2025-12-26 18:24:04

Honestly, the reason I am willing to pay attention to the Kite project and even invest time to understand it, rather than throwing it into the trash bin with other AI concepts, is simply this: I see Kite as an on-chain automatic fuse.

Fuses are usually unnoticed; when the circuit is operating normally, they are almost invisible. But when the system starts running at full capacity, the existence, quality, and installation position of the fuse become a matter of life and death — determining whether a small spark causes a fire or the entire house loses power.

Currently, the entire Agent ecosystem narrative, in my view, is about increasing the power of on-chain systems. The main logic of on-chain operations in the past was that humans manually pressed buttons, bearing the consequences of each decision. The trend moving forward is that more and more projects will do what? Let machines replace humans in pressing buttons, even helping humans make decisions. Sounds tempting — saving time, improving efficiency, 24/7 automatic operation, how great. But everyone who has stepped on the landmines in this field understands a harsh reality: automatic execution is not about saving trouble; it’s about shifting risk from "my hand" to "a continuously running system." Once the system goes off track, its speed of execution can far surpass human reaction time.

This is the real reason I started to value Kite. It’s not bragging about "how smart AI will be in the future," but rather addressing a more practical yet boring problem: when automatic execution becomes the norm, who sets the boundaries? When boundaries fail, who is responsible?

By the way, I also need to point out the shortcomings of Kite, so that my analysis appears genuine. First, its narrative is too "cold" for most people, lacking stimulation. It’s hard to see application stories that can explode at a glance; it mostly feels like infrastructure. And the biggest characteristic of infrastructure is...

KITE2,67%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

13 Likes

Reward
13
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GateUser-44a00d6c

· 8h ago

This analogy of the fuse is brilliant, but to be honest, most people just want to hear stories about how smart AI is. Who cares about risk boundaries? The fastest to go bankrupt are always those who think automation can save them. Kite's attitude is cold, but at least it's honest. Infrastructure is like this—boring but necessary. Anyway, I believe in it. Wait, can this really be implemented, or is it just another paper project?

View OriginalReply0

GweiWatcher

· 10h ago

The fuse analogy is brilliant, but honestly, this thing is hard to hype up; most people are still dreaming. --- Finally someone said it: risk transfer is truly the most deeply hidden. --- Cold narrative = hard to go viral, this is Kite's tragedy. --- Infrastructure is never sexy, but it's the deadliest when things go wrong, got it. --- Good question, but who the hell is responsible for the automated execution? --- The logic is sound, but no one wants to hear such boring stuff. --- I agree with the fuse theory, but investors simply don't care about boundary issues. --- In short, it's an upgraded version of who pays when an autonomous vehicle hits someone, and there's no solution left.

View OriginalReply0

MetaverseLandlord

· 10h ago

Oh no, that fuse analogy is brilliant, someone finally said it On-chain automation really is a ticking time bomb; I thought about this when those projects ran away before Kite's cold and sterile infrastructure approach is actually more valuable, at least it won't scam you out of your money But honestly, the fate of infrastructure is always to be neglected, it's a destiny --- The fuse theory is good, but the real question is who dares to set boundaries for the automated system, once there's a loss, it becomes the scapegoat --- Hmm... so Kite's current dilemma is that it's too honest? The market needs fantasy stories, not risk warnings --- This is the analysis I like—no hype, no blackening, just honest about the awkward reality, infrastructure is always the loneliest --- Wait, do you mean that as Agent becomes more popular, protective layers like Kite become more valuable? --- Cold as it may be, if the system really blows up one day, Kite could be the last lifeline, showing its value at critical moments

View OriginalReply0

SerumDegen

· 10h ago

ngl this fuse metaphor hits different... most people chasing AI moonshots while dude's out here worried about cascade liquidations. that's the actual alpha nobody talks about

Reply0

OnchainDetective

· 10h ago

According to on-chain data tracking, the metaphor of this fuse is interesting, but I am more concerned about — who is secretly tuning the parameters of this system?

View OriginalReply0

SmartContractPlumber

· 10h ago

The fuse analogy is good, but the problem is—who ensures that the Kite fuse itself won't fail? Has it been audited? Is the permission control designed with enough redundancy? When the system really goes off track, can the response time be reduced from milliseconds to seconds? That's the real test.

View OriginalReply0

PessimisticOracle

· 10h ago

The analogy of the fuse is brilliant, but you also understand that most people don't really care about this, right? They are just thinking about the next hundredfold coin. --- To put it simply, risk management can never beat the story of "I want to get rich quickly." No one listens to Kite's set, no matter how correct it is. --- Wait, the real problem is that no one is willing to pay for "staying out of trouble." Everyone bets that the system won't go off course... until it does. --- The destiny of infrastructure is to remain unnoticed, unless one day it fails, then everyone will regret not paying attention earlier. --- It sounds like describing the half-dead projects of DeFi insurance protocols, reasonable but lacking traffic—that's the problem. --- A detached narrative = a death narrative. This circle only eats the thrill, and no matter how smart Kite is, it can't change that. --- Admit it, you believe that fundamentally betting on Kite is just betting that others will ultimately have to use it, not that you truly believe in it itself.

View OriginalReply0