What stood out wasn't the zero-knowledge machinery itself, it was noticing that Dusk's default flow doesn't ask most users to think about selective disclosure at all. Dusk's compliance tooling appears to function as an institution-facing layer, rather than something retail wallets surface by default. So the idea of public activity with privacy and selective disclosure when required is technically true, but in practice the disclosure tooling is primarily relevant to issuers and regulated entities running compliance checks, while ordinary transfers can remain standard public or shielded activity without exposing disclosure tooling to users. That's a sensible sequencing choice: institutions need the auditability hooks, while individuals mostly need privacy. But it also means the compliance framing describes an architecture more than a lived experience for most wallets today. The gap between who the design serves first and who the narrative centers is quiet but real. Makes me wonder how long before that disclosure layer becomes something a regular user actually sees or interacts with, versus remaining mostly backend infrastructure for institutional counterparties.
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk