See, this is what we internally term "fanwank". It's a technical term, I swear!—fanwank basically means explanations that only make sense after the fact, explanations that are constructed to make sense of mechanics as opposed to mechanics that were constructed with built in explanations.
We've talked about this before back in Hacktivist Meeting—
Some level of fanwank is necessary, unfortunately, and I certainly understand the impulse to try harder to construct an explanation for cards you love; we do it all the time! But it's important to recognise that we should be holding the team at FFG to higher standards than that. If a card can only be explained by fanwank, we tend to look more sceptically at it.
So, yeah, that's one of my personal bugbears with the Current mechanics; there's a lot of strategic complexity as to when they're played and when they go away that don't map into any of the in-fiction explanations I've heard for them.
PS. @oconnor0—notice how you mistakenly gave us an explanation for why the corp Current should go away on the Corp scoring an agenda, instead of the Runner stealing one This is one of the main problems of fanwank, of course; if you try hard enough you can justify anything.