Someone asked me, now that AI Agents can handle on-chain tasks by themselves, why do humans still need to take responsibility? My first reaction was: don't trust "full automation" too much; in the end, humans are always the ones who take the fall. The most likely to cause a chain failure isn't clicking a button, but those boundary conditions: how much authority is granted, whether signatures are one-time, contract upgrades/multisig rules changed temporarily, cross-chain bridges suddenly getting stuck... Agents can run processes, but when it comes to decisions like "should we stop, should we rollback, should we admit fault," they don't really feel guilty. Plus, now with the stacking of staking/sharing security and yield, being called a "copycat" isn't without reason; the more layers stacked, the more problems resemble a game of hot potato, and in the end, someone still has to make the call, issue announcements, and take the blame. Anyway, my current approach is: automation is useful, but permissions are kept small, limits are hardcoded, and when it comes to leverage, I still personally confirm.