I look at whether the protocol is reliable or not, and I don't first check Twitter trends. I start by reviewing three things: whether GitHub has ongoing code updates (not just one or two big commits slapped in), whether the audit report clearly states "not fixed / fixed / risk accepted," and whether the upgrade permissions are multi-signature, how many people are required, and if critical parameters can be changed at any time. Newbies should remember one thing: the key that can control your collateralization ratio and liquidation threshold is the core risk point. Now everyone is complaining about miner/validator income, MEV, and unfair ordering, but I'm actually more concerned about whether the protocol has written into the rules who can cut in line, at least avoiding sneaking in backdoors. Later I thought it was pretty funny—before, I even took "audited" as a talisman... Anyway, now I’d rather accept slightly lower interest margins and choose protocols with slower upgrades and transparent permissions.