If I understand you. This goes with the presupposition that crypto will replace the bank and its features exactly. You might then be right on the convergences. But sounds like a failure to understand that crypto is not a traditional bank. It can be less and more.

A few examples of differences that could save money. The protocol processes everything without human intervention. Updating and running the cryptocoin network can be done on the computational margin of the many devices that are in everyone's pockets. Third-party integrations and marketing are optional costs.

Just like those who don't think AI will replace art and employees. Replacing something with innovations is not about improving on the old system. It is about finding a new fit with more value or less cost.

right now this infrastructure processing is Mastercard/Visa which they have high fee and stripe have high minimal fee. There are many local infrastructure in Asia (like QRCode payments) that don't have such big fees or are even free. High minimal fee it's mostly visa/mastercard/stripe greed/incompetence and regulation requirements/risk.

You missed the non-crypto in my comment. I agree with you that crypto can do transactions for a fraction of a cent. My point was that I don't see any non-crypto option for microtransactions.

Literally described the use case - a medium of exchange between agentic entities at massive global scale