I’ve been thinking about Sign Protocol from two very different angles lately… and honestly, that tension is what makes it interesting.
On one side, there’s the market reality.
Unlocks are coming. Supply hits. Price feels it.
That’s not FUD, that’s just how this space works.
If demand isn’t ready, price adjusts. Simple.
But then you look at what they’re actually doing…
Sierra Leone, Kyrgyzstan, real identity systems, real infrastructure attempts.
That’s not the usual “partnership announcement” noise.
So now you’ve got this mismatch.
Short-term pressure vs long-term utility.
And those timelines never align cleanly.
Government-level systems move slow. Painfully slow.
But if they stick… demand becomes real, not speculative.
Then there’s another layer people aren’t talking about enough.
Revocation.
For me, that’s not a feature. That’s basic hygiene.
If I sign something on-chain, I need a way out.
Keys get compromised. Terms change. Mistakes happen.
If I can’t revoke… I’m exposed.
But it has to be clean.
Who can revoke?
When?
Is it visible on-chain?
If a “dead” signature can still be treated as valid somewhere… that’s a problem.
So yeah…
This feels like a real test phase.
Not hype.
Can real usage absorb supply?
And can the system handle human mistakes without breaking?
We’ll see.