using compliance and privacy as breakthroughs to build the infrastructure for on-chain finance. This doesn’t sound like those flashy concepts, but think about it: for traditional financial assets to truly go on-chain at scale, privacy protection and regulatory compliance are like gas stations and toll booths on a highway — both are indispensable. Even more promising is that RWA (Real-World Asset Tokenization) has become a hot focus for major institutions. If this wave really takes off, DUSK, as an infrastructure, might be the first to be needed.

But there are also obvious concerns. The first is timing — the entire RWA market is still in its very early stages, a bit like waiting for a heavy rain that might not come for a while. How long will it take for DUSK, which relies on “selling umbrellas,” to see real returns? The second challenge is competition. Other leading blockchains are also launching their own privacy and compliance solutions. As an independent chain, DUSK faces significant difficulty in attracting enough developers and genuine financial assets to flow in.

My view is that DUSK is more of a “long-term” project. If you want quick profits in the short term, this chain might not be suitable. Its story needs a lot of time to be validated, and the real test is still ahead. But if you believe that large-scale on-chain traditional financial assets are an inevitable trend, and you trust that privacy and compliance solutions will become core competitive advantages in this process, then DUSK might be worth long-term attention.