NEAR Co-Founder Says Centralized Exchanges Increasingly Unnecessary for Onchain Activity

Polosukhin's claim is a directional bet on infrastructure, not a statement of current fact: the argument only holds where onchain liquidity, custody and settlement are deep enough to absorb activity that still routes through order books today. The comment lands as exchanges face growing scrutiny over custody and listing control, making the "unnecessary" framing as much positioning as observation. The open question is whether onchain venues can match centralized execution and compliance rails for larger flows, or whether the split settles into retail onchain and institutions centralized.