Most public chain projects are touting EVM compatibility, but the real differentiating competitive advantage lies elsewhere. Take Dusk as an example; its core strength is "native compliance"—not an after-the-fact wrapper, but built-in regulatory attributes at the moment of asset chain issuance. How is this achieved? By partnering with NPEX to apply for a DLT-TSS exemption, integrating programmatic compliance directly into the protocol itself. What is the result? Significantly reduced risks for institutional participation, and clearer entry thresholds. From this perspective, Dusk is more like a piece of infrastructure rather than a project driven by short-term narratives. The significance of this positioning is that it attracts participants who genuinely want to make long-term arrangements within a compliant framework, rather than speculative capital chasing hot trends.

DUSK70,23%
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.
  • Reward
  • 8
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
ShibaSunglassesvip
· 1h ago
Native compliance integrated into the protocol, this approach is indeed different, but will institutions really buy into it?
View OriginalReply0
StablecoinAnxietyvip
· 01-15 14:02
Oh wow, someone finally said it, EVM compatibility has been played out for a long time. Dusk's approach is indeed a bit different, integrating compliance into the protocol... that's outrageous, it feels like doing something serious. But to be honest, will institutions really buy into this, or is it just another PPT show?
View OriginalReply0
gas_fee_traumavip
· 01-15 14:02
Incorporating compliance into the protocol is indeed a hardcore approach, much better than patching things after the fact. --- Both institutions and exemptions—feels like they're just storytelling? Show some evidence. --- I’m optimistic about native compliance; it’s more reliable than later packaging. --- Is Dusk trying to block institutions? Clever move. --- Sounds nice, but can compliance really be written into code? --- Infrastructure vs. narrative projects—this categorization perspective is pretty good; I’ve learned something. --- Programmatic compliance sounds like the future direction, but how many people really care about this right now? --- Clear thresholds for institutional risk reduction—this statement makes sense. --- Instead of boasting about EVM compatibility, it’s better to deliver something tangible. I like this logic. --- Speculators hate clear thresholds the most, so this might actually be something.
View OriginalReply0
metaverse_hermitvip
· 01-15 13:58
Including compliance in the agreement is a move I haven't seen before, but it depends on whether it can truly be implemented later on.
View OriginalReply0
VitalikFanboy42vip
· 01-15 13:58
Hey, this logic is indeed quite interesting. Compared to all those EVM-compatible tricks, compliance is truly a real necessity.
View OriginalReply0
tx_or_didn't_happenvip
· 01-15 13:56
Incorporating compliance into the protocol—this approach is indeed different. Compared to those chains that boast about how fast they are every day, this infrastructure mindset is the one that can last longer. --- Another project aiming to build infrastructure, but how many can truly stick with it? --- I believe the point about reduced institutional risk, but the question is whether the liquidity is sufficient. --- Got it, it's about treating regulation as a feature rather than a bug. Sounds good, but how will it be implemented? --- DLT-TSS exemption sounds impressive, but how many institutions can actually get involved depends on the data. --- It sounds nice, but what's the current activity level of Dusk's ecosystem? Having only a compliance framework is useless. --- This is the real differentiation, but it depends on how well the subsequent execution is.
View OriginalReply0
NewDAOdreamervip
· 01-15 13:54
Incorporating compliance directly into the protocol itself is indeed a different approach. Compared to those who constantly shout about EVM, Dusk's logic is more like playing chess.
View OriginalReply0
ETH_Maxi_Taxivip
· 01-15 13:53
Including compliance in the protocol is indeed a valid approach, but will institutions really foot the bill for this?
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)