I have always felt that the most absurd part of Web3 is not the scams, but that it can even deter normal users.
If you want to use a decentralized application, you first have to install a wallet to buy Gas tokens, and you need to understand the pricing units of this chain. This process has a very poor user experience compared to any consumer goods industry, but in the blockchain circle, everyone has already gotten used to it, even considering it a way to filter users. I don't see it that way; I think this is just a problem that hasn't really been solved yet.
@MidnightNetwork There is a passage in the white paper that states the DUST sponsee mechanism allows users to complete transactions without holding any tokens at all, or even knowing they are using the blockchain.
$NIGHT Holders generate DUST and can point the generation rights to any address, including addresses controlled by DApp operators. The operators use this batch of DUST to cover transaction fees for users. What users see is just an ordinary webpage; they click to confirm and complete the operation, with no pop-ups and no Gas estimates. The entire blockchain infrastructure is completely transparent to users, just like when you swipe a credit card without needing to understand the Visa clearing network.
This design can work because it relies on DUST being non-transferable. Because DUST has no secondary market and cannot be hoarded for arbitrage, it can be designed as a purely operational resource—operators hold NIGHT, and #night continuously generates DUST, covering user operational costs, forming a predictable cost structure throughout the chain. If DUST could be freely bought and sold, this logic would collapse immediately; developers would hoard it, and fees would be re-linked to token prices, causing predictability to vanish.
However, I must clarify that this is a hypothetical scenario, not something that has already happened. The Midnight mainnet has not yet fully opened, and the infrastructure for the capacity market and the atomic swap mechanism of Babel Station are still on the roadmap. Whether there will be enough developers to actually create products based on this model is another matter.
What I truly care about is what the user growth logic of blockchain will look like if this system is successfully implemented. Currently, all user data across chains is statistically based on "people willing to learn to use wallets." If the sponsee model matures, it will statistically become "people willing to use a certain application." The size difference between these two sets, I believe, is obvious.
If you want to use a decentralized application, you first have to install a wallet to buy Gas tokens, and you need to understand the pricing units of this chain. This process has a very poor user experience compared to any consumer goods industry, but in the blockchain circle, everyone has already gotten used to it, even considering it a way to filter users. I don't see it that way; I think this is just a problem that hasn't really been solved yet.
@MidnightNetwork There is a passage in the white paper that states the DUST sponsee mechanism allows users to complete transactions without holding any tokens at all, or even knowing they are using the blockchain.
$NIGHT Holders generate DUST and can point the generation rights to any address, including addresses controlled by DApp operators. The operators use this batch of DUST to cover transaction fees for users. What users see is just an ordinary webpage; they click to confirm and complete the operation, with no pop-ups and no Gas estimates. The entire blockchain infrastructure is completely transparent to users, just like when you swipe a credit card without needing to understand the Visa clearing network.
This design can work because it relies on DUST being non-transferable. Because DUST has no secondary market and cannot be hoarded for arbitrage, it can be designed as a purely operational resource—operators hold NIGHT, and #night continuously generates DUST, covering user operational costs, forming a predictable cost structure throughout the chain. If DUST could be freely bought and sold, this logic would collapse immediately; developers would hoard it, and fees would be re-linked to token prices, causing predictability to vanish.
However, I must clarify that this is a hypothetical scenario, not something that has already happened. The Midnight mainnet has not yet fully opened, and the infrastructure for the capacity market and the atomic swap mechanism of Babel Station are still on the roadmap. Whether there will be enough developers to actually create products based on this model is another matter.
What I truly care about is what the user growth logic of blockchain will look like if this system is successfully implemented. Currently, all user data across chains is statistically based on "people willing to learn to use wallets." If the sponsee model matures, it will statistically become "people willing to use a certain application." The size difference between these two sets, I believe, is obvious.