Don't rely on big addresses anymore; the "entry ticket" on the future chain depends on who endorses you.

Currently, those playing on the chain have a misconception that as long as they have a few big coins in their wallets and some Gas consumption, they are considered "hardcore users." To be honest, this kind of identity built on the amount of funds is no different from a sieve in the eyes of future institutions.

In the past few days, while researching the underlying principles of Sign, I’ve come up with something quite interesting: when we used to play Web3, it was like building houses on an island. You have your asset proof, I have my interaction records, but these two things don't recognize each other. What Sign does is essentially build a bridge for these islands.

Take the currently popular DePIN for example. How can you prove that your machine is really working and not just running a script to cheat for subsidies? If it's just relying on centralized backend to transmit data, then it’s no different from Web2. But if the operational logs of this device go through the underlying "trusted signature" of Sign, turning into an immutable certificate hanging on the chain, then this machine transforms from a pile of scrap metal into an asset that can generate "credit."

This logic, on a larger scale, is about breaking down social relationships, labor results, and even government credit in reality into pieces that can be freely assembled into "credit Lego."

I have always believed that in the future, project parties will not look at how much U you have in your address, but rather how many nodes like TokenTable or large financial institutions have endorsed you in your Sign records. When this "verified trace" becomes a pass, those projects that rely on PPTs and data manipulation will truly be cleared out by this wave of dimensionality reduction. If this business succeeds, it won't just take a small fee; it will take the control of the entire credit system on the chain. @SignOfficial #Sign地缘政治基建 $SIGN