Aiden Brooks

This part of the Dusk protocol describes how leaders are selected in a way that completely breaks from traditional, visible staking models. Instead of announcing validators, stake sizes, or leader elections publicly, Dusk turns leader selection into a private, cryptographic process that happens locally and silently. The result is a system where leadership exists without exposure, and fairness is enforced by mathematics rather than visibility.
Each consensus participant begins by submitting a blind bid. This bid commits a stake amount using cryptographic commitments and is tied to a clear eligibility window. The network knows that a bid exists, but it does not know who submitted it, how large it is, or when it will become active. The participant alone holds the secret that can later open this commitment. This ensures that participation is verifiable without being observable.
When a new round and step begin, the participant checks locally whether they qualify as leader. This is done by computing a score derived from four elements: the participant’s secret, the committed bid, the current round, and the current step. These values are combined using a cryptographic hash, producing an output that is unpredictable and unique for every round. The output is then mathematically transformed into a score that balances randomness with stake weight.
The key idea is that no one competes openly. Every participant runs the same computation privately. If the resulting score crosses a dynamically defined threshold, the participant is probabilistically selected as leader for that specific round and step. If it does not, nothing happens. There is no signal to the network, no leak of intent, and no information that adversaries can exploit.
The threshold itself is not fixed. It is calculated per epoch based on the active generator set and network parameters. This ensures consistent block production rates while adapting to changes in stake distribution. It also prevents participants from precomputing future advantages or adjusting bids strategically.
Only after a participant proposes a block do they reveal a zero-knowledge proof showing that their score was valid and exceeded the threshold. This proof confirms correctness without revealing the bid amount, the secret, or how close other participants were to winning. The network can verify leadership without learning anything extra.
This design eliminates entire classes of attacks. There is no leader targeting, no front-running, no bribery market, and no way to censor specific validators because their identities are unknown until after they act. Even well-funded adversaries are reduced to guessing, with no reliable way to influence outcomes.
In practical terms, Dusk replaces public leader elections with a private lottery where the rules are enforced by cryptography and probability. Leadership becomes unpredictable, fair, and unexploitable. This is not just an improvement—it is a requirement for blockchains intended to support institutional finance, confidential assets, and real-world settlement without exposing participants to systemic risk.
By combining blind bids, cryptographic scoring, and zero-knowledge verification, Dusk achieves something rare: leader selection that is private by default, fair by design, and provably correct.
@Dusk $DUSK #dusk

Réduction de l'entropie de la mémoire du morse : Lorsque la vérifiabilité étouffe le potentiel évolutif de l'information
La promesse fondamentale du morse est "l'intégrité vérifiable de bout en bout" - une fois que les données sont enregistrées en tant que Sui Blob, son hash devient une ancre immuable de vérité. Après qu'un utilisateur Flatlander télécharge une vidéo, toute partie tierce peut vérifier qu'elle n'a pas été modifiée. Cela semble mettre fin à la crise de confiance de l'ère numérique.
Cependant, à une échelle macro de l'écosystème de l'information, cette "intégrité" déclenche une réduction de l'entropie de la mémoire : en verrouillant des séquences de bytes, le système supprime l'évolution naturelle de l'information dans sa diffusion, son interprétation et sa recréation. Le morse ne préserve pas la mémoire, mais fige le sens, le privant de la capacité de s'adapter à de nouveaux contextes, de stimuler de nouvelles compréhensions et de participer à de nouvelles narrations.

Most traders don’t wake up thinking about payment infrastructure. Price is loud, narratives are loud, and attention usually follows whatever is volatile. But stablecoins quietly changed the real-world use case of crypto long before most people admitted it. You can see it in freelancing, remittances, international trade, OTC desks, and even everyday savings behavior in countries where local currency feels unstable. People aren’t using stablecoins because they love blockchain. They use them because digital dollars move faster than banks, reach further than cards, and work at hours when the traditional system is closed.
That demand creates a simple question: if stablecoins are the product, why are they still forced to run on general purpose blockchains that were never designed for payments?
That’s the context Plasma is built around.
Plasma positions itself as a Layer-1 designed specifically for stablecoins and global payments, with USD₮ (Tether) as the core focus from day one. Instead of treating stablecoin transfers as just another transaction type competing with meme coin trading, NFTs, and on-chain games, Plasma’s design philosophy is that payments should not be a side quest. They should be the chain’s primary job. Plasma describes itself as a high-performance Layer 1 built for USD₮ payments “at global scale,” emphasizing near-instant settlement, low fees, and full EVM compatibility.
For investors, the important part isn’t the marketing line. It’s the implication: a payment chain is judged less by “how many apps launched” and more by whether it can handle repetitive, high-volume, low-margin money movement reliably. That’s a very different battlefield than the usual L1 race.
The biggest user-experience problem in stablecoins is also the most overlooked: gas. Most blockchains require users to hold a separate volatile token to move their stablecoin. In theory that’s normal crypto design. In reality it breaks the payment story at the exact moment it tries to become mainstream. Imagine sending someone $20 in USDT and then being told they also need to buy another coin first just to move it. For traders that’s trivial. For normal users it’s a deal-breaker.
Plasma tackles that problem directly with stablecoin-native mechanics. The chain supports gasless stablecoin transfers through a relayer/paymaster-style system, scoped specifically to direct USD₮ transfers, so the user can move stablecoins without thinking about gas tokens or fee management in the typical crypto way. That “gasless” detail sounds like product design, but it’s actually strategic infrastructure: it removes friction, reduces failed transactions, and makes stablecoin payments feel closer to how money should behave.
Plasma: The Layer-1 Built for Stablecoins and Global Payments
Most traders don’t wake up thinking about payment infrastructure. Price is loud, narratives are loud, and attention usually follows whatever is volatile. But stablecoins quietly changed the real-world use case of crypto long before most people admitted it. You can see it in freelancing, remittances, international trade, OTC desks, and even everyday savings behavior in countries where local currency feels unstable. People aren’t using stablecoins because they love blockchain. They use them because digital dollars move faster than banks, reach further than cards, and work at hours when the traditional system is closed.
That demand creates a simple question: if stablecoins are the product, why are they still forced to run on general purpose blockchains that were never designed for payments?
That’s the context Plasma is built around.
Plasma positions itself as a Layer-1 designed specifically for stablecoins and global payments, with USD₮ (Tether) as the core focus from day one. Instead of treating stablecoin transfers as just another transaction type competing with meme coin trading, NFTs, and on-chain games, Plasma’s design philosophy is that payments should not be a side quest. They should be the chain’s primary job. Plasma describes itself as a high-performance Layer 1 built for USD₮ payments “at global scale,” emphasizing near-instant settlement, low fees, and full EVM compatibility.
For investors, the important part isn’t the marketing line. It’s the implication: a payment chain is judged less by “how many apps launched” and more by whether it can handle repetitive, high-volume, low-margin money movement reliably. That’s a very different battlefield than the usual L1 race.
The biggest user-experience problem in stablecoins is also the most overlooked: gas. Most blockchains require users to hold a separate volatile token to move their stablecoin. In theory that’s normal crypto design. In reality it breaks the payment story at the exact moment it tries to become mainstream. Imagine sending someone $20 in USDT and then being told they also need to buy another coin first just to move it. For traders that’s trivial. For normal users it’s a deal-breaker.
Plasma tackles that problem directly with stablecoin-native mechanics. The chain supports gasless stablecoin transfers through a relayer/paymaster-style system, scoped specifically to direct USD₮ transfers, so the user can move stablecoins without thinking about gas tokens or fee management in the typical crypto way. That “gasless” detail sounds like product design, but it’s actually strategic infrastructure: it removes friction, reduces failed transactions, and makes stablecoin payments feel closer to how money should behave.
From a market structure perspective, that also changes onboarding economics. When fees and gas confusion disappear, stablecoins become easier to integrate into consumer apps, merchant checkouts, payroll systems, and remittance products. This is where Plasma’s “global payments” claim becomes more than branding, because payments don’t scale through enthusiasts. They scale through reduced friction.
Another key angle is compatibility. Plasma is EVM compatible, meaning developers can deploy with familiar Ethereum tooling and wallets rather than learning a brand new stack. In practical terms, Plasma isn’t asking builders to bet their careers on a niche environment. It’s asking them to bring payment applications into an environment optimized for what stablecoins actually do best.
There’s also an institutional thread running through Plasma’s story. Not every “payments chain” is built with serious participants in mind, but Plasma’s public disclosures around funding show a mix of crypto-native investors and market makers. In February 2025, Plasma announced it had raised $24M across Seed and Series A led by Framework Ventures and Bitfinex/USD₮0, with participants including Cumberland (DRW), Flow Traders, IMC, Nomura, Bybit, and others, plus named angels such as Paolo Ardoino and Peter Thiel. CoinDesk also covered Plasma’s raise around the same time, describing a $20M Series A led by Framework following a $4M seed.
This matters because payments infrastructure isn’t only a technology problem. It’s also a liquidity and trust problem. Stablecoin movement at scale requires deep rails: market makers, exchange integrations, custody support, and credible partners who care about uptime more than hype.
What’s happening in the broader market supports the thesis that “stablecoins as payments” is not niche anymore. Major fintechs have been moving toward stablecoin experiments explicitly for cross-border efficiency. For example, the Financial Times reported Klarna launching a payment stablecoin (KlarnaUSD) to reduce cross-border costs, pointing to the reality that even large consumer fintechs now see stablecoins as a cost cutting tool rather than a speculative toy. When fintechs start copying crypto rails, it’s usually a sign that the old rails are too expensive and too slow for modern commerceOn a personal level, I think the best way to understand Plasma is to imagine a very normal situation: you’re paying a supplier in another country, or receiving income from a foreign client, or sending money to family abroad. Today, the cheapest option is often still a painful compromise: bank wires are slow and expensive, card networks don’t work for direct transfers, and local remittance services take hidden spreads. Stablecoins already solved the “digital dollar teleportation” part. What hasn’t been fully solved is making that experience feel natural and safe for everyone, every time.
If Plasma succeeds, it won’t be because it created the next hot DeFi ecosystem. It will be because it quietly makes stablecoins behave like actual money rails: fast settlement, predictable cost, minimal friction, easy integration, and reliability under load.
For traders and investors, Plasma is a bet on a specific vision of crypto’s future: not “everything on-chain,” but money movement on-chain at scale. The upside is straightforward: if stablecoins continue becoming a default tool for payments, the chains designed around that flow could become critical infrastructure. The risk is also straightforward: payments is a brutal arena, where user acquisition is expensive, compliance is unavoidable, and trust is earned slowly.
But even with those risks, Plasma represents a mature shift in crypto thinking. It’s not asking, “what can we tokenize next?” It’s asking a more serious question: if stablecoins are already global digital dollars, what should the base layer look like when the world starts treating them that way?
#plasma $XPL @Plasma

À chaque changement technologique majeur, il arrive un moment où l'innovation avance plus vite que la société ne peut raisonnablement l'absorber. La technologie blockchain existe dans cette phase depuis des années. Elle a prouvé que les systèmes décentralisés peuvent fonctionner à grande échelle, mais elle a souvent ignoré les réalités pratiques du monde qu'elle cherche à transformer. La réglementation, la conformité, la vie privée et la responsabilité institutionnelle ont souvent été considérées comme des obstacles plutôt que comme des conditions essentielles. $DUSK La Fondation existe précisément parce que cette approche n'a jamais été durable. Depuis sa création, Dusk s'est concentré sur une mission plus ancrée et durable : construire une infrastructure blockchain qui fonctionne aux côtés du système financier au lieu d'essayer de le contourner.

Presque tous les investisseurs en crypto apprennent cette leçon tôt ou tard : les blockchains sont excellentes pour transférer de la valeur, mais très mauvaises pour stocker des données réelles. Dès que vous dépassez les transactions de base pour des choses comme les œuvres d'art NFT, les actifs de jeu, les données d'entraînement en IA, les fichiers de médias sociaux, les dossiers juridiques ou les archives de recherche, une question devient inévitable : où se trouve le contenu réel, et existera-t-il encore dans des années ? C'est exactement le problème que Walrus est conçu pour résoudre.
Walrus est un réseau de stockage de blobs décentralisé axé sur le stockage de données permanent à grande échelle, conçu pour être beaucoup plus simple que la plupart des solutions de stockage Web3. Au lieu de considérer le stockage comme une réflexion après coup, Walrus le traite comme une infrastructure de base - quelque chose sur lequel les applications peuvent compter sans forcer les utilisateurs à s'inquiéter constamment de la maintenance ou de la disponibilité. Développé par Mysten Labs, l'équipe derrière Sui, Walrus a été introduit comme un protocole de stockage et de disponibilité des données avec un aperçu pour les développeurs en juin 2024. Son réseau principal public a été lancé le 27 mars 2025, marquant la transition de l'expérimentation à l'utilisation dans le monde réel avec des incitations économiques en direct.

Dans l'arène bruyante de l'innovation blockchain, où le battage médiatique dépasse souvent la substance, un projet différent est en cours. Il n'opère pas avec le rugissement assourdissant d'un lancement de fusée, mais avec le son méticuleux et délibéré d'un maître architecte posant une pierre angulaire. C'est la Dusk Foundation. Née en 2018, sa mission n'est ni triviale ni à la mode. Elle cherche à résoudre le paradoxe fondamental au cœur de la finance moderne : Comment pouvons-nous créer un système qui garantit la confidentialité individuelle tout en assurant la responsabilité collective ? La réponse qu'elle construit — une blockchain de couche-1 conçue pour des actifs réels réglementés — est plus qu'une simple nouvelle technologie. C'est un plan fondamental pour une économie numérique plus équitable et digne de confiance. Comprendre Dusk, c'est comprendre pourquoi l'avenir de la finance ne dépend pas de choisir entre le secret et la transparence, mais de marier ingénieusement les deux.

Dans l'ère numérique en évolution rapide, la confidentialité, la sécurité et l'évolutivité sont les pierres angulaires de la confiance dans la technologie. Alors que le monde se dirige vers le Web3, les développeurs, les entreprises et les individus font face au défi de construire et d'interagir avec des applications décentralisées tout en garantissant que les données restent sécurisées et accessibles. Walrus (WAL) répond à ce besoin en tant que protocole de stockage décentralisé et DeFi axé sur la confidentialité, construit sur la blockchain Sui à haute performance, conçu pour donner aux utilisateurs une infrastructure sécurisée, fiable et économique. Contrairement à de nombreux projets de blockchain qui se concentrent uniquement sur le trading, la spéculation ou l'agriculture de rendement, Walrus offre un écosystème holistique où le stockage, la gouvernance, le staking et les incitations économiques coexistent harmonieusement, fournissant des solutions pratiques tant pour les développeurs que pour les entreprises.