Obviously I am opposed to the implementation of the KYC. the biggest reason why people choose crypto money is the lack of centrality. With kyc application, this situation has no meaning
While I fully understand your point, and I am personally wary about giving out details and such,
I'm not sure what the issue is in the big perspective?
Exchanges demand KYC because of laws; there are other ways like buying p2p.
however, as OP mentioned: ICOs - but, they are also regulated by law,
but what does it matter if one participates and provides KYC?
You can simply stay away from ICOs if you don't like the KYC part,
or otherwise, just participate and then send your tokens/coins somewhere else and don't leave a trace, then it doesn't really matter?
I guess what I'm asking is what the issue with ICO KYC actually are.
Yes, we have to identify ourselves, and if we assume it's to a legitimate party, at one point or another, someone could find out that we invested in this ICO?
at that point tho, does it really matter if there's no trace of the crypto?
It's another discussion about crypto as a whole.
Sadly, currently it appears to be rather easy to identify a wallet and a user aslong as they've at some point gone through an exchange that demands KYC.
since the majority of people don't really bother with making their funds untraceable, it's kinda easier for illegitimate parties to find out a person's crypto value, compared with using a regular bank that is watched.
Not saying that I think people should break the law.
There's a saying which I guess applies in a way to this, something like if one has nothing to hide then it doesn't matter?
I disagree, surely it's very important to retain our privacy, even if we're not breaking the law.