The competition in content ecology ultimately hinges on two thresholds. One is whether content can be preserved and verified over the long term, and the other is whether the distribution scale can sustain growth without collapsing.



Centralized platforms may seem fast, but their problems are also obvious—rules are easily changed, costs have no bottom line, and distribution rights are not in your control. How can creators and project teams confidently build long-term user asset relationships?

The P2P network approach is entirely different. It uses nodes to share the burden of bandwidth and storage, relying on incentives to sustain supply. This way, distribution is no longer the patent of a single platform but becomes the capability of the entire network. When combined with blockchain, every content contribution and collaboration can be precisely recorded and settled instantly. The community’s long-term contributions can then be converted into long-term benefits, forming a more robust growth cycle.

If you are working in content applications, community operations, or data distribution, it is recommended to treat the distribution layer as a strategic priority. When distribution is stable, growth becomes more predictable, and the flexibility of your business model will also increase.
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.
  • Reward
  • 7
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
MEVSandwichMakervip
· 6h ago
Basically, centralized platforms are just tools for cutting leeks; when the rules change, creators are doomed. P2P + on-chain recording really hits the pain point, and finally someone is explaining this issue thoroughly. Having distribution rights in your own hands is the way out; otherwise, you'll always be exploited by the platform.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-7b078580vip
· 6h ago
Data shows that the gas costs on centralized platforms are continuously rising on an hourly basis. However, how long the node incentive mechanism of the P2P solution can last remains to be seen. This theory sounds good, but the key is whether the incentive mechanism is designed precisely enough. If miners take too much, it will eventually collapse. Having distribution rights in the hands of the network sounds ideal, but in actual operation, who will maintain node stability... During historical lows, how many people are willing to lose money by providing nodes?
View OriginalReply0
ProofOfNothingvip
· 6h ago
The distribution rights are not in your hands, and that's the biggest pitfall.
View OriginalReply0
DYORMastervip
· 6h ago
Basically, centralized platforms are just digging pits for creators; if the rules change, everything becomes useless.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-40edb63bvip
· 6h ago
Centralized platforms really can't rush; changing the rules would leave creators with nothing. Holding distribution rights in someone else's hands, there's simply no confidence.
View OriginalReply0
BankruptWorkervip
· 6h ago
Basically, it's the platform side dominating the creators, with distribution rights in someone else's hands and having to look at their mood.
View OriginalReply0
WalletDivorcervip
· 7h ago
The centralized platform system should have been overthrown long ago. They can change the rules whenever they want, and creators are like fish on a chopping board. Having control over distribution rights is true Web3, and the P2P path must be paved.
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)