In 48 BC, Caesar's army set fire to the Library of Alexandria. The place that held the essence of human civilization was instantly reduced to ashes. This catastrophe taught us a lesson: entrusting knowledge to a single-point system is like leaving history to chance.
Over two thousand years have passed, countless technological iterations have occurred, yet humanity has stumbled twice in the same place.
In the Web2 era, data was locked in the servers of a few internet giants. You could use it, but never own it. When company policies change, services shut down, or accounts are frozen—your data is like a hard drive unplugged from power, instantly disconnected. The fate of the data is entirely controlled by centralized institutions.
Web3 claims to change all this, but the reality is quite harsh: blockchain is sufficiently decentralized, yet data storage remains a bottleneck. Most project NFTs are just links that could become invalid at any time. Game assets, AI training sets, on-chain content—they all face the same dilemma.
There is a protocol called Walrus, which is trying to break this deadlock. It’s not naive enough to pile all data onto the blockchain, but instead takes a more pragmatic approach: focusing on building an efficient, secure, and programmable distributed storage system.
Its approach is clever—splitting files into fragments and dispersing them across multiple nodes in the network through encoding techniques. Data no longer depends on a single point of survival. More importantly, through smart contracts, these "cold, hard data" have gained the ability to be composable, callable, and interactive for the first time.
How significant is this? Imagine:
NFTs are finally no longer just links that could 404 at any moment, but real, tangible digital assets.
Training data for AI models, on-chain media libraries, characters and equipment in game worlds—all can be guaranteed long-term.
Storage costs are no longer just "expenses," but part of the entire Web3 economy involving participation, distribution, and incentives.
In this system, the role of tokens is greatly expanded—not only paying for storage but also incentivizing network participants, maintaining system security, and driving community governance. Data is no longer just stored coldly; it is integrated into a complete economy and trust system.
From the burned library to the frequently crashing cloud, humanity has paid enough for "centralized storage." Perhaps this time, we truly understand a principle: the most important things can never be stored in just one place.
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.
10 Likes
Reward
10
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
DaoResearcher
· 40m ago
According to the white paper, the core issue with Walrus's incentive mechanism has not been fully resolved—Token weighted voting can still be vulnerable to variants of 51% attacks in highly decentralized storage networks. It is worth noting that sharded storage itself introduces new trust assumptions. Specifically, can data availability truly be guaranteed?
View OriginalReply0
EyeOfTheTokenStorm
· 01-07 11:54
From a quantitative perspective, this is a classic complete cycle from "storage demand gap" to "token economic incentives"... But to be honest, will projects like Walrus survive until the day of truly large-scale application? Historical data shows that 99% of storage cases fail at the hurdle of "insufficient node incentives." Just a risk reminder to everyone.
View OriginalReply0
GasOptimizer
· 01-07 11:53
Once again, the argument that "history repeats itself"... However, Walrus does have some substance; it's much more practical than those projects that constantly shout "we are completely decentralized."
View OriginalReply0
AirdropNinja
· 01-07 11:37
Another impressive story, but can Walrus really hold up?
---
So ultimately it's a trust issue. Distributed storage sounds great, but who guarantees those nodes won't run away?
---
Haha, that's a perfect analogy. It's been 2000 years, and humans are still tripping over the same pit. Don't they learn from experience?
---
NFTs can't even fix a 404 error now, and they want to save the world? First, save yourself.
---
Wait, I feel like there's something wrong with this logic of decentralized data...
---
This last sentence is harsh, but looking at the current state of Web3, we're still far from "understanding."
---
That's true, but the real problem is that humans just like to bet on a central point for convenience.
---
Walrus is probably here to cut the leeks again. What's really different about this compared to those previous storage projects?
---
Token incentives—can they survive in a bear market? It feels more like just a different way of charging.
View OriginalReply0
GasWaster
· 01-07 11:26
It's another familiar historical analogy, but Walrus does have something... Distributed storage isn't new, the key is whether it can truly be implemented, and not just another vaporware project.
In 48 BC, Caesar's army set fire to the Library of Alexandria. The place that held the essence of human civilization was instantly reduced to ashes. This catastrophe taught us a lesson: entrusting knowledge to a single-point system is like leaving history to chance.
Over two thousand years have passed, countless technological iterations have occurred, yet humanity has stumbled twice in the same place.
In the Web2 era, data was locked in the servers of a few internet giants. You could use it, but never own it. When company policies change, services shut down, or accounts are frozen—your data is like a hard drive unplugged from power, instantly disconnected. The fate of the data is entirely controlled by centralized institutions.
Web3 claims to change all this, but the reality is quite harsh: blockchain is sufficiently decentralized, yet data storage remains a bottleneck. Most project NFTs are just links that could become invalid at any time. Game assets, AI training sets, on-chain content—they all face the same dilemma.
There is a protocol called Walrus, which is trying to break this deadlock. It’s not naive enough to pile all data onto the blockchain, but instead takes a more pragmatic approach: focusing on building an efficient, secure, and programmable distributed storage system.
Its approach is clever—splitting files into fragments and dispersing them across multiple nodes in the network through encoding techniques. Data no longer depends on a single point of survival. More importantly, through smart contracts, these "cold, hard data" have gained the ability to be composable, callable, and interactive for the first time.
How significant is this? Imagine:
NFTs are finally no longer just links that could 404 at any moment, but real, tangible digital assets.
Training data for AI models, on-chain media libraries, characters and equipment in game worlds—all can be guaranteed long-term.
Storage costs are no longer just "expenses," but part of the entire Web3 economy involving participation, distribution, and incentives.
In this system, the role of tokens is greatly expanded—not only paying for storage but also incentivizing network participants, maintaining system security, and driving community governance. Data is no longer just stored coldly; it is integrated into a complete economy and trust system.
From the burned library to the frequently crashing cloud, humanity has paid enough for "centralized storage." Perhaps this time, we truly understand a principle: the most important things can never be stored in just one place.