The Circle has recently become noisy again: the internet changed the flow of information, but who will change the flow of value?

Many people compare XRP to the TCP/IP protocol of the 1990s. This analogy is indeed interesting—back then, no one paid attention to TCP/IP, but it became the underlying layer of the internet. Now some say XRP is the same, focusing on being the foundational layer for value transfer, without engaging in flashy applications.

It sounds reasonable, but the question is: the success of TCP/IP was due to its complete openness and true decentralization. But what about XRP? It’s always inseparable from Ripple Labs. That’s the core issue.

Interestingly, on-chain data shows a very realistic contrast. Over the past 30 days, cross-border settlement volume based on decentralized stablecoin networks has surged—up 310% year-over-year. While people are still debating whether XRP is a "bridge asset" or whether it can reshape value transfer, a more practical application scenario is quietly operating.

So, a fundamental question arises: what kind of asset allocation can truly carry the mission of the "Value Internet"? Having technological ideals alone is not enough; there must be practical application foundations. Currently, stablecoins perform more concretely in cross-border settlement, and their data growth is more solid. But XRP’s vision is not just a pipe dream—it depends on whether it can break the constraints of centralization and truly become a foundational infrastructure like TCP/IP.

The current question becomes: should technological ideals come first, or should practical value be implemented first?