Parallelism and sharding narratives have recently become popular again. The more they talk about being the "next-generation public chain," the more I can't help but think of the two most basic things: where to put the money and how to run. To put it simply, no matter how high the throughput, if you clamp down on bridges, contract permissions, and upgrade switches, when something goes wrong, you won't even have time to cancel orders.

For someone like me who likes to place limit orders near volcanoes, large fluctuations are actually easier to handle. But the premise is that the exit path must be clear: how deep is the liquidity, whether you can smoothly exchange back to mainstream assets on-chain, and whether you can cross out in the worst case. The collapse points of blockchain games are quite typical too—once inflation kicks in, studios fold, and the coin price spirals, no matter how many "gameplays" there are, they can't save it. In the end, it's still about who can leave first.

As lively as it is, I still prefer to split my positions into smaller parts, avoid touching permissions I don't need, keep placing orders, and treat losses as tuition fees. Don't entrust your life to narratives.