The two paths in the storage track are now diverging. On one side is the large-scale, technically heavyweight old players, and on the other is the emerging community-driven solution. I decided to shift some of my holdings from the former to the latter.

Honestly, it's not for the airdrop.

What’s the difference between these two contenders? One is like a traditional enterprise-level cloud storage company—powerful features, well-maintained ledger, but it feels like there's a wall separating it from ordinary users. The other is different; it’s more like a cooperative built together by everyone. Its scale may not be as outrageous, but each participant has a say.

In one sentence: one is "their network," and the other is striving to become "our protocol."

The former competes on hard power—technological accumulation and storage capacity. The latter focuses on soft power—genuine on-chain consensus and practical usability. This is not just about size, but about the distribution of power.

At the price of $0.14, I see it as a vote—casting my support for the idea of a "storage network truly led by the community." Decentralization should never be just a paper in labs and capital; it should start from the moment everyone uploads their first data and earns their first voting rights.

That’s why I am willing to take this risk.