Recently, while delving into DeFi infrastructure, I discovered a severely underestimated issue—our trust in on-chain systems is actually built on sand.

Think about it: we take the numbers displayed on the screen as gospel; we assume the results after smart contract execution are problem-free. This kind of "taken-for-granted" thinking only becomes apparent to be dangerous when encountering certain new protocols.

What moved me the most is that these systems adopt a completely different attitude towards data. They do not see data as immutable golden rules; instead, they openly acknowledge that data can change over time and even contain contradictions—verification must be done before it can be used. This design philosophy is rare in the DeFi space, practical and down-to-earth.

The key point is that these protocols do not force a single answer. They allow multiple data sources to operate simultaneously, and only after integrating and cross-verifying all data do they produce actionable decisions. This is crucial because real markets never follow textbooks—they can stagnate, lag, and sometimes experience sharp rises and falls. Systems that try to overly simplify market complexity will ultimately pay a price.

Under this logic, the role of economic incentive mechanisms becomes natural. Data accuracy is no longer just verbally encouraged but reinforced through real economic rewards. Compared to many current DeFi ecosystems that rely on a single data source for decision-making, this approach clearly aligns better with market realities.