Regarding the successive launches of dedicated chains by Stripe, Circle, and Tether, I offer two perspectives: 1) Impact on Ethereum's Layer 2: Layer 2 chains are collectively striving to more securely inherit the security of the mainnet, but they overlook the fact that the core demand of large clients like Stripe, Circle, and Tether, which could truly bring about mass adoption opportunities for Layer 2s, isn't decentralized security, but full-stack control from minting to settlement. Furthermore, Sequencer revenue, MEV, and gas fees—real commercial benefits that can be pocketed by the chain itself—makes no sense for Layer 2 chains to take a share of the pie. More importantly, when regulatory inquiries or urgent "compliance" issues arise, dedicated chains can clearly more quickly and efficiently meet the risk control requirements of TradFi. This is undoubtedly another blow to Ethereum's Layer 2 strategy. Layer 2 originally hoped to attract real users and trading volume through stablecoins and RWA assets, but these asset issuers have simply bypassed them. Ironically, the more technically "orthodox" L2 becomes, the less commercially appealing it becomes. This is because these technological innovations seemingly address concerns within the Ethereum community, but they aren't the pain points of stablecoin issuers. 2) Impact on the Ethereum Mainnet: The impact on the Ethereum Mainnet depends on perspective. In my view, the stablecoin giants' dedicated chains are essentially creating efficient payment and settlement layers, which solidifies Ethereum's position as the global financial settlement layer. These dedicated chains can indeed optimize the throughput and latency of peer-to-peer payments, but they lack true interoperability. When it comes to complex cross-asset financial operations, the required atomicity and composability can only be achieved within Ethereum's unified state machine. Critically, innovation in the DeFi derivatives market relies on permissionless liquidity aggregation. For example, Uniswap V4's Hook mechanism, Aave's cross-pool risk management, and GMX's synthetic asset model all require access to multiple sources of liquidity. This clearly fails to generate synergy on closed stablecoin chains, and naturally fails to unleash the innovative potential that doesn't require DeFi infrastructure. Therefore, Ethereum will eventually play a dual role: both a neutral settlement layer between these proprietary chains (similar to SWIFT's clearing function) and a base layer for DeFi innovation (providing the composability of complex financial products).