After bed, I scrolled through for a bit, and then I saw someone treating LST/re-staking as “free interest.” Honestly, I’m really at a loss for words.

If you strip it down, the returns basically come in two parts: one is the original “security budget” that staking already had, and the other is the new protocol using “points/subsidies/tokens” to pay for you to package the risk and take it away.

The problem is right here: you think you’re just swapping ETH for a different receipt and lying it down to sit, but in reality, there’s an extra layer of contracts, another layer of an oracle/price feed, plus a bunch of coupling around cross-chain/shared security. If anything goes wrong on any one layer, they can all end up going down together.

And don’t forget—bridges are also the thing that most loves to quietly show up inside “combined yields”…

Also, watching the argument over privacy coins/mixers and compliance, I just want to say this: once the boundaries get tightened, the first liquidity exit points that get stuck are often these nested “doll-in-a-doll” loops—escaping them won’t be easy.

Anyway, whenever I see someone saying “re-staking = low-risk yield,” I want to screenshot it and keep the record, and then use it when the incident is reviewed and reconstructed.