Web3 claims full transparency; everything on the chain is under the sunlight. But this transparency is becoming a nightmare for large capital.



Imagine if Blackstone's trillion-dollar assets managed on-chain, would they agree to let competitors scan every fund flow in real-time? The answer is obvious—it's simply impossible. This explains why the concept of RWA (Real-World Assets) is booming, yet genuine institutional funds remain elusive. Speed in TPS is not the issue; the problem is that the financial world needs a "bulletproof vest."

Traditional privacy coins have taken a wrong turn; they were born to evade regulation. But Dusk Network chose a different path—compliant privacy. It sounds like a paradox, but it cleverly solves this dilemma through zero-knowledge proof technology:

You can prove that you are a qualified investor, that your funds are legitimate, and that you meet compliance checks. At the same time, you don't need to disclose sensitive information like your real identity or specific transfer amounts. The Succinct Attestation protocol is designed for this purpose; it creates an on-chain channel for traditional financial institutions that preserves privacy while complying with regulatory frameworks. This is exactly what institutional funds truly need.
DUSK1,62%
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.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
YieldWhisperervip
· 01-16 17:27
nah wait, "compliant privacy" is just regulatory theater with extra steps... let me check the actual zk proof implementation here
Reply0
GhostInTheChainvip
· 01-16 08:05
Oh dear, the concept of RWA has always been a castle in the air... Institutions still need privacy to truly go on-chain. Blackstone and their kind have a clear plan, transparency is a joke, competitors can see your wallet, who dares to put money in? Compliance and privacy sound fresh, but can zero-knowledge proofs really fool regulators? That's a bit uncertain. Institutional funds are always waiting for that "bulletproof vest," and even if they have it now, they might not dare to wear it. Honestly, it's still a trust issue; no matter how transparent the chain is, it doesn't help much. Dusk's approach is indeed different, but can it succeed... This is what Web3 is missing: privacy without violations, truly appealing to institutions.
View OriginalReply0
RiddleMastervip
· 01-14 21:51
Transparency is a facade; the big players just want an invisibility cloak. Blackstone and their crew have long seen through it. RWA is extremely popular, but real gold and silver are still on the sidelines. Ultimately, they just don't want to be exposed. The compliance and privacy approach is interesting. Zero-knowledge proofs are indeed a killer feature. Finally, someone has thought of this.
View OriginalReply0
CryptoTarotReadervip
· 01-14 21:49
Well, basically it's about wanting to have both fish and bear's paw. --- I trust Dusk's logic, but the problem is, will institutions really use it? --- Compliance and privacy sound sophisticated, but they're actually just a false proposition. --- No matter how advanced zero-knowledge proofs are, they can't change one reality: big funds simply don't trust the chain. --- All these talks ultimately boil down to the fact that on-chain finance hasn't done what it should. --- If Blackstone and that group really go on-chain, it would be even more absurd; no matter how many layers of armor, trust issues can't be solved. --- Wait, doesn't that mean privacy coins are actually a false demand? --- I actually think this exposes the biggest problem in Web3 — institutions' funds can't be stopped at all.
View OriginalReply0
CryptoDouble-O-Sevenvip
· 01-14 21:45
It should have been played this way all along: privacy + compliance are the way to go, traditional finance is just following this approach.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin