|
jseverson
|
 |
July 17, 2018, 01:04:23 PM |
|
Regulations, if written correctly, can help cryptocurrencies earn legitimacy. There are still a lot of people who are convinced that they're a get rich scheme, so if regulations are somehow able to help protect money/people within the cryptospace, people would be more likely to open their minds and engage.
That being said, KYC and AML do nothing for the users themselves and have no direct effect on how they view crypto. They're mostly in place for businesses and governments to be able to prevent abuse and enforce rules -- which, in turn, may help cryptocurrencies earn legitimacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions must be included in a block to be properly completed. When you send a transaction, it is broadcast to miners. Miners can then optionally include it in their next blocks. Miners will be more inclined to include your transaction if it has a higher transaction fee.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indrawan77
|
|
July 17, 2018, 11:02:03 PM |
|
Yes, with kyc it will make the government easier to accept crypto, but when it happened its mean we are under regulation and our identity is known by others, it destroy the bitcoin feature of anonymity, but at one side we need the government approval to make bitcoin growth expanded, but if the regulation of kyc is implemented, I afraid a lot of investors will leave crypto
|
|
|
|
|
Ayston
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 203
Merit: 0
|
|
July 17, 2018, 11:41:33 PM |
|
Not really, some ICO are requiring KYC from their consumer or customer since there project are often banned from a certain country and they don't like to be affected in the future so they make sure that every person is located on countries that allowed people to invest on crypto.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harlot
|
|
July 18, 2018, 06:36:51 PM |
|
Not necessarily.
Regulation will help cryptocurrency businesses gain legitimacy, for sure. However, I don't think that forcing KYC onto users will help a lot regarding its legitimacy. It's attacking the users that are using the service, not trying to keep the integrity of the business or the coin itself in check.
It's going to restrict access to a lot of things. Crypto is supposed to be an anonymous currency, and when you have KYC/AML, especially over the top measures that we're seeing already (like asking where funds are sourced), it makes it extremely difficult to use the service and drive people away from it altogether.
I think that we're going to go down the path of forced KYC nonetheless on all regulated centralized bitcoin services, which may see decentralized versions pop up in response.
Well to tell you honestly there is not place for assets that are anonymous right now. The idea of anonymity will be a thing of the past for cryptocurrencies as the governments are aware of this features that is why they made kyc and aml in the first place. We cannot really push for unknown transactions in this world anymore it is making us look more suspicious then what we are used to. With crypto being anonymous the potential for illegal transactions like crime funding and money laundering will always be there. |
|
|
|
|
Hueristic
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3794
Merit: 4879
Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it
|
|
July 21, 2018, 12:40:12 AM |
|
Not necessarily.
Regulation will help cryptocurrency businesses gain legitimacy, for sure. However, I don't think that forcing KYC onto users will help a lot regarding its legitimacy. It's attacking the users that are using the service, not trying to keep the integrity of the business or the coin itself in check.
It's going to restrict access to a lot of things. Crypto is supposed to be an anonymous currency, and when you have KYC/AML, especially over the top measures that we're seeing already (like asking where funds are sourced), it makes it extremely difficult to use the service and drive people away from it altogether.
I think that we're going to go down the path of forced KYC nonetheless on all regulated centralized bitcoin services, which may see decentralized versions pop up in response.
Well to tell you honestly there is not place for assets that are anonymous right now. The idea of anonymity will be a thing of the past for cryptocurrencies as the governments are aware of this features that is why they made kyc and aml in the first place. We cannot really push for unknown transactions in this world anymore it is making us look more suspicious then what we are used to. With crypto being anonymous the potential for illegal transactions like crime funding and money laundering will always be there. |
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
|
|
|
Danilotot
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 378
Merit: 1
|
|
July 24, 2018, 04:38:56 AM |
|
I think yes, it will help, because they are more protecting our tokens to hackers, and this is also their assurance that we do not enjoy them, it is often used on ICO's. so it's a big thing in the field of cryptocurrency.
|
|
|
|
|
Faeton
Member
Offline
Activity: 308
Merit: 11
|
|
September 13, 2018, 02:57:58 AM |
|
The collection of confidential information about holders of crypto-currency, called the KYC check, should be granted only to state bodies or authorized bodies that have undergone special verification. Then it will be useful to people and the state, and crypto currency. However, the requirement to pass the KYC check by the ICO team, which themselves, as a rule, does not pass any verification and 60-80 percent themselves are potential scammers, I just get annoyed. And we are still discussing what will really be good to pass fraudsters our identification data and copies of our passports. First you need to put things in order here to exclude fraud in the ICO area, and only then to talk about the need to check KYC.
|
|
|
|
|
Theb
|
|
September 13, 2018, 04:44:07 AM |
|
Basically as a consumer I really don't care for Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrencies to be recognized by our government as long as there is no word of prohibition I will freely use my cryptos in some of my transactions that needs to be paid in crypto. But putting myself in the shoes of producers I know that being recognized by the government as a totally legal way of paying something I will consider that as a green light for me to accept cryptocurrencies as payment in my business, legality is one of the concerns why big businesses are not accepting cryptos as a mode of payment.
|
|
|
|
Kemarit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1352
|
|
September 19, 2018, 03:06:15 PM |
|
I think yes, it will help, because they are more protecting our tokens to hackers, and this is also their assurance that we do not enjoy them, it is often used on ICO's. so it's a big thing in the field of cryptocurrency.
There are no so called protection about hackers. They can breach anything if they wanted to be, they even attacks and defamed *.gov websites, what's more a trading exchange or a ICO project? So there's really the risk that your personal data will be exposed and exploited by them. I agree that it can bring some air of legitimacy but it will not be the main reason for bitcoin to go mainstream. It boils down as how people used it, whether as currency (what we wanted) or store of value (as investment). So it really cuts both way, somewhat contradictory so for us, we might or might not followed the procedures but as long as we enjoy using bitcoin and crypto then who needs KYC/AML after all? |
|
|
|
1Referee
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1427
|
|
September 19, 2018, 04:36:56 PM |
|
legality is one of the concerns why big businesses are not accepting cryptos as a mode of payment.
I don't think that legalty is the main obstacle, but rather a lack of understanding. If you ask most stores if they are willing to accept Bitcoin as form of payment, they'll probably say that the volatility prevents them from doing so with how it is a serious concern. The lack of understanding comes down to the point where they don't know that there are payment gateways willing to take that risk away from them, and also that there is no need to deal with Bitcoin 'physically' if you don't want to. By using a payment gateway as hedge, you in most cases aren't even subject to what the government thinks is right or wrong. You just receive every payment in fiat. That's how merchants in Russia are doing it to avoid government intervention and it seems to work extremely well for them. |
|
|
|
|
|
boris singer
|
|
September 21, 2018, 08:16:22 PM |
|
not entirely true, because the monitoring room is still limited to something that is local, this also influences their readiness factor, if indeed it has become an official reference, I am sure they cannot stem many things. I do not really care about this, if there are indeed a number of legal businesses that require it, I will continue to follow them, and this will indeed be very large in conjunction with the potential of legitimacy, but it will not run efficiently overall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
