In the crypto world, if you want to quickly judge whether someone truly understands the field, just talk about 'stablecoins' - after all, it is the core hub connecting traditional finance with the crypto world, and the storm center of current regulatory games and financial innovation.
1. Beginner players: only recognize 'price stability' as a tool
Understanding of stablecoins remains superficial: 'Isn't it just a currency pegged to the dollar with a fixed price? It’s just used for transactions, nothing complex.'
Aware of mainstream stablecoins like USDT and USDC, but only view them as 'tools to replace fiat currency', failing to see the value of connecting on-chain and off-chain, and reconstructing financial infrastructure.
Think stablecoins have 'no investment value', but overlook that they are the 'foundation' of DeFi Lego - without stablecoins, leverage, lending, and the DEX ecosystem simply cannot function.
2. Intermediate players: understand the mechanisms but cannot grasp the 'regulatory games'
Can discuss DAO collateralized issuance (like DAI using ETH as over-collateral), USDT reserve transparency, USDC compliance, but gets stuck when it comes to real-world regulation and industry trends:
When mentioning Circle's listing, Hong Kong Monetary Authority's new stablecoin regulations, and the EU MiCA legislation, one can only vaguely say 'regulation is coming', without understanding whether regulation wants to 'embrace' or 'block'.
Failing to understand the essence of the trend: Circle's listing is a signal of stablecoin 'compliance', but compliance = centralization, will it backfire against crypto freedom? Hong Kong's new regulations aim to seize discourse power in digital finance, or are they genuinely trying to create an innovative testing ground?
3. Advanced players: seeing through 'financial evolution' and 'macro games'
Those who truly understand the field will discuss stablecoins while looking at the bigger picture, pointing directly to the underlying logic of crypto finance and global games:
Talking about stablecoins leads to 'monetary models, liquidity triangles', and even compares the competition and cooperation between CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies) and stablecoins - for example, USDT is the 'on-chain extension' of dollar hegemony, while CBDC is the digitization of national sovereignty. How will the two compete for payment scenarios?
Focus on the deep impacts of Circle's listing and Hong Kong's new regulations: the US wants to strengthen dollar hegemony through stablecoins (on-chain dollarization), while Hong Kong aims to build a 'controllable innovation' financial technology center (using stablecoins to bridge Web3 and traditional finance). This is a global 'redistribution of power' in digital finance.
Seeing stablecoins as the 'essential infrastructure' of Web3: DeFi lending, GameFi economic models, on-chain payment settlements all require 'price stability, fiat currency exchangeability, and sufficient liquidity' as anchors - without stablecoins, the Web3 ecosystem is just a castle in the air.
Current situation: stablecoins are 'evolving amidst tearing apart'
By 2025, the stablecoin battlefield is no longer dominated by USDT alone:
Compliance faction: Circle accelerates globalization after going public, USDC ties to US regulation, seizing the institutional market;
Offshore faction: Hong Kong introduces new regulations to attract Asian capital and build an 'offshore stablecoin hub';
Decentralized faction: DAI and others attempt to break free from fiat currency anchoring, issuing backed by crypto assets, but face the deadlock of 'high price volatility and difficulty in popularization.'
Essentially, the game of stablecoins is a collision between the power of traditional finance (USD, regulation) and crypto innovation (decentralization, free flow). Those who understand the field do not focus on 'stablecoins themselves', but on the reshaping of the financial order behind them - this is the true 'cognitive threshold' in the crypto world.
Daily focus: Omni RPL OPCA
