There is an interesting phenomenon—everyone wants instant liquidity until a moment when everyone tries to withdraw simultaneously.

In the DeFi community, "adding liquidity" has almost become a universal remedy: faster onboarding, lower transaction costs, seamless exchanges. It sounds reasonable. But looking back at the historical ledger makes it clear that the problem lies precisely in this "unconditional liquidity"—big risks often hide in unseen corners, only exploding when you absolutely need to use it.

At this point, it becomes interesting to look at some new DeFi products. They do not blindly pursue "speed above all," but honestly admit: ample liquidity is good, but there must be a bottom line. Take the over-collateralization mechanism—rather than viewing it as waste, it can be understood as a "buffer" for the entire system. When you use assets to mint stablecoins, this extra collateral ratio is like giving yourself more room to maneuver, so that when real risk pressure arrives, you won't be instantly overwhelmed.

From another perspective, this "restrained design" might actually be the key to long-term stable operation.