A borrower misses a payment. That fact has to become a delinquency flag, then a cure period, then an escalation, then eventually an enforcement action. Every one of those steps is a rule both parties agreed to at origination, and every one of them still waits on a human or a nightly batch job to notice. Rialo encodes the entire loan state machine onchain instead. A lender defines the conditions once at loan creation: missed payment triggers the flag, cure period expiring triggers escalation, default triggers enforcement. The network monitors for each condition and executes automatically, with no servicer, bot, or keeper sitting in the critical path. The economics of that are more interesting than the mechanics. Overhead, program maintenance, and administrative expense run around $25 per loan in small dollar lending, before workout costs or actual losses. On a $500 loan that is 5% of principal consumed before a single dollar of credit risk gets priced. Servicing cost is not a line item there. It is the reason the product doesn't exist. What I keep coming back to is that @RialoHQ isn't making existing loans cheaper to service. It's changing which loans are possible to originate at all. Whether lenders actually restructure operations around this or just bolt it onto what they already run is the part nobody can predict yet. The loans that never get made are invisible. Nobody writes a press release about the $400 loan that would have worked if servicing it cost nothing.