2026-01-17 17:27:11

It took a lot of time to study Dusk's technical white paper, real-world case studies, and overall architecture design, while also reviewing the development fluctuations of dozens of RWA projects over the years. The more I looked, the more I realized that a core issue was surfacing.

What is missing in the RWA track isn't actually that complicated. It's not that high-quality assets are in short supply, nor that tokenization technology isn't mature enough. The real gap is—how can institutions, enterprises, and even ordinary users participate confidently and efficiently?

This sounds simple, but implementing it is another matter. It can't just be "placing assets on the chain and calling it a day," nor relying solely on "paper-based compliance packaging" to fool others. It can't be about creating a fragmented environment between privacy and transparency, nor setting high barriers that turn it into a "niche elite game."

What is truly needed is to achieve compliant circulation, privacy protection, secure custody, and second-level settlement simultaneously on the blockchain, while also bridging the trust gap between traditional finance and Web3. To put it plainly, the bottleneck of RWA isn't on the asset side but whether a "trustworthy value circulation system" can be established.

Currently, there are very few blockchain networks that systematically address this issue, and Dusk is one of them. I want to discuss how Dusk has evolved RWA from scattered attempts to scaled implementation, from high-risk experiments to institutional-level choices.

Let's start with an old problem—the trap that traditional RWA projects have been stuck in: the opposition between compliance and privacy.

Most RWA projects can't escape this dilemma: wanting to be compliant means revealing asset information and transaction records, making privacy protection virtually impossible; wanting to protect privacy makes it difficult to meet regulatory audit requirements, and compliance is compromised. The result is either "naked compliance"—all asset details exposed in the sunlight, business secrets can't be protected, and institutions shy away after a quick look; or "underground violations"—over-packaging anonymous features, operating in the gray area.

DUSK-5,54%

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.

11 Likes

Reward
11
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

blocksnark

· 01-20 15:06

Compliance and privacy, these two sworn enemies, finally someone dares to speak frankly. --- Honestly, Dusk's approach really hits the mark; the trusted system is truly the ceiling for RWA. --- Isn't it just about wanting to have both fish and bear's paw? The problem is most projects simply lack the technical capability. --- Instant settlement + privacy protection + compliance? If this can truly be achieved smoothly, traditional finance would be severely impacted. --- Wait, he said the Dusk systemically solves this problem. Have all those RWA projects been just messing around all these years? --- Bridging the trust gap sounds good, but do institutions really believe it? It all depends on actual traffic data.

View OriginalReply0

ForkThisDAO

· 01-20 15:01

Compliance and privacy are really a deadlock; most projects are struggling between these two. Dusk's approach is indeed interesting, but whether it can be practically implemented depends on subsequent real-world application. How many of these will survive until the next cycle? Institutional-level choices sound good, but it all depends on whether institutions are willing to buy in. Balancing compliance transparency and privacy is easy to say but extremely difficult to implement in practice. RWA has been talked about for so many years, but it still feels like we're stuck in the same place. Can Dusk break the deadlock?

View OriginalReply0

FlyingLeek

· 01-19 05:03

Oh dear, it's that old familiar story of "wanting it all," and it sounds so impressive... But Dusk is indeed interesting. Compliance + privacy synchronization? If they can really pull it off, RWA might truly come to life. As for those other projects, let's not bother—they're all just pie in the sky. Wait, there's a detail I want to ask about—do institutions really care about second-level settlement? Or are they just making up stories...

View OriginalReply0

ZenChainWalker

· 01-18 05:39

Alright, another Dusk promotional copy... but this time the issues really hit the nail on the head. I agree about the trust gap—traditional finance and Web3 are like people from two different planets, no matter how you put it, it's awkward. But "few and far between" is an exaggeration; I really want to see projects that can truly solve this. Speaking of compliance and privacy, this contradiction seems impossible for the entire chain to truly reconcile; it's all about various compromises. I'll wait and see, talk after it gets implemented, and not just another PPT pie-in-the-sky.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidationOracle

· 01-17 17:57

Wait, is RWA really just about a trust gap? I think it also depends on who maintains this "trustworthy system," otherwise even the most beautiful architecture is just empty talk.

View OriginalReply0

GasWaster

· 01-17 17:57

Compliance and privacy being at odds is really a common topic; it feels like every RWA project has to go through the same pitfalls to be satisfied. If Dusk can truly handle both at the same time, that would indeed be different, but honestly, it still depends on the real-world data to speak.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeePhobia

· 01-17 17:56

To be honest, I think the author overcomplicated this. The biggest problem with RWA right now is that no one truly believes in it, haha. Dusk's approach sounds pretty good, but I still want to see real data with actual money involved. Compliance and privacy, these two arch-enemies, at the end of the day, are just the same old story... Oh my, another project claiming "we've solved the trust problem." I've heard that hundreds of times. Thinking carefully, instead of stressing over a trustworthy system, it's better to first fix the gas fees to be reasonable; only then will users really participate. This logic sounds fine at first glance, but can it really work when implemented? I bet it will still fail. Ah, I always feel that in the end, RWA is just about who has a stronger background; the technical architecture is all just talk. Compliance and privacy? Bro, you're being too optimistic. Institutions mainly want to figure out how to cut the leeks first.

View OriginalReply0

RugPullSurvivor

· 01-17 17:55

It's RWA, privacy, and compliance all at once—sounds like a perfect concept. But I still want to see what Dusk can really deliver.

View OriginalReply0

FreeRider

· 01-17 17:44

Compliance and privacy are really a huge contradiction. Currently, most projects are caught in a dilemma, like the living dead. This trusted system sounds good in theory, but there are very few that can truly achieve it. I would only believe Dusk if they really manage to get this done. Institution-level choices are a bit of an overstatement; it depends on how long they've actually been running.

View OriginalReply0