Is KYC bad for crypto?

[AicecreaME]

I am not against KYC but KYC is against the purpose of crypto. In Bitcoin whitepaper shows the purpose of it, transaction without information about parties, and without hand of banks. Everything is incognito. It seems that we're going backwards when accept KYC when joining crypto.

This is exactly why we need DEX's. Being able to trade peer 2 peer without trusting nobody is how crypto SHOULD be.

I'm personally using the Blocknet DX Exchange, also hold the coin itself as I predict demand to increase for these DEX coins long term

Exactly, didn't make any sense at all. I mean exchanges shouldn't required their users to submit KYC, because their job is to list coins that mostly used by cryptocurrency users for them to earn profits as well, it is not their job to know who we are, whether we are legit or not, as long as we're paying the fees, they should let us in to Trade, cause that's what's the first purpose of cryptocurrency, to remain anonymous and to feel secured because no one knows who we are.

[1714163450]

1714163450

[1714163450]

1714163450

[1714163450]

1714163450

[Botnake]

Exactly, didn't make any sense at all. I mean exchanges shouldn't required their users to submit KYC, because their job is to list coins that mostly used by cryptocurrency users for them to earn profits as well, it is not their job to know who we are, whether we are legit or not, as long as we're paying the fees, they should let us in to Trade, cause that's what's the first purpose of cryptocurrency, to remain anonymous and to feel secured because no one knows who we are.

Actually exchanges would love that, but they can't violate the law also as they are regulated by the government and it's the order of the regulators to require KYC to exchange clients so they can monitor transactions in case there's an investigation.

We have to understand that while submitting a KYC info, that information will not only stay in an exchange, regulators can also access it not through a request but on order, that's how powerful they are.

[Slow death]

no offense but for the cryptocurrency market KYC becomes a big joke, I'll explain why:

It does not make any sense that an anonymous exchange that has an anonymous owner requires its customers to deliver their documents such as: passport, water bill or electricity bill or internet bill

How can it be fair that the owner of the exchange is anonymous, but the people who use the exchanges are not anonymous?

another very important point:

where are people's documents kept when they do kyc on anonymous exchanges?

If exchanges don't have a license and don't have a physical office why do governments force exchanges to do KYC?

[mu_enrico]

It does not make any sense that an anonymous exchange that has an anonymous owner requires its customers to deliver their documents such as: passport, water bill or electricity bill or internet bill

How can it be fair that the owner of the exchange is anonymous, but the people who use the exchanges are not anonymous?

I think you should group exchanges into two classes: (1) unregulated, and (2) regulated. The anon one surely is an unregulated exchange; thus, it's stupid if you want to do KYC in such exchange because it's not required by the government anyway. But DYOR, no one will protect you from any criminal activities there.

As for regulated exchanges, they need to comply with KYC + AML rules. In return, (ideally) users will be protected because of laws. But DYOR, the government can also become the criminal.

[Smitty Werben Man Jensen]

KYC is actually not bad for the world of crypto currency, instead it will be the most important thing in my opinion, KYC can reduce fraud projects and digital crime, but there must be a condition, crypto projects must have a strong license from the government, if not, should you avoid to KYC  

[forexandcryptoauditor]

As you said, there are two sides. At one end it's very much needed for anti-money laundering, to avoid frauds and at the same time, there is always a risk to our personal information getting exposed to new projects or exchanges.
I see only a way to solve both problems is to have a centralized(yes, even though its for decentralized systems ) system doing KYC which should be acceptable in the entire world. I am not sure how feasible it is but this way we can ensure KYC and AML along with keeping away our personal information exposing to different entities.

[grungelife182]

In some cases regulations are necessary to put an end to fraud and corruption in the crypto/Blockchain industry. By requiring KYC compliance on centralized exchanges, the crypto world could become a better place. However, the mere fact that you'd need to provide some sort of ID verification would completely destroy the purpose of crypto. I've seen situations where centralized exchanges became hacked, putting customers' identities at risk. Last time I've heard, someone hacked Binance and threatened to expose customer's identities across the web.

This makes me to believe that KYC does more harm than good for crypto. Of course, regulation is necessary in order to legitimize the industry in its entirety. Institutional investors, conglomerates, and other entities will find crypto regulatory-compliant for their own needs. But knowing that KYC goes against crypto's principles, could make the entire industry similar to traditional banking.

What are your thoughts?

i think web wallet is the new trend given its security and easy interface. like with the ilcoin project where you can check its own development: https://ilcoinwebwallet.com:5001/

[rexxarofmoknathal]

It depends on who you're talking to. The way I see it KYC is another level of security that I'm quite happy to undergo because these days even a little security is better than no security at all.

As for the crypto I think is good because it helps companies feel that they're falling into a regulatory grey areas so they'd be more likely to utilise cryptocurrencies as part of their daily operations.

[CETAN.IO]

In some cases regulations are necessary to put an end to fraud and corruption in the crypto/Blockchain industry. By requiring KYC compliance on centralized exchanges, the crypto world could become a better place. However, the mere fact that you'd need to provide some sort of ID verification would completely destroy the purpose of crypto. I've seen situations where centralized exchanges became hacked, putting customers' identities at risk. Last time I've heard, someone hacked Binance and threatened to expose customer's identities across the web.

This makes me to believe that KYC does more harm than good for crypto. Of course, regulation is necessary in order to legitimize the industry in its entirety. Institutional investors, conglomerates, and other entities will find crypto regulatory-compliant for their own needs. But knowing that KYC goes against crypto's principles, could make the entire industry similar to traditional banking.

What are your thoughts?

one thing I know for sure, the more controlled the legislation is, the faster it develops! If we want to hang out at the bottom, we don't need KYC

[Jateng]

It depends on who you're talking to. The way I see it KYC is another level of security that I'm quite happy to undergo because these days even a little security is better than no security at all.

As for the crypto I think is good because it helps companies feel that they're falling into a regulatory grey areas so they'd be more likely to utilise cryptocurrencies as part of their daily operations.

Yes I agree it's still depends in crypto exchange or wallet which we're going to undergo KYC like in our local exchange. It's okay for us to pass KYC since it's only for local exchange and it's add more security towards the more safer transaction. If anything goes wrong we have our rights to get back our assets since it's regulated by our government. While in other crypto exchange I don't want to risk any of my identity to anyone that I don't even know. This will be a big problem if anyone's identity will be revealed and use to any illegal activities.

[leatutz]

In some cases regulations are necessary to put an end to fraud and corruption in the crypto/Blockchain industry. By requiring KYC compliance on centralized exchanges, the crypto world could become a better place. However, the mere fact that you'd need to provide some sort of ID verification would completely destroy the purpose of crypto. I've seen situations where centralized exchanges became hacked, putting customers' identities at risk. Last time I've heard, someone hacked Binance and threatened to expose customer's identities across the web.

This makes me to believe that KYC does more harm than good for crypto. Of course, regulation is necessary in order to legitimize the industry in its entirety. Institutional investors, conglomerates, and other entities will find crypto regulatory-compliant for their own needs. But knowing that KYC goes against crypto's principles, could make the entire industry similar to traditional banking.

What are your thoughts?

By protect our privacy we like to do use all currency. But we're doing it to protect our funds from scam. I think we can believe several exchange, trusted exchange is more than 20-higher exchanges. You don't want to hold your all funds in centralized exchange and don't withdraw all currency in one day. Without KYC you can withdraw enough money.

[soramon]

When the first time i heard about KYC i dont really trust on that. Well, i dont want to give my personal data to someone/company that i dont know its too risky. Im afraid they will use my data for their purpose or do fraud things. I hope there is a new safety system.

[iHODL4]

For me, if the exchange is kinda shady, it's bad. And KYC may actually compromise your financial and security information.

But if the exchange is reputable, KYC is good. Although it might be easier said than done, so that's all the more reason why it's very important to do research before trusting your fiat or crypto.

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

KYC is bad for crypto if their are projects that are doubtful  because they can used your personal information in their illegal activities, that is why there are people that are scared in submitting KYC.

[rodskee]

It is not for Crypto but Bad for the people inside crypto,Most of us wanted our privacy to remain and same reason why we are here.
I know that KYC is only here to protect us from possible scams or other related cases but the thing is this has been abused now,many things happens bad for us sending our KYC that is why the community are divided into what is Good and which is Bad.But i Believe that if the requirements for KYC is legit?for sure people here will change mind but until there is scammers here around this will never take from Victims mind.

[SyndicateLabs]

KYC is bad for crypto if their are projects that are doubtful  because they can used your personal information in their illegal activities, that is why there are people that are scared in submitting KYC.

KYC is never good, even the top exchanges in this market. If the exchange is hacked, all information of the user will be stolen. In 2019 I saw an article about Binance, this exchange was hacked and hackers stole a lot of users' KYC files and sold it to others. For me, we should not KYC anywhere to be absolutely safe

[GucciBoy]

KYC beats the purporse of cryptocurrencies entirely. The better option is to trade on DEX's where you stay anonymous at all times, since you don't need accounts or anything else to make use of them.

Personally looking forward to Stakenet's Lightning compatible DEX, which allows instant off-chain trading. Lightning hubs will be hosted by masternodes, so you don't need to be "tech savy" to make use of it.

Here's a preview of what's coming:

[Alohadanc3]

This whole crypto market is full of scammers and cheaters. And maybe kyc is one of the option that could help to fight this scammers. We all know kyc is fully against the purpose of crypto ,the whole scene. So better if we could manage other ways to fight scams. But now when many countries are adopting crypto the kyc or id proofs a stuff are going just common. So somehow we have to accept it. But for me kyc is not one and only option we should find other ways cause it's violate the basic idea of crypto.

[isaac_clarke22]

This whole crypto market is full of scammers and cheaters. And maybe kyc is one of the option that could help to fight this scammers. We all know kyc is fully against the purpose of crypto ,the whole scene. So better if we could manage other ways to fight scams. But now when many countries are adopting crypto the kyc or id proofs a stuff are going just common. So somehow we have to accept it. But for me kyc is not one and only option we should find other ways cause it's violate the basic idea of crypto.

Although you could see it like that, we still never know that a scam project is a scam project as KYC document could be easily faked by someone. We're using crypto almost in a decentralized way anyway so implementing KYC is gonna be hard and not necessary at the same time, just my two cents though as this isn't regulated frankly by the governmennt.

[wingfield_crypto]

     I think KYC is necessary, but it does not contain all the personal data. A document such as an ID card does not think it should be exposed on the crypto market to people we don't even know. A KYC is still needed because it is the only way to get rid of fraud and corruption in the crypto market. In conclusion, I agree with KYC, but I think that the way of identifying the users must be changed.