I remember when one of crypto's biggest selling points was the idea that banks would eventually become irrelevant.
That prediction doesn't sound as convincing as it used to.
If anything, some parts of the industry seem to be moving in the opposite direction.
This week, Telcoin announced what it describes as the first federally regulated onchain bank account connected to the U.S. banking system.
For years, crypto was supposed to be the alternative.
A parallel system.
Something separate from traditional finance.
Now we're watching crypto companies pursue licenses, work with regulators, build banking relationships and offer products that look surprisingly familiar.
A few years ago, that would have sounded strange.
Today it barely feels controversial.
The more I think about it, the less surprising it becomes.
Banks solve problems.
Not every problem, obviously.
But enough of them that billions of people still use them every day.
Most people don't want to worry about private keys.
They don't want to be fully responsible for every security mistake.
They don't want to lose access to their savings because they misplaced a recovery phrase.
Crypto gave people more control.
The tradeoff was more responsibility.
For some users, that tradeoff makes perfect sense.
For many others, it doesn't.
That's probably why the industry keeps drifting toward services that look increasingly similar to the system it once promised to replace.
People simply tend to choose convenience when given the option.
They always have.
Maybe that's the lesson.
Technology doesn't always win by replacing what came before it.
Sometimes it wins by becoming part of it.
The internet didn't eliminate traditional businesses.
Smartphones didn't eliminate computers.
And crypto may not eliminate banks either.
The future might not be a battle between crypto and banking.
It might be a version where the two become increasingly difficult to separate.
Looking back, that possibility seems obvious.
But a few years ago, many people would have called it impossible.
