I have pondered this question for a long time: What is the crypto space really trying to achieve? Is it building a parallel universe completely isolated from traditional finance, or is it transferring some functions of traditional finance onto the blockchain? It seems everyone is talking about the latter, but in practice, the code being written reflects the former. The entire design logic hints that rules will be rewritten, systems redefined, and reality ultimately compromised for technology.

But this is fundamentally unrealistic.

Financial regulatory frameworks are not in place because of "poor efficiency." Simply put, once a system grows large and issues arise, the costs become unbearable. Securities clearing, fund custody, auditing systems—what do these have in common? They all aim to prevent systemic risk. Looking at blockchain from this perspective makes it clear: it’s not that blockchain chooses how financial systems should operate, but rather that financial systems decide which blockchains are viable.

From this angle, Dusk’s design approach stands out remarkably. Most people still see it as a "privacy + RWA" combo, but what it actually does is more core—forcing compliance, privacy, and auditing, three inherently conflicting requirements, into the same underlying logic. Not through external modules or post-hoc fixes, but from the very architecture itself, asserting: these three must operate simultaneously; otherwise, there’s no point in discussing.

Most public chains haven't thought this through. Some choose absolute transparency, others lean toward extreme privacy. Both extremes are avoiding a core contradiction.