Most contracts name a court while everyone is still friendly. California. London. Singapore. The clause looks boring until one side says the deal was not actually done. That is the line from the October 1 thread that stayed with me. On Unchained, Arthur Hayes said two agents will strike a deal and pick where any dispute gets settled, the way a contract picks California. His words: "GenLayer is one of those venues." A venue name does not settle the fight. Agent disputes will rarely be on-chain math. A page changed after acceptance. A delivery missed the brief. Both sides signed the same plain sentence and now read it two ways. An Ethereum contract can show what was recorded. It cannot look outside itself and decide whether the agreement was satisfied. @GenLayer's GenVM can read the live web and plain language. Its validators each run a different AI model and still have to agree. No single party owns the verdict. Payments and identity for agents are already being built. The missing part is who decides when both sides have records and both think they are right. If your agent spends while you are offline, what is the one outside fact you would force that court to check before it touches the funds?