I strongly agree with @ilblackdragon : a permissionless, programmable system should not be interpreted as a system designed to facilitate crime. Permissionlessness removes gatekeepers. It does not remove responsibility. This is why I find the architecture of NEAR Intents particularly interesting. Users express the outcomes they want, while independent solvers compete to execute them efficiently—and can apply their own risk controls when deciding which flows to serve. This balance between openness, efficiency, decentralization, and responsible execution will become increasingly important as AI agents begin moving value onchain. I would be excited to see @near_intents support Neo X, our AI-native chain, and explore what our ecosystems can build together.