概念词典 · 产业链
稳定币
锚定美元的加密货币，由 Tether (USDT) 和 Circle (USDC) 主导，是 Serenity 持续关注的金融科技赛道。
别名： stablecoin／ 稳定币／ USDT／ USDC／ Tether／ Circle
是什么
稳定币（Stablecoin） 是以法币（主要是美元）做储备的加密代币，理论上 1 USDT/USDC = 1 美元。两大玩家：
| 发行方 | 代币 | 上市状态 |
|---|---|---|
| Tether | USDT | 未上市，私营公司 |
| Circle | USDC | $CRCL（2026 年上市） |
USDT 流通量约 1300 亿美元，Tether 是全球第 17 大美国国债持有者。
为什么 Serenity 反复关注
他的核心论点是 “USDC vs USDT 是 Visa vs Mastercard 级别的双寡头”：
- $CRCL USDC：美国监管合规，安全但增长慢
- USDT：监管灰色但流通量大，“和美国政府是爱恨交织的关系”
他用 OnlyFans 和卡组织 作类比：
“卡组织（Visa/Mastercard）和 OF 的合作虽然不完全合法，但因为交易量太大，谁也离不开谁。Tether 和美国政府也是这种关系。“
Serenity 的判断
- $CRCL（Circle）：合规优势 → 受美国监管支持 → 长期价值
- USDT：流动性垄断 → 短期不会被取代 → 但有政策尾部风险
- 中性看待，两者会长期共存
“Tether 持有 1300 亿美元美债，美国政府没动机真的禁掉它”
和 AI 主线的连接
虽然稳定币不是直接 AI 主题，但他把它归入”金融基础设施的隐形冠军”：在加密资产/AI 资产共同推动的全球资本流动中，稳定币就是结算层。
提到此概念的推文 (73)
按时间倒序 · 滚到底自动加载更多
-
CPU 开始像存储一样短缺
CPU “严重短缺” 现在看着 CPU 一天天变得越来越像存储，挺好笑的，像 $SNDK 那样不断涨价。 “自 3 月以来，服务器 CPU 已上涨 10% 到 20%” $INTC 和 $AMD 计划在 Q3 继续涨价。 “CPU 供应很可能在 2026 和 2027 年继续紧张”，其中“Intel 的服务器 CPU 短缺可能长达 6 个月，AMD 则为 8 到 12 周”。 $TSM 也在因这波短缺而增加 capex。 “恐慌的主要原因是 CPU 和 AI ASIC 需求同时爆发；目前库存包括 Intel、AMD 主流代际 CPU，以及 $NVDA 即将推出的 Vera CPU，全部都在 3nm 工艺上。” 看起来我们又绕回来了？
英文原文
CPU "serious supply shortage" It's still funny to see CPUs become more like memory day-by-day with the price hikes like $SNDK. "Server CPUs have jumped between 10% and 20% since March" with $INTC and $AMD planning to further price hikes Q3. "CPU supply is likely to remain tight through 2026 and 2027" with "server CPU shortages reaching up to six months for Intel and 8-12 weeks for AMD" $TSM is also increasing capex in response to this shortage. "The main reason behind the fear is the simultaneous outbreak of CPU and AI ASIC demand; inventory currently includes Intel, AMD mainstream generation CPU, and $NVDA's upcoming Vera CPU, all using 3nm process Looks like we've come full circle?
-
批评加密圈忘了区块链原本的用途。
这感觉就像……对冲基金 / VC 突然忘了区块链本来是干什么的？ 他们居然把数字资产变成了： 代币融资 -> 散户退出流动性，循环往复。 现在，没人再在乎“治理币”或 gas 代币了，因为那只是印钞后的更大傻瓜理论。 区块链最初的意义，是尽可能减少中间商，也顺带把费用降下来。 尽管如此： 1. 3 天 ACH 通道还在……虽然我们已经有 0 成本的支付通道。 2. 巨额 interchange 还在……虽然我们已经有 0 成本的支付通道。 3. 数字资产“信用卡”只是给 Visa/Mastercard 又包了一层更磨损的外壳。 4. 储蓄账户利率还是 0.3%，而现在法律还在试图堵住和稳定币相关的收益。 数字资产原本想做到的事，除了稳定币之外，几乎都没实现。 也许你们只是盲目追下一家 $HOOD / Hyperliquid（代币化、链上股票），或者盲目跟着 Ethereum，所以表现才会这么差。 重点不是靠代币价格上涨赚钱，再把 meme 币的癫狂变现。 而是要去资助真正有颠覆性的项目，比如 Bridge（稳定币出金/入金、interchange）之类。 这个圈子里绝大多数人毫无 alpha，因为他们都忘了它最初到底是为了什么。
英文原文
It's like... Hedge Funds/VCs suddenly forgot what blockchain was ever supposed to do? They somehow turned digital assets into: Token raise -> retail exit liquidity on repeat. Now, nobody cares anymore about "governance or gas" tokens since it's greater fools theory from printed money. The original point of blockchain is removing as many middlemen as possible, and as a byproduct, the fees. Despite all of this: 1. 3 Day ACH rails are still around... Even though we have payment rails for 0 cents. 2. Massive interchange is still around... despite having payment rails at 0 cents... 3. Digital Asset "Credit Cards" are just more friction-add wrappers around Visa/Mastercard. 4. Yields are still .3% in checking accounts and now laws are trying to bank stablecoin related yields. Very little that digital assets set out to do actually got accomplished, aside from Stablecoins? Maybe you all have bad performance by just blindly following the next L2 exchange token or blindly into Ethereum. It's not about making money from token prices going up + monetizing degeneracy from meme coins. It's to be funding any legitimate disruptors, like the next $HOOD/Hyperliquid (Tokenization, on-chain equities), Bridge (stablecoin off-ramps/intercharge), etc. 0 alpha from the vast majority of folks in that space, because everyone there lost vision on what it was originally supposed to do.
-
说法案不会被通过得太理想，散户得看清现实。
大概不会，JP Morgan、$SOFI 和大银行游说太强了。 我只是把这项法案到底会做什么，讲给散户听，免得他们吃亏。 里面确实有一些好内容，比如用美国国债做 1:1 储备之类的（看看 Tether）。 但随后又塞进了银行想要的收益条款……然后政客就对散户继续疯狂洗脑，试图让他们相信这对行业有利。 可实际上，一旦这法案通过，你大概率再也拿不到储蓄的真实利率，而且很多流动性也会被抽干。
英文原文
Probably not, can't beat JP Morgan, $SOFI, and big bank lobbying. I'm just giving the unfortunate truth to retail investors about what the bill actually does. There's some good parts about 1:1 reserve with US treasuries, and such (looking at you Tether). But then they throw in clauses with yields that banks want... Then politicians just straight gaslight retail, trying to convince them it's positive for the industry. But in reality, once this is passed, you'll likely never get true interest rates on your savings and a lot of liquidity will be wiped out.
-
直接把 Clarity Act 说成银行游说法案。
把话说清楚：Clarity Act 是一部银行游说法案。 JPM 和其他机构游说双方，想控制数字资产 / $CRCL 稳定币。 $COIN 大概率会把整个行业卖掉，因为他们拿到了有条件的银行牌照批准。 但实际上，这等于禁止收益竞争： -> 银行可以继续给 .3% 利率的活期账户。 而不是把 4.3% 的国债收益发给用户，然后自己拿走那 4% 的差价。 -> 他们掌握了入金 / 出金通道和稳定币的卡点。 -> 禁止任何非银行机构提供类似服务，比如通过持有稳定币给出 4.3% 收益的新创公司。 他们的理由？ 1. “安全”。这些机构本身就是部分准备金模式，真遇上银行挤兑，和 1:1 抵押代币比起来更扛不住。 2. “那你就去当银行吧”。但他们却在背后偷偷游说，阻止任何新的竞争性公司真正拿到银行牌照。 如果你想看这个政府底下的事情到底是怎么运作的： 就看看现在发生了什么。 任何真正帮到散户的东西，最后大概率都会被禁。
英文原文
Let's get this straight: The Clarity Act is a bank lobbyist bill. Where JPM and others lobbied both sides to get control over digital assets / $CRCL stablecoins. $COIN is probably going to sell out the industry because they got their conditional banking charter approved. But effectively, this bans competition in yields: -> So banks can continue offering .3% interest checking accs. Instead of handing out 4.3% treasury yields and keep the 4% difference. -> Hands them chokepoints over on/off-ramps and stablecoins. -> Bans any non-banks from offerings, like startups giving out 4.3% yields by holding stablecoins. Their claim? 1. “Safety”. These are the same institutions that operate on fractional reserve models and would GG on a bank run vs. 1-1 collateralized tokens. 2. “Just become a bank”. While they secretly lobby behind the scenes to prevent any new competitive firm from becoming a bank. If you want to see how it's things are doing under this administration: Just look at how things are going. Any genuinely helpful to retail are just going to get banned.
-
博主列出30只看好的美股并简述理由，涵盖AI半导体、太空、机器人、加密等领域
今天随机列出30只美国可投资的股票以及我喜欢它们的理由： 1. $INTC——美国晶圆代工的希望，国家安全 2. $MRVL——未来的maia芯片和CPO等附加产品推动营收规模化，业务范围太多数不过来 3. $TSM——半导体/AI的支柱 4. $COHR——业务全垂直整合 + 捕获光学周期 5. $RKLB——太空领域的终极前沿，5年后和20年后都会存在 6. $DRAM——三星/SK海力士的内存敞口 7. $AVGO——超大规模云商不喜欢英伟达GPU税 8. $AMZN——没人能竞争得过隔夜送达卫生纸这件事。机器人技术会长期降低运营费用 9. $ARM——AGI CPU在未来十年会大幅提升营收 10. $TSEM——做光相关的东西你需要晶圆代工 11. $IBIT——比特币，这点我们现在已经众所周知了 12. $NBIS——我认为它是下一个AWS。此外它们还与优步合作做自动驾驶，拥有可扩展的数据库公司、数据标注业务。几乎像一个小谷歌。 13. $GOOGL——youtube不会消失，gemini很棒。它们通过TPU实现垂直整合，用运营收入资助基础设施建设，所以我看好它。 14. $AMKR——超级工厂将在2027-2028年末投产。受益于美国制造政策 15. $HOOD——短期我不喜欢，但长期我看好罗宾汉，因为他们抓住了散户 + 有更多产品如银行等正在规模化。产品创新很疯狂。 16. $CRCL——我恰好非常喜欢稳定币，并认为它们是支付和持有的未来（取决于澄清法案的进展） 17. $META——人们不会很快停止使用Instagram、Whatsapp或其他应用。 18. $LITE——$GOOGL TPU敞口在BOM中占比较高。只要谷歌的AI计划持续运行，我认为$LITE会表现良好。 19. $LPTH——锗和中国出口管制问题将持续存在，因此美国制造的工程替代品将始终重要。 20. $FN——总得有人来组装光学产品 21. $JBL——同上，但加上英特尔硅光业务的IP，可能会成为innolight那样的公司 22. $MP——美国稀土项目极其重要，类似于$INTC涉及的国家安全风险 23. $HIMS——听我说，他们刚收购了一堆公司，股价在$19时有全球DTC渠道。做空者非常讨厌这家公司，但我认为作为逆向多头它实际上很有前景。 24. $SMTC——LRO/LPO转型 25. $POWL——美国版hammond，用于开关设备DC类瓶颈的替代方案 26. $VPG——人形机器人未来会成为主流，大概2027-2028年，这家公司做传感器。 27. $MOG.A——感觉在机器人领域、spacex供应链里到处都能看到它们 28. $MSFT——在$375这个价位，有一天我们会回头看发现这是买入机会。 29. $CVX——战争结束后油价可能会崩，但这些石油公司将变得极其重要，尤其是委内瑞拉还是个金矿。 30. $XLU——我认为降息可能会重启，我们需要电力/电网来支持AI，所以从$CEG到$NEE这些名字将始终重要。 只是顺便抛出一些除了$AAOI和$AEHR之外的想法。
英文原文
Here's a bunch of random 30 US-available random stocks I like today and why: 1. $INTC - America's hope for foundry, national security 2. $MRVL - scales rev from future maia asics and add ons like cpo, they do everything lost count 3. $TSM - backbone of semis/ai 4. $COHR - They do everything vertically integrated + captures optical cycle 5. $RKLB - the final frontier of space will be around 5 years from now and 20 years from now. 6. $DRAM - memory exposure for samsung/sk hynix 7. $AVGO - hyperscalers dont like nvidia gpu tax 8. $AMZN - nobody can compete against the overnight shipping of toilet paper. robotics will lower opex over time 9. $ARM - AGI CPUs scale revenue quite a bit over the next decade 10. $TSEM - you're going to need a foundry for light based stuff 11. $IBIT - bitcoin, we all know by now 12. $NBIS - i think it's the next AWS. Also they do self-driving cars with uber, own scaling DB companies, data labeling. It's almost like a mini Google. 13. $GOOGL - youtube is not going away, gemini is great. they're vertically integrated with TPUs and fund buildout with operating income so i like it. 14. $AMKR - super facilities coming online in late 2027-2028. benefits from made in america 15. $HOOD - i dont like short term, but long term i'm a fan of Robinhood since they captured retail + have more products like banking, etc that they're scaling up. product innovation is wild. 16. $CRCL - I happen to really like stablecoins and see them as the future for both payments/holding (depends on clarity act) 17. $META - people aren't going to stop using instagram or whatsapp, or others anytime soon. 18. $LITE - $GOOGL TPU exposure decently high part of BOM. As long as Google's AI program keeps running I think $LITE will do well. 19. $LPTH - Germanium and China export controls will always be an issue so US made engineered alternatives will always be important 20. $FN - Someone needs to assemble optical stuff 21. $JBL - same as above, but added with ip from Intel's SiPh acqusition so might end up like innolight? 22. $MP - American rare earths program is extremely important, similar to $INTC national security risks 23. $HIMS - Okay here me out they just acquired a ton of companies, and at $19 they have global DTC channel. short sellers really hate this company, but I think it's actually promising as a contrarian long 24. $SMTC - LRO/LPO transition 25. $POWL - US alternative to hammond for switchgear DC type bottleneck 26. $VPG - Humanoids will be a thing down the road maybe 2027-2028, this makes the sensors. 27. $MOG.A - Feels like i see them everywhere in robotics, to spacex supply chains 28. $MSFT - At $375, one day we'll look back and see this as a buying opportunity. 29. $CVX - oil might crash after war but these oil companies are going to be extremely important, especially when Venezulea is a goldmine. 30. $XLU - i think rate cuts might be back online, we need power/grid for AI so these names will always be improtant from $CEG to $NEE Just throwing out other thoughts aside from $AAOI and $AEHR.
-
认为 SOFI 还可以，而一些用稀释去抬股价的逻辑很扯。
$SOFI 这家公司本身没问题。 我觉得 X 上关于银行阻止竞争对手提供收益的逻辑挺有意思的…… 就像让 Wells Fargo 的活期账户比 4% APY 的稳定币银行更有竞争力。 这可能会成为最聪明的观点之一？ 还是说，像 $AMC 那种通过稀释把股东洗掉、结果股价反而能涨 20 倍的逻辑更聪明？
英文原文
$SOFI as a company is fine. I think the X community logic behind banks banning competitors from offering yield… Making Wells Fargo checking accounts more competitive than 4% APY stablecoin banks. Might take the lead as the highest IQ take? Or maybe the $AMC dilution to wipe out shareholders as a way to 20x the share price might be smarter?
-
认为稳定币发行商比单独公链更值得看好。
@rockwell0790 USDC 和其他稳定币都是链无关的，所以它们可以在 Solana 上结算，也可以在自己兼容 EVM 的网络上结算，而且手续费都能用稳定币支付。 相比像 $ETH 这样的单一网络，我对像 $CRCL 这样的稳定币发行商更看多。
英文原文
@rockwell0790 USDC and others are blockchain agnostic so they can settle on Solana or their own EVM compatible network that pays fees in stablecoins. I’m more bullish on stablecoin issuers like $CRCL than i am on individual networks like $ETH.
-
用订阅收入和外汇摩擦说明自己为何看多稳定币。
如果你还在想我为什么看多 $CRCL 和稳定币，这就是原因。 8605 位订阅者，每人 1 美元： -> 1595 美元。 还没算像加拿大这种要多付 46% 的海外订阅费（2 加元对 1 美元订阅），以及外汇 / 四舍五入损耗就直接消失了。 我不是来做订阅收入的，所以我也不打算改什么。 不过即便把按比例分成、或延迟到账之类都算进去，这个现象还是挺有意思的。 你还会进一步减少 30% 的 App Store 费用、Stripe 刷卡交易费，以及其他黑箱费用，比如外币四舍五入损耗。 稳定币肯定就是未来，你已经能看到银行在用 Clarity Act 游说去控制它了。
英文原文
Just in case you’re wondering why I’m bullish on $CRCL and Stablecoins. 8605 subscribers at $1.00: -> $1595. Not even including int. like Canada paying 46% more (2 CAD vs $1 USD subscription) and the FX/rounding disappearing into the void. I’m not here for subscription revenue so I don’t plan on changing anything. But just found this pretty amusing even if you factored in pro rata or holds/delays. You would reduce 30% App Store fees, Stripe card TX fees, and other black box fee mechanisms like foreign currency rounding. Stablecoins are definitely the future, and you can already see banks trying to control it with Clarity Act lobbying.
-
分享小账户分散化投资组合，涵盖AI半导体、光子学、机器人、加密等领域的高增长和杠铃策略标的
快速增长赛道： $AAOI - 光收发器2027年下半年收入增长10倍 $NBIS - 2026年第四季度收入增长10倍 $ARM - 全新AI CPU带来5倍收入增长 $MRVL - 来自$MSFT Maia芯片项目2-3倍收入增长 $AVGO - 长期持有超大规模云厂商ASIC $LITE - 长期持有OCS/谷歌TPU Win Semi - 对前沿行业的代工敞口 $TSEM - 长期持有光子业务，订单积压 SK Hynix - 存储业务敞口，极端营业利润增长 同时配置一些杠铃策略，远离超大规模云厂商资本支出（除亚马逊外）： $VNP - 长期持有西部供应链的稀土 $NEO (TCX) - 机器人供应链 $AMZN - 机器人/AI降低运营成本 $CRCL - 稳定币多头 $RDDT - 高得离谱的利润 $GLD - 安全对冲 $IBIT - 2028年减半 $CVX 看涨期权 - 石油对冲 也许还有长期配置（你知道迟早会来）： $INTC/$AMKR - 美国制造供应链 $SOI - 硅光子学/共封装光学(CPO)基板 $RKLB - 对太空行业的长期看涨期权 然后挑选一两支小盘股博暴涨： $SIVE - CW激光关键点或$I QE - Landmark重组重估，这是我最喜欢的两个 还有其他我提过的，比如$AEHR用于测试或$VPG用于Optimus 我自己在$AXTI等股票上的主动管理模式与其他人应该做的完全不同风险敞口配置。 在这种宏观环境下全仓投入高贝塔标的不太是最佳选择。
英文原文
Faster compounds: $AAOI - 10x revenue ramp from optical transcivers h2 2027 $NBIS - 10x revenue ramp Q4 2026 $ARM - 5x revenue growth from their new AI CPU $MRVL - 2-3x revenue growth from $MSFT Maia Ramp. $AVGO - Long hyperscaler ASIC $LITE - Long OCS / Google TPU Win Semi - Foundry exposure to frontier industries $TSEM - Long photonics, backlogged SK Hynix - Memory exposure, extreme operating income ramp With some barbell exposure away from Hyperscaler capex aside from Amazon: $VNP - Long term rare earths for Western Supply chains $NEO (TCX) - Robotics Supply chains $AMZN - Robotics/AI cutting opex $CRCL - Stablecoin long $RDDT - Ridiculously high profit $GLD - Safe Hedge $IBIT - Halving 2028 $CVX Calls - Oil Hedge And maybe long term (you know it's coming): $INTC / $AMKR- Made in America supply chains $SOI - Silicon Photonics / CPO substrates. $RKLB - Long term call on Space industry Then pick one or two small cap moonshots: $SIVE - CW Laser Chokepoints or $IQE for Landmark rerating on restructuring were my two favorites. There's others I've mentioned like $AEHR for testing or $VPG for Optimus. How I actively manage my own stuff from $AXTI and others is a lot different risk profile than what others should do. Going full port into high-beta in this macro environment is not the best idea.
-
批评David Sacks担任加密货币沙皇期间的政策反而将行业控制权拱手让给银行，造成行业血洗。
能不能有人诚实地告诉我，大卫·萨克斯"沙皇"这个职位的成就是什么？ >数十亿美元的流动性从比特币、以太坊和山寨币被抽走，流入了Trump Coin和Melania Coin >GENIUS Act（天才法案）通过，禁止稳定币发行商（如$CRCL和Tether）支付利息，因为它们会与银行竞争 >试图推动立法，通过Clarity Act（清晰法案）将加密货币咽喉要道的所有控制权交给银行 >试图通过Clarity Act禁止稳定币相关的第三方提供收益 >试图禁止非美元计价稳定币如DAI（造成流动性流失） >银行仍然不接入加密货币公司，甚至会禁止你注册。 >美国实际上只有少数几家愿意这样做，比如Cross River或Customers Bank？ >我们选举他时希望实现的目标一个都没完成，除了给加密货币公司"提供选项"去申请银行牌照。 >但只有与政府关系密切的人获得了豁免，比如Anduril的创始人？真正的加密货币公司一个都没有？ >现在大银行很快将掌控所有主要咽喉要道？ >这是加密货币行业史上最大规模的财富转移和血洗。 >甚至以太坊在Gary Gensler任职期间还更高。
英文原文
Can someone tell me honestly what the accomplishments of David Sacks “Tzar" position was? > Billions of Liquidity drained from Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Altcoins into Trump Coin and Melania Coin > GENIUS Act passed and banned stablecoin issuers (like $CRCL and Tether) from paying interest, which would compete vs Banks > Attempted to push through legislation that would hand all control over Crypto chokepoints over to banks through Clarity Act. > Attempted to ban Stablecoin related 3rd parties from giving yields through the Clarity Act > Attempted to ban non-USD denominated stablecoins like DAI (liquidity drain). > Banks still don't onboard crypto companies and will ban you from onboarding. > There's literally only a few in the US that do like Cross River or Customers Bank? Nothing that we elected him for was accomplished aside from Crypto companies having the "option" to apply for Banking Charters. But only people close to the administration like Andruil’s founder got a pass? Not any actual crypto companies? And now big Banks will have all the major chokepoints soon? This was the biggest transfer of wealth and bloodbaths in the crypto industry to date. Even Ethereum is higher when Gary Genseler was in office.
-
批评 Clarity Act 是银行给 crypto 的毒丸，并指出 stablecoin 收益风险。
我一直都公开批评 Clarity Act，因为那其实就是银行给 crypto 行业和 $CRCL 下的毒丸。 大家早就知道他们会试图起草禁止收益的法案。 不过最后结果还得看。 这对稳定币流通来说，确实是一个合法且实质性的风险。
英文原文
Yes I've always been an outspoken critic of Clarity Act since that's a poison pill by banks for the crypto industry and $CRCL. It's always been known they would try and draft legislation banning yields. But we'll see what the final outcome is. It's a legitimate and material risk to stablecoin circulation.
-
夸张说 Anduril 会在 retail 进场前就以天价 IPO，并认为 Circle 才是最近更重要的美国前沿公司。
@Alex__0x0 我的意思是，Anduril 大概会在散户还没拿到之前，就以 500 万亿美元的估值 IPO。 我最近能想到的美国真正有吸引力的“前沿”公司，大概是 Circle，市值 320 亿。
英文原文
@Alex__0x0 My point is Andruil will IPO at $500 trillion before retail gets access to it. The main compelling US “frontier” company I can think of recently was Circle at $32.
-
认为 Visa 和 Mastercard 不会消失，但未来增长会被免手续费支付网络和 USDC 大量蚕食。
@beauty_oe 我不认为 Visa 或 Mastercard 会消失。 但是，未来增长的大部分，可能会被免手续费的支付系统（支付轨道）以及 USDC 吃掉（被蚕食）。 我现在感觉，市场似乎在默认 $V（Visa）会永远持续复利增长。
英文原文
@beauty_oe VisaやMastercardが消滅するとは思っていません。しかし、今後の成長の大部分は、手数料無料の決済システム（決済レール）やUSDCに奪われる（カニバライズされる）可能性があります。 現在の市場は、$V（Visa株）が永遠に複利成長していくことを前提としている（織り込んでいる）ように思います。
-
AI代理支付以USDC为主且单笔金额极低，市场低估其对传统卡支付网络的冲击。
我对市场没有定价卡支付网络和交换费（如$V和$MA）的长期颠覆感到惊讶。 由$CRCL和$COIN推动。 来自Circle的全球市场负责人： "在过去九个月里，AI代理完成了1.4亿笔支付，总交易量达4300万美元。 其中98.6%以USDC结算，平均交易金额仅为0.31美元。" 像$PYPL这样的卡网络和百分比收费的支付处理器可能要被"烤熟"了？
英文原文
I’m surprised markets aren’t pricing in long term disruption of card networks + interchange like $V and $MA. By $CRCL and $COIN. From Global Markets Head at Circle: "Over the past nine months, AI agents completed 140 million payments with a total transaction volume of 43 million US dollars. Among these, 98.6% were settled in USDC, with an average transaction amount of only 0.31 US dollars." Card networks and % fee payment processors like $PYPL are likely going to be cooked?
-
仍惊讶市场在 USDC 供应增长背景下，对 CRCL 的看空在 50 美元时就投降了。
@Sam_Badawi 我还是不敢相信，大家居然在 $50 的时候就对 $CRCL 投降了…… 而 USDC 的供应明明还在增长。
英文原文
@Sam_Badawi Still can’t believe everyone capitulated $CRCL back at $50… when USDC supply has only grown.
-
回顾 $CRCL 一个月翻倍，强调应关注基本面而非图表。
$CRCL 现在到了 109 美元。 Circle 自从我在 54 美元发帖以来，涨幅已超过 100% 至 109 美元…… 那是一个月前的事了。 我真的很喜欢回头看那些看跌的评论，声称它会“下跌 50%”或“图表看起来很丑”，所以最终会跌至 20 美元。 当 $CRCL 在 50 美元时，X 上的所有人都在看跌，但现在它回到 100 美元，人们又转为看多了。 市场是判断对错的最终仲裁者。 但最大的教训是：关注基本面，而不是图表。
英文原文
$CRCL is now at $109. Circle has increased more than 100% to $109... Since my post at $54. This was 1 month ago. I really love going back and seeing all the bearish comments claiming it would "Go down"50%" or "chart looks ugly" so it ends up at $20. Everyone on X was bearish on $CRCL at $50, but now that it's back at $100, people are bullish again. The market is the final arbiter of right and wrong. But the biggest lesson: Look at underlying fundamentals, not the chart.
-
CRCL案例证明基本面重于图表，关注USDC供应与政策。
$CRCL 是一个很好的教训，说明了基本面比股价/图表更重要。需要关注的是 USDC 供应量、利率以及《Clarity Act》。而不是情绪是否糟糕，或者 XYZ 技术分析(TA)是否说它会涨到 30 美元。X 上的所有人都在 200 美元时争相买入，但在 50 美元时却退缩了。
英文原文
$CRCL is a good lesson why fundamentals matter more than stock price/charts. Things to watch are USDC supply, interest rates, and Clarity Act. Not whether or not sentiment is bad or if the XYZ TA says it’s going to $30. Everyone on X was rushing to buy this at $200 but chickened out at $50.
-
商户支付费用高，未来或激励使用稳定币结算。
@DDBlakeFischer 这是面向商户而非终端用户的。他们同样会被收取约 2-2.9% + 30 美分的费用，以及面临拒付(chargebacks)。 在我看来，未来会有激励措施促使代理使用稳定币(stablecoins)进行结算，例如提供折扣产品。只是人们尚未实现这一点。
英文原文
@DDBlakeFischer It’s for merchants not end users. They get charged like 2-2.9% + 30 cents as well as chargebacks. IMO there’s going to be incentives for having agents settle in stablecoins like discounted products. People just haven’t made it yet
-
Circle 估值具吸引力，看好 USDC 印钞能力并长期持有。
$CRCL 不属于软件板块。由于监管严格，你无法通过“氛围编程”(vibe code) 来开发基于美国的稳定币。此次抛售主要源于更广泛的数字资产情绪、《清晰法案》(Clarity Act) 对利率的影响（这类似于交易所如 $COIN 中人们存放 USDC 存款的情况），以及潜在的降息预期。我发现尽管股价下跌超过 50%，流通供应量仍保持在约 700 亿美元以上，因此认为 $54 的 $CRCL 极具吸引力。话虽如此，我长期持有 Circle，因为我确实认为 USDC 是一台印钞机。
英文原文
$CRCL is not put in the software bucket. You can't vibe code US based stablecoins because it's highly regulated. The selloff was mainly do to broader digital asset sentiment, clarity act interest rate (proxies to exchanges like $COIN where ppl keep USDC deposits), and potential rate cuts. I just found circulating supply was the same above ~$70B despite the stock selling off 50%+ and found $CRCL at $54 to be highly attractive. That being said I am long Circle for the long run because I do think USDC is a money printer.
-
分析多个软件股认为AI无法真正颠覆网络效应驱动的平台，存在投资机会。
"AI正在颠覆软件，但实际上并非如此"这个投资组合。以下是我个人偏好的清单：$RDDT（149美元，年初至今-37.47%）：10/10$NFLX（84.61美元，6个月-30.85%）：9/10$NET（169.5美元，年初至今-13.55%）：10/10$SPOT（488美元，年初至今-15.2%）：9/10$SNAP（5.13美元，年初至今-38.1%）：10/10$DUOL（85.3美元，年初至今-60.92%）：6/10$PINS（17.5美元，年初至今-34%）：8/10$U（18.83美元，年初至今-59.3%）：8/10$FIG（28.93美元，年初至今-23.65%）：7/10Reddit - 10/10：你可以用Opus一天内vibe code一个Reddit，但主要问题是"网络效应"是你无法复制的。你可以问ChatGPT或Gemini一个问题，但主要用途是英雄联盟赛后讨论或人类话语——这些才是人们使用Reddit的原因。Netflix - 9/10：你上Netflix看《鱿鱼游戏》和其他内容。AI确实会帮助生成新的病毒式电影或电视节目，但你仍然会用Netflix或YouTube来看。人们仍然会观看授权动漫如《孤注一掷》或最新的《弥留之国的爱丽丝》剧集，而不是AI生成的内容。Cloudflare 10/10：我不认为AI能颠覆Cloudflare。Spotify - 9/10：最大的颠覆是Apple Music不收取服务费（这可能不会发生）。虽然有AI生成音乐，但就像YouTube一样，你用Spotify来听它。你可以尝试vibe code Spotify，但很大一部分是版权。AI生成的音乐不会取代Martin Garrix的EDM配乐（其中很大一部分是知道这首歌→去音乐节现场）或Taylor Swift的《Love Story》类型歌曲（你也会去现场看演唱会）。Snapchat - 10/10：同样是网络效应——它之所以有效只是因为每个人都同意使用它。它的问题是变现和过多的股票薪酬，不是AI颠覆。Duolingo - 6/10：我长期以来一直嘲笑Duolingo，但在跌到86美元后估值再次合理。是的，你可以通过Gemini学习语言，我自己也是这么做的。但大多数人仍然会把Duolingo作为一种激励工具。还有品牌认知度+便利性，这是最大的因素。人们可以在应用商店vibe code自己的Duolingo，但这不意味着人们会使用它或自己出去编码。Pinterest - 8/10：这是人类相关的品味。人们担心代理商务和生成式AI（Midjourney、DALL-E）会颠覆这种搜索，但人们其实不太用Pinterest做这种搜索。Unity - 8/10：每个人都用Unity做4D AI和World Models。人们担心生成式游戏相关的事情，但它仍然被广泛使用。他们的主要问题是AI使用的变现，不是颠覆。Figma - 7/10：AI现在主要用于将你的Figma文件移植到html/css/js。并不完全是颠覆对软件的需求。也许只是我，但设计和创意有某种人类元素是AI还无法模仿的——用于线框图（它擅长复制和做相对新的东西）。我高度怀疑AI能否一键生成Tempo或$XYZ网站。对于$V和Mastercard等其他公司，我确实相信手续费和百分比费用可能会终结，因为AI通过$CRCL稳定币处理直接支付路由。对于$CHGG等其他公司，它们确实已经被颠覆出局了。对于$RDDT和$NFLX等其他公司，每个人仍然会去那里讨论或看《鱿鱼游戏》，AI没有实质性颠覆效应。由于恐惧已经笼罩软件市场，抄底将很难，但许多公司，如Reddit，提供了绝佳机会。
英文原文
The "AI is Disrupting Software but Not Really" Bucket. Here's my personal list of favorites: $RDDT ($149, -37.47% YTD): 10/10 $NFLX ($84.61, -30.85% 6M): 9/10 $NET ($169.5, -13.55% YTD): 10/10 $SPOT ($488, -15.2% YTD): 9/10 $SNAP ($5.13, -38.1% YTD): 10/10 $DUOL ($85.3, -60.92% YTD): 6/10 $PINS ($17.5, -34% YTD): 8/10 $U ($18.83, -59.3% YTD): 8/10 $FIG ($28.93, -23.65% YTD): 7/10 Reddit - 10/10: You can vibe code Reddit in a day with Opus. But the main thing is "Network Effect" that you can't replicate. You can ask ChatGPT or Gemini a question, but main thing is the type league of legends post-match discussions or human discourse that people use reddit for. Netflix - 9/10: You go to Netflix for squid games and others. I'm sure AI will help with generation of new viral movies or TV shows, but you will still use Netflix or Youtube to watch it. People are still going to watch licensed Anime like Solo Leveling or the newest Alice in Borderlands show over AI generated contnet. Cloudflare 10/10: I don't see how AI would disrupt Cloudflare. Spotify - 9/10: Biggest disruption is Apple Music just not charging for services (which likely won't happen). There's AI generating music but like Youtube, you use Spotify to listen to it. You can try and vibe code Spotify sure, but a large part of it is licenses. AI generated music will not go out and replace Martin Garrix EDM soundtracks (where a large part of it is knowing the song -> going to music festivals in person) or Taylor Swift Love Story type songs (where you also go in person to see concerts). Snapchat - 10/10: Same with network effect only reason it works is because everyone agrees to use it. Their issue is with monetization and excessive stock based compensation, not AI disruption. Duolingo - 6/10: I made fun of Duolingo for the longest time, but it's decent valuation again after the selloff to $86. Yes you can learn languages through Gemini, which I do myself. But most people are still going use Duolingo as more of a motivational tool. There's name recognition too + convenience, which is the biggest factor. People can vibe code their own Duolingo but that doesn't mean people will use it on the app store or go out and code it themselves. Pinterest - 8/10 - It's human related taste. People are fearing agentic commerce and generative AI (Midjourney, DALL-E) will disrupt this type of search, which people don't really use Pinterest for. Unity - 8/10: Everyone uses Unity for 4D AI and World Models. People fear stuff regarding generative gaming, but it's still widely used. Their main issue is monetization from AI usage, not disruption. Figma - 7/10: AI is right now is mainly for porting your figma files over to html/css/js. Not exactly for disrupting the need for the software. Maybe it's just me but there's a certain human element to design and creativity that AI can't emulate yet for wireframing (it's good at copying and doing something relatively new). I highly doubt AI can one-shot Tempo or $XYZ websites. For others like $V and Mastercard, I do genuinely believe interchange and % based fees maybe end as AI handles direct payment routing through $CRCL stablecoins. And for others like $CHGG, they have legitimately been disrupted out of existence already. For the rest like $RDDT and $NFLX, everyone will still go there for discussions or to watch Squid Games, and AI has no material disruptive effect. Going to be hard to time the bottom as fear has overtaken the market with software, but many, such as Reddit present a great opportunity.
-
强调股价与基本面脱节，通过运营指标寻找错杀机会。
$CRCL... 三周内已反弹53%。 $54 是最佳的买入时机，而不是财报后涨幅超50%的时候。 有时很难逆着市场情绪操作。 但例如： $CRCL - 尽管股价暴跌，USDC 流通供应量仍是我关注的顶级指标之一。 $AXTI - 7N InP 在 SMM 上非标准化。 生存法则：股价与运营指标之间的脱节。 有时，股价可能反映一种情况，但财报和现实却是另一种。
英文原文
$CRCL... is now back up 53% in 3 weeks. $54 was the best chance to buy, not 50%+ later after earnings. Really hard to go against the sentiment sometimes. But for example, on: $CRCL - USDC circulating supply one of the top indicators I looked at despite the stock price tanking. $AXTI - 7N InP nonstandard on SMM. Alive lives within: the disconnect between stock prices and operational indicators. Sometimes, stock prices might reflect one thing, but the earnings and reality are another.
-
回顾对 $CRCL 在 54 美元时的看好观点，今日该股大涨 20%。
我喜欢回顾历史，看看评论区经得住时间考验的程度。 $CRCL 今天上涨 20%。https://t.co/E47K80CRG4 （该推文引用了 @aleabitoreddit 的推文，引用内容仅供理解语境）: 我在 $54 美元时非常、非常喜欢 $CRCL。 估值已完全重置回 120 亿美元市值。 当价格在 150-200 美元时，大家都在抢购，但在 54 美元时，这里却门可罗雀。美元稳定币(USDC)供应量仍超过 700 亿美元，我预计稳定币的使用将继续增长。https://t.co/R2Habycf7d
英文原文
I love going back in history to see how well the comment section ages. $CRCL up 20% today. https://t.co/E47K80CRG4
-
批评Clarity法案是银行维护利益的工具，警告其损害流动性。
我确信99%的X用户都是NPC或海鸥，针对《Clarity市场结构法案》。强制美元计价并摧毁大量稳定币对流动性不利。通过资金流向将控制权交给银行，然后禁止收益，并不会突然让比特币和山寨币暴涨。这是一项旨在让银行设置瓶颈的法案，因为银行害怕数字资产初创企业会扰乱其0.39%的活期存款利率。在竞争对手利用《Genius法案》找到漏洞后，他们游说政府通过了该法案。看到人们像鹦鹉学舌般重复银行游说者的谎言，如“数万亿美元流入比特币和山寨币”，而不实际查看法案内容，令人遗憾。
英文原文
I’m convinced 99% of X are NPCs or seagulls with the Clarity Market Structure Bill. Forcing dollar denominations and nuking a lot of stablecoins is not good for liquidity. Handing control over to banks through flow of funds, then banning yields will not suddenly cause Bitcoin and altcoins to moon. This is a bill for bank chokepointing because banks are afraid digital asset startups will disrupt their .39% interest checking accounts. They managed to lobby the administration to get this through after competitors found loopholes with the Genius act Sad to see people parroting bank lobbyist lies like “trillions flowing into Bitcoin and altcoins” without actually looking what’s inside the bill.
-
批评法案将金融权让渡银行，扼杀稳定币创新与流动性。
谢谢。但这并不改变这样一个事实：并非每个人都是特朗普政府的内部人士，坐拥5000万美元以上资产，并能获得银行牌照。 该法案通过将一切权力拱手让给银行，极大地破坏了创新和美国理想。 它实际上禁止非银行机构接触资金流，并禁止通过稳定币为消费者提供真正的收益。 扩大稳定币的美元计价规模更有意义（我会支持贝森特在这一特定角度上的观点），但隐含的“核打击”针对的是大量非USDC的稳定币，这将导致流动性枯竭。
英文原文
Thanks. Doesn't change the fact that not everyone is an insider in the Trump administration, sits on $50M+, and can get a banking charter. This bill is extremely disruptive to innovation and American ideals by handing everything over to banks. It effectively bans non-banks from touching flow of funds and bans giving consumers true yield through stablecoins. Expansion of dollar denomination of stablecoins makes more sense (and I'd support Bessent on this specific angle), but the implicit nuke is on a lot of stablecoins that are not USDC + dries up liquidity.
-
Clarity Act 禁止稳定币收益，保护银行低息模式，或致 USDC 流动性枯竭。
这是 Genius 上 Clarity Act 扩展带来的稳定币相关收益。这是银行的“毒丸计划”，因为它从法律上禁止了任何竞争。这意味着将 USDC 存入稳定币新银行（Stablecoin neobank）-> 公司提供的 3-5% 收益被禁止。如果稳定币本身以及新银行/交易所/金融科技都没有收益，可能会导致 USDC 存款外流并耗尽市场流动性。银行支票账户平均利率约为 0.39%。正如你提到的，像 $SOFI 这样的新金融科技是例外。银行提供“高收益储蓄”，但很多时候，他们隐藏条款，6 个月后降低利率 -> 降至 0.1% 并迫使你开设新账户。如果其他银行/交易所等提供真正的百分之几的 USDC 存款国债利率并保持恒定，将颠覆银行现有的低/零费用支票账户模式。消费者没有获得真正的利率，所有利润都流向了银行。
英文原文
This is stablecoin related yield with the Clarity Act expansion on Genius. This is the Bank's poison pill as it just legally bans any competition. Meaning depositing USDC into a Stablecoin neobank -> the company giving 3-5% yield off that is banned. Having no yield from both the stablecoin itself + neobanks/exchanges/fintechs would likely cause a deposit flight out of USDC and drain liquidity from the market. Bank checking accounts are in average are ~.39%. There are exceptions with new fintechs like $SOFI as you mentioned. Banks offer "high yield savings" but a lot of times, they hide hidden clauses where they lower those after 6 months -> goes to 0.1% and make you open new accounts. If every other Bank/Exchange or others offered true few percent treasury rates from USDC deposits and made it constant, it would disrupt the low/zero fee checking account models banks have. Consumers aren't getting true rates, and any profits just go to banks.
-
批评法案将基础设施让给银行，警告其将扼杀加密创新及COIN前景。
《Clarity Act》（清晰法案）简直是对整个加密货币行业的毒丸核弹，将所有基础设施拱手让给银行。禁止稳定币使用第三方收益，使得银行可以维持其0.01%的支票账户利率。要求接触资金流必须拥有银行牌照或IDI（存款机构）资格，这对你们风投组合中的大多数公司来说都是有效的核打击。继续坚持斗争，政府政策显然在确保美元作为所有加密货币的底层货币，这一点我们可以认同。但同时不要允许银行加入那些会摧毁加密货币和 $COIN 长期创新的条款。
英文原文
The Clarity Act is just a poison pill nuke on the entire crypto industry, giving all the rails over to banks. Banning 3rd party yields for stablecoins allows banks to just keep their .01% interest rate checking. Then having banking licenses or IDI requirements to even touch flow of funds is an effective nuke on majority of your venture portfolio companies. Keep up the good fight, Gov policy is obviously making sure Dollar is bottom line currency for all crypto that is fine to align on. But at the same time don’t let banks throw in provisions that nukes the long term innovation for crypto and $COIN.
-
揭秘监管与保证金调整如何重创加密市场，看好比特币及持牌机构反弹。
我觉得伯恩斯坦(Bernstein)和机构错过了比特币暴跌的许多原因。华尔街日报(WSJ)和媒体也是如此，这就是为什么散户一无所知。 两点原因： 1. “清晰法案(Clarity Act)”加上“天才法案(Genius Act)”的一部分，是银行和政府为了加强美元而对加密货币投下的战术核弹。“安全”目的纯属胡扯。例如（稳定币储备必须与美元/国债保持1:1）。 据CEO去年会议透露，Tether持有10万+枚比特币，且2025年是净买入方。随着该法案实施，像Tether这样的主要买家可能会在2026-2027年被迫卖出，因为其约1800亿美元市值的稳定币中持有大量南美农场等流动性差的资产，而其10万+枚比特币具有高流动性。 -> 稳定币收益率 如果交易所和金融科技(Fintech)公司无法通过稳定币和其他存款提供收益，这将极具破坏性。巨额流动性将从加密货币中流出。 此外，关于美元抵押品、资金流中的银行以及国家CFTC许可证的不同条款，可能会摧毁许多交易所/去中心化交易所(DEX)/金融科技公司的头部，并伤害山寨币。有太多毒丸条款会扼杀任何非银行金融科技/加密货币公司。例如，使银行成为有效的垄断者。但这可以在另一篇帖子中解释。 2. 白银流动性核弹。这是CME和交易所将保证金提高到不合理水平以迫使清算级联，并以“鹰派”美联储主席作为叙事借口。 其他风险投资(VC)声称某亚洲公司爆仓并被迫清算来自白银交易的比特币，但这都是多方面的，很可能源于上述两点。 主流媒体几乎未报道百分比变化和6次以上的加息。只是责怪美联储主席。 这也蔓延到股市中任何高贝塔(high beta)资产，但看起来像是一次孤立暴跌。 基本上，没人能报道《清晰法案》是摧毁加密货币的毒丸，因为银行游说，以及CME保证金上调（以迫使白银清算）。如果报道了，贝森特(Bessent)和美国政府就会追究他们。所以散户一无所知，并被煤气灯操纵(gaslit)认为“清晰法案”对加密货币是好事。 实际上，美国政府只是在通过游说加强美元+银行垄断，同时在这个过程中摧毁加密货币。（如果我是政府，这很有道理，我只是引用诚实的后果） 话虽如此，比特币在当前水平感觉像是免费的地皮，我预计该资产以及申请银行特许状的特定加密货币公司将恢复。
英文原文
I feel like Bernstein and institutions missed a lot on why Bitcoin crashed. Same with WSJ + media, which is why nobody in retail knows. Two things: 1. “Clarity Act” + part of the Genius Act is a tactical nuke on crypto by banks + Gov to strengthen the dollar. “Safety” purposes is just BS. -> For example (Stablecoin reserves must be kept 1:1 with USD/treasuries) Tether has 100k+ Bitcoin (as per CEO last year conference) and were a net buyer in 2025. With the act the main buyers like Tether would probably be a forced sellers 2026-2027 with their $180b-ish stablecoin MC since they have a lot of illiquid assets like farms in South America while their 100k+ Bitcoin is liquid. -> Stablecoin yield This is extremely destructive if exchanges and fintechs were not able to give yield off stablecoin and other deposits. An enormous of liquidity would flow out of crypto. There’s also different clauses around exchange rules regarding USD collateral + banks in flow of funds + national cftc licenses that would likely blow up a lot of exchanges/dexs/fintechs tops and harm altcoins. There’s just way too many poison pill clauses that just kills off any non-bank fintech/crypto company. Eg. Making banks an effective monopoly. But can explain in another post. 2. Silver liquidity nuke. This was CME + exchange margin hikes to unreasonable levels to force liquidation cascades, with a “hawkish” fed chair as a narrative excuse. Other VCs were claiming some Asian firm blew up and were forced to liquidate a bitcoin from the silver trade but it’s all multifaceted, likely stemming from above two. Almost zero mainstream media reporting over changes to percentages and 6+ hikes. Just blaming the fed chair. This also trickled into anything high beta in the stock market but looks like an isolated crash. But basically, nobody can report that the Clarity Act is a poison pill nuking crypto because of bank lobbying and that the CME margin hikes (to force Silver liquidations). Bessent and the Us gov would just go after them if they did lol. So nobody in retail knows and are being gaslit that “Clarity Act” is a good thing for crypto. When in reality US gov is just doing everything to strengthen the dollar + bank monopoly from their lobbying while blowing up crypto in the process. (Which makes sense if I’m the government, I’m just citing the honest repercussions) That being said Bitcoin at these levels feels like free real estate and I expect the asset + crypto companies that applied for bank charters in specific to recover.
-
类比监管打压，批评药企与银行游说扼杀创新。
这看起来为何与2022年Gary Gensler试图将$HOOD和Coinbase创始人送进监狱的情景如此相似？ $HIMS在4年后正在做创新的事情，而大型制药公司（Big Pharma）正在游说禁止它。 稳定币（Stablecoins）和银行目前的情况也是如此，在“清晰法案（Clarity Act）”下，以保护消费者免受稳定币收益风险为幌子。 到了这一步，当$NVO和摩根大通（JP Morgan）可以以“安全原因”游说这些政客时，美国的创新也就到此为止了。
英文原文
Why does this looks eerily similar to Gary Gensler trying to jail $HOOD and Coinbase founders back in 2022? $HIMS is doing something innovative now 4 years later and big pharma is lobbying to ban it. Same with Stablecoins and Banks right now with the “Clarity Act” under the guise of protecting consumers from the safety with stablecoin yields. At this point, so much for innovation in America when $NVO and JP Morgan can lobby these politicians for “safety reasons”.
-
CLARITY法案监管风险是CRCL最大看空因素。
主要需关注的是《清晰法案》(CLARITY act) 及其对收益的监管限制。这可能是 $CRCL 最大的看空论点，涉及交易所利用漏洞为 USDC 存款提供利息。若叠加降息与供应减少，将对 Circle 造成重创。但监管始终是加密货币领域的悬顶之剑。
英文原文
The main thing to look out for is CLARITY act and regulating away any yield. Probably the biggest bear case for $CRCL regarding loopholes exchange use to give interest for USDC deposits. If you combine that with rate cuts + lower supply,then that hurts Circle a lot. But regulation is always one of the overhangs with crypto.
-
看好CRCL重置后的估值，预计稳定币需求持续增长。
我非常、非常喜欢 $CRCL 在 54 美元的价格。估值已完全重置回 120 亿美元市值。当价格在 150-200 美元时，大家都在抢购，但在 54 美元时，这里却无人问津。USDC 供应量仍超过 700 亿美元，我预计稳定币的使用将继续增长。https://t.co/R2Habycf7d
英文原文
I really, really like $CRCL at $54. Valuation has been completely reset back to $12B MC. Everyone was rushing to buy it back at $150-200 but at $54, it's a ghost town. USDC supply still $70B+ and I expect stablecoins to continue growing in usage. https://t.co/R2Habycf7d