2026-01-10 12:29:17

Raising traditional L2 scaling solutions (like those based on Optimism), institutional-grade fund managers always view them with a bit of caution — it feels like a constantly patched-up temporary fix. The most frustrating part is the 7-day fault challenge period; in financial markets, every second counts, and such waiting periods are a disgrace to efficiency.

Dusk aims to flip the script with a different approach. Its three-layer architecture (DuskDS/EVM/VM) directly eliminates this ambiguous state.

**Layer One: DuskDS, Immediate Control of Settlement Rights**

Nodes are no longer passively waiting for challenges. Through the MIPS pre-validator mechanism, state transitions are verified entirely on the hardware circuit side before they are truly committed on-chain. In other words, the causal relationship of assets is physically anchored at the moment of creation. There’s no such thing as "potentially rollbackable" in this system. This instant finality is what institutional funds can truly trust — capital inherently dislikes uncertainty, and DuskDS locks in certainty completely.

**Layer Two: Compatibility is Not a Compromise, but an Expansion Weapon**

The purpose of DuskEVM is actually "absorption" rather than "concession." Using standard Ethereum toolchains (Hardhat, Metamask, etc.), developers can enter Dusk’s privacy ecosystem with almost no friction. What used to take a 12-month development cycle can now be compressed into a few weeks. The brilliance of this move is that Dusk leverages the inertia of the EVM ecosystem to deliver its privacy advantages directly to developers.

DUSK3,96%

ETH1,41%

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.

21 Likes

Reward
21
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ChainMaskedRider

· 13h ago

The 7-day challenge period is truly outrageous... If big institutional players weren't pushed to the brink, who would want to play this game? The idea of instant settlement through hardware verification really hits the pain point. --- The statement about merging ecosystems is brilliant. It's not about following EVM, but using it as a springboard in reverse—this is what it means to truly understand how to play. --- DuskDS's physical anchoring logic doesn't sound like bragging... Capitalists fear the possibility of rollback the most, and now it's completely blocked. --- Wait, MIPS pre-verification handles all validation at the hardware level? Then what's the point of traditional L2 defense and counterattack mechanisms... --- Compatible with EVM but able to preserve privacy, reducing development cycle from 12 months to just a few weeks... If this really comes to fruition, I need to reassess everything. --- Finally, someone is addressing the huge joke of a 7-day wait. The finance sector simply can't afford to lose like this.

View OriginalReply0

BlockDetective

· 01-12 08:38

7-day challenge period, hilarious. In the eyes of institutions, this is truly original sin. --- Wait, instant finality? If that can really be achieved, it’s incredible. Finally, someone is taking the issue of certainty seriously. --- EVM compatibility is actually a form of dimensionality reduction attack; developers benefit, and the ecosystem thrives. --- It seems Dusk is using hardware circuits to bypass the traditional L2 "trust and wait" fate—there's something there. --- Institutions just buy into this—eliminating uncertainty = capital inflow, simple and brutal. --- Just the DuskDS layer is valuable; the other two layers are whatever. That’s the core. --- Switching from the optimistic patchwork approach to physical anchoring really shows a difference in thinking. --- Getting the development cycle down to a few weeks? If that’s true, it’s a direct dimensionality reduction. EVM toolchains are indeed powerful.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-7b078580

· 01-10 12:59

The 7-day waiting period data indeed seems outrageous, but I still need to observe Dusk's approach a bit more. The idea of second-level finality sounds great, but during historical lows, such promises have been made before, and they are bound to collapse. It still depends on actual operational data.

View OriginalReply0

YieldChaser

· 01-10 12:56

Wait, the 7-day challenge period design is really outrageous... How can institutions tolerate it? If Dusk can truly achieve instant finality, that would definitely be a breakthrough. But on the other hand, the combination of privacy + immediacy... could it become a new black box? Trust issues are still quite difficult to overcome.

View OriginalReply0

SnapshotBot

· 01-10 12:56

The 7-day waiting period is really incredible, which is why institutional guys are all watching. Dusk's logic of a second-level finality is indeed fierce; hardware-level validation directly locks in uncertainty, which is exactly what capital wants.

View OriginalReply0

MEVSupportGroup

· 01-10 12:51

Wait, the 7-day challenge period is really outrageous. I complained so many times when I got trapped in it a couple of years ago... This DuskDS sounds interesting, and the pre-verification of hardware circuits is a bit novel.

View OriginalReply0

FlashLoanPrince

· 01-10 12:50

The 7-day challenge period is really crazy. Wait, wait, wait, the project team is fixing bugs over there while I'm here feeling anxious. Who can handle this? Dusk's second-level finality looks okay, but it depends on how it performs in practice. There are too many people bragging.

View OriginalReply0

0xTherapist

· 01-10 12:39

The 7-day challenge period is really outrageous. How could institutions wait that long... Listening to Dusk's second-level finality is truly satisfying.

View OriginalReply0