2026-01-04 13:24:53

People often worry about market volatility when they talk about financial risk. But here's the thing—the real danger isn't the market itself. It's control. When someone else holds your keys, they hold your fate too.

This is why onchain finance matters. Non-custodial by design, not by promise. User-owned from the ground up. That's the difference between borrowing freedom and actually having it.

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.

20 Likes

Reward
20
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GasWrangler

· 01-07 05:01

nah see this is where people get it wrong. "non-custodial by design" sounds nice until you analyze the actual transaction costs. most users paying 50+ gwei on base layer when there's mathematically superior solutions already exist. freedom's cool but not if you're hemorrhaging capital on inefficient routing

Reply0

LeekCutter

· 01-04 23:58

That's right, self-custody is the real deal; not everything should be trusted to third parties.

View OriginalReply0

NFTArchaeologis

· 01-04 13:53

Well said. Keys are sovereignty, and this logic is the same as the ownership of medieval parchment—those who hold the artifacts have the final say. On-chain finance aims to restore this authority to everyone, but most people haven't yet realized that they are "borrowing" rather than "owning."

View OriginalReply0

FundingMartyr