Sophia Carter

Dusk has always felt like it’s building for a different audience than most crypto projects. Not the crowd that wants fireworks every week, but the people who care about whether something can run quietly, correctly, and for a long time. If most chains are trying to be the most exciting city on the map, Dusk is trying to be the part you rely on without thinking about it, like the rails under a train.

The privacy angle is easy to misunderstand, because in crypto privacy usually means one of two extremes. Either everything is public and you just hope you blend in, or everything is hidden and you accept that trust becomes a guessing game. Dusk is aiming for something more practical. Think of it like frosted glass in a meeting room. Outsiders can tell a meeting happened and that it followed the rules, but they cannot hear the conversation. That is the kind of privacy regulated finance actually wants. Confidential, but still accountable.

The mainnet launch on January 7, 2025 matters for a simple reason. Before that date, the story is theory. After that date, incentives, fees, validators, and real usage start shaping what the network becomes. That is when a chain stops being a concept and becomes a machine with moving parts.

What I like about Dusk’s token design is that it reads like someone expected the project to still be here years from now. The supply starts at 500 million DUSK and the rest is emitted as staking rewards over 36 years, with a max supply of 1 billion. Fees are paid in a tiny unit called LUX, where 1 LUX equals 10 to the minus 9 DUSK. These details sound small, but they are the kind of boring clarity integrators and institutions care about. And Dusk publishes a live supply figure on its own supply page, which is another subtle sign of seriousness. It is not hype, it is something you can check.

The two way bridge launch on May 30, 2025 is another moment that tells you how Dusk sees itself. A lot of chains add bridges mainly to chase liquidity somewhere else. Dusk’s bridge is framed more like a source of truth setup. Mainnet DUSK is treated as the real thing, and the BSC version is minted only after proof that the mainnet tokens were locked. In plain terms, it is saying this is where truth lives, and other chains can be places you move around, but the anchor stays here. That is a very regulated finance way of thinking.

The part that feels most grown up to me is the direction around verified market data and the Chainlink and NPEX angle. If you want regulated assets on chain, you do not just need tokens. You need reliable market truth, pricing that is defensible, and rails that support rules without turning everything into paperwork. When a project starts talking seriously about verifiable data feeds and cross chain transport in service of regulated assets, it is not doing it for attention. It is doing it because that is what the real world demands before it takes a system seriously.

People sometimes look at on chain activity and assume higher numbers always mean healthier. But different networks have different jobs. Some chains are like busy malls, constant movement whether or not anything meaningful is happening. Dusk feels more like a courthouse. Fewer events, but the expectation is that each one should be legitimate, auditable by the right parties, and not broadcast everyone’s business to the entire world.

That is also how I think about DUSK as a token. Its value is not in looking like a membership badge. It behaves more like fuel and a security deposit. Fuel because fees pay for execution. Security deposit because staking secures the validator set and the network itself. If Dusk becomes a real settlement layer for regulated assets, that kind of utility is not flashy, but it is hard to replace.

If I were tracking Dusk in a practical way over the next year, I would focus on three things. First, whether the chain keeps getting easier to operate and integrate, meaning better tooling, better endpoints, better ways to observe what is happening without compromising confidentiality. Second, whether regulated asset workflows actually show up in a real way, not just tokenization talk, but issuance, transfer constraints, and audit paths that hold up under scrutiny. Third, whether mainnet remains the place where truth is anchored, even as bridges and other ecosystems expand distribution.

The simplest description I can give is this. Dusk is trying to let financial applications prove that something happened correctly, while still keeping sensitive details private, and still giving the right parties a way to verify. That is not the usual crypto fantasy. It is closer to making blockchain infrastructure that regulated finance can actually live with. If it works, it will not feel like a hype wave. It will feel like the kind of plumbing you stop noticing because it finally fits the building.
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK

When I first came across Plasma, I didn’t think of it as another blockchain.” It felt more like someone looking at stablecoins and asking a very simple question:

Why does moving digital dollars still feel harder than it should?

Stablecoins are already doing real work in the world. People use them because they’re practical. They’re not chasing some futuristic experiment — they just want money that holds value and can move quickly. But the strange part is that even today, sending stablecoins often comes with extra steps that don’t make sense to normal users.

You can hold the exact currency you want, like USDT, and still get stuck because you don’t have the right token to pay for fees. It’s like having cash in your pocket but being told you need a separate coupon just to hand it over.

Plasma is trying to remove that friction at the base level. One of the most interesting parts of its design is that basic USDT transfers can be sponsored through a built-in relayer system. The chain is structured so that sending stablecoins doesn’t automatically require people to think about gas tokens or transaction costs in the way most networks do. That’s not just a marketing idea — it’s written directly into how Plasma approaches stablecoin transfers, with clear limits and safeguards to prevent abuse.

What stands out to me is how “practical” the thinking feels. Plasma doesn’t seem obsessed with being everything for everyone. It’s being built around one core use case: stablecoin settlement that feels instant and uncomplicated.

Speed matters here, but not in the way blockchains usually brag about it. Plasma’s network is designed for sub-second finality, with block times around one second. That’s the kind of timing that starts to feel closer to payment infrastructure than slow financial rails.

And it’s not just about speed for the sake of speed. Plasma’s consensus design focuses on predictable finality, the kind that matters if you’re settling value rather than trading memes. Even details like how validator penalties are structured — using reward slashing instead of harsh stake destruction — suggest the chain is being shaped with long-term stability and institutional comfort in mind.

Then there’s the token side. With a stablecoin-first chain, there’s always an awkward balance: how do you secure the network without forcing every user into holding a volatile asset just to move money?

Plasma’s approach is that XPL exists more as the internal engine of the system rather than something everyday users constantly interact with. The supply starts at 10 billion XPL, with validator rewards and inflation only activating once external validators and delegation are fully live. It also uses an EIP-1559 style burn to balance emissions over time.

That separation feels important. The chain is trying to let stablecoins behave like stablecoins simple, direct, boring while XPL quietly supports the network underneath.

Another part of Plasma’s vision is its Bitcoin-anchored security direction. What I appreciate is that Plasma is careful about what’s live today versus what’s still being built. The Bitcoin bridge design is openly described as under active development, not something already deployed. But the intent is clear: Bitcoin acts as a neutral external anchor, strengthening censorship resistance and long-term credibility.

That idea resonates because settlement layers need neutrality more than they need hype. If stablecoins are going to become global money rails, the infrastructure underneath them has to feel harder to capture, harder to censor, harder to bend.

Plasma is still early, but the mainnet beta phase already shows the direction: gasless USDT transfers being rolled out carefully, a network tuned for fast finality, and token economics built around security rather than forcing users into complexity.

To me, Plasma’s real ambition isn’t to be the loudest chain. It’s trying to become the chain you don’t notice the one where sending stablecoins feels as natural as sending a text message.

And honestly, that’s probably the highest compliment a settlement network can earn.

@Plasma #Plasma $XPL
#plasma

Most blockchains feel like a checklist: faster blocks, cheaper fees, more “modules.” Vanar feels like it’s chasing something closer to product reality: the idea that adoption doesn’t fail because people dislike crypto, it fails because the experience asks normal users to become part time infrastructure engineers.

When I read through Vanar’s own material, what stood out wasn’t a single big claim, it was the shape of the stack. It’s presented less like “here’s an L1, build whatever,” and more like “here’s an L1 plus memory plus reasoning, so apps can behave like modern software.” That mindset is very different from the usual chain narrative. It’s the difference between building a race car and building a reliable transit system. One wins headlines, the other wins commuters.

Vanar’s network details are intentionally straightforward, which sounds boring until you’ve watched teams abandon a chain because integration becomes a weekly fire drill. The published mainnet parameters are clear: RPC and WebSocket endpoints, an explorer, and a specific chain identifier, Chain ID 2040. That kind of standard surface area matters more than people admit, because mainstream teams want the chain to feel like plumbing, not a personality.

The more interesting part is what Vanar is trying to do above the chain. Neutron is described as a semantic memory layer that compresses and restructures data into programmable “Seeds” that remain fully onchain and verifiable. The number they put on it is wild: 25MB compressed into 50KB. Even if you treat it cautiously, the intention is clear. They don’t just want to store hashes or pointers. They want data to stay usable and provable, not just “present.”

That matters because real world apps aren’t made of transactions, they’re made of context. A receipt isn’t valuable because it exists somewhere, it’s valuable because you can pull it up, check it, and make a decision with it. An audit trail isn’t useful because it’s immutable, it’s useful because it’s readable. Most chains leave that meaning layer offchain, which is why so many Web3 products end up with a Web2 backend doing the actual thinking, and the chain acting like a glorified log.

Vanar’s pitch is basically, what if the chain could hold more “meaning” close to the execution layer so apps don’t have to rebuild that logic offchain every time. Their own examples point in that direction: turning documents and data into compact, verifiable objects that are easier to query and automate against.

Then there’s Kayon, which Vanar describes as an AI reasoning layer that can work across Neutron, blockchains, and enterprise backends. The way they frame it is blunt: blockchains can store and execute, but they can’t reason. Kayon is supposed to make Seeds and other datasets usable through a more natural interface, including integrations that connect to explorers, dashboards, and business systems. Again, you can read that as aspirational, but the direction is consistent: they’re trying to make “ask a question, get an answer” part of the onchain workflow instead of something you bolt on with scripts and spreadsheets.

I also like grounding any narrative in observable signals. Vanar’s explorer displays very large headline counts: 8,940,150 total blocks, 193,823,272 total transactions, and 28,634,064 wallet addresses, with network utilization shown around 22.56% on the same page. Those top line stats don’t automatically equal meaningful adoption, but they do suggest Vanar wants to present itself as a chain that’s already running, not a concept waiting for traffic.

On the token side, their docs describe VANRY as the gas and staking asset in a delegated proof of stake setup, with validators earning rewards in VANRY and stakers supporting validators to receive rewards. It’s not flashy, but it’s coherent. Consumer scale products don’t need a token that tries to be the main character. They need a token that does its job and stays out of the way.

From the Ethereum contract you linked, Etherscan shows an onchain snapshot that helps make the story concrete: about 7,511 holders and 165 transfers in the last 24 hours at the time of viewing. It also displays a max total supply figure on that page. Meanwhile, CoinMarketCap lists VANRY with a max supply of 2.4B and a circulating supply around 2.256B, which is a reminder that supply figures can vary by source and methodology.

Where Vanar’s consumer angle becomes more believable is when you see ecosystem pieces that naturally fit that “stay inside the experience” loop. Virtua, for example, describes Bazaa as a fully decentralized marketplace built on the Vanar blockchain, aimed at trading NFTs that have onchain utility across games and metaverse experiences. Marketplaces like that are less about hype and more about habit. They give users an everyday reason to touch the chain without making it feel like they’re “doing crypto.”

If I had to put the whole thesis in plain language, it would be this. Vanar isn’t only trying to be a faster road. It’s trying to build the street signs, the map, and the navigation system too. Neutron is about making data compact and provable. Kayon is about making that data understandable and usable. The chain underneath is meant to be familiar enough that builders can ship without rearchitecting their entire toolchain.

And that’s the quiet bet: people won’t adopt blockchains because they love blockchains. They’ll adopt them when the experience feels like any other good app, and the complexity disappears behind the scenes.
#vanar @Vanarchain $VANRY
#Vanar

When people say a blockchain is “private” I usually tense up a little. Not because privacy is bad. Because most of the time it is treated like a blanket you throw over everything. That works for hiding. It does not work for finance. Real finance lives on receipts. It lives on approvals. It lives on the ability to prove something to the right party at the right moment.

Dusk has always felt like it started from that uncomfortable truth. It is not trying to make the world invisible. It is trying to make visibility optional and precise.

The easiest way I can explain it is this. Imagine a building with two entrances that lead to the same vault. One entrance is a glass corridor. Everyone can see you walk through it. The other entrance is a curtained corridor. People can see that someone entered the building. They do not get a free movie of what you carried. Both routes still end at the same vault. Same locks. Same guards. Same final settlement.

That is basically the Moonlight and Phoenix idea in human terms. DuskDS supports two native transaction models. Moonlight is public and account based. Phoenix is shielded and note based using zero knowledge proofs. They settle on the same chain but they reveal different things to observers.

What I like here is not the vocabulary. It is the posture. Dusk is admitting that regulated finance rarely runs in a single mode. Some flows must be transparent. Some flows must be confidential. A lot of flows want selective disclosure. Dusk puts that choice inside the core transfer system instead of forcing people to bolt on a separate privacy network later. The documentation is very direct about this. Transactions on DuskDS are managed by a Transfer Contract and that contract supports both models for handling transfers and gas payments and acting as a contract execution entry point.

If you have ever watched a company try to use a fully transparent chain for anything sensitive you know the pain. Salaries. Treasury moves. Counterparty relationships. Market makers. Even simple inventory planning. The ledger becomes a surveillance feed. That is great for some things and awful for others. Dusk feels like a deliberate attempt to stop that default leakiness while still keeping a path for audit.

Now zoom out a bit. The project describes itself as a privacy blockchain for regulated finance and it leans on a modular approach. There is DuskDS as the settlement layer and there is DuskEVM as an execution environment so builders can work with familiar EVM tools while still settling into the Dusk stack.

I think that separation matters more than most people realize. Institutions hate uncertainty at the bottom. They can tolerate experimentation at the edges. A modular design is only useful when it lets the foundation stay boring while the application layer evolves. That is the vibe Dusk is aiming for.

Then there is the token. If you strip away the trading chatter and look only at what the network says it needs. DUSK is the fuel for fees and it is the stake that anchors consensus. The tokenomics documentation gives concrete numbers that feel more like infrastructure budgeting than hype. Maximum supply is 1 billion DUSK. The initial supply was 500 million. The remaining 500 million is emitted over time with a schedule described as 36 years. Gas is denominated in LUX where one LUX equals 10 to the minus 9 DUSK.

Two details here make it feel real to me.

First the minimum staking amount is 1000 DUSK. That number is not symbolic. It is a threshold that shapes who can participate directly. The same page also states a stake maturity period of two epochs which it quantifies as 4320 blocks.

Second the circulating supply story is unusually crisp across major market trackers right now. CoinMarketCap lists a circulating supply of 496999999 DUSK and the same max supply of 1000000000.

Those numbers matter because they frame the network as something that is already past the “maybe someday” phase. Roughly half the max supply is already in circulation. The rest is an explicit long runway for security incentives. That is the kind of structure you want if you are aiming for a chain that has to survive quiet years as well as loud ones.

If you want a simple way to judge whether this is alive beyond words. Look at what node operators see. The official node installer repository shows a release tagged v0.5.13 dated 30 Jan 2026. The operator docs also describe a non destructive upgrade flow using the installer script and mention that it gracefully shuts down the node software during upgrades.

That is not a flashy “announcement” kind of update. It is the kind of update you ship when you care about uptime and repeatability. It also lines up with a Dusk Foundation post that says a new node installer was released with new Rusk and wallet binaries along with bug fixes and new features.

There is also a small but meaningful ecosystem signal that I think deserves attention. Dusk released an updated block explorer and described it as showing blocks and transactions plus a snapshot of network statistics including market cap the number of nodes and the amount of DUSK staked. When a team talks about node counts and staked amounts as first class dashboard items it tells you what they think success looks like. Not just price. Operational health.

One more timeline detail helps anchor the narrative. Dusk published a mainnet rollout plan that included on ramp activation in late December 2024 and a milestone that points to the first immutable blocks on January 7 2025. Again this is not something you need to celebrate like a trophy. It is useful because it shows the project treating launch like a staged migration and not a single dramatic switch.

So why does any of this matter in plain language.

Because the future version of on chain finance is not going to be a single public spreadsheet. It is going to be a set of markets where different participants have different visibility rights. A regulator might need proof that a rule was followed. A counterparty might need proof of solvency. A user might need privacy for balances and flows. The public might only need aggregate confidence that settlement is honest.

Dusk is trying to make that messy reality feel native. Two transaction lanes on one settlement layer. A transfer system designed to handle both transparent and shielded flows. A modular execution story that invites builders without asking them to abandon familiar tools. Token mechanics that read like long term security planning. Operator tooling that keeps getting maintained rather than abandoned.

Dusk is not pitching secrecy as a vibe. It is pitching controlled disclosure as a product.

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk_Foundation

Nelle ultime 24 ore, Plasma è sembrato meno un “progetto crypto” e più un pezzo di tubature silenziose che sta facendo il suo lavoro. Plasmascan mostra 320.443 transazioni in 24h, ~3 transazioni in sospeso in media nell'ultima ora e 5.855,32 XPL in totale di commissioni di transazione (24h).

Quel piccolo terzetto di numeri è onestamente l'aggiornamento più “umano” che puoi ottenere: suggerisce che le persone stanno effettivamente utilizzando la ferrovia, i blocchi vengono elaborati senza drammi e il costo del trasferimento di valore non sta aumentando in modalità sorpresa. Se stai cercando di vincere il regolamento in stablecoin, l'affidabilità noiosa è il punto di forza.

Most blockchains feel like they were designed by engineers talking to other engineers. Speed charts, consensus diagrams, throughput benchmarks — impressive, but oddly disconnected from how normal people actually use technology.

Vanar feels like it’s trying to solve a different problem: what would a blockchain look like if the end user never needed to know it was there?

That shift in mindset runs through everything they’re building. Instead of treating the chain as the product, Vanar frames it as the foundation layer in a bigger system that also includes data memory and AI reasoning. On their site, they describe layers like Neutron (semantic memory) and Kayon (AI reasoning), which suggests they’re not just thinking about storing transactions, but about storing context what data means, how it connects, and how applications can actually use it in an intelligent way.

That might sound abstract, but it lines up closely with the kinds of apps they’re targeting: games, entertainment platforms, digital worlds, and brand experiences. These aren’t “one big transaction” environments. They’re made of thousands of tiny actions unlocks, achievements, asset changes, interactions, identity signals. Traditional blockchains are good at proving that something happened. Vanar is trying to help apps understand what that something represents.

Neutron is the clearest example of that philosophy. Instead of just storing raw files or pointers, it’s presented as a system that compresses and structures data into what they call “Seeds” units of knowledge that can be verified onchain and then reused by apps or AI agents. Their materials even reference compressing large datasets down dramatically before anchoring them. The important part isn’t the compression number — it’s the usage pattern they’re hinting at: lots of small, repeatable data interactions instead of a few giant ones.

When you look at Vanar’s mainnet explorer, the numbers actually reflect that kind of design. The chain shows millions of blocks and hundreds of millions of transactions, along with tens of millions of wallet addresses. Those figures don’t automatically equal mass adoption, but they do show a network structured around frequent, lightweight activity — exactly what you’d expect if the goal is consumer-style usage rather than purely financial heavy lifting.

One of the most practical design choices, though, has nothing to do with AI. It’s fees.

Vanar documents outline a fixed-fee model where common transaction ranges are targeted at fractions of a cent in USD terms. Instead of users being exposed directly to token volatility every time they click a button, the system aims to keep the experience stable even if the underlying token price moves. Behind the scenes, that relies on pricing feeds and adjustment mechanisms, but for a game studio, a brand, or an app developer, the takeaway is simple: you can design user flows without worrying that “mint” suddenly costs $12 today.

That’s a subtle but powerful difference. Mainstream apps are priced like SaaS predictable, boring, budgetable. If Web3 infrastructure can’t match that, it struggles to sit underneath real consumer products.

VANRY sits at the center of all this as the network’s gas and staking token. It’s used to pay for transactions, participate in network security, and support validator operations. What’s also notable is that Vanar maintains an ERC-20 version of VANRY on Ethereum and Polygon for interoperability, with a bridge connecting those environments to the native chain. You can see the Ethereum-side token contract and holder activity publicly on Etherscan, which shows thousands of holders and an actively tracked supply for that representation.

That multi-chain presence matters because adoption rarely happens in a vacuum. Liquidity, exchanges, and integrations still orbit around established ecosystems like Ethereum. Having a wrapped version available lowers the friction for users and platforms to plug into Vanar’s economy, even if the day-to-day consumer activity is meant to live on the Vanar network itself.

The ecosystem direction reinforces that consumer focus. Projects like Virtua and the VGN Games Network are often associated with Vanar’s broader vision, pointing toward digital worlds, gaming infrastructure, and branded interactive experiences rather than purely financial protocols. Whether each of those verticals scales at the same pace is still an open question, but strategically it’s clear: Vanar is chasing engagement-driven activity, not just capital-driven activity.

From the outside, the success metric for a network like this won’t be a single explosive DeFi moment. It’ll be something quieter: steady growth in everyday interactions, more apps quietly relying on the chain for background processes, and users who never once think, “I’m doing a blockchain transaction right now.”

If Vanar can make Web3 feel less like a trading dashboard and more like invisible internet infrastructure, it won’t win because it shouted the loudest about performance. It’ll win because it made complexity disappear and that’s usually what real-world adoption actually looks like.
@Vanarchain #vanar $VANRY
#Vanar

Most blockchains talk like ideologues. Total transparency, total anonymity, code is law, banks are evil — you know the script. Dusk doesn’t really fit that personality type. If anything, it feels like it was designed by people who’ve actually seen how financial institutions operate behind the scenes — where privacy is normal, audits are normal, and neither side thinks the other one is optional.

The way I’ve come to understand Dusk is through a very un-crypto analogy: a professional office building. Inside, doors are closed, conversations are private, documents aren’t taped to the windows. But at the same time, there are logs, access controls, compliance officers, and paper trails when they’re legitimately required. That’s the balance Dusk is chasing on-chain — not hiding everything, not exposing everything, but making disclosure something that happens with purpose, not by default.

That’s where the split between Phoenix and Moonlight actually becomes meaningful. Instead of declaring that one privacy model should rule the entire network, Dusk treats privacy like lighting in a building. Some rooms need bright lights. Some rooms need the blinds down. What matters is that you can move between those environments without leaving the system or breaking its rules. For institutions — who live in a world of NDAs, restricted information, and regulatory oversight — that flexibility isn’t philosophical. It’s operational.

Lately, what’s made Dusk feel less like an idea and more like infrastructure is the quiet progress under the hood. When the core node software, Rusk, began fully enabling third-party smart contracts, that was a turning point that didn’t come with fireworks. It simply meant: other people can now build serious things here. That’s when a chain stops being a project and starts being a place. Cities don’t grow because the mayor builds everything; they grow because strangers open shops.

The modular structure of the network also feels less like trend-chasing and more like practical design. With DuskDS anchoring consensus and finality, DuskEVM welcoming Solidity developers, and DuskVM pushing deeper into privacy-preserving logic, Dusk resembles financial market plumbing more than a typical monolithic chain. In traditional markets, execution venues and settlement layers are distinct for a reason: it’s cleaner, safer, and easier to supervise. Dusk seems to be importing that same logic into blockchain design.

Even the token, DUSK, makes more sense when you stop thinking like a trader and start thinking like an operator. Staking here isn’t just yield farming with a different logo. It’s closer to a reliability bond — a financial commitment that says, “I’m serious about running this infrastructure correctly.” The introduction of soft-slashing mechanics reinforces that tone. Instead of treating validators like gamblers, the network treats them more like service providers with performance expectations. That’s subtle, but culturally important if the goal is to host regulated financial activity.

One detail I genuinely appreciate is how straightforward Dusk is about its monetary state, despite building privacy tech. The live supply tracker at supply.dusk.network currently shows roughly 566 million DUSK in circulation. That kind of clarity about system-level numbers, while still protecting individual transactional privacy, shows the project understands the difference between confidentiality and opacity. Serious finance needs the first, not the second.

On the ecosystem side, the developments that catch my attention are the ones that look boring at first glance. The arrival of EURQ on Dusk is interesting not because “stablecoins are cool,” but because a euro-denominated, compliance-aware asset provides a bridge between on-chain logic and real-world accounting. It gives institutions a unit of value that feels familiar, auditable, and legally legible. That’s the kind of building block you need before sophisticated financial products can realistically exist on a network.

The same goes for custody and interoperability efforts involving groups like Cordial Systems, NPEX, and standards from Chainlink. None of this is flashy. But these are the support beams of a system meant to carry regulated assets — custody that institutions can actually use, and data rails that allow tokenized assets to interact safely beyond a single chain.

I also keep an eye on the “edges” of the ecosystem, like legacy token activity on explorers such as Etherscan and BscScan. During transitions to a native chain, those flows tell you whether the asset still has circulation and liquidity while the core network matures. It’s not a perfect measure of adoption, but it’s a pulse check.

At a human level, what makes Dusk compelling to me is that it doesn’t pretend finance will suddenly become anarchic or perfectly transparent just because we have blockchains now. It assumes the real world — with its rules, privacy expectations, and reporting obligations — is coming on-chain, not disappearing. So instead of building a system that rebels against that reality, Dusk is building one that can live inside it.

That’s a harder path. It’s slower, less viral, and far less meme-friendly. But if blockchain is ever going to host serious financial infrastructure, it probably won’t look like a revolution. It’ll look like something much more ordinary: a network where privacy is respected, accountability is possible, and most of the time, everything just quietly works in the background.
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK