No. The initial model is designed as a non-invasive proxy layer that routes into existing public liquidity rather than forcing a core AMM redesign.

No. The concept is specifically built to avoid separate empty shielded pools and preserve access to existing order books.

The architecture is designed around selective disclosure, allowing specific fund flows to be reviewed when needed rather than making all activity publicly visible.

Neti already has working demo-level mechanics and prior R&D/implementation work in privacy-oriented ZK infrastructure, even if some client references remain limited by NDA.

This version is designed to solve the most immediate privacy problems for larger traders and institutions using public DEX infrastructure. It focuses first on: strategy privacy balance privacy selective disclosure for specific flows stronger confidentiality for privacy-sensitive execution In practice, it is especially relevant where public execution visibility creates copy-trading risk or discourages larger participants from using public liquidity.

Not fully in the first version. The current model is strongest for privacy, reduced strategy exposure, and protection against copy-trading. Because execution still interacts with public liquidity infrastructure, it does not fully eliminate all MEV or front-running vectors. A more complete protection model would require deeper protocol-level changes in the DEX architecture and execution environment.