The part that stuck with me in @SignOfficial is not where the data ends up. It is what habit the builder learns first.
If the fully Arweave path starts through the Sign Protocol API and the finished data then shows up in SignScan, the system is not only offering storage. It is teaching builders a workflow. Write here. Read here. Query here. That matters more than people think, because once a team builds around the easiest path, “decentralized underneath” does not automatically mean “independent in practice.”
I think that is the sharper dependency risk in $SIGN.
Most teams do not get locked in by ideology. They get locked in by convenience. If SignScan becomes the normal place to discover data and the API becomes the normal place to initiate the off-chain path, then the habit layer starts forming before anyone even argues about decentralization. New builders copy the same route. Integrations assume the same route. Over time, the stack gets stronger not just because it stores evidence well, but because it trains the ecosystem to enter and read the system the same way.
That creates a very specific kind of moat. Not “your storage is impossible to replace.” More like “your workflow becomes the default one people stop questioning.”
So my read is simple: with Sign, the dependency may not begin at the archive. It may begin at the builder habit.
And once habit hardens, switching costs start showing up long before anyone says the word lock-in.