Regulations or Anonymity

[Belianez]

These two have been topics of debates for quite some time. Some want Anonymity, while others want Regulation. Either of these two will work best for us.
It will get to a time that we just have to choose between Regulations and Anonymity.

In my opinion:
If blockchain  is redesigned without privacy, everything will work fine. Full KYC will make scams impossible.
What is your take on this?

Well, I think anonymity is necessary for the market, since the blockchain is popular for this, but kyc I think only ico projects are needed because there are a lot of scams in this area!

[1715492828]

1715492828

[1715492828]

1715492828

[1715492828]

1715492828

[1715492828]

1715492828

[Diablopablo666]

I love the idea of Blockchain - decentralized, allowing the people to conduct their business without borders and without the prying eyes of authorities. The problem is, while most people would like the idea of blockchain, they want the "safety" of regulation so that they have someone to hold their hand if it goes wrong. This comes at a high price, though. With regulation comes the loss of anonymity, and with loss of anonymity comes traceability and tax liability. I'm afraid our choice comes down to the lesser of two thieves - the scammer or the tax man.

[Denton]

The blockchain and cryptocurrency was originally anonymous. Decentralization is an integral part of them. The lack of decentralization contradicts all the rules of cryptocurrency and blockchain. Because they were originally created with this idea.

[TheCrimsonFucker]

I think it depends on the services you want and need for your deals for example, you know that anonymity and security are not siblings, maybe at most cousins! I'm using this childish example to explain that the more anonymous the situation, the safety technically will be put at risk, precisely because you are not clear about what you can do or will do! The job of these regulators is possibly to protect innocent people. Unfortunately they are not wrong and not all are getting ready to enter cryptocurrencies. In fact, it's a tiresome discussion and it diverges at various points!

[crenfrosck]

Regulations and economy? They are not the best friends. If you are not a "neccessary" middlemen, of course . Exchanges will become self-regulated as people will demand some tools that would protect them while exchanges will have to implement rules that would take care of it. A single man can not decide for millions of other people without harming a great part of them. Let them be and those with the best set of rules will survive while others will be left for dead.

[moon sorcerers]

basically crypto guarantees the anonymity and privacy of its users, but if you want to be legalized in a country,
regulation must be done, actually the regulation and KYC are good but this eliminates the anonymity of crypto

[G2z_Riya]

Regulated usage of bitcoin will give an authority to use bitcoin, upon the same there isn't anything to fear thinking the government. When it comes to anonymity, there are people who wish to be hidden to the outer world. Most of the users who are into the cryptocurrency wish to be anonymous. When both ends in contradiction solution is to go anonymous.

[Aligab166]

These two have been topics of debates for quite some time. Some want Anonymity, while others want Regulation. Either of these two will work best for us.
It will get to a time that we just have to choose between Regulations and Anonymity.

In my opinion:
If blockchain  is redesigned without privacy, everything will work fine. Full KYC will make scams impossible.
What is your take on this?

I prefer regulated cryptocurrency industry to the anonymous one. A lot of dubious activities have taken place in crypto because of this issue of anonymity where sometimes even the team won't be know until they cart away with people's funds.

[peonminer]

We have both. There's no running from it. Unless you never e-verify. Then it's just that much harder to get your hands on coins these days. Want to cash out? e-verify. Want to buy? e-verify. Want to be a boss because you bought 10k BTC at 10 cents and you're just hodling and slowly selling a few satoshi on the street corners in LA every chance you get? Meh. Seems easier to just e-verify and deal with it. Yeah you can jump the coins around into something like XMR and be anonymous for a bit. If someone really wanted to trace your bitcoin blockchain though, they can.

[marks1976]

basically crypto guarantees the anonymity and privacy of its users, but if you want to be legalized in a country,
regulation must be done, actually the regulation and KYC are good but this eliminates the anonymity of crypto

That's indeed but you can see that even the centralized exchange site can eliminate the anonymity of crypto consider each of user can apply for KYC to increase its withdraw limit.
Regulation is good but it's not so good as the people said.

[Bijikopi]

I think the blockchain should remain anonymous. And decentralized. Otherwise, the idea is lost.
KYC should be carried out just for project organizers. Then the scam will be impossible since the scammers can be found and punished according to the law.

regulation of bitcoin is actually very important. this is the recognition of a country against bitcoin, if a country provides a regulation on bitcoin it can make bitcoin categorized as an official item and can be used without a significant obstacle. against the potential for fraud every country has a law enforcement body regarding cyberspace laws or the digital world. so bitcoin needs a regulation in order to develop in the future.

[motun01]

Regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies is still uncertain and this moment however the SEC should be able to reach regulatory proceedings that will allow for the level of scrutiny to be taken into blockchain projects and investors while still protecting the identity of the investors using the blockchain's anonymity capabilities.

KYC is important to achieve this but a storage of personal data of millions of people will be a target.

[peonminer]

Regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies is still uncertain and this moment however the SEC should be able to reach regulatory proceedings that will allow for the level of scrutiny to be taken into blockchain projects and investors while still protecting the identity of the investors using the blockchain's anonymity capabilities.

KYC is important to achieve this but a storage of personal data of millions of people will be a target.

You make some very good points. The storage of peoples' data is a huge target and there's so many places KYC has it stored. The fact that there's so many places not regulated by the SEC or people just disregard it shows a place for anonymity and a huge gap for failure at the same time... It's a double edged sword in today's world.

[VasyaPupkin]

Regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies is still uncertain and this moment however the SEC should be able to reach regulatory proceedings that will allow for the level of scrutiny to be taken into blockchain projects and investors while still protecting the identity of the investors using the blockchain's anonymity capabilities.

KYC is important to achieve this but a storage of personal data of millions of people will be a target.

It is unlikely that they will be able to carry out the whole complex of measures that will help to rid the ICO sphere of all its main shortcomings, especially if you have to think how not to touch anonymity

[fvb]

I think the blockchain should remain anonymous. And decentralized. Otherwise, the idea is lost.
KYC should be carried out just for project organizers. Then the scam will be impossible since the scammers can be found and punished according to the law.

This is definitely noticed.  For organizers, KYC is required.  Working with the bounty, I do not want to distribute my data to each project.  Anonymity and decentralization, this is the main thing in the blockchain.

[pushups44]

I think regulations are necessary and healthy, and that anonymity can be good as an optional feature. My concern with anonymity is the potential for abuse and kidnappings, so I think complete and total privacy, while there will always be a market for it, is not ideal in the space generally.

[kakawin]

I prefer the idea of anonymity, especially because of the strong state control over the private life of citizens in recent times. This is a kind of response against excessive state control. But I understand that regulation in some areas of the crypto world is necessary for further development.

[nizamcc]

I believe that anonymity can not help the market. At this time, the market needs regulation. As we fall to the bottom and how you need to change it.

[ifightformerkel]

I am clearly in favor of anonymity. This is one of the main features for which I love cryptocurrencies and buying new coins, I want to keep the right not to reveal my identity. If to participate in the ICO, the passage of KYC is a mandatory procedure, then for bounty hunters, I think it is necessary to introduce alternative options that will allow to remain anonymous.

[FLHippy]

If you want regulations go to stock market.
If you want anonymity then choose cryptocurrencies that give us opportunity to be free again.