Crypto_Sheena

New to crypto? This step-by-step tutorial shows you how to create a Binance account in 2026 safely and quickly. From registration to verification, learn everything you need to start trading and exploring the crypto world.

#binancesquare #write2earn #creatorpad #BinanceTutorial #CryptoGuide

I’ve been quietly following $DUSK Network for the past few days, reading about what they’re building and trying to really understand their vision. The more I learn, the more it actually makes sense to me.
What stands out to me about @Dusk _foundation is that they don’t seem to be chasing hype or quick gains. Instead, they’re focused on something that’s genuinely hard in crypto — finding the right balance between privacy and regulation. And honestly, that’s not easy at all.
Most blockchains are fully transparent, others focus only on compliance. But real-world finance doesn’t work like that. Banks, institutions, and enterprises need both — they cant ignore regulations, and they also can’t sacrifice privacy. That’s why seeing Dusk work on privacy-preserving smart contracts feels forward-thinking. It looks like something that could actually fit into regulated financial systems.
Another thing I like is how the $DUSK token isn’t treated as just another trading coin. It has a real role in the network — helping with security, participation, and how the ecosystem functions. For me, that signals long-term value, not just short-term excitement.
I also think campaigns like the ones on Binance help people look beyond price charts. In a market full of noise ,and confusion taking time to understand fundamentals really matters.
Personally, I’m curious — and honestly a bit excited — to see how this ecosystem grows over time.
Let’s see where this journey goes.
#Dusk  @Dusk_Foundation

What is proof-of-reserves?
At its core, proof-of-reserves is a public demonstration that a custodian holds the assets it claims to hold on behalf of users, typically using cryptographic methods and onchain transparency.
If every crypto exchange can publish a proof-of-reserves (PoR) report, why can withdrawals still be delayed or halted during a crisis?
The truth is that proof-of-reserves is not a trust guarantee. It shows whether verifiable assets exist on a platform at a single point in time, but it does not confirm that the platform is solvent, liquid or governed by controls that prevent hidden risk.
But even when executed properly, PoR is often a point-in-time snapshot that can miss what happened before and after the reporting moment.
Without a credible view of liabilities, PoR cannot prove solvency, which is what users actually need during periods of withdrawal stress.
What PoR proves and how it is usually done
In practice, PoR involves two checks: assets and, ideally, liabilities.
On the asset side, an exchange shows that it controls certain wallets, usually by publishing addresses or signing messages.
Liabilities are trickier. Most exchanges take a snapshot of user balances and commit it to a Merkle tree, often a Merkle-sum tree. Users can then confirm that their balance is included using an inclusion proof, without everyone’s balances being made public.
When done properly, PoR shows whether onchain assets cover customer balances at a specific moment.
How an exchange can “pass PoR” and still be risky
PoR can improve transparency, but it shouldn’t be relied on as the sole measure of a company’s financial health.
Of course, a report on assets without full liabilities does not demonstrate solvency. Even if onchain wallets appear strong, liabilities can be incomplete or selectively defined, missing items such as loans, derivatives exposure, legal claims or offchain payables. That can show funds exist without proving the business can meet all of its obligations.
Also, a single attestation does not reveal what the balance sheet looked like last week or what it looks like the day after the report. In theory, assets can be temporarily borrowed to improve the snapshot, then moved back out afterward.
Next, encumbrances often do not show up. PoR typically cannot tell you whether assets are pledged as collateral, lent out or otherwise tied up, meaning they may not be available when withdrawals spike.
Liquidity and valuation can also be misleading. Holding assets is not the same as being able to liquidate them quickly and at scale during periods of stress, especially if reserves are concentrated in thinly traded tokens. PoR does not address this issue; clearer risk and liquidity disclosures might.
PoR isn’t the same as an audit
A lot of the trust problem comes from a mismatch in expectations.

Many users treat PoR like a safety certificate. In reality, many PoR engagements resemble agreed-upon procedures (AUPs). In these cases, the practitioner performs specific checks and reports what was found without providing an audit-style opinion on the company’s overall health.
Indeed, an audit or even a review is designed to deliver an assurance conclusion within a formal framework. AUP reporting is narrower. It explains what was tested and what was observed, then leaves interpretation to the reader. Under International Standard on Related Services (ISRS) 4400, an AUP engagement is not an assurance engagement and does not express an opinion.
Regulators have highlighted this gap. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has warned that PoR reports are inherently limited and should not be treated as proof that an exchange has sufficient assets to meet its liabilities, especially given the lack of consistency in how PoR work is performed and described.
This is also why PoR drew increased scrutiny after 2022. Mazars paused work for crypto clients, citing concerns about how PoR-style reports were being presented and how the public might interpret them.
What’s a practical trust stack, then?
PoR can be a starting point, but real trust comes from pairing transparency with proof of solvency, strong governance and clear operational controls.
Start with solvency. The real step up is showing assets versus a complete set of liabilities, ensuring assets are greater than or equal to liabilities. Merkle-based liability proofs, along with newer zero-knowledge approaches, aim to close that gap without exposing individual balances.
Next, add assurance around how the exchange actually operates. A snapshot does not reveal whether the platform has disciplined controls such as key management, access permissions, change management, incident response, segregation of duties and custody workflows. This is why institutional due diligence often relies on System and Organization Controls (SOC)-style reporting and similar frameworks that measure controls over time, not just a balance at a single moment.
Make liquidity and encumbrance visible. Solvency on paper does not guarantee that an exchange can survive a run. Users need clarity on whether reserves are unencumbered and how quickly holdings can be converted into liquid assets at scale.
Anchor it in governance and disclosure. Credible oversight depends on clear custody frameworks, conflict management and consistent disclosures, especially for products that introduce additional obligations such as yield, margin and lending.
PoR helps, but it can’t replace accountability
PoR is better than nothing, but it remains a narrow, point-in-time check (even though it’s often marketed like a safety certificate).
On its own, PoR does not prove solvency, liquidity or control quality. So, before treating a PoR badge as “safe,” consider the following:
Are liabilities included, or is it assets only? Assets-only reporting cannot demonstrate solvency.What is in scope? Are margin, yield products, loans or offchain obligations excluded?Is it reporting a snapshot or ongoing? A single date can be dressed up. Consistency matters.Are reserves unencumbered? “Held” is not the same as “available during stress.”What kind of engagement is it? Many PoR reports are limited in scope and should not be read like an audit opinion.
$BTC $ETH $SOL

There’s a strange calm that shows up right after a market shake-up. The panic fades, the charts slow down, and suddenly you can actually see what’s standing… and what isn’t. That’s kind of where Plasma is sitting right now. After sliding down to around $0.0939, $XPL didn’t spiral or disappear into the void. It paused. It steadied itself near that $0.10 zone, almost like the market took a step back and said, alright, let’s be serious for a second.
And honestly, those moments say more than any green candle ever could.

While everything else was busy reacting, @Plasma just kept doing its thing. Just building, quietly, like a team that already knows what they’re here to solve. Because Plasma was never about chasing trends. It was designed for one job, and it’s a big one ... moving stablecoins around the world without friction, delays, or surprise costs that make you sigh every time you hit “send.”

Think about how broken money movement still feels in most places. Fees stacked on fees, waiting times that feel ancient, systems that buckle the moment volume picks up. #Plasma looks at all that and says… why is this still a thing? Then it builds a chain where sending USDT doesn’t cost you anything, where blocks settle almost instantly, and where speed isn’t some marketing line, it’s just how the network works.
What’s refreshing is that Plasma doesn’t try to be clever for the sake of it. Developers don’t need to jump through hoops or relearn everything they already know. If you’re comfortable in the Ethereum world, you’re basically at home here. Things just work. And for those thinking beyond EVM, even Bitcoin has a clean, native way into the ecosystem. a straightforward bridge that respects what BTC is.
So when people ask why some are still bullish on XPL even when the market looks tired, this is usually the answer. It’s not about today’s price or tomorrow’s candle. It’s about the fact that Plasma feels like it’s being built for actual use, not just screenshots and hype threads. The kind of infrastructure that makes more sense the longer you look at it.
CONCLUSION : This isn’t a shouty call to buy. It’s more of a quiet tap on the shoulder. A reminder that sometimes the strongest projects don’t scream when prices dip. They stay focused, keep shipping, and let the market catch up later… whenever it’s ready. anyways always DYOR, NFA.