@NewtonProtocol I don't love that a machine can lose money on my behalf and the "accountability" is just a slashed stake somewhere. Newton's model ties agent operators to collateral, so if their AI agent oversteps its permissions, part of their stake gets redirected to whoever got hurt. It's not insurance exactly. It's more like a security deposit for a robot you never actually spoke to. That should feel reassuring. Mostly it just makes me notice how much distance now sits between a decision and the person responsible for it. Nobody's watching in real time. The system watches, then bills someone later if it catches a violation. Convenient, until the violation is the kind that never technically breaks a rule.
#newt $NEWT $MAGMA $TLM
Would collateral-backed slashing make you trust an AI trading agent?