Something I keep thinking about with @arc : - Circle may have finally found a way to make its infrastructure more valuable than just issuing stablecoins. - They already have one of the most widely used assets in crypto with USDC. But most USDC activity still happens across infrastructure Circle doesn’t control. ➜ Ethereum. ➜ Solana. ➜ Base. ➜ Arbitrum. Multiple chains, multiple liquidity pools, different fee markets. Arc changes that equation. Circle can now provide the money, the settlement layer and the infrastructure connecting institutions to onchain markets. That’s a much deeper business model than simply competing for stablecoin market share. And this is where I think the retail side gets interesting. Most new chains create new waves of retail activity. And somehow, retail usually ends up taking the biggest hit. Most get rugged, drained, or caught in token hype and mechanics they don’t fully understand. This is a problem most chains still haven’t really solved yet. But Arc has an interesting foundation here. USDC is incredibly easy to trace, and Circle can block certain addresses. You can still steal, you just can’t necessarily enjoy it. And @liftdotfun seems to be pushing a similar idea into the retail layer. Not trying to make trading risk-free, but making some of the usual ways teams can interfere after launch harder. More freedom for retail, less room for teams to interfere. That’s also why I’ve been keeping an eye on $LIFT If Arc becomes a serious retail ecosystem, projects built around reducing unnecessary risks and improving how value moves could become increasingly important.