The cost of 0 minting seems tempting, and the multiple vulnerabilities hidden in the CIAS of the Celestia inscription project are worthy of vigilance

In an era of increasing popularity of digital currency and blockchain technology, the recent developments of the Celestia inscription project CIAS have attracted a lot of attention on the X platform. CIAS has announced that it has minted about 29% of its coinage and has more than 52,000 holders, a figure that is undoubtedly impressive on the surface. What’s more noteworthy is that more than 50% of the transactions on the Celestia chain are related to CIAS, which shows the significant influence of CIAS in the Celestia chain. However, when we dig deeper into this data, some critical questions emerge.

Listing the key issues of CIAS in the near future, it is found that the fundamentals of this project are not as optimistic as imagined

The first is that the project attracted more than 1 million website visits from 120,000 people within just one hour of its launch, and this high level of traffic led to RPC failures. While the team promised to improve the user experience and get the site back up and running, this exposed the project’s deficiencies in technical readiness and scalability. In the digital currency space, user trust in the platform is crucial, and this technical glitch may have an impact on user trust.

CIAS official website page

In addition, CIAS, as the first inscription project on the Celestia chain, has a first-mover advantage in the market, but this does not guarantee its long-term stable development. In the blockchain industry, the first-mover advantage often comes with high risk, especially when the market is volatile. At the same time, while CIAS has a clear roadmap and claims to be on track, this does not fully offset the risks posed by new technologies and market uncertainty.

Finally, CIAS’s professed “0 fee mint” strategy, while seemingly appealing, may hide other costs or risks. Without full transparency and risk disclosure, this zero-cost strategy can mislead investors, especially those who are inexperienced and newbies.

In general, although the CIAS inscription project is active in the field of digital currency, the technical issues, market volatility risks, and strategic transparency issues behind it are worth pondering.

The inscription project has extremely high requirements for transaction records to be tamper-proof, which is completely contrary to the centralized Celestia

Celestia’s modular blockchain technology, although forward-looking and innovative in theory, has shown multiple problems when applied to inscription projects in practice. At the heart of this technical architecture is its unique design, which decouples functions such as execution, settlement, consensus, and data availability between multiple dedicated layers, similar to the structure of Lego bricks. This brings flexibility and scalability to each module, but when applied to inscription projects, these advantages seem to become difficult problems.

Celestia Chain focuses on Data Availability Sampling (DAS) and Namespace Merkle Trees (NMT), a data availability-centric design that significantly conflicts with the inscription project’s need for data immutability. The inscription project requires the blockchain to maintain a high degree of data integration and immutability, and the design of the Celestia chain may not meet this.

Celestia Network Data Graph

In addition, the modular structure of the Celestia chain, while providing flexibility, can also lead to complications during the implementation of inscription projects. Inscription projects require a stable and consistent environment to ensure the reliability and efficiency of their operation, and the independence of individual modules on the Celestia chain can introduce unnecessary complexity and potential compatibility issues.

Celestia Chain’s efforts to improve the chain’s scalability and performance may conflict with the inscription project’s need for immutability of transactions and permanent preservation of historical records. Especially when dealing with a large number of inscription transactions, this can pose a challenge to the performance and stability of the Celestia chain.

Celestia inscription project CIAS: High traffic causes RPC failure

In terms of security and consensus mechanisms, the Celestia chain may also not fully adapt to the needs of the inscription project. The inscription project has extremely high requirements for the security and anti-attack ability of the blockchain, while the design focus of the Celestia chain may be more focused on data availability and performance optimization.

The inscription market is beginning to show the phenomenon of rotten streets, and Celestia is likely to follow in the footsteps of other public chains

On the Celestia chain, the rapid growth and proliferation of inscription projects is becoming an issue of concern. This trend is rooted in the lack of regulation and arbitrariness of the project, which can lead not only to a decrease in liquidity in the secondary market, but also to trigger market volatility and instability.

The proliferation of inscription items has led to a flood of similar or low-quality products on the market. This market saturation has dampened investor interest in these projects, especially when it is difficult for investors to distinguish which projects are worth investing in. This uncertainty is detrimental to investor confidence, which in turn affects the liquidity and stability of the market.

The problem is further exacerbated by a lack of transparency and a regulatory environment. In such an environment, the arbitrariness and uncontrollability of inscription projects significantly increase the risks faced by investors. This risk is especially significant for ordinary investors who are not familiar with the technology and operating model behind these projects.

The over-refinement of the content of the inscription project on the Celestia chain also calls into question its value and utility. Too many fragmented items in the market have led to the uniqueness and attractiveness of each project being questioned, which has affected the overall market value. For example, the slowdown in the BTC rally of the Ordinals project is a clear sign.

According to Dune, the cost of BTC the Ordinals inscription fell to $6.5 million from $9.99 million the previous day (No. 17), a decrease of almost 35%. Not only does this reflect a waning interest in similar projects, but it also suggests that investors may be starting to be skeptical about the long-term value of such projects.

The proliferation of inscription projects not only reduces the effectiveness of investors’ choices, but also increases the uncertainty and risk of investment. Therefore, the management and supervision of inscription projects need to be more rigorous and systematic. In order to ensure the healthy and stable development of the market, measures need to be taken to guarantee the quality and transparency of the inscription project, reduce the instability of the market and the potential risks for investors. At the same time, the market and regulators need to be more cautious and strict in the application of these emerging technologies to prevent long-term negative impacts on the entire blockchain ecosystem.