The most underestimated pain point of storage protocols is not whether the technology can be implemented, but a more realistic issue: whether users dare to truly rely on it.

How painful is the current situation? Costs fluctuate wildly—soaring today and plunging tomorrow, making it difficult for project teams to accurately budget. The end result is that everyone reverts key data back to centralized cloud services, and on-chain storage becomes a "casual tool." Under this model, no matter how advanced the technology is, it’s hard to achieve genuine long-term application scenarios.

The core problem lies in the misalignment of interests on both ends. Users genuinely care about: not losing control of their monthly expenses. Node operators genuinely care about: not losing their revenue streams. But the existing cost models often fall short in addressing both concerns.

There is a project with a different approach—it optimizes the design logic of payment and fee mechanisms from the source, aiming to make costs more predictable in fiat currency terms. Imagine a scenario where storage costs are as stable and predictable as rent. What would happen? AI datasets require stable storage, game resource libraries need long-term hosting, on-chain archives need permanent preservation… These real application needs will gradually migrate upward, rather than relying on short-term hype fueled by funding subsidies.

Therefore, what’s worth paying attention to is whether such protocols can truly eliminate "price fluctuation anxiety" from the infrastructure level. Once this is achieved, the storage sector can evolve from an "experimental tool" into a "production-grade infrastructure."