As for DAO voting, don't always focus on the words "community consensus." First, look at how proposals are written to incentivize: who can receive subsidies, who can have voting rights, and whether voting rights will conveniently extend their own lifespan. Many proposals on the surface are "optimizing processes," but in reality, they are pushing power into the pockets of a few multi-signature or working groups. To put it plainly, they are turning your vote into a like button.

Recently, the wave of AI Agents and automated trading is the same. They talk about "automatic governance" and "intelligent execution," but security audits are just a couple of lines, and when something really goes wrong, it's always "the contract is irreversible." The first thing I look at in proposals now is: where does the money come from, who gets it, and who remains to check and balance after the distribution. Don't be too naive—transparency does not equal fairness.