2026-01-18 11:27:36

The real bottleneck of Web3 is not at the transaction layer, but in usability.

Imagine this: your NFT suddenly fails to load, application data mysteriously disappears, and carefully created content is taken down without reason. What would users think at this moment? Most likely, they will give up. Many people complain that Web3 is hard to use, but fundamentally, it's because the infrastructure can't keep up.

That's why Walrus is worth paying attention to. It addresses this critical issue—solving the trust crisis with decentralized storage.

How does it work? By using the protocol's internal WAL token to incentivize storage nodes to participate continuously. Nodes need to stake tokens to join, which also means they have skin in the game. You wouldn't mess around with your assets, so naturally, there's motivation to maintain stable service.

The technical architecture is also carefully designed. Based on Sui's blob storage design, combined with erasure coding technology, data isn't stored in a single location but dispersed across multiple nodes. If one node goes down? No problem, data fragments from other nodes can be recombined and restored. This is the source of resilience—the system is not afraid of partial failures.

More importantly, this solution completely avoids reliance on a single service provider. Without centralized single points of failure, censorship resistance is greatly enhanced.

Honestly, many Web3 projects fail. The reasons seem diverse on the surface, but the underlying cause is often the same: the concept sounds impressive but is a mess in practice. Conversely, those low-profile, truly reliable infrastructure projects are often overlooked. Reliable storage solutions and projects with solid privacy protections are currently severely undervalued.

If the foundation isn't solid, even the most magnificent superstructure is just a castle in the air. Making storage and data availability robust and reliable is the true beginning of Web3's path to maturity.

WAL2,08%

SUI-0,78%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

BlockchainBrokenPromise

· 7h ago

Honestly, infrastructure has been severely neglected. --- Both storage and usability sound pretty vague, but they are indeed pain points. --- I need to pay attention to Walrus, but whether WAL can hold up remains to be seen. --- Web3 projects all die due to details; no one wants to do these dirty and tiring jobs. --- The concept of erasure coding and distributed storage is old news; the key is how well it is implemented. --- Single point of failure should have been taken seriously long ago; it's already too late now. --- Overhyped concepts that turn into a mess when used—this description is spot on. --- I agree that infrastructure is seriously underestimated, but investors still chase hot topics. --- Whether staking mechanisms can truly motivate nodes to provide good service is the real test. --- Giving up if an NFT doesn't load—this user experience is just too real.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketSurvivor

· 7h ago

Really, infrastructure is often overlooked, but it's exactly this kind of thing that can save lives. That's right, most Web3 projects fail because they are too complicated to use. The idea behind Walrus is okay; decentralized storage is indeed a bottleneck. However, how long the WAL token incentives can last is still an issue—these types of infrastructure projects are the most likely to be disliked. Staking models sound good, but the operational costs of nodes are right there. This is what Web3 should be doing, not just shouting about new concepts every day. Combining anti-censorship with usability is the only way to have vitality; pure decentralization is useless. I agree, no matter how many high-end applications there are, if the foundation is unstable, it's all in vain.

View OriginalReply0

HackerWhoCares

· 7h ago

Honestly, I hear people boasting about how high TPS is every day, but only realize the data was lost afterwards. Truly impressive. I've encountered issues where NFTs wouldn't load. At that time, I was thinking of deleting the wallet. The infrastructure really sucks. I'm quite optimistic about Walrus's decentralized storage logic. The staking model can indeed constrain nodes and is much more reliable than those surface-level promises. Here's a question: can erasure coding reassembly efficiency really hold up? I'm worried that latency might degrade the user experience again. The key issue is that those boring infrastructure projects are really being buried, while some conceptual projects are skyrocketing. The contrast is quite stark.

View OriginalReply0

MEVSupportGroup

· 8h ago

Honestly, infrastructure is the key. It's very true that NFTs sometimes fail to load. I like Walrus's approach; the staking system can indeed regulate node performance. Decentralized storage is much more reliable than centralized, this is what decentralization should be about. Most Web3 projects fail because the user experience is too poor. Storage has indeed been underestimated; I recommend paying more attention to it.

View OriginalReply0