2026-01-11 20:23:13

The current NFT market has a major problem—fragmentation. Your blue-chip NFTs are doing well on Ethereum, but once they move to Arbitrum, they become mirror versions. Lost ownership data, zero reputation accumulation, dispersed liquidity—making seamless integration impossible.

Walrus Protocol has a different approach. It doesn't simply transfer assets; it does something more core—unify the NFT "data layer." Through this protocol, applications can instantly see the distribution of owners across all public chains, complete transaction history, and market sentiment for a given NFT series.

What does this bring? A truly cross-chain NFT market becomes a reality. Cross-chain reputation systems are no longer a dream. Airdrops based on multi-chain behavior can also be precisely targeted. As a data service payment and staking tool, WAL's demand will rise sharply with the degree of NFT multi-chainization.

In short, the future of NFTs is multi-chain identity, and data is the real passport. Walrus's foundational role in this ecosystem looks promising.

ETH0,03%

ARB-3,9%

WAL0,47%

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.

12 Likes

Reward
12
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SnapshotBot

· 7h ago

The data layer approach indeed addresses the pain points, but how is the token economics of WAL designed? Could it become another tool for cutting leeks?

View OriginalReply0

DustCollector

· 16h ago

Honestly, I'm tired of hearing about cross-chain, but the idea behind Walrus is indeed different. Unified data layer? Sounds impressive, but can it really be implemented? The demand for WAL is skyrocketing... I need to check if the current price has already been pumped. Resetting the reputation system is too heartbreaking; the influence built up before can disappear in an instant. Full-chain identity sounds very futuristic, but in reality, everyone still only cares about the mainstream chains. If this protocol can truly solve the problem of liquidity fragmentation, then it’s definitely a good thing. But on the other hand, how many projects end up just being concepts?

View OriginalReply0

TheMemefather

· 16h ago

The fragmentation issue is really annoying, cross-chain mirroring is basically the original sin of NFTs. The perspective of unifying the data layer is fresh and indeed hits the pain points. I buy into WAL's logical chain, but the question is whether it can truly be implemented. The idea of a full-chain identity sounds great, but it really depends on gas fees and user experience. Walrus is interesting, but many projects have hyped up infrastructure organizations—believe it or not. Data is indeed a gold mine; it all depends on who can truly integrate these fragmented pieces of information.

View OriginalReply0

NewDAOdreamer

· 16h ago

The idea of unifying the data layer is indeed excellent, but to be honest, whether it can be truly implemented depends on whether the ecosystem can keep up. Having an agreement alone is not enough.

View OriginalReply0

LucidSleepwalker

· 16h ago

The idea of unifying the data layer is indeed brilliant, much more reliable than simple cross-chain transfers... However, whether the WAL token can truly take off depends on its adoption rate.

View OriginalReply0

WinterWarmthCat

· 16h ago

This logic makes sense. The unified data layer is indeed a pain point, but whether WAL can maintain this position depends on future on-chain data.

View OriginalReply0

GasOptimizer

· 16h ago

Unified cross-chain data is indeed a necessity, but whether WAL can capitalize on this wave of benefits depends on the team's execution capability. Don't become the next vapor project again.

View OriginalReply0