Totally agree—and that’s actually where DVI starts to break from legacy systems. Escrow + verification exists, yes—but it’s fragmented, manual, and reactive. W

Totally agree—and that’s actually where DVI starts to break from legacy systems. Escrow + verification exists, yes—but it’s fragmented, manual, and reactive. What I’m proposing with DVI is a protocol layer that combines passive presence, programmable transaction rules, and autonomous settlement. Think less “escrow agent + QA team” and more: "If deliverable confirmed by X API + location + timestamp, auto-release funds." "If 2/3 validators approve within 24 hours, trigger split settlement to contractor + reviewer." "If transaction exceeds $150, route to identity-assured validator pool for audit." It’s programmable trust, not just third-party enforcement. And it opens the door to scalable contract validation without human bottlenecks. Appreciate the deep comments—this is exactly the level of feedback I was hoping for.