In the past, when looking at DeFi, there was often a sense of disconnection.

The interface is on-chain, and settlement is on-chain, but the part that truly determines prices and risks is actually not on-chain.
Matching, state updates, feedback—these are scattered across different systems, ultimately stitched together to present a result to you.

@magicblock is not solving the question of "whether it can be on-chain," but rather "selectively on-chain."
When latency and throughput are no longer hard limits, the game itself no longer needs to stay off-chain.
Matching occurs on-chain, state synchronization happens on-chain, and prices are formed through collision, not pre-calculated.

Change is real.
Tighter spreads are because information synchronization is faster;
earlier risk exposure is because there is no buffering layer.
Participants place orders while simultaneously bearing the outcome.

So, it’s more like a correction at the infrastructure level rather than a narrative upgrade.
DeFi here functions like a real-time system, not a place for post-hoc accounting.