Mr Crypto_ 加密先生

@Walrus 🦭/acc #walrus
In 2024, as Web3 infrastructure began to mature beyond experiments and short-lived hype cycles, one challenge became impossible to ignore: data scalability. Blockchains were getting faster, cheaper, and more expressive, but the data they relied on was still fragile. Links broke. Files disappeared. Storage depended on centralized services that could change rules overnight. This growing gap between powerful blockchains and unreliable data layers is exactly where Walrus Protocol ($WAL ) enters the picture.

Walrus was built with a clear understanding of what modern Web3 actually needs. Applications today are not just smart contracts moving tokens. They include AI systems that rely on large datasets, games that require persistent worlds, NFT platforms that depend on permanent media, and social apps that cannot afford to lose user content. Traditional blockchains were never designed to store large blobs of data, and centralized cloud storage undermines decentralization. Walrus exists to solve this problem at its root.
At its core, Walrus is a decentralized blob storage protocol built on the Sui blockchain. Sui’s architecture—designed around parallel execution and object-based ownership—makes it a natural foundation for a scalable storage system. Walrus uses Sui not as a place to store large files directly, but as a coordination and verification layer. The heavy data lives off-chain, distributed across many independent storage nodes, while cryptographic proofs and metadata live on-chain.
What makes Walrus different from earlier decentralized storage systems is its focus on economic alignment. Storage is not just a technical problem. It is an incentive problem. Data only stays available if someone has a reason to keep storing it. Walrus addresses this by designing an economy around $WAL , where incentives are structured to reward reliability over time.

Storage nodes in Walrus are backed by delegated staking. WAL token holders can stake their tokens to nodes they trust, even if they do not operate hardware themselves. Nodes with more stake are entrusted with storing more data, but that trust comes with responsibility. Poor performance, downtime, or dishonest behavior puts future rewards—and eventually stake—at risk. This creates a competitive environment where good operators attract stake and bad ones are gradually pushed out.
This model does two important things. First, it decentralizes participation. Not everyone needs to run servers to help secure the network. Second, it ties long-term data availability to economic incentives, not goodwill. Walrus does not assume that operators will behave honestly forever. It makes honesty the rational choice.
By late 2024, Walrus had clearly positioned itself as a base data layer rather than a finished product. It does not try to handle encryption, access control, or application logic itself. Instead, it focuses on being extremely good at one thing: keeping data available and verifiable. Developers can then build higher-level services on top—private storage, marketplaces, AI pipelines, or archival systems—without worrying about the underlying durability of their data.
Another key strength of Walrus is its use of erasure coding and redundancy. Data is split into fragments and distributed across many nodes. Even if some nodes go offline, the data can still be reconstructed. This design accepts reality: failures happen. Hardware breaks. Networks partition. Walrus is built to survive these conditions instead of pretending they will not occur.
The integration with Sui’s object model adds another layer of flexibility. Data stored via Walrus can be referenced as on-chain objects, making it possible for smart contracts to reason about ownership, availability, and integrity without pulling large files on-chain. This is especially important for scalable applications that need to coordinate data across many users and chains.
By early 2025, the demand for this kind of infrastructure became more obvious. AI models required massive, persistent datasets. Games needed reliable asset storage that would not disappear with a company shutdown. NFT creators demanded guarantees that media would still exist years later. At the same time, regulatory and platform risks made centralized storage less attractive. Walrus fit naturally into this environment because it was designed for longevity, not short-term convenience.
What truly defines Walrus is its philosophy. It treats data as load-bearing infrastructure. When data disappears, everything above it collapses. When data holds, ecosystems can grow safely. Walrus does not promise permanence through marketing. It enforces permanence through economics, cryptography, and open competition.
In simple words, Walrus is building the backbone that Web3 quietly depends on. It is not flashy. It is not user-facing. Most people will never interact with Walrus directly—and that is exactly the point. The best infrastructure is invisible when it works.
As Web3 continues to scale through 2025 and beyond, success will depend less on novelty and more on reliability. Applications will only be as strong as the data they stand on. By combining Sui’s scalable architecture with a carefully designed incentive system, Walrus Protocol ($WAL ) is positioning itself as one of the few projects genuinely focused on solving that foundational problem.
$WAL

In the spring of 2018, a small team of cryptographers, developers, and financial experts gathered in Amsterdam with a quiet but radical idea. Public blockchains like Bitcoin and Ethereum had proven that trustless systems could work, but they exposed everything—every transaction, every balance, every move. For the traditional financial world, built on confidentiality and regulatory safeguards, this transparency was a deal-breaker. Dusk Network was born to solve that contradiction: to give institutions and everyday users the privacy they already expect, without abandoning decentralization.
The founders understood something profound. Banks, stock exchanges, and asset managers don’t need to be rebuilt from scratch—they need a bridge that respects the rules they already follow. Dusk set out to become that bridge, a Layer 1 blockchain where compliance isn’t an afterthought but the foundation.
For years, the team worked in steady rhythm. By late 2023, they shipped two breakthroughs that changed everything. First came Citadel, the first production-ready confidential smart contract. Then Rusk VM 2.0, a zero-knowledge virtual machine that made complex private computations fast and secure. Rusk, the technological heart of the network, powers the node software that validators run. It’s where zero-knowledge proofs meet practical finance—allowing contracts to hide sensitive data while still proving correctness to regulators and auditors. This wasn’t theoretical research anymore; it was code that institutions could actually use.
June 2023 brought a symbolic shift: Dusk Network rebranded simply to Dusk. Five years of research had matured into something focused and ready for partners. The vision sharpened—bring real-world assets on-chain, from bonds to private equity, with privacy that satisfies MiCA in Europe and SEC requirements elsewhere.
The long-awaited mainnet arrived on January 7, 2025. After six years of testnets, audits, and incremental launches, the first immutable blocks were written. $DUSK , the native token, finally had a permanent home. Stakers secured the network, paid fees, and governed upgrades. Transactions settled instantly and privately. Developers could deploy confidential smart contracts that no other Layer 1 could match.
But Dusk didn’t stop. By May 2025, the two-way bridge between the base layer and DuskEVM went live, letting users move $DUSK seamlessly and open the door to broader DeFi tools. In June 2025, the team announced a multilayer architecture—settlement, execution, and data availability layers working together to cut costs and speed up integration for institutions. Privacy remained non-negotiable across every layer.
Partnerships followed quickly. In July 2025, Dutch stock exchange NPEX chose Dusk to tokenize regulated assets, citing its unique ability to meet compliance demands on-chain. By November 2025, Dusk integrated Chainlink’s CCIP and data standards, making tokenized institutional assets composable across ecosystems while keeping sensitive information shielded.
What makes Dusk different is the Confidential Security Contract (XSC) standard. Traditional security tokens reveal too much; XSC tokens hide ownership and transfer details behind zero-knowledge proofs. A pension fund can trade private shares without exposing its entire position. A company can issue bonds without broadcasting who bought them. Regulators can still audit when required—Dusk provides view keys for authorized parties only.
Rusk sits at the center of all this. It’s more than a node; it’s the reference implementation that ties together Plonk zero-knowledge proofs, the consensus mechanism, and the virtual machine. Every improvement to Rusk—faster proof generation, lower gas costs, better developer tools—directly strengthens the network’s promise of usable privacy.
Today, in early 2026, Dusk is no longer a vision. Institutions are running pilots. Tokenized real-world assets are moving on-chain with full regulatory comfort. $DUSK holders stake to secure a network that finally speaks the language of traditional finance while staying true to blockchain principles.
The financial world didn’t need another transparent ledger. It needed privacy that already exists in boardrooms and trading floors—now brought securely, verifiably, and openly to everyone. Dusk Network spent eight years building exactly that. And it’s only getting started.
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK

In January 2026, while much of the crypto market remains focused on short-term narratives and retail-driven momentum, a different story is unfolding beneath the surface. Institutional investors are not chasing hype. They are positioning for infrastructure that can survive regulation, compliance, and scale. This is why Dusk Network ($DUSK ) has been quietly moving onto institutional radar screens in 2026, not through loud announcements, but through design choices that align closely with how real financial markets actually work.

To understand why institutions care about Dusk, it helps to start with what most blockchains still get wrong. Public blockchains are transparent by default. That transparency works well for open experimentation, but it breaks down the moment regulated finance enters the picture. Institutions cannot operate in environments where trade sizes, identities, and strategies are exposed in real time. Privacy is not a preference for them. It is a requirement. Dusk was built around this reality from the beginning.
Dusk Network is a privacy-first, compliance-aware Layer-1, designed specifically for regulated financial activity. Instead of trying to retrofit privacy later, Dusk treats it as foundational infrastructure. By late 2024, when regulators became more explicit about on-chain compliance expectations, this design choice started to look less ideological and more practical.
One of the core reasons institutions are accumulating $DUSK in 2026 is selective privacy. Dusk does not promote absolute anonymity. It enables confidential transactions while still allowing proofs and disclosures when required. This balance is critical for securities, funds, and real-world assets moving on-chain. Institutions need privacy from competitors, but accountability toward regulators. Dusk’s architecture is built for that exact tension.
Another key factor is finality and settlement certainty. Financial institutions care deeply about settlement risk. Dusk’s consensus design prioritizes predictable finality rather than headline transaction speed. In real markets, knowing when a transaction is final matters more than shaving off milliseconds. By 2025, as tokenized securities pilots expanded globally, this focus on settlement quality became increasingly valuable.
Dusk is also not trying to be a general-purpose DeFi playground. Its ecosystem is structured around regulated use cases: tokenized equities, debt instruments, compliant funds, and permissioned financial workflows. This clarity of purpose is attractive to institutions. They are not looking for chains that do everything. They are looking for chains that do one thing correctly.
The $DUSK token plays a supporting role in this design. It is not positioned as a speculative utility token detached from network purpose. It aligns incentives around network security, participation, and long-term operation. For institutions, this matters. They assess whether a token’s value is tied to real usage or purely to market sentiment. In Dusk’s case, the token is tied to a network explicitly designed for institutional finance.
By mid-2025, another trend became clear: privacy itself was being reframed by regulators. Rather than rejecting privacy outright, regulatory frameworks began distinguishing between privacy that hides wrongdoing and privacy that protects legitimate business confidentiality. Dusk fits neatly into the second category. This shift reduced perceived regulatory risk and made exposure to privacy-aware infrastructure more acceptable.
There is also a strategic reason institutions accumulate quietly. Liquidity in infrastructure tokens is often thinner than in large-cap assets. Accumulating slowly avoids market impact and attention. Institutions learned this lesson repeatedly across crypto cycles. By the time a narrative becomes obvious on social media, positioning is already complete. Dusk’s accumulation pattern in early 2026 reflects this behavior.
Another overlooked aspect is operational risk. Many blockchains optimize for developer experimentation, not operational reliability. Institutions care about uptime, governance clarity, and long-term maintenance. Dusk’s development approach emphasizes correctness and auditability over rapid iteration. This conservative engineering culture resonates strongly with institutional risk teams.
In simple words, Dusk is not exciting in the way meme coins or consumer apps are exciting. It is exciting in the way financial plumbing is exciting—only to people who understand how markets actually break. Institutions do not invest based on narratives alone. They invest based on whether infrastructure reduces risk over a ten-year horizon.
By 2026, the crypto industry is no longer asking whether institutions will come on-chain. That question has been answered. The real question is where they will settle. Dusk offers something few networks do: a place where privacy, compliance, and decentralization coexist without contradiction.
That is why institutional investors are accumulating $DUSK quietly. Not because they expect overnight price action, but because they see a network built for the rules of the real world. And in finance, infrastructure that respects those rules tends to last longer than anything built to ignore them.
@Dusk #dusk

2024年、イーサリアムのレイヤー2ネットワークが費用競争を繰り広げながら拡大を続ける中、Web3インフラの世界で静かに浮上した別の議論があった：取引手数料は本当に最大のコストなのか、それともストレージが隠れたボトルネックになっているのだろうか？この問いは重要である。現代のWeb3は、トークンの送金にとどまらない。NFTのメディア、AIデータセット、ゲームアセット、アプリケーションの状態、長期にわたるコンテンツといったデータの保存が中心となっている。ここに、ウォルラスプロトコル（$WAL ）が登場する。これは従来の実行レイヤーではなく、Sui上で構築され、全く異なるコストモデルを持つストレージに特化したプロトコルである。

@Walrus 🦭/acc #walrus $WAL
When I look at the crypto space today, I feel that most people are still obsessed with the visible layers: tokens, prices, narratives, applications, and short-term trends. Very few stop and think deeply about the invisible infrastructure that everything depends on. Over time, I have come to believe that data availability and long-term storage are not side problems; they are foundational. This is where my interest in Walrus Protocol began. Walrus is not a loud project. It does not rely on hype-driven marketing or exaggerated promises. Instead, it quietly focuses on one of the most underestimated problems in the digital world: how do we make data truly permanent, verifiable, and available in an environment where failure is normal and trust is limited? This thesis is my attempt to explain Walrus in simple, human language, the same way I would explain it to myself while doing serious research, without shortcuts, templates, or buzzwords.

The modern internet gives us the illusion of permanence, but in reality it is extremely fragile. Links die, websites vanish, servers shut down, and platforms change policies without warning. We have all experienced “404 not found” errors, broken archives, and missing content. This problem becomes far more serious when you realize that blockchains, NFTs, DeFi protocols, AI systems, and even governance frameworks depend on off-chain data. If that data disappears, the blockchain record may remain intact, but the meaning behind it collapses. Most systems today simply assume availability. They trust that servers will stay online, companies will keep operating, and incentives will not change. Walrus starts from the opposite assumption: things will fail. Nodes will go offline. Actors will behave selfishly. Infrastructure will be attacked or abandoned. The system must still work despite all of this. That single assumption shapes the entire architecture of Walrus.
Walrus is not trying to be a general-purpose cloud storage replacement like Google Drive or AWS. It is also not just another IPFS-style file-sharing network. Its goal is more specific and more difficult: to provide strong, cryptographically verifiable guarantees that data remains available over time, even in adversarial conditions. In simple terms, Walrus treats data as a long-term liability that must be actively defended, not as a passive file that is assumed to exist. This philosophical difference is important because it aligns much more closely with how real financial systems, legal records, AI models, and digital identities need to operate. These systems cannot afford silent data loss.

At the technical core of Walrus is its storage and encoding model, often discussed through its RedStuff approach. Instead of storing full copies of files across many nodes, which is expensive and inefficient, Walrus breaks data into encoded fragments using advanced erasure coding techniques. These fragments are distributed across a large set of independent storage nodes. The key idea is that only a subset of these fragments is required to reconstruct the original data. This means the system can tolerate multiple node failures without losing availability. From an economic perspective, this drastically reduces storage overhead compared to naive replication. From a security perspective, it increases resilience against targeted attacks or coordinated outages. From a systems perspective, it allows Walrus to scale without exploding costs.
One of the strongest aspects of Walrus is that it does not rely on trust-based promises. Storage nodes are not simply paid and hoped to be honest. They must regularly produce cryptographic proofs that they are still storing the data they committed to. These proofs are verifiable and enforceable. If a node fails to prove storage, it loses rewards and risks penalties. This creates a powerful incentive structure where honest behavior is economically rational and dishonest behavior is punished. In my view, this is one of the most important properties of any decentralized infrastructure: the system should not rely on goodwill. It should rely on incentives that align individual behavior with network health.
Walrus is closely integrated with the Sui ecosystem, and this relationship makes architectural sense. Sui focuses on high-throughput execution, parallelism, and efficient handling of on-chain objects. Walrus complements this by acting as a durable storage layer for large data objects that do not belong directly on a high-performance execution chain. Instead of forcing everything onto the blockchain, Walrus allows developers to separate computation from storage while preserving verifiability. This modular approach reflects a broader shift in blockchain design, where specialized layers handle specific responsibilities instead of one chain trying to do everything.
When I think about real-world use cases, Walrus becomes even more compelling. NFTs are often marketed as permanent digital assets, but in practice many rely on centralized or semi-centralized storage solutions. If the underlying media disappears, the NFT loses its value and meaning. Walrus offers a path toward truly persistent NFTs. Rollups and modular blockchains require reliable data availability layers to function securely; Walrus can serve as neutral infrastructure for publishing and retrieving transaction data. AI systems depend on massive datasets and trained models that must remain accessible and auditable over time; Walrus provides a way to store these artifacts with cryptographic guarantees instead of blind trust. Even governance systems and legal records benefit from storage that is verifiable, censorship-resistant, and long-lasting.
The WAL token plays a critical role in coordinating all of this activity. It is not just a speculative asset; it is the economic glue that binds users, storage providers, and the protocol together. WAL is used to pay for storage, incentivize honest participation, and enforce penalties when rules are broken. This ties resource usage directly to cost, which is essential for sustainability. Systems that give away resources for free tend to attract abuse. Systems that price resources properly tend to survive. From my analysis, WAL is designed more like infrastructure fuel than a hype-driven governance token, and that distinction matters over the long term.
Of course, Walrus is not without risks. Infrastructure adoption is slow. Developers need time to integrate new storage paradigms. Education is required because decentralized storage is conceptually different from traditional cloud services. Competition exists from other data availability and storage projects, some of which are better known or more aggressively marketed. There is also ecosystem risk: Walrus benefits from broader adoption of modular blockchain architectures and data-intensive applications. These risks are real, but they are also typical for any project operating at the base layer of a technology stack.
When I compare Walrus to centralized cloud storage, the trade-off is clear. Centralized systems are easy and familiar, but they require trust and offer no cryptographic guarantees. When I compare Walrus to earlier decentralized storage solutions, I see a stronger focus on verifiable availability and economic enforcement rather than simple content addressing. Walrus is less about convenience and more about correctness. That makes it less flashy, but more durable.
In the long run, I believe Walrus represents a shift in how we think about digital memory. If blockchains are global ledgers, then systems like Walrus are global memory layers. As more value, identity, and coordination move on-chain, the importance of reliable data availability will only increase. The projects that solve this problem quietly and correctly may not dominate headlines, but they will sit underneath everything that matters.
My final view is simple. Walrus does not promise to change the world overnight. It does not rely on hype cycles or emotional narratives. It assumes failure, selfishness, and decay — and builds around those assumptions. That is a sign of mature engineering and realistic thinking. In a space filled with optimism and speculation, Walrus stands out as infrastructure built for reality. Over time, that may prove to be its greatest strength.

@Dusk #dusk $DUSK
ダスクネットワークを観察するとき、通常の暗号通貨のレースであるスピード、ホットな話題、短期間の注目を勝ち取ろうとしているブロックチェーンは見ません。むしろ、はるかに不快な真実から出発するインフラ戦略を見ています。実際の金融市場は、デフォルトですべてを公開するブロックチェーンでは動かないのです。10年以上にわたり、暗号通貨は極端な透明性を道徳的・技術的な美徳として称賛してきました。この考え方には、初期の実験や小規模参加者、オープンなシステムにおいて効果がありました。しかし、規制された金融をブロックチェーン上に移行しようとした瞬間——証券、債券、ファンド、コンプライアンス対応の実物資産（RWA）——同じ透明性は構造的な欠陥となるのです。ダスクネットワークは、この欠陥を真剣に捉え、それを無視するのではなく、その上に構築されているからこそ存在するのです。