2026-01-16 19:24:54

The DUSK project makes me feel like they are truly playing a long game. Looking at their combined approach of zero-knowledge proofs and shared state, the idea is very unique—data encryption is executed while maintaining composability. Most chains are either fully transparent or completely black box, but they have found a middle ground where developers can build private and verifiable DeFi products, such as batching orders without revealing the true intent.

The biggest test for this technology will be in 2026. Market testing at that time will reveal whether privacy costs ultimately fall on the chain—will institutional users be willing to pay for it? That will be the real test.

From my perspective, DUSK is redefining what efficiency means. It’s not just about higher TPS, but about the net benefits of privacy and compliance. Compared to application-layer solutions like ZK-rollups, DUSK is more like infrastructure-level technology, especially suitable for banking-grade applications. Recently, they integrated fully homomorphic encryption (FHE), enabling machine learning to be privacy-preserving as well. Imagine AI fund management tools operating without revealing trading strategies—that’s the potential.

If you want to dive deeper, check out their code commits on GitHub. The activity level is quite high, and the 0.8 version’s compressed ciphertext optimization is very practical, giving you an intuitive sense of the iteration direction and real potential of privacy chain technology.

DUSK60,85%

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.

19 Likes

Reward
19
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MoodFollowsPrice

· 6h ago

Sounds good, but will institutions really pay for privacy? I'm a bit skeptical. --- The idea of a middle-ground approach is correct, but who bears the cost is the real key. --- FHE is truly outstanding, and AI strategies that don't expose this idea are very ambitious. --- We'll see the results in 2026; it's still a bit early to say anything now. --- Bank-grade applications sound impressive, but how many can actually be implemented? --- Active code is a good sign, but I'm worried it might just be another technical castle in the air built on piling up features. --- After all the fuss, the core question remains: who pays for privacy? --- Version 0.8 optimizations look quite solid, but turning these detailed updates into ecological applications is the real challenge. --- The net benefits of privacy and compliance? It sounds like walking a tightrope between fish and bear paws—how long can it last? --- Many are already paving the way with ZK-rollups, but can DUSK, as a foundational-level infrastructure, really stand out from the crowd?

View OriginalReply0

SigmaValidator

· 16h ago

NGL, the privacy + compliance roadmap of DUSK really moved me, but the cost model in 2026 is the true litmus test. Are institutions really willing to spend? FHE might be overthought here. The idea of privacy-preserving AI trading strategies sounds great, but can it actually run on-chain? The GitHub commit frequency is indeed impressive, but I have no idea if the ecosystem is cold or warm. The infrastructure-level concept is good, but I worry it might end up as just another good idea that no one uses. Honestly, the question of who bears the privacy costs can't be solved. No matter how awesome DUSK is, it’s pointless if that’s not addressed. ZK-rollups already have an ecosystem foundation. Why would developers migrate to DUSK? That’s the real problem.

View OriginalReply0

UnluckyMiner

· 16h ago

Damn, this privacy + composability approach is indeed different, but can 2026 really prove anything? Feels like privacy chains are always just storytelling, where's the real-world implementation? GitHub activity is active, but elegant code ≠ market acceptance, brother. FHE is a bit far-fetched, machine learning privacy sounds great, but what about the gas fees? Institutional users are the key. Do they really care about privacy or just costs? Full homomorphic encryption sounds impressive, but who will pay for the performance trade-offs? Bank-level applications? Come on, they wouldn't touch this kind of experimental product. There are so many ZK solutions, why does it have to be DUSK? Honestly, it's still a gambler's mentality. Is it possible I misunderstood? Can their FHE solution really be implemented? Privacy + efficiency is a contradiction; pick one and don't try to have both.

View OriginalReply0

CommunityWorker

· 16h ago

To be honest, the idea of DUSK is indeed different; balancing privacy and composability is very challenging, but they found something. By 2026, when the fee market takes off, we'll see if is not salty anymore. Will institutions be willing to pay for privacy? That's the real question. Wait, fully homomorphic encryption + AI fund? If this setup can really run, I need to reassess. I looked around GitHub; the code activity is pretty good, but I still need to dive deeper into the 0.8 optimization part. This kind of infrastructure-level stuff is not even on the same level as ZK-rollup, but don't overhype it; bank-grade applications still need time for validation.

View OriginalReply0

LayoffMiner

· 16h ago

I really think this approach is solid; the middle ground is key. Will people truly pay for privacy? See you in 2026. Making privacy chains into infrastructure is a somewhat different idea, but the real question is whether the cost pressure can be sustained. FHE (Fully Homomorphic Encryption) is indeed impressive; AI strategies that don't expose too much are not too outrageous. High activity in code is a good sign, but we also need to see genuine reactions from institutions.

View OriginalReply0

ImpermanentPhilosopher

· 16h ago

Hey, 2026 is the real test of credibility; let's see if institutions dare to truly pay for privacy then. --- The approach of DUSK's middle-ground strategy is indeed quite insightful, clearer than those all-or-nothing design ideas. --- I need to pay attention to the FHE integration; the potential for AI trading not exposing strategies is quite significant. --- Wait, do privacy costs ultimately need to be absorbed on-chain? Can you elaborate on this logic? --- High activity in GitHub commits only shows that work is being done, but whether it can really be implemented depends on 2026. --- Bank-level applications sound grand, but are there actually banks using privacy chains now? Are there any case studies? --- I need to look at the code myself for the compression ciphertext optimization; just hearing the description is a bit uncertain. --- Honestly, compared to chasing TPS, DUSK's approach truly aligns better with the real needs of institutional users. --- Achieving both composability and privacy sounds easy, but in reality, it might kill a bunch of people trying. --- If this set of technologies can really be implemented, its impact on the entire privacy track could be greater than some star projects.

View OriginalReply0