Bitcoin Forum

WBTC is an ERC-20 token that is pegged to Bitcoin:

https://medium.com/renproject/wrapped-bitcoin-wbtc-a-bitcoin-token-community-project-started-by-bitgo-kyber-and-republic-599c9abc8139
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190130005011/en/WBTC-Live-Ethereum

It's pegged by the public wallet that is used as a reference to any mints that happen on the token.

My question, BitcoinTalk, is whether you think there can be benefit to adding yet another token backed by Bitcoin in the same manner but with hard KYC/AML rules on entry (buyin) and exit (payout) of the token?

My gut says yes, I have my reasons of course, but I am curious to know your take.

There is a bad thing. It has KYC. Idex will start implementing WBTC if i remember correctly, and all I can say is that some people don't like KYC.

That is one hell of a problem. But  if it doesn't affect you, it will be a good thing to have another Bitcoin backed ERC20.

Imho it's worse than useless.
It's useless because there is already a crypto currency with the value of 1 BTC, called, you know, Bitcoin.
And it's worse because of the KYC.

We have a different perspective on this, but for me, I won't agree that Bitcoin has another copy cut cryptocurrency. There is BCH already but as we notice it seems nothing compare to Bitcoin. So, what are looking for just because you want to apply KYC on that token to a holder? That makes things worse if they apply KYC because people want a decentralized platform and Bitcoin is deserving to have mass adoption.

That looks simply unworthy, because there can be only one bitcoin. Scams most often use the term bitcoin along with some other to make it easily reach the common people. One among that in the recent days I came through is Foxbtc. This has been a scam project and was promoted to reach the position of bitcoin soon.

I agree that it does look somewhat unworthy. It's not enough simply to point to a public wallet and say "Hey there's the wallet backing this token".

On KYC/AML, I suspect there is none happening on WBTC but I don't think it will be a bad thing if it does.

I think if bitcoin is one and has good development, it might be said that almost all want to set up tokens by including the name bitcoin.
We need to learn and provide opportunities for WBTC development, even though using KYC, this can reduce fraud.

KYC/AML? For what purposes? KYC/AML are needed when you doing a connection to fiat world. In wbtc's case all the things happens in a closed crypto ecosystem

I think it is a great step forward for people that do not have a Bitcoin wallet. Right now I think WBTC is only tradable on IDEX but as soon as more exchanges will accept it, it would become much more comfortable.

What a hell? Is that Frankenstein? ;D I don't see any application of such a crypto, except checking BTC price for smart contracts based on ethereum network. Maybe it's not that weird idea.

Things like this is prone to abuse, Decentralise exchanges want to have a slash of the centralise fees collected from trading BTC but since they are mostly built on Ethereum platform they need something to get around this. A lot is said of Tether and most of the stable coins that they are not backed with real USD in ratio 1:1 and I can see this in play with WBTC in future

I don't think that this project will have a success because we can use bitcoin instead of this WBTC and we don't have problems with KYC procedure.

Perhaps you're missing the point of what this is offering? It's an ERC-20 token pegged to BTC so you get the benefits of Ethereum whilst enjoying the value of BTC. Very clever and most definitely handy for traders, market makers et cetera.

there will not be a benefir from this coin and instad of buy WBTC when you can buy real bitcoin easily and why you must do that. That idea totally non sense for me personally dude. I consider that as a garbage idea. that will be another useless idea.

They don't need to create that project in the first place. KYC? I doubt people will take the bait on this one.