EKRAMUL3

Viena no visu pārskatītākajām, taču strukturāli būtiskākajām vērtspapīru tirgus sastāvdaļām ir akcionāru identificēšana. Emītentiem ir jāzina, kas ir viņu akcionāri, lai nodrošinātu uzņēmuma pārvaldību, balsotāju tiesības, regulatīvās ziņošanas un uzņēmuma pasākumus. Tomēr mūsdienu vērtspapīru infrastruktūra ir attīstījusies tā, ka šī redzamība ir gandrīz neiespējama. Uzglabātāji, vārda akuntes, pārvedēji un CSDs sadala īpašuma datus atsevišķos juridiskos un infrastruktūras līmeņos. Rezultātā ir paradokss: emītenti bieži nevar identificēt tieši tos ieguldītājus, kuri juridiski pieder viņu vērtspapīriem.

Most decentralized storage systems treat data retrieval as a background event something that “just happens” off-chain without creating any traceable economic or verifiable state. Walrus turns that assumption upside down. For applications on Sui, data retrieval becomes a cryptographically-provable, economically-metered, and contract-settleable event rather than an invisible network side-operation. That shift sounds subtle, but structurally, it unlocks an entire class of application patterns that were previously impossible to build without centralized backends.
From Availability Guarantees to Retrieval Guarantees
Web3 has historically focused on availability proofs, i.e., “the data exists somewhere.” But availability alone doesn’t support consumer-facing or enterprise workloads. A dataset that exists but cannot be reliably retrieved on demand is effectively useless. Walrus introduces an upgraded semantic: retrieval-proofed data meaning the system can not only prove data exists, but that the data can be actively pulled from the network when needed, not merely archived.
This distinction turns storage from a passive durability service into an active reliability surface. For AI workloads, social feeds, decentralized websites, and encrypted media, this matters far more than slogans about decentralization.
Retrieval Becomes a Settlement Event
The second transformation Walrus introduces is economic. Retrieval isn’t free. It consumes bandwidth, computing overhead, and node availability. Instead of treating these as externalities absorbed by operators (or worse, subsidized indefinitely), Walrus makes retrieval a first-class transaction routed through Sui contracts.
When a blob is retrieved:
✔ a certificate is validated
✔ a retrieval-proof is generated
✔ a fee is settled on-chain
✔ and token flows are recorded
This creates correct pricing, correct incentives, and most importantly auditable consumption.
Storage stops being a sunk cost. It becomes a market with lifecycle economics.
Why Sui Is the First Place This Makes Sense
Sui’s object-centric execution model is a surprisingly good substrate for retrieval surfaces:
objects can mutate without global consensus overhead
proofs can be stored as first-class state
data usage can trigger downstream logic
fees can be distributed per retrieval
ownership models support gated access
In most chains, retrieval would need to be simulated through opaque off-chain middleware. On Sui, retrieval certificates can be referenced directly as Move objects, aligning data consumption with programmatic logic.
For example, a dApp can require that a dataset was successfully retrieved before allowing an AI agent to run inference on it and pay accordingly.
New Composability Primitives Emerge
Making retrieval verifiable and settleable introduces new primitives:
Retrieval-gated execution
Contracts can require verified data access before they execute certain branches.
Consumption-based billing
Data owners can charge for downstream retrieval rather than upfront uploads.
Lease-style renewal
Long-lived data can expire and renew based on real usage rather than arbitrary time windows.
Cross-tenant privacy
Encrypted blobs can be accessed selectively without exposing raw data to the protocol.
These patterns align with real-world SaaS and cloud models, except without centralized trust.
AI and Enterprise Workloads Are the Real Drivers
Walrus’s retrieval-centric design is not optimized for NFT hype; it aligns with workloads where:
datasets are heavy
retrieval is frequent
privacy is mandatory
cost predictability matters
This includes:
✔ AI inference datasets
✔ ML training records
✔ enterprise audit logs
✔ regulated document flows
✔ private social graphs
✔ multi-user CMS systems
These are the exact categories centralized cloud controls today. Walrus gives them a path onto Sui without degrading privacy or data integrity.
Downstream Economic Implications for $WAL
Once retrieval becomes a settlement surface, the WAL token inherits deeper utility:
storage → paid upfront
retrieval → paid per consumption
renewals → paid per lifecycle
staking → collateral for operators
governance → sets pricing curves
This is not yield farming. It’s cost-of-service economics, similar to infrastructure tokens like bandwidth and compute credits.
If retrieval volume grows with AI and data-rich applications, WAL demand becomes structurally tied to usage instead of sentiment a distinction most tokens never achieve.
The Quiet Shift Underway
The broader implication is simple:
Walrus moves storage from a trust assumption to a programmable resource, and moves retrieval from a side-effect to a settlement event.
Chains that only offer execution cannot scale beyond financial experimentation. Real applications need memory, privacy, availability, and retrieval guarantees all priced correctly and settled transparently.
Walrus is quietly building that layer for Sui before most developers realize they need it.
@Walrus 🦭/acc #Walrus $WAL

Corporate actions are the silent machinery of financial markets. They are not as visible as trading, not as fast as price discovery, and not as glamorous as IPOs yet they define the relationship between issuers and shareholders. From dividends and proxy voting to rights issues and stock splits, corporate actions ensure that capital, governance, and shareholder rights flow correctly through the market. However, the modern corporate action system is surprisingly antiquated. Behind electronic trading platforms and algorithmic liquidity sits a deeply paper-based, intermediated, and reconciliation-heavy ecosystem that slows markets, introduces errors, and creates unnecessary opacity.
Dusk doesn’t just update the old way of handling corporate actions it completely flips the script. Forget about issuers juggling transfer agents, custodians, CSDs, and all those middlemen just to figure out who owns what, pay out entitlements, or get things done. With Dusk, corporate actions settle on-chain, right away. You get real-time ownership, privacy where it matters, and eligibility checks that don’t spill your data everywhere. Everything happens in one shot.
This isn’t just a minor upgrade. We’re talking about a full-on overhaul. Corporate actions aren’t just messages bouncing between intermediaries anymore they’re direct changes written into the protocol itself. It’s the way digital financial markets are supposed to work.
The Legacy Corporate Action Workflow: Slow, Manual, and Friction-Filled
If you really want to grasp how much Dusk changes things, just look at how clunky corporate actions are right now. Take a simple dividend payout. First, the company makes an announcement. Then the central securities depository tracks the record dates. Custodians scramble to match up who owns what. Transfer agents try to keep up and update the list of beneficial owners. All sorts of middlemen jump in to double-check entitlements. Eventually after all this back and forth the money trickles down to actual investors, but never directly.
Proxy voting? That’s another headache. Investors rarely get to vote straight with the company. Instead, their votes pass through a maze of intermediaries, and a lot of the time, the issuer never even sees who’s voting. The whole thing gets bogged down because shareholder lists aren’t updated in real time. You have to wait for settlement cycles just to confirm who owns what. The whole system basically runs on the idea that companies don’t get to see their own shareholder records; they just rely on layers of middlemen to pass along information and instructions.
This system introduces four chronic failures:
1. Latency: actions settle on multi-day timelines.
2. Opacity: issuers cannot directly see who their investors are.
3. Intermediary drag: multiple actors introduce cost and error.
4. Reconciliation: records often conflict due to multi-ledger realities.
All of this exists not due to theoretical requirements but because legacy infrastructure is fragmented.
The Dusk Model: Corporate Actions as Protocol Logic
Dusk collapses this infrastructure by integrating the securities layer into the settlement layer. When beneficial ownership updates atomically at settlement, the issuer always has a real-time registry directly and without reconciliation overhead.
This enables a new class of corporate action execution that is:
✔ programmatic,
✔ instant,
✔ compliant, and
✔ self-settling.
For example:
• Dividends can distribute automatically to the current beneficial owners at record time.
• Voting rights can map directly to the live registry without custodial mediation.
• Rights issues can be offered to qualified shareholders based on residency and eligibility rules evaluated through zero-knowledge proofs.
• Buybacks can destroy tokenized shares programmatically while realigning shareholder distributions.
Corporate actions become software, not paperwork. They become state transitions, not administrative requests.
Real-Time Registries Enable Real-Time Actions
The critical enabler for programmatic corporate actions is Dusk’s concept of continuous beneficial ownership finality. Traditional markets maintain shareholder lists off-chain, updated periodically. Dusk updates beneficial ownership as part of settlement atomic, authoritative, and legal.
Issuers no longer ask:
“Who owned the shares at record date?”
Instead, the protocol already knows. This removes:
— transfer agents,
— reconciliation events,
— custodian attestations, and
— CSD-based registry certification.
The issuer’s obligations and shareholder entitlements become reproducible from protocol state.
Compliance Without Exposure
Institutional markets operate under compliance constraints eligibility, residency, sanctions, investor classification, etc. These constraints often force corporate actions into manual channels because issuers cannot publicly expose shareholder identities or portfolios.
Dusk solves this using zero-knowledge compliance, enabling the protocol to evaluate whether a shareholder is entitled to an action without revealing personal or strategic information. For example:
• A rights offer can be restricted to shareholders in permitted jurisdictions.
• Voting can be restricted to beneficial holders at record time.
• Dividend withholding tax rules can be evaluated privately.
Compliance becomes proof-based, not disclosure-based preserving confidentiality for institutions.
Why This Unlocks Institutional Tokenization
Most tokenization platforms focus on settlement and issuance. Few address corporate actions, yet corporate actions are essential for actual securities, not just tokenized representations. Real markets require:
✓ dividends,
✓ cash distributions,
✓ governance,
✓ corporate restructurings, and
✓ participation rights.
Tokenization without corporate action automation is just digitization. Tokenization with automation is infrastructure replacement and this is the category where Dusk operates.
Conclusion: From Paperwork to Protocol
Dusk represents a paradigm shift where corporate actions no longer rely on intermediaries to interpret issuer intent. Instead, issuer intent becomes programmatic logic, executed on a live, compliant, privacy-preserving shareholder registry. Corporate actions become real-time events that reflect the true ownership state of the market at the moment they occur.
Where legacy systems treat corporate actions as administrative tasks, Dusk treats them as state transitions in a securities-native protocol. That is how real-world finance becomes on-chain not by tokenizing assets, but by digitizing the mechanisms that make ownership meaningful.
@Dusk #Dusk $DUSK

The history of capital markets is essentially the history of settlement. While trading has become increasingly digital, global, and instant, settlement has remained governed by legal finality, record transfer, beneficial ownership updates, and compliance checks all of which operate at the “securities layer” rather than the “execution layer.” Most blockchains assume that settlement finality equals block finality. In institutional finance, that assumption is fundamentally incorrect.
True settlement finality requires more than cryptographic confirmation. It requires the legally recognized transfer of beneficial ownership, compliance validation, and corporate registry updates. This distinction is why legacy markets continue to operate on T+2 settlement windows despite electronic trading. On-chain infrastructure cannot serve institutional markets unless it can collapse both forms of finality into a unified process operational and legal.
Dusk introduces a blockchain architecture specifically designed for this securities-layer requirement, enabling capital markets to migrate on-chain without breaking compliance, legal enforceability, or regulatory confidence. In doing so, it closes the gap between blockchain finality and the real-world finality that securities markets require to function.
Why Settlement Finality in Finance Is Not the Same as Blockchain Finality
In traditional blockchain narratives, finality is treated as the moment a transaction becomes irreversible. But in regulated securities markets, irreversibility is only one dimension. Securities do not legally transfer until:
✔ the beneficial ownership registry updates,
✔ corporate rights transfer,
✔ compliance checks pass, and
✔ settlement instructions align with regulatory frameworks.
Without these, trades are merely promises, not settlements. Broader markets call this the difference between “trade execution” and “trade completion.” Execution can be instant; completion requires legal and regulatory closure.
This gap is why most tokenization experiments fail to attract institutional liquidity. Tokenizing assets on public chains still leaves the securities layer off-chain, requiring custodians, CSDs, and transfer agents to perform post-trade updates manually. Dusk eliminates that post-trade reconciliation phase entirely.
The Securities Layer as a Protocol Primitive
Dusk is one of the first blockchains to treat the securities layer as a protocol-level feature, not middleware. In legacy infrastructure, securities-layer tasks sit inside structures like DTCC, Euroclear, Clearstream, and national CSDs. Dusk re-architects those functions into cryptographically verifiable components at settlement time. When securities trade on Dusk:
→ beneficial ownership updates automatically,
→ the registry updates atomically,
→ compliance constraints evaluate privately, and
→ settlement reaches legal finality in a single event.
This compression of functions is not just efficiency it is structural realignment. Instead of building an on-chain trading system that still depends on off-chain settlement, Dusk collapses both into a unified protocol.
Finality With Confidentiality
Regulated securities cannot settle publicly with their ownership data exposed. Institutional actors cannot have their holdings, allocations, residency statuses, or strategic positions broadcast to competitors. This is where Dusk deviates from traditional public blockchains.
Dusk integrates zero-knowledge compliance, allowing the protocol to verify transfers against regulatory rules without exposing raw identities or financial positions. The protocol can verify:
✔ eligibility,
✔ residency restrictions,
✔ AML screening,
✔ issuance caps, and
✔ beneficial owner validity,
while preserving privacy for institutional participants. Finality therefore becomes both compliant and confidential, something that no prior L1 has achieved at protocol level.
Eliminating Post-Trade Reconciliation
Legacy financial infrastructure is built around reconciliation the process institutions use to make independently maintained ledgers agree. This exists because the securities layer and execution layer are separate. Reconciliation introduces delays, errors, intermediaries, and settlement risk.
Dusk eliminates reconciliation because there is no ledger fragmentation. The settlement ledger and beneficial ownership ledger are one and the same. When finality occurs, every relevant registry updates instantly and authoritatively.
This directly collapses multiple legacy actors:
— CSD settlement layers,
— transfer agents,
— registries, and
— corporate action intermediaries.
By automating these operations at protocol level, Dusk converts multi-day workflows into atomic settlement primitives.
Institutional Appeal: Risk Compression and Legal Enforceability
Institutions care less about efficiency and more about risk compression. Dusk enables on-chain markets to compress:
• operational risk,
• settlement risk,
• counterparty risk, and
• custody risk.
Removing the securities layer from off-chain intermediaries reduces the risk surface that regulators constantly hedge against. At the same time, Dusk ensures that finality meets the legal standards required for enforceability a major blocker for tokenization platforms built on generic L1s.
Conclusion: Dusk Aligns Blockchain With Market Reality
Institutional markets will not migrate to on-chain infrastructure because tokens are novel they will migrate because settlement becomes safer, faster, compliant, and legally consumable. The bridge between crypto finality and securities finality is not a UI problem, it is a protocol problem. Dusk solves it by absorbing the securities layer into the settlement fabric itself, enabling real-world capital markets to exist on-chain without compromise.
Where most blockchains ask markets to adapt to crypto, Dusk adapts crypto to the way markets already function and that is where adoption lives.
@Dusk #Dusk $DUSK

Web3 vēsturiski ir attiecinājies uz datu pieejamību kā uz kaut ko, kas «vienkārši notiek». Lietotājs augšupielādē failu, dApp atsaucas uz tā atslēgu, un ekosistēma kopumā pieņem, ka kāda glabāšanas tīkla sistēma kaut kur turpmāk turpinās glabāt pamatētisko saturu. Šis pieņēmums darbojās tikai tāpēc, ka agrīnās lietojumprogrammas neuzlikta spiedienu uz šo modeli. Kad decentralizētās sistēmas sāka glabāt dinamisku saturu, šifrētus datus, spēļu resursus un AI radītu stāvokli, plaisas kļuva redzamas. Pieejamība vairs nevarēja tikt uzskatīta par implikatīvu pakalpojumu. Tā bija jāvar pārbaudīt, jāvar ievērot un jāatrisina ekonomiski.

Viena no lielākajiem aizspriedumiem Web3 infrastruktūrā vienmēr bija pieņēmums, ka ārpus ķēdes dati vienkārši “būs pieejami”, kad lietojumprogrammai tos nepieciešams. Industrija uzskatīja glabāšanu par fonu atbildību, nevis kā par apmaksas pakalpojumu. Šis pieņēmums pastāvēja tik ilgi, cik dApp bija mazākas lietojumprogrammas un datu daudzums bija neliels. Kad lietojumprogrammas sāka iekļaut mediju bagātus aktīvus, AI izvērtēšanas rezultātus, šifrētu lietotāju datus un stāvokļa attēlus, pamatmodelis sabruka.
Walrus ievieš korekciju šajā pieņēmumā, pārveidojot ārpus ķēdes datu pieejamību par pārbaudāmu, apliecības atbalstītu procesu, kas tieši integrējas ar Sui izpildes slāni. Vietā, lai cerētu, ka dati būs atgūstami, Walrus padara atgūstamību par to, ko var pierādīt, apmaksāt un atsaukties uz tām ar prasību.