Recently, more and more people are discussing re-staking and shared security, sounding like "I copy a deposit ten times, and all ten chains pay me a salary."

Yield stacking is fine, but don't also stack illusions: swapping the same risk into different packages won't hurt less when something goes wrong just because it's spread across several protocols.

From the perspective of the bridge side, the biggest fear is that "security outsourcing" turns into "responsibility outsourcing."
You think you've bought shared security, but what you've really bought is a very long chain of accountability.
When a vulnerability occurs, first there's a meeting, then a vote, and finally a post-mortem; by then, the money has already cooled off.

Some people also use expectations of rate cuts and the dollar index to say risk assets will rise together...
Fine, emotions can push prices, but black swans love to strike when everyone is moving in the same direction.
Anyway, when I see "an extra layer of yield," I first ask: who will bear the liquidation?
Who will take responsibility for the penalties?
Forget it, I won't talk about it anymore, lest I get called a killjoy again.