Often pondering, where is the most ironic aspect of blockchain over the past decade? After thinking it through, it boils down to these paradoxes: on one hand, shouting "Code is Law," only to frequently hit walls when facing real-world legal systems; on the other hand, promising "Trustless Trust," but ending up deeper in trouble due to lost private keys and exchange risks.

This is why the emergence of Dusk Foundation is quite interesting—not to break down walls, but to carve out a window in the high walls of regulation, allowing light in while maintaining privacy.

Speaking of privacy, we need to first dispel a misconception. Early in the crypto space, privacy was demonized, as if privacy equals money laundering or underground transactions. But look at traditional finance? Bank account balances are not displayed on glass windows for everyone to see, and stock trading orders are not scrolling across large screens at exchanges. So, privacy has never been a "cloak of shame"; it is a fundamental aspect of financial operations—selectively revealing information, and that is common sense.

Dusk’s zero-knowledge proof technology is like a confessional in medieval Europe. You can prove to the priest that you have repented without revealing the specific "sins." This logic also applies to finance: proving compliance to regulators without having to open the entire ledger. The beauty of ZKP lies here—it’s not about making transactions "disappear," but about transforming from a "completely public ledger" to a "verifiable secret."

This actually touches on the most difficult problem in Web3: how to rebuild "reasonable privacy rights" in decentralized systems? Bitcoin takes a path of complete transparency, which is an ideological choice. But what the real world needs might be a different balance—not naive anonymity, nor a surveillance society in disguise.