# stablecoins — X 热门讨论 (2026-10-02 02:45 UTC)
## @Xfinancebull (X Finance Bull) · 10-02 02:01 · ♥82 ↻14 💬5 🚨🚨🚨SEC Chair Paul Atkins is flipping the switches for onchain U.S. markets.
$XRP already has the wiring.
I’ve been looking closely at what the SEC is actually building, and I think XRP holders need to understand the difference between “crypto regulation” and what is happening now.
The SEC has already created an Innovation Exemption that allows certain tokenized U.S. stocks to trade through permissioned AMM liquidity pools.
And these are supposed to be actual tokenized NMS stocks carrying the same rights and privileges as their traditional equivalents.
The smart contracts have to be public and auditable. The blockchain underneath has to be public and permissionless.
The participants can still be permissioned. SEC Read that structure again.
Public blockchain. Permissioned investors. Real securities. AMM liquidity.
Now look at what XRPL has been building.
Credentials. Permissioned Domains. Permissioned DEX infrastructure. Multi-Purpose Tokens. RLUSD. Native exchange infrastructure. XRP auto-bridging.
XRPL’s Permissioned Domains are specifically designed to let financial institutions restrict access according to credentials while still operating on the public XRP Ledger.
That is a very clean fit with the type of market structure the SEC is now allowing.
And XRP itself sits in a different regulatory bucket.
The SEC’s March 2026 interpretation was subsequently described in an SEC-filed Bitwise XRP ETF prospectus as expressly identifying XRP as an example of a digital commodity, with the filing stating that XRP itself does not constitute a security based on its current characteristics and publicly available information about XRPL.
So imagine the architecture:
Tokenized Apple shares = security OUSG = tokenized Treasury exposure RLUSD = digital dollars XRPL = settlement and trading infrastructure XRP = native liquidity asset
Those things do not need to compete with each other. Each can do its own job.
And XRPL already has pieces of this happening.
Ondo’s OUSG Treasury product is on XRPL with RLUSD-based 24/7 minting and redemption.
Guggenheim Treasury Services brought Digital Commercial Paper to XRPL through Zeconomy.
The instrument had already processed more than $280M of issuance before expanding to XRPL.
So regulated U.S.-linked financial instruments are already touching the network.
Now take the SEC’s tokenized-stock model and scale it.
Stocks. Bonds. Funds. Commercial paper. Treasuries. Stablecoins. Tokenized deposits.
Every additional asset creates another market that needs buyers, sellers and liquidity.
XRPL’s auto-bridging can use XRP between two assets when the XRP route offers the better path:
Asset A → XRP → Asset B
That becomes interesting very quickly when hundreds or thousands of different tokenized assets exist.
You don’t need a perfectly liquid direct pair between every single asset.
Market makers can hold XRP inventory and use it as working liquidity.
And that kind of demand is completely different from someone buying XRP and waiting.
It becomes: “We need XRP inventory to run the market.”
The SEC is also working on the issuance side through Regulation Crypto Assets, with proposed fundraising pathways of up to $5M over four years and up to $75M in a 12-month period under specified conditions.
So America is addressing both ends:
how assets can be created onchain and how assets can trade onchain.
Ripple already has Payments, Custody, Prime, Treasury, RLUSD, tokenization infrastructure and XRPL positioned around that transition.
I’m bullish on $XRP because I’ve researched the infrastructure underneath this shift, not because Paul Atkins mentioned XRP. He didn’t.
I’m watching the rules being written for markets XRPL was already preparing to serve.
Study the filings yourself. Study the tech.
Then decide how much of this thesis you agree with. > 引用 @Xfinancebull: JUST IN 🚨🚨🚨 The SEC officially proposes new crypto custody rules for advisers and regulated funds, with self-custody and state trust companies included.
Is Wall Street getting the crypto framework it’s been waiting for?
$XRP $XLM $HBAR $QNT https://t.co/EG8z4G8za6 https://x.com/Xfinancebull/status/2105840441140945046
## @stitchdegen (Stitch) · 10-01 23:57 · ♥61 ↻11 💬17 And next up is solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE, a name that has been getting quite a lot of attention after running from below $1M to nearly $10M market cap
Instead of just looking at the chart, I dug deeper into the product, flywheel, and especially the creator/dev wallet to see what is actually behind this move
Let’s break it down
1. What is Hooked actually building?
What caught my attention is that Hooked isn’t simply another launchpad on Solana
Hooked is built around Token-2022 Transfer Hooks, allowing creators to embed certain rules directly into the token’s transfer process
For example :
> Anti-bundle > Anti-dump > Max wallet > Holder vesting > Allowlist > DEX-only > Market hours > FOMO-only buys > Sniper fee cap
Whenever a token is transferred or swapped, the hook program checks the transaction. If it violates the configured rule, the transaction can be rejected directly on-chain
Simply put, instead of relying entirely on a frontend, bots, or separate infrastructure for protection, Hooked moves part of that logic to the on-chain level
That’s what I find interesting about the product
2. A few things you need to understand
Transfer Hooks don’t necessarily stay forever
If a creator chooses a Graduating Curve, once the token reaches graduation, the transfer hook can be removed during migration. After that, the token trades more like a normal token and the previous restrictions may no longer be enforced
With a Permanent Curve, the hook remains active
So features like anti-dump, max wallet, or anti-bundle are not automatically permanent for every token launched through Hooked
Another thing worth noting is that the hook program can still be upgraded by Hooked’s deploy authority to fix bugs or update the program
The rules are enforced on-chain and don’t simply depend on the frontend, but there is still a certain level of trust involved with the team and program authority
There is also one important distinction around fees
When Hooked says “fees do not go to the creator,” that refers to protocol fees generated by tokens launched through the platform. It doesn’t necessarily mean the team cannot receive other types of fees related to the solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE pool itself
So it’s important to separate protocol flywheel fees from solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE pool fees before looking at creator wallet activity
3. The flywheel is where solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE gets interesting
The technology creates the narrative, but the flywheel is what connects platform activity directly back to solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE
According to the mechanism, every trade on a Hooked bonding curve pays a 1% protocol fee
Of that :
85% is used to market buy solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE and burn it
15% goes toward development
The flywheel is pretty straightforward :
More launches => More volume => More fees => More solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE buybacks => More burn
If the platform actually scales, activity on Hooked creates direct demand for solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE instead of the token relying purely on speculation
More importantly, this mechanism is already operating on-chain, not just sitting on a roadmap
At the time I checked, the dashboard had recorded roughly 25.7M solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE burned, with around 865 SOL used for buybacks
So at the very least, the flywheel has already started working in practice
But I still think it’s too early to extrapolate a few days of activity into a long-term trend
What matters more is whether volume, fee revenue, and the pace of buybacks can remain sustainable once the initial hype cools down
4. Hooked still needs a real runner
The number of tokens launching on the platform is growing quickly, but quantity isn’t the metric I care about most
A launchpad can create hundreds of tokens, but if most of them stall at a few thousand dollars in market cap, the ecosystem still won’t generate sustainable volume
What I want to see is :
Token graduates => maintains liquidity => retains holders => continues generating volume
Right now, most of the launches I’ve seen are still relatively small, and there hasn’t been a major runner yet that truly proves the model
If Hooked starts producing a few real runners, the thesis becomes much stronger
At that point, the flywheel would no longer be fueled purely by speculative volume from newly launched tokens
It would start being supported by real ecosystem activity
That’s the catalyst I care about most
5. Creator/dev wallet
This is where things get more interesting when looking deeper on-chain
The wallet associated with the creator/dev side :
Dpmutmc4ZLqvJwHbwabvKYeFJ9zkQ86nutUAUviRrXG2
This wallet has been claiming fees from the solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE pool, with part of the SOL later being swapped into USDC
At the time I checked, the wallet was still holding around 110K USDC, while fee claims continued to appear
A public compilation of on-chain transactions covering September 28 to October 1 recorded roughly 2,080 SOL in pool fees claimed, with around 1,970 SOL swapped into USDC and approximately 160.8K USDC later flowing into Privacy Cash
Some of the larger transactions cited include roughly 652 SOL claimed, 955 SOL swapped, and 103.2K USDC deposited
I still treat the aggregate figures above as reference data from a public on-chain compilation, since I haven’t reconciled every individual transaction myself
What can be seen directly on-chain, however, is that the wallet has been claiming fees, converting part of them into USDC, and holding a significant amount of stablecoins
The fact that the team is claiming pool fees doesn’t automatically mean they are dumping or that something is wrong with the project
As mentioned earlier, solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE pool fees and the 1% protocol fee feeding the flywheel need to be treated separately, because they are not necessarily the same flow of funds
What interests me more is where the money goes after being claimed
If the USDC flow into Privacy Cash is fully confirmed, tracking the final destination of those funds becomes much more difficult
That doesn’t prove the team is doing anything malicious, but it clearly reduces transparency from a holder’s perspective
So I’d like to see the team provide more clarity around where these pool fees come from, how they are allocated, and the purpose of funds moving through Privacy Cash
Until then, this remains one of the main risks I’ll continue monitoring with solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE
6. Don’t just look at dev holdings
This is also why I’m not only checking how much of the supply the dev currently holds
For a token directly tied to a platform, cash flow can be just as important as token holdings
If the ecosystem generates revenue through fees, the team doesn’t necessarily need to sell large amounts of solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE to monetize platform activity
So what I want to track is :
Fees generated => wallet receiving the fees => what those assets are converted into => where the funds eventually go
That gives me much more context than simply looking at holder distribution
7. What about the chart?
solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE’s price action is obviously strong
The token ran from below $1M to nearly $10M market cap, and despite the volatility afterward, it has managed to hold a significant part of that expansion, trading around the $7–8M range on the chart I’m watching
That shows the narrative has attracted attention very quickly
But the risk/reward is also completely different from when the token was below $1M
At the current valuation, the market is already pricing in quite a few expectations :
Hooked continues attracting users
More tokens continue launching
Volume continues growing
The flywheel keeps buying back solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE
And eventually, the platform produces runners large enough to keep the ecosystem active
So I no longer consider solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE an early discovery at these levels
From here, execution starts to matter more than narrative
8. The thesis from here is pretty simple
The bull case for solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE is easy to understand
Hooked has real technical differentiation through Token-2022 Transfer Hooks
Platform activity generates fees
Those fees create market buys for solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE
The purchased tokens are burned
If Hooked starts producing successful launches, the loop could become :
Better launches => More users => More volume => More fees => More solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE buybacks => More attention => More launches
But the other side is just as clear
If most tokens launched on Hooked die quickly, the initial hype fades, and no real runners emerge, fee generation will decline
Buybacks decline
Burns decline
And one of the most important parts of the solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE thesis becomes weaker
On top of that, there are still questions around the creator wallet and transparency of the pool fee flows
9. What am I watching next?
I don’t need Hooked to announce another twenty new rules to become more bullish
I want to see real usage
A few tokens graduating and surviving afterward
Volume remaining active after the initial hype
Fee revenue continuing to come in
Buybacks and burns continuing even as attention cools down
And most importantly, I’d like to see a clearer explanation around the creator/dev wallet and the pool fee flows
If these things start happening together, the solana:C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE thesis becomes significantly stronger
At that point, the story is no longer simply a new token with a Transfer Hook narrative
It becomes a launchpad with real activity, where ecosystem volume directly creates buy pressure and reduces the supply of its native token
For now, I’m keeping a neutral view
The technology is real. The flywheel is already running. The price action is strong
But Hooked is still too new to prove sustainable demand, and wallet flows are still something I want more transparency on before having stronger conviction
Instead of FOMOing the chart or FUDing the project just because the team is claiming fees, I’d rather keep watching product adoption, fee generation, and on-chain flows and let the data speak for itself
C1mBfBoDkwWfd6uTFZp62ARHLjeVp3bDpCDMfMZtPngE > 引用 @stitchdegen: Continuing today’s memecoin recap series
The first one I want to talk about is $JANE
This is obviously a pretty sensitive narrative, so I want to make one thing clear from the start: the celebrities, large accounts, and media outlets talking about “I Am Jane Doe” are discussing the actual case behind it, not endorsing the $JANE memecoin
But from a memecoin perspective, the thesis here is actually pretty simple :
$JANE is trading attention
1. The narrative behind $JANE
$JANE is riding the “I Am Jane Doe” story surrounding the Cornell case, which has been getting a lot of attention across social media
The more information that comes out, the more people discuss the case, and the further the “I Am Jane Doe” narrative spreads, the larger the attention pool becomes
And for memecoins, sometimes that’s all you need
The flow I’m watching is pretty straightforward :
Real-world story => Social attention => More people talking about Jane Doe => Memecoin speculation
$JANE doesn’t have some complicated product or utility that I’m trying to value here
This is simply a pure attention play
2. What makes $JANE a little different
Normally, I’m pretty cautious with memecoins that build their narrative around sensitive real-world stories
But there’s one thing about $JANE that makes it stand out from the usual copycats
The creator rewards are being directed to the Rape Recovery Center
According to the information displayed on the coin’s page, around 266 SOL, roughly $31K, has already been donated to the organization
That matters to my thesis
If attention keeps growing and brings more trading activity, creator rewards could continue increasing, which could also mean more funds being directed toward the charity
Of course, I’m not saying buying $JANE = directly donating to charity. This is still a memecoin and it’s still extremely speculative
But at least part of the attention and trading activity surrounding the token is being converted into real donations rather than the entire story simply being used to farm liquidity
3. The early numbers are pretty strong
$JANE only recently launched, but the initial expansion has been pretty aggressive
When I checked :
MC : around $1.7M-$1.9M
ATH : close to $2M
Volume : $4M+
Holders : 6K+
The chart from the bonding curve also looks relatively clean so far
Instead of one straight pump followed by an immediate dump, we’ve seen periods of consolidation after the expansions, buyers stepping back in, and the overall structure continuing to hold
That’s what I want to see from a newly launched attention play
But there’s one thing you definitely shouldn’t ignore :
Liquidity is only around $66K-$68K
That’s still very thin compared with a market cap approaching $2M
A few large wallets exiting could change the chart very quickly, so don’t look at the market cap and assume $JANE is already some relatively safe mid-cap play
This is still high-risk memecoin territory
4. The biggest catalyst is still attention
This is probably the most interesting part for me
The story behind the narrative is still getting attention, and I think there’s a real possibility that more public figures, celebrities, or large accounts could speak about the issue itself, bringing another wave of attention to the broader narrative
If that happens, the flow is simple :
More big names talking about the case => More mainstream/social attention => More searches around Jane Doe => More speculative attention potentially flowing into $JANE
But again :
A celebrity talking about Jane Doe does NOT mean they endorse $JANE
Those are two completely different things
The token is simply trying to capture the downstream attention coming from a real-world story
What matters to me is whether this specific $JANE contract continues to be where that liquidity and mindshare concentrate
Because if the narrative gets hot but 20 different copycats appear and split the liquidity, all that external attention might not translate into a stronger chart for $JANE
5. What I’m watching next
With $JANE, I’m not really waiting for some roadmap or major team announcement
I’m mainly watching three things :
Attention, volume, and holders
If the story continues spreading, bigger accounts start discussing it, $JANE keeps its volume, and the holder count continues growing, then the thesis remains alive for me
The creator rewards mechanism also becomes more interesting if trading activity keeps increasing, because that could potentially mean more rewards being directed toward charity
On the other hand, if social media is still talking about Jane Doe but token volume starts drying up, holder growth stalls, and liquidity starts moving into copycats, I’ll become much more cautious
For this type of play, attention needs to convert into actual on-chain activity
6. My chart and trading plan
After the run from low cap to nearly $2M, I don’t really want to chase $JANE around the current area
If it keeps running without me, that’s fine. I don’t need to catch every move
The dip zone I’m watching is around $1M-$1.2M MC
That’s where the risk/reward starts becoming more interesting to me
If $JANE comes back into the $1M-$1.2M area while the narrative is still hot, volume remains healthy, and buyers start defending the structure, I may consider taking a small position
I also have a pretty clear invalidation :
If it drops below $600K MC, I’m probably moving on
For a pure attention play, if the market cap retraces that deeply and the initial momentum basically disappears, I don’t want to keep trying to catch the bottom just because the real-world story is still trending
Attention on X doesn’t automatically mean liquidity will return
On the other hand, if we don’t get the dip and $JANE cleanly breaks its $2M ATH with strong volume, continued holder growth, and mindshare still concentrated around this contract, I’ll watch the price discovery rather than FOMO into the candle
My plan is pretty simple :
Dip zone : $1M-$1.2M MC
Invalidation : below $600K MC
Break $2M + strong volume/holder growth: watch the price discovery
7. Final thesis
I’m not looking at $JANE as some fundamentally strong project that I want to hold for months
This is an attention trade
But right now, the attention is real, the token has managed to capture part of that flow, and the early numbers are strong enough for me to keep watching it
The part I like most is that creator rewards are being directed toward the Rape Recovery Center, with around 266 SOL (~$31K) already donated according to the coin page
If the narrative keeps spreading and more big names speak about the broader issue, attention could continue growing. If that attention converts into $JANE volume, the creator rewards could potentially generate even more funds for the charity
But ultimately, I’ll let the market tell me what to do
Attention stays, volume stays, holders keep growing => thesis stays alive
Attention is there but the money leaves => I move on
I’m not marrying a coin like this
Waiting for $1M-$1.2M for a better setup
Below $600K and I’m out
9pJWJdpPebyANys45eetpemLJo8yTz4n5B9zbpYw9ZMr https://x.com/stitchdegen/status/2105809411134599261
## @meigga (Maggie Hsu) · 10-01 23:52 · ♥41 ↻5 💬6 What a great week in Korea for Korea Blockchain Week. Institutions are increasingly coming onchain. At our @a16zcrypto KBW Summit, I moderated an all-star panel with @YuvalRooz (@digitalasset @CantonNetwork), @PaulFrambot (@Morpho), and @jinglejamOP (@Optimism) on the strong momentum behind institutional adoption in Korea, how to think about progressive privacy, and why local stablecoins matter. At the Asia Stablecoin Conference, @alexlimasia (@LayerZero_Labs) and I discussed how crypto rails are being used for "mundane" transactions like payroll, merchant settlement, and treasury management. That's a great sign: stablecoin transaction volume that doesn't move with crypto prices reflects real consumer and institutional adoption. I also managed to eat half my body weight in kBBQ and ramen along the way! https://x.com/meigga/status/2105808162825605296