Peter Maliar

Lately, when I think about Dusk, I don’t think about price charts or trending posts anymore. What stands out to me is something much quieter: it feels like the project is finally growing into what it always said it wanted to be. Not a hype machine. Not a meme chain. But real financial infrastructure that can actually be used in the real world.
I’ve watched enough crypto projects come and go to know how rare that is.
Most chains start with big dreams. Then they pivot. Then they chase the next trend. Then they slowly fade. With Dusk Network, the story has been strangely consistent. For years, they’ve talked about privacy, compliance, and real-world assets. Back then, it sounded boring. Now, in 2026, it sounds practical.

That’s because institutions are finally moving past “testing blockchain” and into “using blockchain.” Banks, exchanges, and financial firms aren’t looking for experiments anymore. They want systems that fit into existing rules. They want privacy, but not secrecy. They want transparency, but not exposure. And they want accountability without sacrificing security.
That’s exactly the space Dusk is trying to fill.
From a market point of view, DUSK is still small compared to major chains. It’s not fully diluted yet, and supply is still tied closely to network activity. What I find interesting is that trading hasn’t completely dried up, even during quiet periods. That usually tells me people haven’t written it off. There’s still attention, even without hype.
But honestly, price is the least important part of this story.
What matters more is whether the network actually works for what it claims to support. And from what I’ve seen, Dusk has reached a level of maturity that many projects never reach. The mainnet is stable. Confidential smart contracts are usable. Privacy isn’t something you add later. It’s built into how things operate.
At the same time, it’s not “hide everything and hope regulators never notice.” Dusk uses selective disclosure. That means transactions can stay private, but proofs exist when someone needs to check compliance. Auditors can verify. Regulators can investigate. Users don’t have to expose everything.
That balance is rare in crypto.
Most chains choose one extreme or the other. Full transparency or full darkness. Real finance doesn’t work like that. It lives in the middle. And Dusk was designed for that middle ground.

Another thing that stands out is developer access. With DuskEVM supporting Solidity, builders don’t have to relearn everything from scratch. They can test real ideas quickly. They can move from concept to prototype without fighting the system. That might sound small, but it’s huge for long-term growth.
When developers feel comfortable, ecosystems grow naturally.
To understand why this matters, think about something simple: tokenized bonds. A company wants to issue digital bonds to professional investors. Those investors must be verified. Their balances shouldn’t be public. Transfers must follow rules. Regulators need access if something goes wrong.
On most chains, half of this happens off-chain. On Dusk, it can happen inside the system. The contract, the privacy layer, and compliance tools work together. That’s what “built for finance” actually looks like.
This is also why Dusk doesn’t move fast in public. You don’t see daily announcements. You see slow progress. Pilots. Legal reviews. Quiet testing. That’s how financial infrastructure develops. It’s not exciting. It’s careful.
When people compare Dusk to Ethereum or Solana, I think they miss the point. Those chains are amazing for open DeFi and experimentation. Anyone can build anything. That’s their strength. But that openness is also a weakness for regulated assets.
On the other side, pure privacy chains scare institutions. No accountability. No clear oversight.
Dusk sits between those two worlds. And that’s where real finance operates.
Of course, there are risks.

Regulation is different in every country. Some authorities understand selective disclosure. Others don’t. Institutional adoption is slow. Not every pilot becomes a real product. Token prices can distort how people judge progress.
All of that is real.
But direction matters more than speed.
Tokenized assets, compliant settlement, and on-chain issuance aren’t theories anymore. They’re happening. If that trend continues, infrastructure built specifically for these needs becomes hard to replace. You can’t just copy it overnight.
That’s why I look at Dusk the way I do now.
Not as a quick trade.
Not as a hype story.
Not as a guaranteed winner.
But as a serious attempt to build something that fits into how finance actually works.
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk_Foundation

A primeira vez que percebi quão quebrado o cripto #Payments ainda está foi não durante uma queda ou um hack. Foi durante uma simples transferência. Eu enviei uma stablecoin, então fiquei lá assistindo a tela, verificando o gás, me perguntando se perdi algo, atualizando a carteira, esperando que não falhasse. Nada dramático aconteceu. Funcionou. Mas não foi calmo. Nunca se sente calmo. E foi aí que me atendeu: dinheiro em cripto ainda pede atenção demais.
A maioria #blockchains parece aceitar isso como normal. Eles tratam a fricção como um processo de aprendizado. Você deve entender gás, taxas, tempos de confirmação, pontes, tentativas e redes. Se você não entender, isso é "sua responsabilidade." Com o tempo, as pessoas se acostumam com isso. Mas se acostumar com algo não significa que seja bom. Apenas significa que você está cansado de lutar contra isso.

I’ve been in #crypto long enough to notice a pattern. Every new cycle, projects start using the same words: “mass adoption,” “next billion users,” “real-world use.” It sounds great. It always does. But most of the time, those words are just decoration. When you actually try to use the product, it still feels like you need a technical background and a lot of patience.
That’s why, when I started paying attention to Vanar, I didn’t look at charts first. I looked at where people were actually using it. Games. Digital worlds. Collectibles. Brand experiences. Not just trading dashboards and farming platforms. That already told me something important.

They’re not building only for traders.
They’re trying to build for normal people.
And that changes everything.
Most #blockchains are quietly designed for a very specific type of user. Someone who understands wallets, knows how to protect a seed phrase, checks networks before sending, and accepts that mistakes can’t be reversed. Someone who stays calm when things break and knows how to troubleshoot. That person exists, but it’s a small group.
That person is not my cousin who just wants to play a game.
It’s not my friend who barely updates his phone.
It’s not most people.

Most people are busy. They’re tired. They multitask. They forget things. They click wrong buttons. They panic when something looks strange. They don’t want to “learn crypto.” They want things to work like normal apps.
If a system can’t handle that reality, it will never grow beyond insiders.
That’s why user experience matters more than most people admit.
When someone joins a platform through a game or digital experience, they’re excited. They want to explore. They want to collect something. They want to have fun. Then suddenly they’re asked to create a wallet, back up a phrase, approve permissions, and confirm transactions. For many users, that moment is scary. They feel like they might lose something without understanding why.

Most of them won’t complain.
They’ll just leave.
That’s the silent killer of adoption.
Then there’s recovery.
Phones get lost. Apps get deleted. People change devices. It happens every day. In Web2, you reset a password and move on. In crypto, that mistake can mean total loss. If a platform doesn’t have a realistic way to deal with this, it’s not built for everyday users. It’s built for experts.
Support is another big test.
Something always goes wrong eventually. A transaction is slow. A marketplace freezes. A login fails. When that happens, users look for help. They want to know who is responsible. If the answer is “nobody” or “that’s just crypto,” trust disappears.
Real adoption happens when support is a system, not a hope.
From what I’ve seen, Vanar seems aware of these problems. They talk more like product builders than protocol engineers. They care about smooth onboarding, predictable fees, and experiences that don’t feel technical. That mindset is rare in this space.
They’re trying to make blockchain feel like background software.

Like Wi-Fi.
Like payment systems.
Like cloud services.
You use it without thinking about it.
That’s how real infrastructure works.
Of course, this path is harder.
It’s much easier to say, “Users should be careful.”
It’s much harder to design systems that protect users from mistakes.
It’s easier to ship fast and let people struggle.
It’s harder to slow down and build safety into the product.
Vanar seems to be choosing the harder route.
But choosing it once is not enough. They have to keep choosing it.
Because there’s a trap here.
Many projects talk about “mass adoption” while still expecting expert behavior. They say they’re for everyone, but design for insiders. They hide complexity instead of managing it. They push responsibility onto users instead of building systems that absorb human error.
If Vanar falls into that trap, it will become just another niche chain.
But if they stay focused on real people, not just ideal users, something different can happen.
Look at where they’re building: gaming, entertainment, digital culture. That’s where people naturally understand ownership, identity, and participation. You don’t need to explain “blockchain” when someone is collecting items in a game. You just need the experience to feel safe and smooth.

That’s how every major platform grew.
Not through education campaigns.
Through usefulness.
Nobody learned how the internet worked before using Instagram.
Nobody studied databases before using Spotify.
They just worked.
That’s the standard now.
So when I think about Vanar, I don’t ask, “Is the tech impressive?”
A lot of projects have impressive tech.
I ask something simpler:
Can normal people make mistakes here and still survive?
Can they lose a phone and recover?
Can they get confused and find help?
Can they use it while distracted?
Can they trust it without understanding it?
If the answer becomes “yes” over time, Vanar has real potential.

If the answer stays “only if you’re careful,” then adoption will always be limited.
Right now, I see effort in the right direction.
I see focus on products people actually touch.
I see attention to experience, not just architecture.
But the real test is still ahead.
Because building for humans is not a one-time decision.
It’s a long-term commitment.
You have to keep choosing it, even when it’s slower.
Even when it’s less flashy.
Even when it doesn’t pump the price.
In crypto, many projects chase attention.
Vanar seems to be chasing comfort.
If they succeed, users won’t talk about it much.
They’ll just use it.
And honestly, that’s the highest compliment any technology can get.
@Vanarchain $VANRY #vanar #WhenWillBTCRebound

Assistir #DUSK tem sido como ver alguém tentar se levantar após cair e escorregar novamente toda vez que chega à metade do caminho.
Cada vez que o preço começa a subir, há um pequeno momento de esperança. As pessoas notam. Alguns começam a pensar: “Talvez esta seja finalmente a virada.” Os gráficos parecem um pouco melhores. O momento melhora. Parece que as coisas podem se estabilizar.
Então, ele desaparece.

Em pouco tempo, o preço volta a cair. Os indicadores enfraquecem novamente. A energia desaparece. E de repente, estamos de volta ao ponto de partida.

No crypto, geralmente conectamos “bons projetos” com empolgação. Movimentos rápidos de preços, comunidades barulhentas, atualizações constantes e algo acontecendo todos os dias. Quando essa energia se esvai, a maioria de nós automaticamente assume que o projeto está perdendo relevância.
É por isso que minha primeira experiência com o Plasma pareceu estranha.
Na primeira vez que o usei, enviei alguns USDT. A transação ocorreu suavemente. Sem atrasos. Sem taxas estranhas. Sem problemas técnicos. Tudo funcionou exatamente como esperado. E ainda assim, senti uma pequena sensação de desapontamento. Não porque algo deu errado, mas porque nada dramático aconteceu.

Uma coisa que comecei a prestar atenção em cripto é isso: alguém fora deste espaço realmente gostaria de usar este produto?
Não “entender” isso. Não “investir” nisso.
Apenas... use isso. Sem estresse. Sem tutoriais. Sem sentir como se tivessem entrado em um mundo estranho.
Essa é a pergunta que Vanar continua respondendo melhor do que a maioria dos projetos que eu assisti.

Quando eu olhei para isso pela primeira vez, o que me surpreendeu não foi alguma afirmação técnica maluca. Foi o quanto eles tentaram mostrar pouco. Não havia barulho de “somos os mais rápidos”, “somos os mais baratos”, “somos o futuro de tudo”. Em vez disso, o foco parecia muito prático: como fazemos o blockchain se encaixar em coisas que as pessoas já fazem, como jogar, juntar comunidades, colecionar itens digitais ou interagir com marcas?