Recently, I saw the secondary market toggle the royalty switch back and forth, and creators are arguing quite loudly, while buyers just say, "I didn't sign any contract." To put it plainly, the issue of royalties used to rely on "everyone's self-awareness," but now that liquidity is tight, who still cares about sentiment... I understand that creators want ongoing income, but embedding it into the transaction path is easily bypassed, ultimately turning into a cat-and-mouse game.

I'm not regretful of the outcome, but of trusting too much in the default setting that "the platform will always bear the responsibility for creators." Now it seems more like a permissions issue: who has the authority to change rules, when can upgrades happen, and who controls the switches. There's also a trust point similar to an oracle: you think it's on-chain rules, but in reality, it's the front end/market that makes the call.

By the way, a quick rant about modularization and the DAO layer narrative—developers are talking excitedly, while ordinary users are completely confused: you keep dismantling things, but in the end, royalties—money that is closest to creators—become even more uncertain. Anyway, now before I buy something, I first check the contract/market execution method, or else I might just pay the "comprehension tax."