I have never considered decentralized storage to be a pseudo-narrative.
Because blockchain itself, as a distributed ledger, although possessing storage capabilities, does not constitute a broad sense of 'data storage.' Real data files are indexed and mapped onto the chain.
To give another analogy, if we compare blockchain to a computer, while it has memory, it still needs external storage to provide data.
This market is not without players; Filecoin,@Filecoin Arweave,@Arweave Ecosystem
have been around for several years now, but how are they doing?
Filecoin: It is essentially a layer built on top of IPFS to incentivize storage service providers, which has little to do with blockchain, and the user experience is terrible. The number of nodes is pitifully small.
Arweave: Focused on permanent storage, it has specifically developed the Arweave block, where each block connects to the next and the previous two blocks: one block ahead and one historical recall block. The technical architecture has no issues, but it is just expensive. Are there users? Yes, there are. Many data-related projects like MindNetwork @mindnetwork_xyz have declared partnerships with Arweave.
Then this year, Arweave also developed the computing layer AO @aoTheComputer, which was originally the product I looked forward to the most, but after its release, it turned out to be a mess, constantly crashing. I don't know what Sam is doing; it’s not even EVM, the ecosystem cannot take off, and $AR cannot be pulled.
The storage track has not truly exploded due to both internal and external reasons.
The internal reason is: the lack of ecology and value chain, the value of data being 'decentralized' has not yet seen an explosion, while the native computing layer of the storage layer is not mature enough, resulting in limited attractiveness to the application layer. There is a lack of bridges between underlying assets and application layer assets, and there is no complete value chain.
The external reason is: expensive. Indeed, compared to Filecoin, Arweave, and other established storage chains still in operation, the storage prices are higher than those of centralized storage like Amazon Cloud and Alibaba Cloud, even several times higher.
So why is BNB Chain @BNBCHAINZH still stubbornly entering the development of BNB Greenfield @BNB_Greenfield?
Binance has actually bet on one thing correctly: the upcoming era is the 'data' era. Whether it's RWA or artificial intelligence, they essentially rely on a few things: data rights confirmation, data set property rights, data privacy, and data monetization. In the future, the value of data being 'on-chain' will be exponentially amplified.
At the same time, Binance has solved these two key issues.
Binance has a trading chain BSC, and now with the storage chain, developers can build DApps based on these two EVM chains, with one-click asset storage on-chain. Moreover, Greenfield is a side chain, which has a cross-chain bridge with BSC, both using BNB as the token. This allows seamless integration of BSC assets, identities, and permissions, achieving the generation, management, financialization, and cross-chain circulation of data assets.
At the same time, Greenfield has reduced storage prices. Let's compare it with traditional cloud service providers:
Google Cloud Storage: ($0.020~0.026 / GB / month) The cost of storing 100GB for a year is 100 × 0.023 × 12 ≈ $27.6 / year
Alibaba Cloud: (¥0.12~0.14 / GB / month) The cost of storing 100GB for a year is: 100 × 0.018 × 12 ≈ $21.6 / year
I also compared many domestic and international cloud storage services, where 100GB is around $20-30, then I used the Greenfield calculator to calculate the storage cost: $35.99. Basically on par with web2 prices.
In terms of usage, Greenfield imitates web2 with API data access methods. Compared to traditional web3 storage projects, this approach is more convenient and lowers the migration threshold for web2 users and developers.
This move is clever, but BNB chain is still too comprehensive. The storage track has not yet exploded, waiting for Greenfield to be widely adopted.$BNB Must break $10,000.
@heyibinance @BNB Chain