Research in compute resource management for cloud-native applications is dominated by the problem of setting optimal CPU limits -- a fundamental OS mechanism that strictly restricts a container's CPU usage to its specified CPU-limits . Rightsizing and autoscaling works have innovated on allocation/scaling policies assuming the ubiquity and necessity of CPU-limits . We question this. Practical experiences of cloud users indicate that CPU-limits harms application performance and costs more than it helps. These observations are in contradiction to the conventional wisdom presented in both academic research and industry best practices. We argue that this indiscriminate adoption of CPU-limits is driven by erroneous beliefs that CPU-limits is essential for operational and safety purposes. We provide empirical evidence making a case for eschewing CPU-limits completely from latency-sensitive applications. This prompts a fundamental rethinking of auto-scaling and billing paradigms and opens new research avenues. Finally, we highlight specific scenarios where CPU-limits can be beneficial if used in a well-reasoned way (e.g. background jobs).