My favored project is AR. Arweave is a data storage layer in the Web3 stack. The data storage layer is based on smart contracts, and its function is permanent storage. In the Web2 model, application providers store and manage user data, so users don't have to worry about storage and management. Web2 application providers' servers are always online, while users are often offline. In the Web3 model, there are no centralized application server providers, so the entire data ownership paradigm needs to be adjusted. With permanent storage, all our files will never disappear. Currently, only Arweave is capable of achieving this.

In the Web2 era, if you wanted to find a photo of actress Ni Ni, you would first use DNS to find the server's address on Baidu, and then the server would query the image it hosts on its local file system, with the path being "/image.png." Assuming the server is cooperative, it would check the directory for /image.png. If the file exists, it would return the file. However, if the file is moved, altered, or the server is busy or uncooperative for any reason, you might never see that image of Ni Ni.

But how would this look in Arweave? You would use a hash, similar to a random string starting with "0x," to locate Ni Ni’s photo. You would pinpoint the exact image you want, with none of the aforementioned problems. Human progress aims to fix past mistakes or improve more convenient ways of doing things. Arweave provides a logically centralized but architecturally and politically decentralized storage system to improve upon previous centralized storage methods. Content addressing offers a logical interface, and with content-based addressing, no matter where the data is stored within the decentralized, vast computer network, it will always be correctly resolved.

The project has four core technologies:

Blockweave: The project uses a new blockchain data structure called Blockweave, which is created by consensus mechanisms and specific block creation patterns. In this data structure, nodes wishing to mine don't have to store full node files like BTC or ETH nodes. As long as a node stores a particular historical block, it has a chance to be selected for block creation. The more blocks a node stores, the higher its chance of being selected. In other words, only nodes with random blocks can perform Proof of Work (PoW) for block creation. This mode reduces PoW energy consumption and minimizes unnecessary work by nodes.

POA (Proof of Access): The project’s consensus mechanism, called Proof of Access, uses random numbers to validate a randomly chosen block that has appeared before. Unlike traditional blockchain structures where information is transmitted along the chain, this consensus mechanism results in a more mesh-like structure, reducing the storage burden on nodes. Similarly, only nodes that know the randomly chosen block can perform PoW for block creation.

BlockShadow: Nodes don’t need to verify the entire stored file during validation. When blocks are created, the nodes don’t hand the entire file over for other nodes to review; instead, they place the content inside the block and only transmit a hash value and a list of accounts. This hash represents the content, and other nodes verify it against the file pool to check for a match. This method speeds up verification and offloads part of the work off-chain. Similarly, when calling data, only BlockShadow is needed to locate and retrieve the stored block.

Wildfire: To incentivize nodes and address the issue of nodes storing large amounts of irrelevant information, the project has designed a reputation system called ALLA, where nodes can rate each other. This encourages nodes to verify stored content and ensures its health and effectiveness. The ratings are primarily used when calling stored files. When users request a file, nodes storing that file will compete to respond. The node that successfully creates the block will select the highest-rated node to deliver the file.

Difference Between AR and FIL

Arweave and Filecoin have many differences in their economic models. Filecoin operates on a pay-as-you-go basis, similar to the cost structure of AWS and Google Cloud. Unlike Arweave, Filecoin primarily offers temporary storage solutions, not permanent storage solutions. Additionally, in Filecoin’s protocol, there are thousands of different contracts between users and nodes, each with different storage terms (e.g., price, duration, replication). In contrast, Arweave only provides one type of contract: permanent data storage.

So, in fact, I don’t think Arweave will directly compete with Filecoin (or similar variants). The solutions offered by both projects are complementary. In some cases, permanent data storage may be more cost-effective, while in others, paying for short-term storage makes more sense. It's hard to find another platform with a similar value proposition to Arweave. While IPFS comes close, files can still be dropped from the IPFS network. For instance, Infura’s IPFS pinning service removes user data that hasn't been accessed in six months.

AR in Web3

Let’s first list the advantages of Arweave. Arweave’s unique consensus and miner incentive mechanisms ensure the permanence of storage. Permanent data preservation has been a major issue in human history, and its importance is enormous. Arweave could serve as the Alexandria Library of the Web3.0 era, preserving data and continuing to accumulate human wisdom.

Arweave’s decentralized nature could disrupt the monopoly of centralized cloud service providers in the storage market, protect user data from censorship, and allow data to be freely distributed in the cloud. Its storage positioning is fundamental, serving as "Layer0," an essential part of blockchain development. It is highly versatile, easy to use, and an ideal foundation for decentralized applications.

Now, let’s look at Arweave’s drawbacks. Arweave is very foundational, and due to its architecture, it cannot limit token and contract standards. The ecosystem is too flexible, which may lead to a lack of unity, preventing collective force within the ecosystem. We may not fully understand Arweave right now, but we didn't fully grasp Bitcoin at first either. Charlie Munger once said, "To save computational space, the human brain resists change. This is a form of avoiding inconsistency." We shouldn’t look at Arweave with the usual blockchain perspective, or we might miss many of its key values.

Web3.0 is likely to arrive in two years, and by then, blockchain infrastructure like Arweave will definitely show its strengths and be understood by everyone.

Mirror’s Potential Breakthrough in Web3

Mirror is an interesting project. As mentioned earlier, Arweave’s ecosystem has grown significantly, and Mirror is part of this ecosystem. Many people might not know that Mirror is a content publishing platform built on Arweave. Based on Arweave's permanent storage feature, Mirror can achieve eternal content storage and provide content creators with sustained copyright income support.

What distinguishes Mirror from other collaborative platforms is the different revenue sources in Web2 and Web3. Let’s take a look at the roles in the text industry: creators, publishers, intermediaries, bookstores, and online media platforms. How much of the work, from creation to publication, actually belongs to the creator? Very little. This is the first dilemma. The second is that copyright fees don’t always reach the creator in time. The third is that copyrights are often pirated or plagiarized.

One major reason authors engage in promotions and soft advertisements is because relying solely on their independent works might not yield a substantial income. Simply depending on readership and audience likes to earn platform rewards is insufficient for supporting themselves or their teams. Even now, with the rise of streaming, when your article or short video becomes a hit, most of the revenue goes to centralized content platforms. Centralized platforms like Douyin or Weibo hold the power, even though your content may generate a large amount of traffic. But the valuation of those platforms grows largely thanks to your work. The recommendation algorithms behind these platforms heavily influence how visible your content becomes.

In the book or streaming era, the distribution of copyright income has always been uneven, and the creator’s living environment has always been harsh. So, can blockchain effectively solve the pain points of the copyright industry? Mirror reflects the fairness thinking of blockchain, returning the rights of data usage to users. Authors are rewarded with tokens based on the reading and liking of their works, which motivates them to create high-quality content, and readers can enjoy purer content.

Here’s a brief summary of how you would create on Mirror: First, you write an article, stating your desire to purchase the "Qingming Riverside" painting and upload it to the chain as an NFT. Next, you create a crowdfunding campaign for your article. You then promote it within your circle, finding people who are interested in supporting your idea. With the funds raised, you buy the painting. Then, you upload the painting onto the chain and divide it into multiple NFTs, which are distributed to your supporters. Creators can tokenize their works as NFTs on the platform, raising funds, while investors can earn ongoing copyright income through NFT investments. Each person owns a small part of the content. Finally, both you and your supporters can fulfill your dreams through this process.

Therefore, decentralized platforms like Mirror are absolutely meaningful. Gradually surpassing and disrupting the current centralized platforms will be a long-term trend.

Now, let’s return to the current creation process on Mirror. The initial motivation for people to join might be the expectation of an airdrop. But after joining, they find that the experience is great, and it's very cool with blockchain. So I think the connection with incentives is significant, but not the main reason. The more important factor is people’s recognition and expansion of the NFT+copyright model.

My favored project is AR. Arweave is a data storage layer in the Web3 stack. The data storage layer is based on smart contracts, and its function is permanent storage. In the Web2 model, application providers store and manage user data, so users don't have to worry about storage and management. Web2 application providers' servers are always online, while users are often offline. In the Web3 model, there are no centralized application server providers, so the entire data ownership paradigm needs to be adjusted. With permanent storage, all our files will never disappear. Currently, only Arweave is capable of achieving this.

In the Web2 era, if you wanted to find a photo of actress Ni Ni, you would first use DNS to find the server's address on Baidu, and then the server would query the image it hosts on its local file system, with the path being "/image.png." Assuming the server is cooperative, it would check the directory for /image.png. If the file exists, it would return the file. However, if the file is moved, altered, or the server is busy or uncooperative for any reason, you might never see that image of Ni Ni.

But how would this look in Arweave? You would use a hash, similar to a random string starting with "0x," to locate Ni Ni’s photo. You would pinpoint the exact image you want, with none of the aforementioned problems. Human progress aims to fix past mistakes or improve more convenient ways of doing things. Arweave provides a logically centralized but architecturally and politically decentralized storage system to improve upon previous centralized storage methods. Content addressing offers a logical interface, and with content-based addressing, no matter where the data is stored within the decentralized, vast computer network, it will always be correctly resolved.

The project has four core technologies:

Blockweave: The project uses a new blockchain data structure called Blockweave, which is created by consensus mechanisms and specific block creation patterns. In this data structure, nodes wishing to mine don't have to store full node files like BTC or ETH nodes. As long as a node stores a particular historical block, it has a chance to be selected for block creation. The more blocks a node stores, the higher its chance of being selected. In other words, only nodes with random blocks can perform Proof of Work (PoW) for block creation. This mode reduces PoW energy consumption and minimizes unnecessary work by nodes.

POA (Proof of Access): The project’s consensus mechanism, called Proof of Access, uses random numbers to validate a randomly chosen block that has appeared before. Unlike traditional blockchain structures where information is transmitted along the chain, this consensus mechanism results in a more mesh-like structure, reducing the storage burden on nodes. Similarly, only nodes that know the randomly chosen block can perform PoW for block creation.

BlockShadow: Nodes don’t need to verify the entire stored file during validation. When blocks are created, the nodes don’t hand the entire file over for other nodes to review; instead, they place the content inside the block and only transmit a hash value and a list of accounts. This hash represents the content, and other nodes verify it against the file pool to check for a match. This method speeds up verification and offloads part of the work off-chain. Similarly, when calling data, only BlockShadow is needed to locate and retrieve the stored block.

Wildfire: To incentivize nodes and address the issue of nodes storing large amounts of irrelevant information, the project has designed a reputation system called ALLA, where nodes can rate each other. This encourages nodes to verify stored content and ensures its health and effectiveness. The ratings are primarily used when calling stored files. When users request a file, nodes storing that file will compete to respond. The node that successfully creates the block will select the highest-rated node to deliver the file.

Difference Between AR and FIL

Arweave and Filecoin have many differences in their economic models. Filecoin operates on a pay-as-you-go basis, similar to the cost structure of AWS and Google Cloud. Unlike Arweave, Filecoin primarily offers temporary storage solutions, not permanent storage solutions. Additionally, in Filecoin’s protocol, there are thousands of different contracts between users and nodes, each with different storage terms (e.g., price, duration, replication). In contrast, Arweave only provides one type of contract: permanent data storage.

So, in fact, I don’t think Arweave will directly compete with Filecoin (or similar variants). The solutions offered by both projects are complementary. In some cases, permanent data storage may be more cost-effective, while in others, paying for short-term storage makes more sense. It's hard to find another platform with a similar value proposition to Arweave. While IPFS comes close, files can still be dropped from the IPFS network. For instance, Infura’s IPFS pinning service removes user data that hasn't been accessed in six months.

AR in Web3

Let’s first list the advantages of Arweave. Arweave’s unique consensus and miner incentive mechanisms ensure the permanence of storage. Permanent data preservation has been a major issue in human history, and its importance is enormous. Arweave could serve as the Alexandria Library of the Web3.0 era, preserving data and continuing to accumulate human wisdom.

Arweave’s decentralized nature could disrupt the monopoly of centralized cloud service providers in the storage market, protect user data from censorship, and allow data to be freely distributed in the cloud. Its storage positioning is fundamental, serving as "Layer0," an essential part of blockchain development. It is highly versatile, easy to use, and an ideal foundation for decentralized applications.

Now, let’s look at Arweave’s drawbacks. Arweave is very foundational, and due to its architecture, it cannot limit token and contract standards. The ecosystem is too flexible, which may lead to a lack of unity, preventing collective force within the ecosystem. We may not fully understand Arweave right now, but we didn't fully grasp Bitcoin at first either. Charlie Munger once said, "To save computational space, the human brain resists change. This is a form of avoiding inconsistency." We shouldn’t look at Arweave with the usual blockchain perspective, or we might miss many of its key values.

Web3.0 is likely to arrive in two years, and by then, blockchain infrastructure like Arweave will definitely show its strengths and be understood by everyone.

Mirror’s Potential Breakthrough in Web3

Mirror is an interesting project. As mentioned earlier, Arweave’s ecosystem has grown significantly, and Mirror is part of this ecosystem. Many people might not know that Mirror is a content publishing platform built on Arweave. Based on Arweave's permanent storage feature, Mirror can achieve eternal content storage and provide content creators with sustained copyright income support.

What distinguishes Mirror from other collaborative platforms is the different revenue sources in Web2 and Web3. Let’s take a look at the roles in the text industry: creators, publishers, intermediaries, bookstores, and online media platforms. How much of the work, from creation to publication, actually belongs to the creator? Very little. This is the first dilemma. The second is that copyright fees don’t always reach the creator in time. The third is that copyrights are often pirated or plagiarized.

One major reason authors engage in promotions and soft advertisements is because relying solely on their independent works might not yield a substantial income. Simply depending on readership and audience likes to earn platform rewards is insufficient for supporting themselves or their teams. Even now, with the rise of streaming, when your article or short video becomes a hit, most of the revenue goes to centralized content platforms. Centralized platforms like Douyin or Weibo hold the power, even though your content may generate a large amount of traffic. But the valuation of those platforms grows largely thanks to your work. The recommendation algorithms behind these platforms heavily influence how visible your content becomes.

In the book or streaming era, the distribution of copyright income has always been uneven, and the creator’s living environment has always been harsh. So, can blockchain effectively solve the pain points of the copyright industry? Mirror reflects the fairness thinking of blockchain, returning the rights of data usage to users. Authors are rewarded with tokens based on the reading and liking of their works, which motivates them to create high-quality content, and readers can enjoy purer content.

Here’s a brief summary of how you would create on Mirror: First, you write an article, stating your desire to purchase the "Qingming Riverside" painting and upload it to the chain as an NFT. Next, you create a crowdfunding campaign for your article. You then promote it within your circle, finding people who are interested in supporting your idea. With the funds raised, you buy the painting. Then, you upload the painting onto the chain and divide it into multiple NFTs, which are distributed to your supporters. Creators can tokenize their works as NFTs on the platform, raising funds, while investors can earn ongoing copyright income through NFT investments. Each person owns a small part of the content. Finally, both you and your supporters can fulfill your dreams through this process.

Therefore, decentralized platforms like Mirror are absolutely meaningful. Gradually surpassing and disrupting the current centralized platforms will be a long-term trend.

Now, let’s return to the current creation process on Mirror. The initial motivation for people to join might be the expectation of an airdrop. But after joining, they find that the experience is great, and it's very cool with blockchain. So I think the connection with incentives is significant, but not the main reason. The more important factor is people’s recognition and expansion of the NFT+copyright model.