Recently, everyone has been talking about AI Agents one-click onboarding, but I actually want to ask: where must there be human oversight? Don't pretend automation for the signing step; handing over the private key to a script means essentially replacing "I trust myself" with "I trust an unreviewed dependency." And regarding authorization/limits, agents like to give unlimited allowances to save trouble—newcomers see it as smooth, but in reality, they're burying future risks all at once. My current understanding is: authorization should either be minimized or replaced with one-time permissions; it's more troublesome but allows for peace of mind.

Then there's the idea that "it can find better prices," but agents can calculate paths without understanding the project's integrity. When faced with phishing contracts, fake frontends, or tokens with the same name, ultimately, humans need to verify addresses, review source code, or at least check audits and permissions. The most critical points in on-chain interactions that require human oversight are: fund exits (bridges/cross-chain), contract upgrade permissions, and anything else you need to "trust."

By the way, I want to complain about those L2s' arguments about TPS/fees/subsidies... Data can be tuned by parameters, and once subsidies stop, the ecosystem cools down. The same applies to agents—running fast doesn't mean avoiding crashes. Anyway, my principle remains: if you can fork, fork; if you can read the code, read; if you can't read, don't let a bot sign blindly for you.