Suyay
--
The false comfort of saying "it's permissionless"
Why the absence of permissions does not eliminate risk, it only changes who absorbs it.
"It's permissionless."
The phrase appears as a final argument in countless DeFi discussions. It acts as a conceptual shield: if there are no permissions, there are no responsibilities; if there are no responsibilities, there are no blames. The system is open, and therefore, just by definition.
But the comfort of this idea is deceptive. The absence of permissions does not equate to the absence of consequences. In fact, in many cases, the permissionless nature becomes an elegant way to avoid difficult design decisions.
"It's permissionless."
The phrase appears as a final argument in countless DeFi discussions. It acts as a conceptual shield: if there are no permissions, there are no responsibilities; if there are no responsibilities, there are no blames. The system is open, and therefore, just by definition.
But the comfort of this idea is deceptive. The absence of permissions does not equate to the absence of consequences. In fact, in many cases, the permissionless nature becomes an elegant way to avoid difficult design decisions.
Disclaimer: Includes third-party opinions. No financial advice. May include sponsored content. See T&Cs.