Hello everyone, my name is Azzu. Regarding the topic of storage, what is the first reaction of many people? — Backend costs. When you develop an application, in the end, you need to find a place to store images, videos, logs, and various datasets. Save where you can, and as long as there are no issues, everything is fine.
But after recent in-depth research into Walrus, I have a completely new perspective: what it aims to do is not fundamentally reduce storage costs, but to transform storage itself from a "backend expense" into a "frontend asset." In other words, allowing contracts to directly call "storage" resources just like calling funds or permissions.
To understand from a different angle: storage is no longer just about paying for space, but after objectification, it becomes a resource on the chain that can be owned, transferred, combined, and integrated into logic. This is the true composability that Walrus seeks.
Why is "objectification" so critical? Because in the on-chain world, only things that can be recognized by contracts have financial attributes and reuse value. If you treat storage capacity or a data block as an object, it instantly ceases to be "a piece of data somewhere on a server" and becomes a resource with identity, rules, and a lifecycle. Contracts can read its state, adjust permissions, perform operations, and even use it as a kind of "credential" to trigger the next action.
In traditional internet, storage is an engineering detail, buried in the background. But in Walrus's paradigm, it is upgraded to a first-class citizen at the protocol layer.
Practical scenarios immediately emerge. For example, automatic renewal — in the past, storing something meant the biggest worry was data expiring and disappearing, requiring manual handling. Now, storage itself becomes a programmable resource; contracts can automatically monitor expiration dates, call funds to renew, and even support multiple parties jointly maintaining the lifecycle of a storage object. This is not a minor improvement; it’s a paradigm shift.
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.
19 Likes
Reward
19
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MindsetExpander
· 01-08 09:55
Wow, Azzu, I really didn't expect this angle. Turning storage from a cost into an asset is brilliant.
View OriginalReply0
StakoorNeverSleeps
· 01-07 18:54
Wow, this idea is indeed brilliant. I really didn't expect the shift from storage cost to assets.
View OriginalReply0
YieldHunter
· 01-07 18:51
ngl if you actually look at the data, walrus is just trying to financialize what was always operational overhead... technically speaking, turning storage into an "asset" only works if there's actual yield, not just composability theater
Reply0
MysteryBoxBuster
· 01-07 18:49
In simple terms, it's about transforming storage from "service fees" into "financial assets." This approach is indeed brilliant.
View OriginalReply0
airdrop_whisperer
· 01-07 18:48
Hmm... Object storage sounds interesting, but can it really be implemented?
---
Interesting, turning storage into financial assets is indeed a fresh idea.
---
Wait, does automatic renewal mean paying more gas again? When you add it up, it's still expensive.
---
The logic of walrus sounds like securitizing storage, which seems promising.
---
I like the term "backend costs become frontend assets," but can the Sui ecosystem support this scale?
---
Got the concept of objectification, but the question is how many applications will actually use it...
---
The direction of composability is right, but I'm worried it might just be an empty promise.
---
Automating renewals really hits the pain point; traditional solutions are a nightmare.
---
On-chain storage is probably a pseudo-demand, unless the costs are truly competitive.
---
Paradigm shift? Let's see if it can survive the next bear market first.
View OriginalReply0
ZKProofster
· 01-07 18:35
hmm, objectifying storage as a first-class primitive is... technically sound, i'll give him that. but let's not pretend this magically solves the actual hard problems—you still need the cryptographic commitments to hold up under adversarial conditions, right? the composability angle is cute though.
Hello everyone, my name is Azzu. Regarding the topic of storage, what is the first reaction of many people? — Backend costs. When you develop an application, in the end, you need to find a place to store images, videos, logs, and various datasets. Save where you can, and as long as there are no issues, everything is fine.
But after recent in-depth research into Walrus, I have a completely new perspective: what it aims to do is not fundamentally reduce storage costs, but to transform storage itself from a "backend expense" into a "frontend asset." In other words, allowing contracts to directly call "storage" resources just like calling funds or permissions.
To understand from a different angle: storage is no longer just about paying for space, but after objectification, it becomes a resource on the chain that can be owned, transferred, combined, and integrated into logic. This is the true composability that Walrus seeks.
Why is "objectification" so critical? Because in the on-chain world, only things that can be recognized by contracts have financial attributes and reuse value. If you treat storage capacity or a data block as an object, it instantly ceases to be "a piece of data somewhere on a server" and becomes a resource with identity, rules, and a lifecycle. Contracts can read its state, adjust permissions, perform operations, and even use it as a kind of "credential" to trigger the next action.
In traditional internet, storage is an engineering detail, buried in the background. But in Walrus's paradigm, it is upgraded to a first-class citizen at the protocol layer.
Practical scenarios immediately emerge. For example, automatic renewal — in the past, storing something meant the biggest worry was data expiring and disappearing, requiring manual handling. Now, storage itself becomes a programmable resource; contracts can automatically monitor expiration dates, call funds to renew, and even support multiple parties jointly maintaining the lifecycle of a storage object. This is not a minor improvement; it’s a paradigm shift.