#稳定币发行与类型 Seeing Ripple and AMINA Bank's collaboration, my mind immediately flashed back to several key moments in the stablecoin track over the past decade.

I remember back in 2015, people's understanding of stablecoins was still in the theoretical stage, and although USDT existed, it was quite controversial. By the 2017 bull market, stablecoins truly proved their value—every time the market experienced sharp fluctuations, the demand for stablecoins on exchanges surged. The problem at that time was straightforward: cross-border settlement was too slow, too costly, and involved too many intermediaries.

Over the years, I have witnessed several evolutionary cycles of stablecoins. From the early days of centralized issuers monopolizing the market, to the emergence of decentralized stablecoins like MakerDAO, and then to major blockchains racing to issue their own stablecoins. Each iteration aimed to solve the same core issue—how to make stablecoins truly fluid and not just trading tools within exchanges.

What does Ripple's latest move indicate? Traditional financial institutions are finally beginning to actively adopt stablecoins as a settlement layer. AMINA Bank's support for RLUSD custody and trading reflects a genuine institutional-level demand. 24/7 minute-level settlement is indeed a qualitative breakthrough for cross-border payments.

But I must honestly say, this is not the start of a new story, but a continuation of an old cycle. When Libra (later Diem) was proposed in 2019, we were already discussing the cross-border potential of stablecoins. The only difference this time is that the enthusiasm is no longer from big tech companies' unilateral attempts, but from traditional financial systems proactively reaching out.

Whether it will succeed or fail depends on whether it can truly break down the barriers of vested interests. AMINA is just a bank; the key is whether more peers will follow suit. History has shown us that a single pilot is hard to change systemic patterns.