Bitcoin wasn’t created to make you rich. It was created to Enslave U & Track U

[kryptqnick]

Bitcoin wasn't created for either of the purposed that the title of the thread mentions. And while over the years KYC becomes more common, it's been rightly mentioned that Bitcoin isn't the one to blame for this because it's actually various companies that introduce it. Moreover, transparency and decentralization always seemed to come before anonymity for Bitcoin, and I'm personally okay with this. After all, most of us use bank accounts and have social media profile anyway, so a lot of info about us is available to various people and companies. Bitcoin is just a drop in the ocean, but it does other things pretty well.

[7788bitcoin]

That is terrible, I was unaware they had added the ability to make money expire after some time, I have read about that capability for some time and how governments wanted to add it somehow to their money and it seems this is becoming a reality, however while they are stealing away the possibility of saving with their digital currencies it is as f they do not realize such a characteristic is going to kill that currency, after all while inflation is simply the increase in the money supply inflation is not really felt until the money velocity increases up to a certain point and a feature that forces you to spend your money will do exactly that.

Even i was not aware of the obstacles they set in place for their currency, someone posted about it here about the expiry  and that is when i came to know about that and it is clear that they did not create that to replace anything because any monetary system will not work if there is a expiry date and i think they did that because they know that they experiment will fail and they wanted an excuse for the failure  .

Bitcoin wasn't created for either of the purposed that the title of the thread mentions. And while over the years KYC becomes more common, it's been rightly mentioned that Bitcoin isn't the one to blame for this because it's actually various companies that introduce it. 

Even if Bitcoin was not created for the purpose of forcing the exchange to verify every deal it was evident that we will see these sort of restrictions as the exchanges will be forced to carry on these procedure to avoid any serious legal issue in the name of money laundering.

[sana54210]

The problem isn't bitcoin or the decentralized platforms, it's the businesses that are doing the KYC. If you really want to not be tracked, they should probably fake your death and start of a new life.

I guess if KYC is everywhere in the crypto world, then it is part of the crypto world. I get that in gambling part of it there are some that ask for KYC and there are some that doesn't ask for KYC so you can make an exception there however when it comes to fiat2crypto or vice versa those exchanges make sure to get your KYC even for smallest things and that's the thing that matters.

I can't send fiat to buy crypto without giving my KYC, all companies ask for it, there are none that doesn't ask for it, it is not even an alternative situation it is in everyone of them. I am sure there must be few out there in the world left but not for my nation, I know all the good ones and they all ask for it. This is why we can't just say that "it is the companies, it is not bitcoin itself asking for your KYC", if EVERY company that you have a path to asks for it, then it is part of bitcoin itself.

[Mauser]

Bitcoin wasn't created for either of the purposed that the title of the thread mentions. And while over the years KYC becomes more common, it's been rightly mentioned that Bitcoin isn't the one to blame for this because it's actually various companies that introduce it. Moreover, transparency and decentralization always seemed to come before anonymity for Bitcoin, and I'm personally okay with this. After all, most of us use bank accounts and have social media profile anyway, so a lot of info about us is available to various people and companies. Bitcoin is just a drop in the ocean, but it does other things pretty well.

It's probably just a thread against bitcoins on an attempt to lower the price. It can become very frustrating when we want to hold bitcoins but can't afford to buy at the current price level. I think we all l or that bitcoins are here to track it enslave us. It's exactly the opposite, we have more freedom and anonymity with bitcoins compared to fiat money.

[zanezane]

~

I can't send fiat to buy crypto without giving my KYC, all companies ask for it, there are none that doesn't ask for it, it is not even an alternative situation it is in everyone of them. I am sure there must be few out there in the world left but not for my nation, I know all the good ones and they all ask for it. This is why we can't just say that "it is the companies, it is not bitcoin itself asking for your KYC", if EVERY company that you have a path to asks for it, then it is part of bitcoin itself.

We also have to understand that companies don't want to be a part of the problem regarding money laundering so they implement KYC so they don't have to face troubles in the near future.

[laredo7mm]

The traditional banking system is much more convenient to track you than bitcoin. Banks take KYC data and have every transaction and user's details in their database. The centralized system is easy to track human activity that's why bitcoin was created to make a decentralized financial system. It's not about money always but the system that wants to enslave you. Bitcoin was created to throw away that system.

[SquallLeonhart]

It's not about money always but the system that wants to enslave you.

Yeah privacy through anonymous is the biggest benefit we can enjoy because of bitcoin/decentralization. But, when bitcoin is dominated by one group of miners and all bitcoin related services are enforcing about KYC clearances then we might need to think about the original essence of having bitcoin will still intact or slowly getting polluted due to non-caring its adopters?

Only when people who are already adopting bitcoins, will be talking about maintaining a balanced decentralization, anything possible harmful may get rectified. When everyone is not caring about what is going on bitcoin ecosystem, then slowly we may not have bitcoin as a decentralized system.

[AndySt]

It's not about money always but the system that wants to enslave you.

Yeah privacy through anonymous is the biggest benefit we can enjoy because of bitcoin/decentralization. But, when bitcoin is dominated by one group of miners and all bitcoin related services are enforcing about KYC clearances then we might need to think about the original essence of having bitcoin will still intact or slowly getting polluted due to non-caring its adopters?
Only when people who are already adopting bitcoins, will be talking about maintaining a balanced decentralization, anything possible harmful may get rectified. When everyone is not caring about what is going on bitcoin ecosystem, then slowly we may not have bitcoin as a decentralized system.

You just need to be realistic and understand that any state wants and will control financial flows on its territory and therefore, in any case, will find ways to implement it. Therefore, anonymity and decentralization may well exist in small transactions, but large transactions are a completely different matter and the big financial tycoons who make them in any case will then inform the state authorities or the state authorities themselves will force them to do it. Therefore, privacy and decentralization can exist only to a certain extent, the boundaries of which are determined by the state.

[VanDeinsberg12]

such ridiculous conspiracy, doesn't matter what's come after bitcoin was intentionally made for p2p without any middlemen intervention, any thing that goes against that like KYC, etc all enforced by the centralized institution,
 its not like we demand any exchange to be that complicated anyway and I don't believe the whitepaper publisher was NSA lol even bitcoin itself im pretty sure goes against their interests so why they should bleed themselves.
also if you see the government also working hard to make crypto entirely taxable etc and all the regulation in every corner was released but don't you think that if btc was truly their masterplan why they are not prepared earlier instead of opposing crypto first.

[Silberman]

That is terrible, I was unaware they had added the ability to make money expire after some time, I have read about that capability for some time and how governments wanted to add it somehow to their money and it seems this is becoming a reality, however while they are stealing away the possibility of saving with their digital currencies it is as f they do not realize such a characteristic is going to kill that currency, after all while inflation is simply the increase in the money supply inflation is not really felt until the money velocity increases up to a certain point and a feature that forces you to spend your money will do exactly that.

Even i was not aware of the obstacles they set in place for their currency, someone posted about it here about the expiry  and that is when i came to know about that and it is clear that they did not create that to replace anything because any monetary system will not work if there is a expiry date and i think they did that because they know that they experiment will fail and they wanted an excuse for the failure  .

I think they are dumb enough to think this is somehow going to work, it is obvious this is an attempt by them to rob people from the possibility to build wealth over time, after all from their point of view this is bad for the economy, every dollar that you have saved it is a dollar that is not out there producing so they are trying to force in an underhanded way for the people to spend or invest that money, but as I said at the end of the day this is going to be counterproductive for them and the economy in general.

[bitgolden]

anonymity and decentralization may well exist in small transactions, but large transactions are a completely different matter and the big financial tycoons who make them in any case will then inform the state authorities or the state authorities themselves will force them to do it. Therefore, privacy and decentralization can exist only to a certain extent, the boundaries of which are determined by the state.

I believe there are lot of other alternatives are available for not transacting in big volume/in big amount.
Everywhere large transactions are really a problem but at least with bitcoin transactions we are having assurance to keep our identity protected.

If you're feeling like splitting large volume into multiple smaller volume will lead to unnecessary transaction costs then probably you need to get into some other marketplace where your country's regulations are not at all applicable. With bitcoin we can have that kind of solution because no one will able to track your bitcoin transactions but only the exchange related transactions.

[bosede1]

I don't think anywhere and also on this forum if there is any legal binding for you to trade any of the coins. My instinct if you are not cool with the US and China into this cryptocurrency you can take time off and if you think you will regret it in the long run  take your time to figure out whatsoever this is with you.

[jaysabi]

China is releasing a digital Yuan (there's already a pilot program running in the country) and you're right, they are able to monitor the flow of money in real time. They know exactly how much money you have, where you spend it, and most alarmingly, they can assign the money to expire if not spent by a certain date which forces stimulus spending by the population without cost to the government of handing out money and hoping people spend it. Digital currencies are going to be a very bad development, and yet they seem inevitable.

That is terrible, I was unaware they had added the ability to make money expire after some time, I have read about that capability for some time and how governments wanted to add it somehow to their money and it seems this is becoming a reality, however while they are stealing away the possibility of saving with their digital currencies it is as f they do not realize such a characteristic is going to kill that currency, after all while inflation is simply the increase in the money supply inflation is not really felt until the money velocity increases up to a certain point and a feature that forces you to spend your money will do exactly that.

It's one of the biggest draws of a digital currency for governments that want to mandate stimulus.  Whereas now the government doles out money to everyone and if you just save it it helps the economy in no way, with a digital currency you could tag dollars with an expiration period and ostensibly certain spending parameters so that the stimulus payments can only be spent on certain items (no booze, no lottery tickets, etc.).

[mojun7982]

he is saying it's NSA. if it's NSA then they just endanger the USD dominance and the fiat system where the governments rely on. NSA would just see it not worth pursuing project if that is the case.

not all people are in coinbase.  i don't think 50% of the crypto trader are in coinbase. but you're right that BTC isn't meant to make people rich. not everyone can trade and if you panic sell you'd really mess up your investment.

Unless they are Satoshi Nakamoto and have been buying Bitcoins for over a decade now. That would change a lot but we would never find out about that anyway. I guess the mistrust among government towards Bitcoin is quite reasonable. The Russians may have thought Bitcoin is a US project, the US may have thought it's the Koreans or the Russians and so on. We will never find out who built Bitcoin and hence we won't have answers to many questions and considerations.

[Lanatsa]

he is saying it's NSA. if it's NSA then they just endanger the USD dominance and the fiat system where the governments rely on. NSA would just see it not worth pursuing project if that is the case.

not all people are in coinbase.  i don't think 50% of the crypto trader are in coinbase. but you're right that BTC isn't meant to make people rich. not everyone can trade and if you panic sell you'd really mess up your investment.

Unless they are Satoshi Nakamoto and have been buying Bitcoins for over a decade now. That would change a lot but we would never find out about that anyway. I guess the mistrust among government towards Bitcoin is quite reasonable. The Russians may have thought Bitcoin is a US project, the US may have thought it's the Koreans or the Russians and so on. We will never find out who built Bitcoin and hence we won't have answers to many questions and considerations.

There are still lots of things that haven't been answered yet when we do talk about the owner or who had built bitcoin until this very moment and when it comes to decentralized aspect or feature

then there's no doubt that this one wasn't created about enslaving or tracking out but rather goes to the opposite side and this is what it makes too big and been mainly supported.

Government had already some bad impressions and views about its existence and trying out to get rid but still failed up until this moment.

[_Miracle]

or...it was created as digital cash .

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

I don't have to worry about that kind of thing happening in my country though, the government agebcies are incompetent and slowpokes so I know that they will not do this kind of thing, there is some merits to living in a hellhole of country after all. And if the unlikely thing like that was to happen, I am sure that we are going to just completely avoid using it since it will be a different system compared to blockchain.

It is terrible if fiat currencies are camouflaged as digital currencies, where it is like following the blockchain trend that is identical to bitcoin. I think the government is not yet ready to launch a digital currency which has the same system as fiat currency, and I think this is just a breakthrough that has no definite purpose

They won't create a digital currency that they won't benefit from if I am being honest because the government no matter how incompetent they are, they will only put in some work if their interest is highly favored.