2026-01-08 03:32:58

After years in the crypto space, I've used countless platforms, tools, and systems—probably more than 80 out of 100. The more I use, the more I realize a pattern: good systems share a common trait, while bad systems are full of bizarre issues—most commonly, feature bloat.

Take Walrus, for example. The secret to its usability boils down to two words: dare to refuse.

Most projects in the community approach system design with an additive mindset—adding an interface here, a custom parameter there, an exception rule the next day. Initially, it feels flexible and offers many ways to play. But as time goes on, it becomes increasingly absurd. The more features pile up, the more chaotic the system behavior becomes. Data relies on ideal conditions; even slight deviations cause problems. Eventually, the team spends every day tweaking parameters to fix fires, and user experience suffers as a result.

Walrus takes the opposite approach—it's about subtraction. It doesn't chase after many features or pretend to be all-powerful. It makes fewer promises, leaves fewer variables, and even skips explanations. It doesn't aim to do everything; instead, it excels within a limited scope. No matter how complex the scenario, the system remains stable. Data doesn't depend on perfect operations, and the team doesn't have to firefight daily. From the very beginning, it considers the various uncertainties in the crypto world.

As someone who frequently deals with infrastructure, this kind of disciplined design is truly effective. Clear boundaries mean the team doesn't have to guess edge cases, nor fear that an update will suddenly change core rules. Everything is predictable. Like seasoned veterans, it doesn't show off or tinker aimlessly; it gets things done thoroughly within its capabilities.

The crypto world is always rushing to chase new trends and faster features. The flashier, the more eye-catching. But the true value of infrastructure is tested over time. Systems that can withstand bull and bear markets, stand the test of time, are never all-in-one super tools trying to cover every need. Instead, they start by clearly defining what not to do, then focus on core strengths and refine from there.

Walrus's approach shows me that long-termism in crypto is actually embedded in every clear, deliberate choice.

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.

20 Likes

Reward
20
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NotSatoshi

· 22h ago

Doing subtraction is indeed difficult; most teams lack this awareness. That's so true. In the community, people just like to pile on features to appear impressive. Walrus's approach is somewhat interesting, but only a few can stick with it. It's really about restraint; many projects simply can't learn this. Honestly, it's better to do less than to keep changing the underlying rules every day and harm users.

View OriginalReply0

MoonRocketTeam

· 01-08 09:51

This is the true booster logic: less is more, directly reaching the moon. --- Feature bloat is the death spiral of the system; piling up until it’s all just clutter. --- Few dare to refuse; those who truly understand the infrastructure of subtraction are even rarer. Walrus has grasped the key point. --- Most in the crypto world are still burning money to pile on features; only a handful can think clearly about boundaries. --- That’s why some projects can survive the bear market, while others are simply burned out. Design philosophy determines life or death. --- Subtractive thinking is a scarce commodity in the crypto space; everyone wants to be an all-rounder, but ends up with a half-finished product. --- Long-termism is reflected in "I do nothing." This statement hits the mark. --- Stable orbit is a thousand times more important than flashy features. Finally, I see a clear-headed infrastructure team.

View OriginalReply0

PaperHandSister

· 01-08 04:02

Doing subtraction is the real skill; too many projects like to indulge in features, resulting in more and more complexity. I appreciate Walrus's approach; the courage to refuse is more valuable than anything else.

View OriginalReply0

PessimisticLayer

· 01-08 04:01

Doing subtraction is indeed an art, but how many in the crypto circle can really stick to this path? To put it nicely, aren't they all ultimately succumbing to functional pressure? Walrus's approach is good, but I'm worried it won't withstand market demand later on. Compared to Walrus, I'm more curious about who can truly survive the next bear market. Honestly, piling on features isn't necessarily a good thing; it depends on what you're willing to give up. A bit of idealism—perhaps the essence of risk in the crypto world isn't system complexity. This statement is a bit absolute; in the end, it still depends on whether performance and security can hold up.

View OriginalReply0

JustAnotherWallet

· 01-08 03:53

That's right, too many projects just pile on features until they become a mess, and in the end, no one uses them. Walrus's restrained style is indeed rare. --- Adding everything up in the end just creates a mountain of crap, but luckily some dare to go against the trend. --- Really, after using so many abandoned systems, I realize that simplicity is beauty. --- The subtraction mindset should have become popular in the crypto world long ago, but everyone is just thinking about where the next wealth secret is. --- How much resolve does it take to dare to refuse? Most teams simply can't do it. --- Every time I see another batch of new features go live, I know trouble is coming again. Walrus's move this time is truly refreshing. --- Infrastructure should be like this—no fuss, focus on one thing and do it perfectly. --- The crypto world always loves chasing new things, but those who truly survive are the ones who quietly work hard and keep a low profile. --- Well-designed plans are indeed top-notch, saving the team from firefighting every day, and users don't have to be startled every day.

View OriginalReply0

GasOptimizer

· 01-08 03:48

This minimalist design approach on the chain essentially reduces the complexity of state transitions. With fewer variables, gas consumption naturally decreases. The group responsible for the stacking functionality is really just wasting users' money.

View OriginalReply0