2026-01-07 19:23:33

After carefully reviewing the relevant materials on Walrus Protocol, I think their RedStuff technical system approach is still somewhat different. To put it simply, they aim to solve the two major challenges of data storage—being cost-effective and stable—within a decentralized framework using more optimized solutions.

This pain point is quite real. There are many projects currently doing storage, but once actually used, the costs often become overwhelming. The reason blockchain applications haven't yet seen large-scale explosion is that the costs and efficiency issues of data storage are actually hidden deal-breakers. If a team can truly optimize the cost-performance ratio of storage, making it accessible for developers and users alike, it’s not just a technological innovation; in plain terms, it addresses the practical bottleneck of ecosystem expansion.

How about the prospects for $WAL? It still depends on how many applications Walrus’s technology can ultimately attract to run effectively. Behind the market’s lively performance, it ultimately comes down to the most critical metric: application adoption rate. What do you think about the feasibility of their technical direction?

WAL2.26%

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.

18 Likes

Reward
18
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MeaninglessGwei

· 23h ago

Storage costs are really a tough problem, but whether the Walrus solution can be truly implemented depends on the actual application and market conditions. Having advanced technology alone isn't enough.

View OriginalReply0

ThreeHornBlasts

· 01-07 19:51

Sounds good, but truly implementable storage projects are few and far between. If RedStuff can handle the cost aspect, it will already have won half the battle.

View OriginalReply0

ForkThisDAO

· 01-07 19:48

Storage costs are indeed a pitfall; I've been cut multiple times by several projects. However, whether RedStuff can truly reduce costs depends on subsequent implementation—just shouting slogans won't do any good.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainBouncer

· 01-07 19:37

The real skill is in reducing storage costs; there are too many projects just hype now.

View OriginalReply0

ChainPoet

· 01-07 19:29

Cheap and stable storage sounds good, but who isn't saying that now? The key is whether it can truly be implemented. The RedStuff system's approach is indeed innovative, but the storage sector is already so competitive. I really don't know what allows Walrus to overtake on a bend. I'm not too concerned about the rise and fall of $WAL; I just want to see how many real application scenarios it can solve. I believe tokens without application support are just fleeting. It sounds like they want to do big things, but I'm more concerned about how much the cost can be pushed down and whether it can truly compare to centralized solutions. No problem, thorough cost-performance is indeed the key to breaking the deadlock, but it's easier said than done.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeNightmare

· 01-07 19:28

Storage costs are indeed a big pitfall; I’ve used several projects before that were ridiculously expensive. But to be fair, whether RedStuff can truly be implemented depends on what happens next. A good plan on paper doesn’t necessarily mean it can actually run.

View OriginalReply0