Have you ever experienced such a dilemma——when shopping online, the seller’s pre-sale hype is over the top, but when something goes wrong, you contact customer service and all you hear is "Please wait, dear," only for the other side to go offline forever.

The current on-chain data service ecosystem is, to some extent, a replica of this pattern. Prices suddenly plummet? The response is "This is market behavior, we only transmit data." Settlement errors? Blame-shifting says "The contract execution is fine, check your operations." Assets disappearing across chains? A light reply: "Cross-chain bridge risks are on your own"—and then, nothing more.

It’s noticeable that most oracles are essentially just data "couriers." They only handle uploading price data onto the chain and then walk away, completely indifferent to whether you end up losing everything or getting liquidated in the process.

But recent market trends are a bit different. Some projects seem to be moving away from the old routines of "how fast the updates are" and "how high the accuracy is." Instead, they are doing something more interesting—building an "after-sales customer service system" for on-chain data.

**What is truly scarce is having someone responsible when things go wrong**

We’ve been brainwashed by the concept of "decentralization" for too long, always thinking that as long as there are enough nodes, the algorithms are robust, and updates are fast enough, everything will be fine. But reality is harsh: accidents will happen. Exchanges will go down, APIs will glitch, and small exchanges will show extreme prices.

The defensive strategy of traditional oracles is "I try to minimize errors." The new generation’s approach shifts to "Since errors are inevitable, let’s make them traceable, manageable, and ensure someone is responsible."

How obvious is the difference? It’s like choosing a phone brand—
Brand A claims "Our products never break" (Do you really believe that?)
Brand B says "If it breaks, we offer 72-hour on-site service, full video recording of repairs, and every part is traceable."

If it were you, which would you choose?

The on-chain ecosystem is the same. Users ultimately need not a utopian oracle promising "never making mistakes," but a reliable partner that honestly admits "mistakes may happen, but we will take full responsibility." This shift in logic might be the true watershed in the next round of oracle competition.