2026-01-08 09:28:04

Many teams want to solve the decentralized identity problem, but they are only paying lip service.

We choose to start from the foundation.

After years of testing, continuous trial and error, and iteration, we have derived a core truth: without a shared, decentralized credential layer as infrastructure, privacy protection and Sybil resistance cannot truly achieve scalable expansion.

This is not about optimizing interfaces or improving user experience. The key is that the credibility and security of the entire system depend on the design of the underlying credential architecture. As long as this layer is not done right, any construction on top will be a castle in the air.

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.

14 Likes

Reward
14
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

LiquidationKing

· 01-11 02:17

Talking tough, but the underlying architecture is truly fundamental. There are too many castles in the air; we still need to cut into the voucher layer. This is the real deal.

View OriginalReply0

MeaninglessGwei

· 01-10 15:02

The Juan Wang team always talks about revolution, but in reality, they just change the UI. This guy is right—if the foundation isn't stable, building more floors is pointless. --- Another discovery of the "truth." Let's see if this time is really different. --- The key to solving identity issues indeed lies in the underlying architecture, but how many teams dare to start from zero? --- Everyone is focused on the optimistic layer, no wonder it's all just pseudo-need. --- That's quite true, but such infrastructure teams often fail before they get funding or market recognition.

View OriginalReply0

LadderToolGuy

· 01-10 10:29

This is the team that truly wants to get things done, unlike those who just talk about PPT every day. Exactly, without a solid underlying architecture, everything else is pointless. How many projects have failed here? Unfortunately, some people just don't listen. The voucher layer is the lifeblood of this game. Doesn't anyone understand that?

View OriginalReply0

RebaseVictim

· 01-08 09:58

To be honest, it's really difficult to get the underlying credentials right. Most projects are just showmanship. The idea of digging deep into infrastructure is correct, but implementing it is another matter. If the credential layer isn't sorted out, everything else is fake, I agree with that. Wait, how exactly is it implemented? Tell me. It's been years of iteration, and it feels like every project says the same thing haha. Sybil resistance is really a bottleneck; let's see how you guys break through it. Only with the correct underlying architecture can the ecosystem above be supported; this logic is sound.

View OriginalReply0

AltcoinHunter

· 01-08 09:58

Well... the idea is good, but I've heard this "we're diligently building infrastructure" tone too many times. In the end? It's just another proof-of-credential protocol, waiting to be integrated by a big company?

View OriginalReply0

SatoshiLeftOnRead

· 01-08 09:57

That's correct. The underlying infrastructure is indeed a weakness for most projects. They haven't done it thoroughly and are rushing to add product features. Can such a setup be stable?

View OriginalReply0

MissedAirdropAgain

· 01-08 09:56

Someone finally dares to tell the truth: if the foundation is not solid, all the fancy features are useless. That's right, right now many projects are just hyping concepts and haven't thought about how to truly solve problems. This is the correct approach—starting from infrastructure rather than just piling on features. I believe in you guys, just because of your execution and depth of thinking. If the credential layer isn't done well, all privacy resistance is just a dream. Got it.

View OriginalReply0

just_another_fish

· 01-08 09:46

The underlying architecture is indeed a major flaw; there's no denying that. --- It's the same old story, getting tired of seeing it. --- How many projects have shouted until they're hoarse, but in the end, it's just a bluff. --- If the voucher layer is truly understood thoroughly, everything else is not a problem. --- Nice words, but only practical implementation counts. --- I've never seen anyone truly get this right. --- The metaphor of a castle in the air is perfect. --- If the infrastructure is weak, throwing more money at it is useless.

View OriginalReply0

governance_ghost

· 01-08 09:40

The underlying infrastructure is indeed a tough nut to crack; most projects have bypassed it. To put it simply, it's still too difficult, so they just think about changing the UI to deceive people. I agree with your approach, but how many can actually see it through to the end?

View OriginalReply0