It hardly makes any sense. Vaults in Morpho exist to solve a UX problem, as users simply cannot track thousands of markets themselves. But vaults do not offer much additional protection to users. In fact, they significantly reduce user protection compared to depositing directly into a market. The absolute majority of users will not understand what changes are being introduced under a 1-day timelock, even if they somehow decide to monitor the vault 24/7. And the existence of a timelock does not mean that every investment decision made by the curator is implicitly approved by the lender. Coming back to the first point, Paul says that “the vault turns the complexity of tracking thousands of markets into a single set of predetermined rules that allocates across many markets at once.” But now the user effectively has to monitor the thousands of markets the curator allocates to. And if the funds are mismanaged, we can suddenly say that this was done with the user's “explicit or implicit” approval. And I am not even talking about situations where curators use their “discretionary” vaults as collateral within their non-custodial vaults. What is the vault called in that situation? I do not think Paul is naive enough to believe that these vaults are “non-custodial”. Rather, he seems to want others to believe in that.