Sure, but that role could be truncated to "convert between financial system currencies and stablecoins" while DeFi handles all the other work of an exchange, displacing centralized exchanges.
And even that role might be obviated once enough people transact directly in the stablecoins.
(Not necessarily saying it's likely, just delineating the hypothetical word where DeFi has maximally taken over.)
>>Sure, but that role could be truncated to "convert between financial system currencies and stablecoins"
Coinbase has already started doing that, by abolishing the distinction between the stablecoin, USDC, and its bank deposit USD.
It's entirely plausible that other financial institutions, beyond commpanies like Coinbase which are heavily involvd in the cryptocurrency market, begin doing that as stablecoins gain wider credibility and adoption.
Huh? I was talking about a world where they only concert between those assets. If coinbase is additionally doing that, then that’s not what I’m describing.
And it’s it’s not even the service I was referring to (which requires that the asset classes be kept distinct).
I swear, something about that comment just set people off, when it should be uncontroversial with the caveats I gave.
I was agreeing with you. I was citing an example of a financial institution providing that particular utility, to support the idea you presented, that it's plausible that one day financial institutions could be relegated to only providing that utility.
Your point was well supported, so I don't see the reason why it got downvoted.
>>which requires that the asset classes be kept distinct
Yes it's not exactly what you described, but functionally speaking, it is quite similar as it enables on-chain and off-chain fiat to be converted one for one.
And even that role might be obviated once enough people transact directly in the stablecoins.
(Not necessarily saying it's likely, just delineating the hypothetical word where DeFi has maximally taken over.)