What he forgot to mention is that Morpho can charge fees at the market level, allowing it to capture the economic value created by curators without bearing the cost of risk management.
This means markets are neither neutral nor ownerless. Curators invest in building liquidity and managing risk, but Morpho retains the ability to extract a share of the revenue, compressing curator margins and accelerating competition toward zero profitability.
This creates a fundamental misalignment: either Morpho monetizes and competes for the economics generated by curators, or it doesn't and must sustain its business through other revenue sources once incentives run out.
Curators should own their market economics and capture fees from both lending and borrowing. Otherwise, they're building businesses on infrastructure that can tax away their margins. Full stop.
This is why Paul is spooked about Aave V4.
You gotta follow Pablo.
He's one of the most actionable security people out there: if you implement half of what he recommends on his feed, you'll be in the top 1% in OpSec practises
This might be a bad take but i think DeFi is better prepared for AI based hacks than tradfi, we operate in the most adversarial environment imaginable with billions sitting in public smart contracts and literal state actors trying to exploit them, AI is going to make every environment just as adversarial and so I wonder how well opaque legacy systems that arenβt as battle tested as DeFI is will fare.