To be honest, over the past six months, I’ve found something increasingly surreal:
Everyone keeps hyping how AI can help companies save on manpower, run automation, and use agents to eliminate repetitive work. But anyone who’s actually tried to implement these things in an enterprise knows—getting the AI to be accurate isn’t the hard part; the real challenge is getting it to “follow instructions obediently.”
Think about it: just spend a few days observing the core business processes of any mid-sized company and you’ll notice: - The risk doesn’t lie in whether the model is accurate, but in whether execution can be controlled; - The problem isn’t about intelligence, but about whether boundaries are strictly defined; - The bottleneck isn’t about efficiency, but about whether the processes can be fully contained.
That’s also why, when I later looked back at certain projects focused on execution-layer infrastructure, I realized what they do is far more important than it appears—they’re not stepping on the gas for AI, but installing the brakes. To put it more bluntly, they’re putting a “structured cage” around automated execution.
The more a business wants to rely on AI to make things easier, the more it needs a system that ties together execution actions, permission scopes, payment flows, and rules consistency. And right now, in this entire field, there are very few projects that can articulate this system clearly using structured language.
# The smarter the model, the higher the risk of execution getting out of control
A lot of people, the first time they see agent systems running in an enterprise, are impressed: Automatic order placement, automatic budget allocation, automatic cross-border transfers, automatic SaaS integration, automatic refunds, automatic API routing.
But what the enterprise CTO sees is completely different: - Is it overstepping its authority? - Did it bypass risk controls? - Which supplier is it calling? - Why did it choose this particular path? - Is there an audit trail for this transaction? - Will the budget be
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
13 Likes
Reward
13
8
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
StealthMoon
· 17h ago
The underlying protocol is the key
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeLover
· 18h ago
Money is the most important, but straying costs more.
To be honest, over the past six months, I’ve found something increasingly surreal:
Everyone keeps hyping how AI can help companies save on manpower, run automation, and use agents to eliminate repetitive work. But anyone who’s actually tried to implement these things in an enterprise knows—getting the AI to be accurate isn’t the hard part; the real challenge is getting it to “follow instructions obediently.”
Think about it: just spend a few days observing the core business processes of any mid-sized company and you’ll notice:
- The risk doesn’t lie in whether the model is accurate, but in whether execution can be controlled;
- The problem isn’t about intelligence, but about whether boundaries are strictly defined;
- The bottleneck isn’t about efficiency, but about whether the processes can be fully contained.
That’s also why, when I later looked back at certain projects focused on execution-layer infrastructure, I realized what they do is far more important than it appears—they’re not stepping on the gas for AI, but installing the brakes. To put it more bluntly, they’re putting a “structured cage” around automated execution.
The more a business wants to rely on AI to make things easier, the more it needs a system that ties together execution actions, permission scopes, payment flows, and rules consistency. And right now, in this entire field, there are very few projects that can articulate this system clearly using structured language.
# The smarter the model, the higher the risk of execution getting out of control
A lot of people, the first time they see agent systems running in an enterprise, are impressed:
Automatic order placement, automatic budget allocation, automatic cross-border transfers, automatic SaaS integration, automatic refunds, automatic API routing.
But what the enterprise CTO sees is completely different:
- Is it overstepping its authority?
- Did it bypass risk controls?
- Which supplier is it calling?
- Why did it choose this particular path?
- Is there an audit trail for this transaction?
- Will the budget be