The PATRIOT Act comes to cryptocurrency

[o_e_l_e_o]

https://freedom.tech/patriot-act-comes-to-cryptocurrency/

A fantastic article authored by Seth For Privacy (https://nitter.cz/sethforprivacy), who is the Head of Strategy & Marketing for Foundation Devices, known for their Passport hardware wallet.

As I've mentioned in another thread, and as Seth explains in this article, this newest piece of legislation is an outright attack on bitcoin. It is clear the US government want the only way to use bitcoin to be through fully KYCed centralized exchanges. They are trying their hardest to absorb bitcoin in to the existing fiat system and surveillance state, and destroy the very thing that bitcoin is.

What can you do about it? Get your coins off of any centralized exchange and in to your own wallet. Close your KYCed accounts and refuse to ever complete KYC again. Use privacy tools. Anonymize your coins. Refuse to use any service or product which treats bitcoin as non-fungible and discriminates against or censors certain coins. Bitcoin was not made to become an off-shoot of the fiat system, to be another tool by which the government can can surveil, censor, and control. And if you happen to live in the US, start contacting your representatives about this draconian piece of legislation.

https://bitcoiner.guide/nokyconly/
https://kycnot.me/


Spam will be deleted.

[1715332591]

1715332591

[1715332591]

1715332591

[1715332591]

1715332591

[Three Millionth User]

You can't do anything about it until people start learning from their mistakes. And if someone has not yet realized that any KYC passed will backfire on them in the end, then there is nothing to be done about it. Moreover, state structures will soon begin to more strictly direct ordinary users towards services with different levels of verification. I am deeply convinced that sooner or later the US government will classify all services that exchange bitcoins anonymously as strictly prohibited. I believe it is not a problem for them to refer to any law, for example, section 311 (of the U.S. Patriot Act).

[Upgrade00]

The propaganda machines has been working for several years now to changed the narrative is on Bitcoin and privacy, and they've done such a good job at it that even some Bitcoin users start asking the question of 'why someone wants privacy?' and even those who do not ask the question and sees nothing wrong in wanting privacy does not d anything to protect theirs or teach others how to.

Refuse to use any service or product which treats bitcoin as non-fungible and discriminates or censors certain coins.

I am starting to do this now.
I often use some KYC services, albeit without completing KYC and felt that was okay cause I was not enabling the anti privacy war, but even if you do not send them your documents, the time period when you use such services, you are dependent on that as a central authority, so if you use an exchange but don't pass through KYC, they can still choose to freeze the coins you are about to trade for no reason and force you to send documents to identify yourself or abandon the coins you just sent. They also collect tons of other information about you which can easily be gotten if you don't use at form of anonymity tool.

You are also promoting those anti privacy platforms when you use them to trade, buy/sell or store your coins.

You can't do anything about it until people start learning from their mistakes.

They have to first realize what their mistakes are. Many people don't see using centralized platforms and submitting your documents as detrimental to their privacy.

[DooMAD]

You can't do anything about it until people start learning from their mistakes.

They have to first realize what their mistakes are. Many people don't see using centralized platforms and submitting your documents as detrimental to their privacy.

That's the tricky part.  Once you've lost it, it's often not an easy thing to obtain again.  By the time these people realise, they might not want to put in the required effort to regain their privacy and just lazily continue down the path the government are laying out.  I'd imagine that's exactly what the US are banking on. 

It's unfortunate that we're likely going to end up with a two-tier system.  Privacy for a few, surveillance for the many.  Purely because some people are negligent.

[Upgrade00]

That's the tricky part.  Once you've lost it, it's often not an easy thing to obtain again.  By the time these people realise, they might not want to put in the required effort to regain their privacy and just lazily continue down the path the government are laying out.  I'd imagine that's exactly what the US are banking on.  

Privacy lost cannot be regained, but one can choose to prioritize it after a period of not doing so and still achieve some levels of anonymity.

If I have submitted documents to two centralized exchanges and have email and password links around, I cannot redact that information, but I can isolate that from any future transactions I make.
If I buy Bitcoin anonymously through decentralized, P2P services and send them to an unused address on non custodian wallets, no one can link that activity to my already exposed identity. And if there is no transaction activity on my already exposed identity it hopefully doesn't get as much attention.
There's of course always the risk it is sold on the darkweb.

It's unfortunate that we're likely going to end up with a two-tier system.  Privacy for a few, surveillance for the many.  Purely because some people are negligent.

This will only increase the cost of privacy for the few.

[Zoomic]

I always wonder why centralized exchanges are still a big thing after everything that has happened already, since sudden collapses of big crypto platforms have been happening since few years ago, MT GOX was a good example.

The problem is not with the exchanges, it is the government and why the exchanges are involved is because the government can only successfully enforce their laws through the exchanges. The exchanges must comply with the rules of the government. Meanwhile, we need to understand that exchanges (CEX or DEX) are very big part of the cryptocurrency industry, the industry cannot do without the exchanges. If you check the number of newbies that come to this industry, majority of them came through the exchanges and instead of them to own non custodial wallet and save their keys, they will open account on exchanges.

The government cannot sensor all the bitcoin. There are still highly private people like the Op and some of us who doesn't dwell much on exchanges and KYC.

That's the tricky part.  Once you've lost it, it's often not an easy thing to obtain again. 

Privacy lost cannot be regained, but one can choose to prioritize it after a period of not doing so and still achieve some levels of anonymity.

Yea, if you do not validate your data on exchanges, to a certain time the data would become invalid. Which is better than revalidating the data with the fear that your privacy is already gone.

[Z-tight]

Yea, if you do not validate your data on exchanges, to a certain time the data would become invalid. Which is better than revalidating the data with the fear that your privacy is already gone.

It is hard to understand you here, but any data you submit to a centralized service does not become 'invalid', they store your data and do not delete it, but just because you have already lost your privacy doesn't mean you can go on and register on many different other centralized services, because the more your data is in the hands of different centralized services, the more likely it is to get leaked or exposed.

If you want to stop using centralized services and protect whatever privacy you have left, you must close your accounts on centralized services and do not use wallets that are already linked to your identity, if you add using Coinjoins and mixers to it, then you'll get somewhere, people who think their privacy is already lost for good need to do this.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Many people don't see using centralized platforms and submitting your documents as detrimental to their privacy.

Using centralized exchanges is no longer just detrimental to your privacy and your security as it always has been - it's now detrimental to even owning bitcoin at all. If we don't fight against this you won't be allowed to own bitcoin at all. All you will be allowed to own is an IOU on the centralized spreadsheet of some centralized exchange, and we've seen plenty of times over the last few years that such a thing is completely worthless.

This proposal is disastrous for bitcoin on the whole, but even if you don't care about bitcoin at all and are only here to make fiat profits, this bill should worry you.


Here's something else to keep an eye on, and I'll post updates here as relevant: https://nitter.cz/Bill_Fowler_/status/1716288705655083017#m

Once this proposal is formally published, there will be a 90 day window to submit comments as a first step to legally challenging this nonsense.

[suzanne5223]

You can't do anything about it until people start learning from their mistakes.

Yes, but we can't until that happens before the message is passed across to the people because new people are entering the crypto market every day who are still naive about the benefit of privacy.
This is what people like James Lopp, and Seth are doing by spreading the words about the true intention of the government, and this is also one of the reasons why I am scared of the Bitcoin spot ETF despite its going to increase the crypto market cap because it could be the weapon to treats bitcoin as non-fungible or I am I the only thinking about this?

[coolcoinz]

I don't use centralized exchanges. Haven't done so for the last 5+ year. Fortunately you can still exchange EUR 1k per transaction with no KYC here. Used to be 10k, now it's 1k, so the noose is tightening, but it's going to be very hard for them to lower this limit, as this would have to come with fiat currency withdrawal limits at ATMs and all that.
Anyway, the system can be "cheated" as the limits aren't per day, but per transaction, so it only makes things annoying, but not impossible to accomplish

As for the US, they're obviously trying to attack bitcoin by making the public think that it's used by terrorists, and since there's a war in Palestine and Palestinians are being labeled as terrorists, it all makes sense. There's always going to be the right side of the conflict. The side that pays more, that can offer more if it wins, and so on.
This is just a proposal and there were many similar proposals in the past that did not get approved, so time will tell how this goes.

[Upgrade00]

Fortunately you can still exchange EUR 1k per transaction with no KYC here. Used to be 10k, now it's 1k, so the noose is tightening, but it's going to be very hard for them to lower this limit, as this would have to come with fiat currency withdrawal limits at ATMs and all that.

It just seems that the safest option is to use an exchange that allows the freedom to trade anonymously and not to play around the regulation as it gets stricter. There are decentralized options that require no KYC that one can opt for.

Anyway, the system can be "cheated" as the limits aren't per day, but per transaction, so it only makes things annoying, but not impossible to accomplish

If someone spammed this system with multiple maximum order transactions the exchange will very likely flag such an account after a while and freeze what's left on it.

[BlackHatCoiner]

This bill is beyond insane. It literally tries to discriminate anyone owning Bitcoin, unless they're running a fully KYC-operating centralized exchange. And the genius part, is that it is backed by the good assumption that the majority of Bitcoin users store their coins there, so it won't affect them (as it would if they made it officially illegal).

Every true Bitcoiner living in the US should take action.

Once this proposal is formally published, there will be a 90 day window to submit comments as a first step to legally challenging this nonsense.

Is there anything the people outside the US can do to help? Or do comments get submitted eponymous?

[apogio]

Close your KYCed accounts and refuse to ever complete KYC again. Use privacy tools. Anonymize your coins.

3 months ago, I have decided to permanently delete my Binance account. Meanwhile, I havent used binance since 2022.

The majority of my actions and decisions are based upon this forum.

Just one more note to anyone like me having coins from KYC exchanges. It is ok to have them, just don't mix them with the non-kyc ones. Privacy is everything. If you want to get rid of your KYC coins, that's even better and you will find many ideas in the forum.

[digaran]

So FATF is coming to crypto after all these years, finally they get it. This makes you wonder, it's not the world elites who run the global policy making machine but rather a bunch of mentally happy people, after 14 years they got this idea.

If anyone doesn't know what is FATF, it is Financial Action Task Force, established to control the "money" in the world, meaning that they would want to know about a transaction even if it was just to buy a cup of coffee, just to make sure there is no money laundering and terrorist financing involved.  If you wanna know whether they monitor all your transactions or not, check to see if your government has signed up to join this task force or not, if they have, you are already exposed.
Welcome to 2030 agenda(a plan for the "new world order", or "novus ordo seclorum").

[hatshepsut93]

It is clear the US government want the only way to use bitcoin to be through fully KYCed centralized exchanges. They are trying their hardest to absorb bitcoin in to the existing fiat system and surveillance state, and destroy the very thing that bitcoin is.

It doesn't really matter as long as they don't force miners to censor non-compliant transactions. They can't stop anyone from using privacy tools, doing p2p transactions, paying to services that don't comply, etc. If you are using Bitcoin the way the cypherpunks envisioned decentralized money, then Bitcoin fulfills its goal of being decentralized money.

[Zaguru12]

The propaganda machines has been working for several years now to changed the narrative is on Bitcoin and privacy, and they've done such a good job at it that even some Bitcoin users start asking the question of 'why someone wants privacy?' and even those who do not ask the question and sees nothing wrong in wanting privacy does not d anything to protect theirs or teach others how to.

If you ask people who do not have any problem with KYC exchanges you will definitely get the answer that it is use to reduce the risk of crimes or can be used to track down people using it to commit crimes ( at least that’s what the government wants them to believe). The same government that can’t tame down crimes done with fiat and transactions done through banks that have almost all users data.

People will tell you that without centralized exchanges they can exchange their funds and if you suggest decentralized exchanges for them the next question goes to the point that decentralized exchanges do not have much liquidity compared to their counter part. How will they get the liquidity when are busy using the centralized ones, it is not that this liquidity is something that is bought, once we migrate and use more decentralized exchange and give it more liquidity we will be at least saving bitcoin primary purpose which is privacy

Just one more note to anyone like me having coins from KYC exchanges. It is ok to have them, just don't mix them with the non-kyc ones. Privacy is everything. If you want to get rid of your KYC coins, that's even better and you will find many ideas in the forum.

It is not ok to have them as long as they are linked to you. Separating them wouldn’t matter much as they could still be traced to you ones they exists, get total rid of them either by mixing them or converting them to fiat and then buy those coins back from decentralized exchanges.

[Alpha Marine]

People have become so used to the usual fiat/banking/centralized systems to the extent that they don't even see anything wrong with using centralized exchanges.
Even if your privacy means nothing to you, why are you so comfortable keeping your funds in a centralized exchange?
How do they sleep peacefully at night knowing they could wake up to devastating news about that exchange or that the exchange has frozen their account or the coins in it?
We don't have to be nonchalant about things like this.

And if you happen to live in the US, start contacting your representatives about this draconian piece of legislation

The sad part is that, if this works in the US, many countries would follow this path.

[examplens]

3 months ago, I have decided to permanently delete my Binance account. Meanwhile, I havent used binance since 2022.

The majority of my actions and decisions are based upon this forum.

Just one more note to anyone like me having coins from KYC exchanges. It is ok to have them, just don't mix them with the non-kyc ones. Privacy is everything. If you want to get rid of your KYC coins, that's even better and you will find many ideas in the forum.

I don't know if you know, but the Mixtum which you promote in your signature, enter Bitcoins into their service that originate from exchanges Binance, OKEx, DigiFinex, Cryptonex etc...
It is highly likely that some payments came to you from one of those KYC exchanges.
https://[banned mixer]/#how

[pooya87]

In my opinion the biggest threat that United States poses to Bitcoin is not through centralized services (that's not new anyways), the biggest threat is to the network itself through 3 things: (1) miners (2) nodes (3) developers.
We've already seen their actions in (1) and (3) like the shenanigans of MARA pool and bringing in bitcoin developers to CIA headquarters for questioning and god knows what else! I still don't know of any case where they tried getting to nodes, specially since a lot of them are running on centralized servers such as Amazon and other remote servers in EU that US can easily influence/exert its power.

So although warning individuals about using centralized KYCed crap services is good and we should continue doing that but I believe the more important concern should be the 3 points above, specially the hashrate that has been growing in US or more importantly any mining pool that is geographically located in a place where US can control (US mainland and colonies).

[Upgrade00]

It doesn't really matter as long as they don't force miners to censor non-compliant transactions. They can't stop anyone from using privacy tools, doing p2p transactions, paying to services that don't comply, etc. If you are using Bitcoin the way the cypherpunks envisioned decentralized money, then Bitcoin fulfills its goal of being decentralized money.

• They CAN start a crackdown on privacy tools for whatever boogey reason,
• They can do the same to P2P platforms and any other service that doesn't comply for the same non existent reason.

If this is allowed the cost of privacy will keep growing until those seeking it are considered to be doing something illegal.

It's just that, due to the situation and opportunity, we still can't avoid submitting our KYC because we have something that needs to be released to an exchange that is under this regulation, or else we won't be able to release our money on their exchange site platform, right?

There are a couple of non KYC compliant options that you can use.

[Despairo]

I think the slogan of "Buy Bitcoin" is over, we need a new slogan "Protect User's Privacy". Sooner or later US will crackdown the P2P exchanges that not comply with the regulation.

this is also one of the reasons why I am scared of the Bitcoin spot ETF despite its going to increase the crypto market cap because it could be the weapon to treats bitcoin as non-fungible or I am I the only thinking about this?

People must be know if Bitcoin ETF is an IOU, where they not hold the real coins and trust the institutions to hold their coins. I think it's not a problem as long as people fine with that, this what freedom to choose is where you can choose to trust your coins with institutions or buy a real coins and hold it in your own wallet.

[Zaguru12]

It can't be denied that most of us here still don't like giving KYCs to centralized exchanges; even I don't want it either. It's just that, due to the situation and opportunity, we still can't avoid submitting our KYC because we have something that needs to be released to an exchange that is under this regulation, or else we won't be able to release our money on their exchange site platform, right?

By opportunity I think you meant high liquidity, this simply can be solved with if majority value privacy and decides to move towards the decentralized exchanges, this will reduce the liquidity on them and increase more liquidity on the decentralized exchanges. There are also CEX that do not require KYC at first, you can simply make use of them but be rest assured that they will definitely come back one day to ask for full KYC and as such do not leave your coins on them.

Now, the question is: who really controls our KYCs? Is the exchange centralized, or has it passed the requirements so that they can operate legally under the government of a country where their business is located internationally? Isn't it clear that the government is really in control because they don't like the decentralized system?

Needless to ask, it is simple, before you can get the autonomy to operate legally you need to be regulated and how is that done. The government will need the data of its citizens using your platform. Look at the reports of users funds that are got freezed by government, almost all of them are traced to their centralized exchange account.

[minor-transgression]

I'll misquote Greg Carlin "Think of how brainwashed the average person is, and then realise that half the population are more brainwashed than that."

If that half of the population got a text message letting them know they could watch themselves being auctioned online, they'd be over the moon if they fetched a higher price than the guy (or gal) before or after. 

They'd be texting their mates to let them know their good news.

After that they'd be only too happy to have their number tattooed across their forehead, and demand the the Government provide the service for cheap.

[mvdheuvel1983]

o_e_l_e_o  this so called PATRIOT Act should be called the DRACONIAN Act because that is exactly what it is. The PATRIOT Act does exactly the opposite of what patriot means and so this is why I think the DRACONIAN acts fits it better.

To explain this better for those who may not understand it, if this law is eventually passed you cannot do simple bitcoin transactions which you normally do without raising an eye brow from the US government. This simple transactions like sending bitcoin from multiple exchanges to your hardware wallet. Once the US government suspects you, they can confiscate your bitcoin and it is on you to prove that the bitcoin is yours and isn't used for laundering or terrorism financing.

The US is dong this to try and save the US dollar. People are dumping the global reserve asset and this piece of regulation is a desperate measure to try and save it. This is basically their attempt to control and even close the exits. Which is why they want us to own bitcoin through brokerage like the bitcoin ETF which is not real bitcoin and also to only have it on exchanges so they easily freeze it whenever they like.

All bitcoiners must fight against this vehemently.

[franky1]

o_e_l_e_o  this so called PATRIOT Act should be called the DRACONIAN Act because that is exactly what it is. The PATRIOT Act does exactly the opposite of what patriot means and so this is why I think the DRACONIAN acts fits it better.

patriot does not support "freedom"/individualism
patriot does support the country. aka government

EG an ex-pat american considers themselves american. but lives in another country. so is not supporting the american economy nor paying american tax nor voting nor many things

an ex-pat supports freedom/individualism more than a patriot

when you notice patriots singing to a flag and declaring their allegiance to the government.. you soon see what patriot really means

[nutildah]

The good news is the US government won't have the manpower to enforce compliance of such regulations to a T. They can only threaten non-complying entities with sanctions and criminal charges, which likely won't come to fruition unless something like the Lazarus Group is using said entity to launder funds.

What we see time and again is that investigations & raids are only conducted when the government has a strong chance of recouping their expenses... This goes all the way back to the Silk Road bust and continues through the ChipMixer takedown. This is also how the IRS operates: unless the government can more than recoup its cost, an audit is unlikely to take place.

I'll misquote Greg Carlin "Think of how brainwashed the average person is, and then realise that half the population are more brainwashed than that."

Funny enough George (not Greg) Carlin hated it when people accredited him on the internet for stuff he didn't say, but you  haven't received any sMerits yet so I sent you a couple of them.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Anyway, the system can be "cheated" as the limits aren't per day, but per transaction, so it only makes things annoying, but not impossible to accomplish

Well, that's already covered under this proposal. This would be classified as "splitting CVC for transmittal and transmitting the CVC through a series of independent transactions", which by their new definition counts as mixing. And I know you are speaking about EUR, but this legislation will absolutely spread beyond the US and affect the whole world soon enough.

Is there anything the people outside the US can do to help? Or do comments get submitted eponymous?

Spread the word.

If you are using Bitcoin the way the cypherpunks envisioned decentralized money, then Bitcoin fulfills its goal of being decentralized money.

Well yes, but that is missing the point. This bill will not affected me directly since I have never and will never use any KYC platform. But it will absolutely force more service providers down the KYC route, it will massively increase the barriers for new small businesses and service providers to start accepting bitcoin, it will turn many people off of bitcoin altogether, and it will create a two tiered system between "government approved bitcoin" and "free bitcoin". All of this is terrible for bitcoin on the whole.


Comments on the proposal are now open, and remain so until January 22nd: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/10/23/2023-23449/proposal-of-special-measure-regarding-convertible-virtual-currency-mixing-as-a-class-of-transactions#

[franky1]

comments for proposals should be to make bitcoin a private property again not a legal currency. then all these financial jurisdictions cant gain traction
(EG auctioned art is treated differently than currency)

there is no point playing whack a mole of certain definitions of certain niches whist still within the currency jurisdiction., if the overall definition of the whole still gives governments chances to change currency definitions 90 days after x or y.. you just end up in a endless loop of fighting

this also goes towards certain idols of a subnetwork. if they define their units of account as currency. and route it for a fee. they too become a MSB/MTS needing MSB/MTS licence

so redefine your unit of account to not be currency, but instead property. and define the utility of routing in a way that does not fit the definitions of a MSB/MTS

there were good reasons why governments were helpless and unable to do anything with bitcoin in 2009-2013... LEARN WHY

[cryptosize]

So FATF is coming to crypto after all these years, finally they get it. This makes you wonder, it's not the world elites who run the global policy making machine but rather a bunch of mentally happy people, after 14 years they got this idea.

If anyone doesn't know what is FATF, it is Financial Action Task Force, established to control the "money" in the world, meaning that they would want to know about a transaction even if it was just to buy a cup of coffee, just to make sure there is no money laundering and terrorist financing involved.  If you wanna know whether they monitor all your transactions or not, check to see if your government has signed up to join this task force or not, if they have, you are already exposed.
Welcome to 2030 agenda(a plan for the "new world order", or "novus ordo seclorum").

Please don't be a conspiracy theorist/doomsayer.

Governments care for their people (according to some people).

[NotATether]

Many people don't see using centralized platforms and submitting your documents as detrimental to their privacy.

Using centralized exchanges is no longer just detrimental to your privacy and your security as it always has been - it's now detrimental to even owning bitcoin at all. If we don't fight against this you won't be allowed to own bitcoin at all. All you will be allowed to own is an IOU on the centralized spreadsheet of some centralized exchange, and we've seen plenty of times over the last few years that such a thing is completely worthless.

It is very clear that this piece of legislation has a hidden agenda behind it to give the banking giants, Paypal, and other Wall Street outfits even more bitcoins than they may already own right now. As well as pretty much every other cryptocurrency that has a worth. Why? To make trillions of dollars in more obscene profits which will make for fat paychecks for their executive staff.

Comments on the proposal are now open, and remain so until January 22nd: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/10/23/2023-23449/proposal-of-special-measure-regarding-convertible-virtual-currency-mixing-as-a-class-of-transactions#

I notice there are 48 comments on this document, and yet none of them are even visible. Looks like they are withholding comments for "review" or whatever that means.

[stadus]

The way things are unfolding, it seems we're heading in that direction. Everything involving Bitcoin that the government can regulate, they want to intervene in. Exchanges and even gambling sites now require KYC, and this KYC requirement erases the anonymity that we intended to preserve. It's tough to accept that what Satoshi created for anonymous transactions and decentralization is becoming centralized, and anonymity is being stripped away due to KYC.

Why doesn't the government just create its own digital asset and let Bitcoin continue to function in our ecosystem? I'm sure the massive adoption we hope for could still happen even if they don't heavily regulate the market.

[kryptqnick]

For many reasons, I'm happy that I don't live in the US, and I guess this is now one of them. This proposal is extremely unfair. First, there's still a ton of cash people use without going through any KYC, right? Second, the vast majority of money laundering is occurring with the traditional banking systems with fiat currencies, not with cryptos, so it's unreasonable to impose the rules that don't seem to work and attack the crypto market while turning a blind eye to traditional money laundering. Oh, and as for terrorism sponsorship, which is mentioned in the article, I think that making things hard for everyone just because some people use cryptos to finance terrible organizations is totally uncalled for. And I love how the article shows how little the government has been actually trying to prove regarding the scope of illicit activities.
What's giving some comfort is that it's a proposal, so it's not enacted yet and there's some place for hope that it will be rejected.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I notice there are 48 comments on this document, and yet none of them are even visible. Looks like they are withholding comments for "review" or whatever that means.

It's standard protocol. No way the US government is going to let unmoderated comments be posted live to one of their websites. They should be posted once they've been checked for inappropriate content.

and anonymity is being stripped away due to KYC.

And because the majority of people complete KYC without a second though. Bitcoin wasn't designed so you can just comply with the same old fiat rules and regulations you've been complying with your entire life. The whole point of bitcoin is to remove the ability of faceless third parties to control you.

Why doesn't the government just create its own digital asset and let Bitcoin continue to function in our ecosystem?

Because bitcoin takes power away from the government and gives it to the people, and the government will never accept that.

For many reasons, I'm happy that I don't live in the US, and I guess this is now one of them.

If FinCEN are able to enact this, many countries will follow suit with their own such bullshit regulations. Don't think you are safe from this just because you aren't American.

[Franctoshi]

The government will surely go to any length to make sure they control what they don't control and this is the case here with Bitcoin, after seeing that they can't ban it or is difficult to ban it totally, now they have to employ a strategy of control by passing bills or laws that will pressure Bitcoiners to left with a tiny option than likely cooperate with those laws if possible.

This is a fight for privacy and freedom, So as the government is doing everything to get us on our knees, we must employ our strategy to try to avoid those traps they are setting up to get us on the knees,  totally avoiding the use of centralized exchanges if possible.

[Agbe]

This matter of Governments trying to control bitcoin in their different countries is getting complicating every day and night. But the matter what they can't win the war, when the matter has gotten out of hand then p2p will be fully implemented. And one thing I also discovered the centralized exchange prices of bitcoin is higher than decentralized exchange platforms. I have been checking this for a long time now and it still the same. Op, I click on the last link you provided on the Op and I make some comparations, men the Gap is very big but that is not withstanding, from all the links and articles you provided shows that the issue is very serious. And one thing I will also say about privacy is that, privacy is when you have not given your identity to anyone and once you do then it is no longer privacy. Like the all the people that are using centralized exchange platforms now is no longer anonymous because KYC has been given to the exchange and the only thing for them to do now is to abandoned the accounts and they should not send bitcoin to those accounts again. Even at that their information are still there but it will not have any effect on them because they are not using the accounts. Personally, I have been looking for a good price Decentralized Exchange DEX platform since but I have not seen and that was why I am using CEX, but with this serious warning, I have to look for a better DEX platform to be used.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

What can you do about it? Get your coins off of any centralized exchange and in to your own wallet. Close your KYCed accounts and refuse to ever complete KYC again. Use privacy tools. Anonymize your coins.

Powerful, this is what every serious minded bitcoiners should first seek after to know and understand the difference between these and otherwise, some will be using bitcoin yet feels unsecured thesame way they have been dealing with using the fiat economy system and currency, if you're interested in bitcoin, then know this and have a perfect peace with your entire investment in bitcoin without any risk or fear of missing out.

Refuse to use any service or product which treats bitcoin as non-fungible and discriminates against or censors certain coins. Bitcoin was not made to become an off-shoot of the fiat system, to be another tool by which the government can can surveil, censor, and control. And if you happen to live in the US, start contacting your representatives about this draconian piece of legislation.

Maybe this will also let he governments or regulatory bodies take actions over every other centralized exchanges or organizations that take advantage of bitcoin to colonize others without offering the same privacy and decentralization function people should enjoy from bitcoin, if governments were also found in this mess, then all they were after is a chase after air.

[franky1]

many things even in fiat are not declared as being a MSB/MTS

ordering a taxi is not a money service business even though people deposit money into a taxi app and the taxi company then sends funds(minus commission) to the driver at the end of shift

a taxi company head office does not do any driving of cabs itself and just facilitates the payments of journeys. yet they get to define themselves not as a MSB but as a transportation service.

so think outside of the box of the definition of money service business and create a service that is described as something else but still produces end result as another withdrawal address gets funds from a different deposit address.. BE SMART.

when you want privacy dont advertise people should use a mixer. tell them to use a driverless car transportation service that offers 99% refunds if the car does not turn up(a lame example)

ive hinted enough without spelling it out. but lets see who is smart enough to do something and work out other methods to get the results they want without being considered a MSB

[DooMAD]

many things even in fiat are not declared as being a MSB/MTS

ordering a taxi is not a money service business even though people deposit money into a taxi app and the taxi company then sends funds(minus commission) to the driver at the end of shift

a taxi company head office does not do any driving of cabs itself and just facilitates the payments of journeys. yet they get to define themselves not as a MSB but as a transportation service.

so think outside of the box of the definition of money service business and create a service that is described as something else but still produces end result as another withdrawal address gets funds from a different deposit address.. BE SMART.

when you want privacy dont advertise people should use a mixer. tell them to use a driverless car transportation service that offers 99% refunds if the car does not turn up(a lame example)

ive hinted enough without spelling it out. but lets see who is smart enough to do something and work out other methods to get the results they want without being considered a MSB

Did you attend the same business school as Donald Trump?  The similarities are mounting.   

Just because it's in your nature to be deceitful and dishonest, doesn't mean other people are.  There are numerous problems in founding a business under false pretenses like that.  How do you market your service to your target audience without giving the game away?  When your business is audited, how do you explain the unusually high percentage of refunds?  Why would anyone who isn't a criminal found a company on the basis of a lie?  Such a company may not have to register as an MSB, but they'll still have to answer to some form of regulatory body, depending on what industry sector they pretend to serve, and they'll likely still be subject to whatever AML requirements are enforced by those regulators.

The sensible people in the room are campaigning to ensure legitimate day-to-day interactions are not lumped in with illicit activity.  But you're just there at the back shouting "hAvE yOu TrIeD oPeNiNg A bUsInEsS tO cOmMiT mOnEy LaUnDeRiNg?".  That's completely moronic (even for you).  If you were truly smart, you'd realise that real life doesn't match your fevered daydreams.  You can't just go telling people to open a "front" to commit money laundering and act like you've solved the issue.

Simple fact is, all these mixing services you so clearly despise actually operate under a greater level of integrity than you do.  They are open and honest about the service they provide and the principles they uphold.  You have no such principles.  All you do is lie and deceive.  You're disgusting.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Personally, I have been looking for a good price Decentralized Exchange DEX platform since but I have not seen and that was why I am using CEX, but with this serious warning, I have to look for a better DEX platform to be used.

The price on a DEX is what you make it. The price usually favors the maker, because the maker posts an offer for other people to accept. If you don't see a price you like, then post your own offer and wait for other people to accept it. You'll potentially get lower trading fees as well depending on the platform by being the maker rather than the taker.


Looks like the first couple of comments are now starting to show up:

This proposal is a gross regulatory overreach. First, the free transmission of value from one party to another is fundamental to our american values. This proposal limits this, inserts the state into our every day lives needlessly, and is a significant encroachment on our basic freedoms.

Any further nonsense from franky1 will be deleted. Please keep this on-topic.

[apogio]

Quote from the article:

Tools that allow you to reclaim your financial privacy like Samourai Wallet (a powerful, privacy-preserving wallet for Bitcoin) and Monero (a cryptocurrency that protects sender, receiver, and amount in every transaction) are indispensable tools for freedom, and should be something you practice with regularly, no matter what the state says.

Ok so Samourai is top notch in terms of privacy. I love Samourai when it is connected to my own node, even if I don't use it regularly. We should note however that Samourai is not a panacea and if it is not properly set up, it can be bad for privacy.

Is monero as private as everyone says? I am surprised it is not that widespread since it is mentioned too much in privacy related posts and articles.

[Upgrade00]

Looks like the first couple of comments are now starting to show up:

Out of curiosity.
Will positive comments about the proposed regulation also be taken into account and what stops the government from sponsoring comments encouraging it inorder to counter any criticism that it gets?

[Smartvirus]

It is clear the US government want the only way to use bitcoin to be through fully KYCed centralized exchanges. They are trying their hardest to absorb bitcoin in to the existing fiat system and surveillance state, and destroy the very thing that bitcoin is.

What can you do about it? Get your coins off of any centralized exchange and in to your own wallet. Close your KYCed accounts and refuse to ever complete KYC again. Use privacy tools. Anonymize your coins. Refuse to use any service or product which treats bitcoin as non-fungible and discriminates against or censors certain coins. Bitcoin was not made to become an off-shoot of the fiat system, to be another tool by which the government can can surveil, censor, and control. And if you happen to live in the US, start contacting your representatives about this draconian piece of legislation.

Surely that’s a Draconian policy but by some means, the centralized exchanges have got a place in the cryptospace. Not just about there ease of operation but, these exchanges bridge the gap and resolve a simple issue of trust between both parties in a p2p trade with them serving as escrow. They also ensure you remain anonymous to the other party in a p2p trade but, not to them if I must make that clear.

There need to exists within a jurisdiction places them under certain laws which demands compliance at all level and as much as that is bad for business in the cryptospace, it’s something really useful to the government. I’m the absences of proper subsidiaries, it’s hard not to use.

[hatshepsut93]

If you are using Bitcoin the way the cypherpunks envisioned decentralized money, then Bitcoin fulfills its goal of being decentralized money.

Well yes, but that is missing the point. This bill will not affected me directly since I have never and will never use any KYC platform. But it will absolutely force more service providers down the KYC route, it will massively increase the barriers for new small businesses and service providers to start accepting bitcoin, it will turn many people off of bitcoin altogether, and it will create a two tiered system between "government approved bitcoin" and "free bitcoin". All of this is terrible for bitcoin on the whole.

Bitcoin was clearly created with the assumption that the government will try to do something like that. Bitcoin community got too relaxed, too reliant on the centralized ecosystem. So yes, it will greatly shake the current ecosystem and community, it will be ugly, but ultimately Bitcoin will survive, and hopefully the ecosystem will become more decentralized and resilient to such moves by the government.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Is monero as private as everyone says?

Yes. The US government posted bounties of $625,000 for cracking Monero, which were not claimed, and no blockchain analysis company advertises Monero breaking services. The government (so far) are unable to break Monero, provided you use it properly.

Will positive comments about the proposed regulation also be taken into account and what stops the government from sponsoring comments encouraging it inorder to counter any criticism that it gets?

Yes and nothing, but they are still required to respond to negative comments, particularly any that can cite relevant laws explaining why this proposal is a crazy overreach.

[apogio]

Yes. The US government posted bounties of $625,000 for cracking Monero, which were not claimed, and no blockchain analysis company advertises Monero break services. The government (so far) are unable to break Monero, provided you use it properly.

I downloaded monero (not the full blockchain), out of curiousity. I used it through coin exchange in order to get rid of some UTXOs. My question remains: why is monero not very widespread? I would argue, according to all the comments and posts I have seen, that monero is a "good" coin.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Who knows? Maybe because it doesn't promise 1000% returns like most of the scam shitcoins people buy. There are no shitty ICOs or tokens or ordinals or other nonsense built on Monero. Or maybe because people who use Monero aren't super vocal about it. And there is zero media presence for Monero - governments and blockchain analysis companies don't like it, so centralized exchanges won't advertise it and the big sponsored crypto sites don't talk about it. And there was no pre-mine for the creators to splash on advertising campaigns or similar.

Personally, it's the only coin other than bitcoin I own and use.

[apogio]

Who knows? Maybe because it doesn't promise 1000% returns like most of the scam shitcoins people buy. There are no shitty ICOs or tokens or ordinals or other nonsense built on Monero. Or maybe because people who use Monero aren't super vocal about it. And there is zero media presence for Monero - governments and blockchain analysis companies don't like it, so centralized exchanges won't advertise it and the big sponsored crypto sites don't talk about it. And there was no pre-mine for the creators to splash on advertising campaigns or similar.

I will quote you by enumerating what you said:

1. it doesn't promise 1000% returns like most of the scam shitcoins
2. no shitty ICOs or tokens or ordinals or other nonsense
3. zero media presence for Monero
4. governments and blockchain analysis companies don't like it
5. centralized exchanges won't advertise it

Sounds good to me!!!

Sounds like monero has achieved what they wanted.

Sounds like "Monero above all", when it comes to privacy.

[Charles-Tim]

But I think it is worth knowing that monero is also adopted to some extent, despite the pressure from governments of many countries, and exchanges that delisted it.

There was a time monero was $0.2
In March 2020, monero was $25
In May 2021, monero had all-time-high, which was $519. Despite that many altcoins were existing long time ago but they did not had  all-time-high.

Monero price as of today is $157.5 which is 3 times lower than all-time-high. Unlike most altcoins that are 10 time or more lower than the highest price they got to in 2021

Monero has a marketcap of $2.89 billion and the 24th (as of today) on the lists of coins with the higher marketcap.

Sounds like "Monero above all", when it comes to privacy.

Definitely. That is why converting bitcoin to monero and back to bitcoin on decentralized exchanges is advised as one of the means of mixing bitcoin. You can see mixer like [banned mixer] having monero bridge used to mix bitcoin in advanced mode. No coin is existing that gives this benefits.

[hugeblack]

Does anyone know what the impact of such a law (if passed) would be on the forum? I found that they are citing some of the reasons that prompted them to do so at ---->  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/09/ fact-sheet-president-biden-to-sign-executive-order-on-ensuring-responsible-innovation-in-digital-assets/
If we search, we will find that some of the mixing service providers accused in the above list are present in this forum, and according to the page --->  https://bitcointalk.org/privacy.php,

Bitcointalk.org is in US jurisdiction, and is subject to US subpoenas, wiretap orders, preservation orders (which would negate the above retention rules), and similar. Furthermore, our service providers could also be subject to similar orders without our knowledge. Note that we consider PMs to require a warrant in order to be released.

[blckhawk]

Is leaving the US a possible option? Because I've replied in an earlier post that being an expatriate working outside of the US but still making US pay grade and possibly living in other country might be an option against this act against cryptocurrency. The Carribean might be a good option, it's near the US and it's outside so you can still visit family or are they still able to tax you even if you live there?

[SamReomo]

I really don't know why they want Bitcoiners to be trapped in the traditional banking system is it that they don't want us to be independent and Kyced thing could be pretty much unacceptable for many Bitcoiners who don't want to reveal their identity in public. I guess they're doing this so that they can tax everyone who is hodling Bitcoin and that's the worst thing they can do with Bitcoiners.

People love and use Bitcoin because of its decentralized nature and now they want to take away that freedom from us. I'm not sure but I guess that all KYCed centralized exchanges have accepted their proposal of sharing the users complete data to the governments and that's why now they want to every Bitcoin holder to use Bitcoin via centralized exchanges.

[tranthidung]

If we search, we will find that some of the mixing service providers accused in the above list are present in this forum, and according to the page --->  https://bitcointalk.org/privacy.php,

Bitcointalk.org is in US jurisdiction, and is subject to US subpoenas, wiretap orders, preservation orders (which would negate the above retention rules), and similar. Furthermore, our service providers could also be subject to similar orders without our knowledge. Note that we consider PMs to require a warrant in order to be released.

theymos was summoned to US subpoenas after the Silk Road investigation.
Bitcoin Forum Bitcointalk.org Receives and Answers First Subpoena from DOJ.

DPR subpoena.

This is the first government request/inquiry I've received related to Ulbricht's case. I have received a few other inquiries for other cases.

All advertisements in Bitcointalk, in my understanding, falls into Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act.

Section 230: Everything you must know about the rule that shaped the internet.

According to Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, no provider or user of an interactive computer service will be regarded as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

[Lucius]

I downloaded monero (not the full blockchain), out of curiousity. I used it through coin exchange in order to get rid of some UTXOs. My question remains: why is monero not very widespread? I would argue, according to all the comments and posts I have seen, that monero is a "good" coin.

I don't use CEX, so I don't know what the situation is with the most famous ones when it comes to that coin, but what I do know is that a few years ago in the EU there was increased pressure on the so-called "privacy coins" and that all local crypto exchanges in my country over night removed that coin (and some others) from their trading pairs. Given that people in most cases buy cryptocurrencies because they want to profit from them, privacy is not something that is valued, especially if it is also marked by the authorities as something bad.


I read the entire article from OP and I can only say that I am not at all surprised that all this is happening, because any decentralization that goes in the direction of finance is literally a thorn in the side of every government that wants to have absolute control over every individual and his life. Although there is quite clear evidence that cryptocurrencies are to a very small extent responsible for financing terrorism or money laundering (according to what Chainalysis claims) and that there should be much more focus on the classic methods used by terrorists/criminals. Unable to admit that their (FIAT) system is as full of holes as Swiss cheese, some governments look for the culprit on the completely wrong side, and it's even easier if that someone might not even defend himself.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Sounds like "Monero above all", when it comes to privacy.

Pretty much.

Monero has a marketcap of $2.89 billion and the 24th (as of today) on the lists of coins with the higher marketcap.

As far as I am concerned, the price of Monero is even less relevant than the price of bitcoin - it addresses a specific need, and it has been proven over years to work and work well. When Bitcoin fell ~80% I didn't care because the fundamentals hadn't changed. If Monero falls ~80%, the same applies.

Is leaving the US a possible option?

A much easier option than that in the short term is just to close all your KYCed accounts and use bitcoin peer to peer as it was intended in the first place. Long term I would say leaving the US is a good plan for a whole host of reasons, given the mass surveillance machine the US government has turned in to.

I guess they're doing this so that they can tax everyone who is hodling Bitcoin and that's the worst thing they can do with Bitcoiners.

They are doing it so all bitcoin transactions can be easily monitored and surveilled. A population under constant surveillance is a population which is easy to manipulate and control, a population which will never dare to step out of line.

[NotATether]

Comments on the proposal are now open, and remain so until January 22nd: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/10/23/2023-23449/proposal-of-special-measure-regarding-convertible-virtual-currency-mixing-as-a-class-of-transactions#

One new thing I want to note about this:

It has come to my attention that there is a similar draconian bill attempting to be passed by the IRS that would essentially require all crypto to be KYC'ed for all transactions to be allowed.

Some cool dudes made a site where you can submit an AI-generated complaint comment to the paper: https://treasuryraid.lexpunk.army/

I think it's a really cool idea and we should try to find a way to do it for this act too.

[panganib999]

https://freedom.tech/patriot-act-comes-to-cryptocurrency/

A fantastic article authored by Seth For Privacy (https://nitter.cz/sethforprivacy), who is the Head of Strategy & Marketing for Foundation Devices, known for their Passport hardware wallet.

As I've mentioned in another thread, and as Seth explains in this article, this newest piece of legislation is an outright attack on bitcoin. It is clear the US government want the only way to use bitcoin to be through fully KYCed centralized exchanges. They are trying their hardest to absorb bitcoin in to the existing fiat system and surveillance state, and destroy the very thing that bitcoin is.

What can you do about it? Get your coins off of any centralized exchange and in to your own wallet. Close your KYCed accounts and refuse to ever complete KYC again. Use privacy tools. Anonymize your coins. Refuse to use any service or product which treats bitcoin as non-fungible and discriminates against or censors certain coins. Bitcoin was not made to become an off-shoot of the fiat system, to be another tool by which the government can can surveil, censor, and control. And if you happen to live in the US, start contacting your representatives about this draconian piece of legislation.

https://bitcoiner.guide/nokyconly/
https://kycnot.me/


Spam will be deleted.

What part of "Anonymous" can these mofos in the government not understand? We've been at it for years now, these people are so concerned about "the dangers that crypto could pose in the AML integrity" that they laser-focused on regulating bitcoin instead of actually finding the time to crack down on industries where money laundering does happen (ahem, charitable organizations, carpet resellers, music industry, everything else where you can create clean money). I sometimes feel like we should just take our business elsewhere cause as long as these senile retards remain seated they will continue to do the most belligerent shit you could ever think of. There's harmony and peace with having a little anonymity, it's been like that for years now, why is it that they are pushing to do it NOW?

[Darker45]

Is this somehow expected, that at some point this would come? As the adoption or exploitation of Bitcoin grows, so will the enmity between the technology and the government?

Just a couple of weeks ago, in his Bitcoin Amsterdam speech, Snowden mentioned how he used Bitcoin to pay for the servers that would host the classified information that he shared with certain people.

I can also remember Andreas Antonopoulos mentioning how the efficiency of Bitcoin as money makes it desirable by both upright and crooked men.

And so as the volume of transactions grow and the number of users increase which, of course, include bad actors, the approach of the government against it also grows in severity.

I'm curious now, will you, then, encourage that people don't declare their Bitcoin holdings? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but you seemed to have advised people quite a while ago to just declare what they have to avoid possible troubles with the IRS.

[blckhawk]

Is leaving the US a possible option?

A much easier option than that in the short term is just to close all your KYCed accounts and use bitcoin peer to peer as it was intended in the first place. Long term I would say leaving the US is a good plan for a whole host of reasons, given the mass surveillance machine the US government has turned in to.

People should have left a long time ago if you asked me, Snowden's leaks should have been the lynchpin to the decision that people should leave US, but it just fizzled out through the years and people just moved on but the mass surveillance was still going on which is scary but if we're talking about mass surveillance, I don't think that China and other totalitarian regimes around the world would probably shame US in their mass surveillance programs, if only Bush didn't masterminded the 9/11 attacks, this whole thing wouldn't happen.

[Poker Player]

Well this is something along the same lines of what is underway in Europe and what I talked about back in the day.

Goodbye, privacy, goodbye, it was nice while it lasted.

The strange thing is that Europe took the lead in this before the United States, which is now lagging behind. But yes, the idea is to try to control Bitcoin transactions as banking transactions are controlled, and in Europe the last thing I read is that by January 2026 the full exchange of information between countries should be implemented.

To all this, apart from the advice given in the thread, such as not using CEX, I would like to add that you should use cash as much as possible when you have to pay with fiat. Taking care of privacy as much as possible with Bitcoin and then paying for everything with your smartwatch is not very coherent.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I think it's a really cool idea and we should try to find a way to do it for this act too.

I don't think so. They will simply ignore any AI generated content, and all it does is water down genuine comments and complaints.

I'm curious now, will you, then, encourage that people don't declare their Bitcoin holdings?

I would encourage people, as I have always done, do trade exclusively peer to peer and to never complete KYC anywhere, so there are no third parties which can track all your bitcoin and share that information with anyone they like.

The strange thing is that Europe took the lead in this before the United States, which is now lagging behind.

Everything I've seen come out of the EU in relation to bitcoin has been just as bad/stupid/misguided/idiotic as what our government in the US spits out. This kind of mass surveillance of bitcoin will only spread if we don't fight to put a stop to it.

[NotATether]

I think it's a really cool idea and we should try to find a way to do it for this act too.

I don't think so. They will simply ignore any AI generated content, and all it does is water down genuine comments and complaints.

I'm pretty sure a lot of normal people are going to fall into a quagmire while trying to write a proper formal letter to a government entity. So do you really think something like the following would be ignored?

Dear Internal Revenue Service and Treasury Department,

I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed regulations outlined in the PDF document titled "Gross Proceeds and Basis Reporting by Brokers and Determination of Amount Realized and Basis for Digital Asset Transactions." Specifically, I would like to address the topics of privacy and poorly defined terms.

Firstly, I am deeply concerned about the privacy and safety implications of allowing multiple third parties to have access to my sensitive financial data and social security number. The proposed regulations would require brokers, including digital asset trading platforms, digital asset payment processors, and certain digital asset hosted wallets, to file information returns and furnish payee statements on dispositions of digital assets. This would potentially expose my personal information to numerous entities, which raises significant privacy and security risks.

Furthermore, I find the definitions of certain terms in the proposed regulations to be poorly defined. For instance, terms such as "platform," "software," and "ledger" are left undefined, leaving room for multiple interpretations. Additionally, the definitions of terms like "wallet" and "validator" do not accurately describe their technical meanings, leading to potential confusion and inconsistent application of the regulations.

I believe it is crucial for regulations of this nature to provide clear and precise definitions to ensure consistency and understanding among all stakeholders. Vague and loosely defined terms can lead to misinterpretation and hinder compliance with the regulations.

In conclusion, I urge you to reconsider the implications on privacy and security that may arise from these proposed regulations. Additionally, I strongly recommend providing clearly defined terms to avoid confusion and promote consistent interpretation and application.

Thank you for considering my concerns. I trust that you will take these issues into account when finalizing the regulations.

Sincerely,
<name>

There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with this when I look at it from a first glance. Also it's not like it's serving the same letter to everybody, the sentences and vocabulary are slightly different for each.

[Lucius]

~snip~
A much easier option than that in the short term is just to close all your KYCed accounts and use bitcoin peer to peer as it was intended in the first place. Long term I would say leaving the US is a good plan for a whole host of reasons, given the mass surveillance machine the US government has turned in to.

If someone decides to leave, it would be very good to do a thorough research about the country to which they want to move, because although surveillance in the US went to a completely different level after the terrorist attacks, it is not better in other parts of the world either.

I watched a documentary about how the police in the UK use some kind of AI for facial recognition, and with the help of cameras on vehicles, they try to detect potential terrorists, and the vehicles with these cameras are parked in the middle of city centers where thousands of people pass by. Imagine you're walking with your family/friends and then the police grab you and take you for an extra check because the AI has marked you as suspicious and all the other people are looking at you and wondering if you're really a terrorist.

What I want to say is that there are much worse places in the world when it comes to limiting and endangering human freedoms than is the case in the US, only that a perception has been created that Big Brother is still the biggest in the world's largest democracy.

[avp2306]

I would encourage people, as I have always done, do trade exclusively peer to peer and to never complete KYC anywhere, so there are no third parties which can track all your bitcoin and share that information with anyone they like.

Yeah its good to do peer to peer transaction if there's a lot of people using crypto on where are but if there's few people using it then we don't have a choice but to engage with those Kyc compliant platforms. Its hard situation to get track but we can't do anything if the only option we have is to engage with those KYC platforms.

Everything I've seen come out of the EU in relation to bitcoin has been just as bad/stupid/misguided/idiotic as what our government in the US spits out. This kind of mass surveillance of bitcoin will only spread if we don't fight to put a stop to it.

Just like they make it a normal habit to spit some bad words against bitcoin and we can't do anything with those old dudes believing some negative about its existence, but for sure they will eat all the words they spit against it once bitcoin will get massive adaption and for sure this guys will change their minds especially they see its real potential.

[suzanne5223]

this is also one of the reasons why I am scared of the Bitcoin spot ETF despite its going to increase the crypto market cap because it could be the weapon to treats bitcoin as non-fungible or I am I the only thinking about this?

People must be know if Bitcoin ETF is an IOU, where they not hold the real coins and trust the institutions to hold their coins. I think it's not a problem as long as people fine with that, this what freedom to choose is where you can choose to trust your coins with institutions or buy a real coins and hold it in your own wallet.

The Bitcoin ETF will work just like IOU because the institution and the government never like decentralization. Besides, I read an article today where BlackRock said it will seed its Bitcoin ETF with its own fund.
As you said, it's a matter of choosing but the way their Bitcoin spot ETF will be operated is going to treat BTC as non-fungible, and also believe very soon KYC will be made compulsory for every crypto-related transaction after the ETF approval.

[Darker45]

I'm curious now, will you, then, encourage that people don't declare their Bitcoin holdings?

I would encourage people, as I have always done, do trade exclusively peer to peer and to never complete KYC anywhere, so there are no third parties which can track all your bitcoin and share that information with anyone they like.

But can the IRS be trusted that it won't share sensitive information with its fellow government agencies? And should we decide that we won't be declaring any Bitcoin holdings, which I am doing right now, and trade exclusively peer-to-peer, are we then limited to the option of transacting face to face and on cold cash basis? Because peer-to-peer transactions which involve the likes of PayPal, bank transfers, and the rest of online payment options are almost pointless because they always ask for personal information.

[Plaguedeath]

Yeah its good to do peer to peer transaction if there's a lot of people using crypto on where are but if there's few people using it then we don't have a choice but to engage with those Kyc compliant platforms. Its hard situation to get track but we can't do anything if the only option we have is to engage with those KYC platforms.

You don't have to trade through direct P2P with real people, you can trade through DEX or no KYC P2P. I'm not sure where you come from, but you can useBisq (mostly trade for EUR, USD, BRL, GBP, CAD, AUD, or CZK), you can also use Agoradesk since it's wider than Bisq.

Because peer-to-peer transactions which involve the likes of PayPal, bank transfers, and the rest of online payment options are almost pointless because they always ask for personal information.

Are you trade big amount of money? I never face any problem when deal with P2P trade by using bank transfers, usually I cash out my money once a month.

[o_e_l_e_o]

The Bitcoin ETF will work just like IOU because the institution and the government never like decentralization.

This is clearly the future the government want for bitcoin. The majority just buy ETF IOUs. Those who do actually buy bitcoin can only do through via KYCed exchanges, and their bitcoin can only move from there to other KYCed exchanges. Actually owning your own bitcoin won't be allowed - after all, what are you trying to hide?

But can the IRS be trusted that it won't share sensitive information with its fellow government agencies?

They will, of course. All branches of the government freely share all the information they have on you with each other.

are we then limited to the option of transacting face to face and on cold cash basis?

If you want no traces left in the fiat system, then cash in person is the best way to do it, yes. I've done this for years. It works well.

[apogio]

Actually owning your own bitcoin won't be allowed

which will give more value to the BTC you actually own.

If you want no traces left in the fiat system, then cash in person is the best way to do it, yes. I've done this for years. It works well.

not very easy, at least not everywhere on the planet.

the share holders just buy and sell shares into and out of fiat. without ever touching bitcoin

so? why can't they freely do so if the wish? I mean it's their problem after all. Meanwhile, we can hold our own keys and keep doing what we want.

[o_e_l_e_o]

As a reminder:

Any further nonsense from franky1 will be deleted. Please keep this on-topic.

You can see DooMADs post here for an explanation why: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5471353.msg63048733#msg63048733


There are now over 120 comments on the proposal, but still only two are viewable. I wonder why they have chosen to withhold so many of the comments?

which will give more value to the BTC you actually own.

Maybe, but it still creates a two tier system which is bad for bitcoin on the whole, even if I never interact with any of these custodial services.

[apogio]

You can see DooMADs post here for an explanation why: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5471353.msg63048733#msg63048733

Ook sorry!

Maybe, but it still creates a two tier system which is bad for bitcoin on the whole, even if I never interact with any of these custodial services.

I have the same point of view but I try to also understand people who will prefer buying ETFs rather than self custody bitcoin. Anyway, my point is nothing forces us to interact with those services. At least I hope so

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Maybe, but it still creates a two tier system which is bad for bitcoin on the whole, even if I never interact with any of these custodial services.

I have the same point of view but I try to also understand people who will prefer buying ETFs rather than self custody bitcoin. Anyway, my point is nothing forces us to interact with those services. At least I hope so

What I see here is that governments, once they have realised that bitcoin is unstoppable, are interested in people owning them with custodial services, such as ETFs, which could be seized at any given moment, as opposed to people getting used to holding their bitcoins with their private keys.  That way, something like Executive Order 6102 would be much more easily enforceable.

I'm sure there were those at the time who had small gold pieces that they were able to hide and save from seizure, but they would be of little use to them, unless they could find someone trustworthy to do a P2P deal, unlikely at the time, and the most they could do is hold out until possession was legal again, which, given that it was legal in the 1970s, they might have been dead by then.

This legislation is bad news.

[Darker45]

Because peer-to-peer transactions which involve the likes of PayPal, bank transfers, and the rest of online payment options are almost pointless because they always ask for personal information.

Are you trade big amount of money? I never face any problem when deal with P2P trade by using bank transfers, usually I cash out my money once a month.

I have not encountered any problem with it as well, so far at least. But if the point is privacy and completely staying away from KYC, I'm afraid this kind of transaction isn't an option. Even if you choose P2P all the time, if you're receiving or sending money through banks whenever you sell or buy Bitcoin, respectively, your identity is still known and you can easily be traced. That's why I'm seeing it as somehow pointless. A third party is still involved and that party has your complete personal information.

[suzanne5223]

The Bitcoin ETF will work just like IOU because the institution and the government never like decentralization.

This is clearly the future the government want for bitcoin. The majority just buy ETF IOUs. Those who do actually buy bitcoin can only do through via KYCed exchanges, and their bitcoin can only move from there to other KYCed exchanges. Actually owning your own bitcoin won't be allowed - after all, what are you trying to hide?

The exact thing they are hiding is still unknown to the general public but it's glaring that know the potential of Bitcoin, they also know that people investing in it are inevitable, and approving the spot ETF will give them international competitiveness, economic gain, and regulatory control that's why they will want to the ETF to IOU form of investment.

[digaran]

Tools that allow you to reclaim your financial privacy like Samourai Wallet (a powerful, privacy-preserving wallet for Bitcoin) and Monero (a cryptocurrency that protects sender, receiver, and amount in every transaction) are indispensable tools for freedom, and should be something you practice with regularly, no matter what the state says.

That should be a joke, or is this another samourai we are talking about? I haven't verified this, but apparently they work for microsoft and ban sanctioned countries.
Ever since the invention of CCTVs, and smart phones, achieving privacy has become expensive, you can have it, but you have to pay the price.
One thing our mentally happy elites running the governments can't understand is the fact that, more you censor and try to control people, more privacy oriented projects such as Monero, Tor etc would gain adoption, they don't realize that they are slowly digging their own graves.

[Abiky]

https://freedom.tech/patriot-act-comes-to-cryptocurrency/

A fantastic article authored by Seth For Privacy (https://nitter.cz/sethforprivacy), who is the Head of Strategy & Marketing for Foundation Devices, known for their Passport hardware wallet.

As I've mentioned in another thread, and as Seth explains in this article, this newest piece of legislation is an outright attack on bitcoin. It is clear the US government want the only way to use bitcoin to be through fully KYCed centralized exchanges. They are trying their hardest to absorb bitcoin in to the existing fiat system and surveillance state, and destroy the very thing that bitcoin is.

What can you do about it? Get your coins off of any centralized exchange and in to your own wallet. Close your KYCed accounts and refuse to ever complete KYC again. Use privacy tools. Anonymize your coins. Refuse to use any service or product which treats bitcoin as non-fungible and discriminates against or censors certain coins. Bitcoin was not made to become an off-shoot of the fiat system, to be another tool by which the government can can surveil, censor, and control. And if you happen to live in the US, start contacting your representatives about this draconian piece of legislation.

https://bitcoiner.guide/nokyconly/
https://kycnot.me/


Spam will be deleted.

The Biden Administration has been fighting against crypto real hard with its strict regulations. First it was Tornado.Cash, then the SEC's aggresive stance towards crypto (by classifying almost every digital asset as a security), and now the enforcement of KYC/AML across all crypto exchanges. I've read somewhere that the US Treasury Department wants to target crypto mixers as they can be used by Hamas for money laundering/terrorist financing. Isn't Fiat currencies like the USD and EUR used for said purpose? All of this could stifle innovation/growth for the crypto industry in the long run.

I believe the US government is doing this because it doesn't want people to embrace the full benefits of decentralization + censorship-resistance that comes with using Bitcoin. If this keeps up, people will end up trading BTC through P2P or truly-decentralized exchanges. It will be a "headache" for the government, because it's much harder to identify people using these alternatives (after all, there's no KYC). One can only imagine the US government will eventually "ban" Bitcoin like it banned Gold a few decades ago. I really hope Americans in support of crypto stand against the new legislation for the healthy growth of the industry. Who knows what will happen in the future?

[o_e_l_e_o]

That should be a joke, or is this another samourai we are talking about? I haven't verified this, but apparently they work for microsoft and ban sanctioned countries.

You have entirely misunderstood that post. It is GitHub which was acquired by Microsoft, not Samourai. The only coinjoin implementation which bans certain coins is Wasabi.

I've read somewhere that the US Treasury Department wants to target crypto mixers as they can be used by Hamas for money laundering/terrorist financing.

This is just the usual nonsense from the government misusing some current event to justify their mass surveillance machine. The evidence shows Hamas have raised barely any money via cryptocurrency: https://nitter.cz/nic__carter/status/1717210060777009636#m

One can only imagine the US government will eventually "ban" Bitcoin like it banned Gold a few decades ago.

Good luck confiscating bitcoin like they confiscated gold. I unfortunately lost all my private keys in an unfortunate boating accident.

[apogio]

Good luck confiscating bitcoin like they confiscated gold. I unfortunately lost all my private keys in an unfortunate boating accident.

Oh, me too. I guess boating accidents happen quite often nowadays, or perhaps we 've been in the same accident.

Seriously though:

One can only imagine the US government will eventually "ban" Bitcoin like it banned Gold a few decades ago.

How exactly do you think they can bitcoin? I don't judge you, I ask for a reasonable way to do it. You will realise that one of the reasons why Bitcoin is superior to Gold is this. They can't confiscate Bitcoin like gold, unless of course they ban the internet everywhere on planet earth.

P.S Even if they ban internet on the planet, thanks to blockstream satellite (https://blockstream.com/satellite/), Bitcoin may survive. 

[Three Millionth User]

Good luck confiscating bitcoin like they confiscated gold. I unfortunately lost all my private keys in an unfortunate boating accident.

Could you share some details?

I'm really curious. I know several similar stories from the news, but I have never met a person who could just talk about it like that. I don’t know what amount we’re talking about, but I think your sense of regret is simply immeasurable. My condolences! In the end, everything that doesn't happen happens for the better.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Could you share some details?

I took all my hard drives, hardware wallets, paper wallets, steel engravings, and other back ups out with me for my semi-regular camping trip. I think it's good for them to get some fresh air now and then and feel the wind in their circuits. I like to sail to a secluded island in the middle of a nearby lake where I definitely haven't buried my 8 tonnes of gold (which were previously in my basement until I also unfortunately lost that in a tragic boating accident). Unfortunately my boat sank since I hadn't bothered to repair it after it sank three months ago, and I lost everything, including the map to the gold I don't have.

I'm not too beat up about it because I hadn't accumulated too much since I last lost all my keys in the aforementioned identical accident three months ago.

[bbc.reporter]

I had a similar argument against someone before about self custody and how the government wants to take this away from us. It appears this thread might teach him.

There are also news updates that treasury officials want congress to help fight against the illegal use of the cryptospace. If congress agrees then there might have more laws against self custody, there will be stricter KYC and there will certainly be a certain classification of people who will be banned from using the cryptospace.

However, everything from the treasury department is allegedly without the promise of showing proof.



A senior Treasury Department official said the Biden administration wants new powers from Congress to aid in a crackdown on the illicit use of cryptocurrencies, citing digital asset flows allegedly connected to Palestinian militant group Hamas.

Treasury has been in communication with Democrats and Republicans about actions that they could take, Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo said Tuesday in Washington at the annual meeting of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, a trade group.

Source https://www.wsj.com/articles/congress-must-aid-fight-against-illicit-use-of-crypto-treasury-official-says-1bebab02

[o_e_l_e_o]

If congress agrees then there might have more laws against self custody, there will be stricter KYC and there will certainly be a certain classification of people who will be banned from using the cryptospace.

As I've said before, this is the clear direction the US government is heading in. They want the only bitcoin to be bitcoin which is bought on fully KYCed exchanges, stored on fully KYCed exchanges, and not sent anywhere except to other fully KYCed exchanges. They want complete control over everything that you "own", and they want complete surveillance of everything that you do. As with this piece of legislation, using any non-KYCed service will be illegal. Hell, even holding your own coins will be illegal.

I understand this has already started in other countries. For example this news story from a few days ago: https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/gemini-uk-to-prohibit-regular-bitcoin-transactions/

[apogio]

I understand this has already started in other countries. For example this news story from a few days ago: https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/gemini-uk-to-prohibit-regular-bitcoin-transactions/

What makes an exchange approved or non-approved? Who approves an exchange?

[BenCodie]

This is good news in a sense...Why? Because this is pretty much admission that they are giving up on the on chain analysis scam that has been pedalled for years! If it actually worked in all scenarios, why on earth would they come out with this crap?

I am sure that they will not succeed, just like they haven't succeeded to erode privacy to date.

Now, this is even more validation that we need a board for cyber security and privacy here. If we don't add it, ignorant people who don't respect thus rule when it is implemented will be unfairly punished, and this is the downside. If we all have good practice, I say good luck to them! If we are weak and allow them to succeed, it will be detrimental for many.

If you agree with a board in bitcointalk for cybersecurity and privacy:
Discuss here | Vote here

I understand this has already started in other countries. For example this news story from a few days ago: https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/gemini-uk-to-prohibit-regular-bitcoin-transactions/

What makes an exchange approved or non-approved? Who approves an exchange?

Whoever bows down to permitting full surveillance to government and pays the fee to get the approved badge...like any other form of government approval.

[apogio]

Whoever bows down to permitting full surveillance to government and pays the fee to get the approved badge...like any other form of government approval.

Which government though?

I mean an exchange is an exchange. It's a business that exchanges from one currency to another. In our case, a crypto exchange buys FIAT and sells crypto and vice-versa.

That said, how can Gemini know which other exchanges are "permitted" by the government and more importantly, why do they need to obey to this rule? I mean why would they need to allow incoming funds only from certain other exchanges? That's stupid. It would also decrease their incoming liquidity.

[BenCodie]

Whoever bows down to permitting full surveillance to government and pays the fee to get the approved badge...like any other form of government approval.

Which government though?

I mean an exchange is an exchange. It's a business that exchanges from one currency to another. In our case, a crypto exchange buys FIAT and sells crypto and vice-versa.

That said, how can Gemini know which other exchanges are "permitted" by the government and more importantly, why do they need to obey to this rule? I mean why would they need to allow incoming funds only from certain other exchanges? That's stupid. It would also decrease their incoming liquidity.

I assume US. We even saw that Kraken, a non US exchange, was demanded to provide user data to the IRS for auditing and after a court battle, Kraken lost. So, the US has power even outside of the US.

In relation to this topic we are talking about US exchanges in any case, so to answer your question shortly: the US government.

They would need to obey the rule because otherwise, no business, or fines, or court battles. It probably won't be prominent today or tomorrow, but once this is all enforced it will change the landscape. However, they can't control dexes, they can't control code. There will be routes to avoid these rules for for those who don't like them, that goes for both companies and individuals.

[apogio]

They would need to obey the rule because otherwise, no business, or fines, or court battles. It probably won't be prominent today or tomorrow, but once this is all enforced it will change the landscape. However, they can't control dexes, they can't control code. There will be routes to avoid these rules for for those who don't like them, that goes for both companies and individuals.

This is rediculous. So we know for a fact that they try to control exchanges because they know they can't control bitcoin fundamentally. Which means they know they can't shut it down and they try to control it using otherr techniques. Sounds like they are desperate. P2P exchanges for the win.

[nutildah]

We even saw that Kraken, a non US exchange, was demanded to provide user data to the IRS for auditing and after a court battle, Kraken lost.

Kraken is a US exchange, and its founder, Jesse Powell, is an American. It is notable for being not only one of the first and longest-standing US-based BTC exchanges, but for also holding out on over-reaching demands from the government, to the farthest extent possible. An example of this would be continuing to list XMR when most other US exchanges have delisted it out of fear of future regulation & compliance issues.

So, the US has power even outside of the US.

This part is still true.

[GigaBit]

United States want to maintain their authoritative behavior in every place in the world and that is why they are so eager to enact such laws. When they are unable to take control, they try to impose by enacting various laws. The SEC is working as a major tool for them. Trying to take control crypto currency but only in BTC they could not control. They will certainly fail to control it if we move away from those centralized platforms. No matter how hard they try, they can't control it. Bitcoin would completely collapse if it was controlled by such an entity.


https://bitcoiner.guide/nokyconly/

The main enemy in the cryptocurrency world is “KYC” and this KYC completely diverts the religion of cryptocurrency. Only one major feature of cryptocurrency is that it would work against the conventional financial system. It would have no centralization. It is completely independent, anonymous and supports transparency. But if users are made KYC then that freedom, transparency, anonymity everything will be disappear.

US Senators Elizabeth Warren and Roger Marshall were the first to propose such legislation that would require every cryptocurrency-related corporation or those associated with such services to perform KYC as a bank. ‍So i think The purpose for which cryptocurrency was born that will go in vain. It can be said that KYC is like killing cryptocurrency by strangulation.

[Abiky]

As I've said before, this is the clear direction the US government is heading in. They want the only bitcoin to be bitcoin which is bought on fully KYCed exchanges, stored on fully KYCed exchanges, and not sent anywhere except to other fully KYCed exchanges. They want complete control over everything that you "own", and they want complete surveillance of everything that you do. As with this piece of legislation, using any non-KYCed service will be illegal. Hell, even holding your own coins will be illegal.

I understand this has already started in other countries. For example this news story from a few days ago: https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/gemini-uk-to-prohibit-regular-bitcoin-transactions/

The question is: How will the government be able to enforce KYC in decentralized protocols/services and non-custodial wallets? For what I know, it's impossible to do such a thing. There's nothing stopping a person from acquiring BTC (or any other crypto) without KYC and storing it in a non-custodial wallet. Even if it's "illegal". People from China have already been doing this, even when the country outright rejected crypto/Blockchain tech. In fact, crypto has become more popular in the region.

Tighter crypto regulations will only make decentralization stronger in the long run. It's already too late to put a stop to the revolution. If you thought censoring mixers was enough, then you haven't seen nothing yet. I believe governments (particularly the US government) will target privacy coins like Monero and Zcash next. They will make an excuse that such coins are being used massively for money laundering and tax evasion. This will be a never-ending war between crypto and mainstream governments. As long ss people stand up and fight, don't expect the revolution to go anywhere soon.

[apogio]

The question is: How will the government be able to enforce KYC in decentralized protocols/services and non-custodial wallets? For what I know, it's impossible to do such a thing. There's nothing stopping a person from acquiring BTC (or any other crypto) without KYC and storing it in a non-custodial wallet. Even if it's "illegal".

Yes. What they want to achieve is to force you to use exchanges for trading, so they are able to know how much you hold.

If you buy 0.1BTC from a KYC exchange, then they don't care where you withdraw it to. They will claim that you own 0.1BTC.

They also want you to use exchanges when you sell, so they can prove that you own X amount of FIAT, gained by selling BTC and tax you on that.

[oktana]

The link between a transaction/wallet and the real-world identity of a person is meant to be anonymous and known by no one (in fact, there should be no link), but sadly, Centralized platforms (exchanges, etc) don't care about that. I have always distaste platforms that ask for KYC as I see no reason why it is valid for a system that was built to respect privacy. What I find scary is that these centralized platforms have a record of every transaction you make, and then, they have a record of your identity (through KYC) and have tied this together. While they know it's you who is making the transaction (which is bad), the chances of that data getting leaked are still there (which is terrible)!

[Fiatless]

The question is: How will the government be able to enforce KYC in decentralized protocols/services and non-custodial wallets? For what I know, it's impossible to do such a thing. There's nothing stopping a person from acquiring BTC (or any other crypto) without KYC and storing it in a non-custodial wallet. Even if it's "illegal". People from China have already been doing this, even when the country outright rejected crypto/Blockchain tech. In fact, crypto has become more popular in the region.

It is true that the government and its agencies cannot stop decentralised platforms and people will still secretly buy Bitcoin. But we should also take into cognisant that unfavourable policies discourage people from joining or continuing in the Bitcoin ecosystem. People will always avoid investments that are illegal in a country because it will be seen as risky. More Chinese citizens would have acquired more Bitcoin if it was legal in China and Beijing crypto space would developed to compete favourably with the US market.      

Tighter crypto regulations will only make decentralization stronger in the long run. It's already too late to put a stop to the revolution. If you thought censoring mixers was enough, then you haven't seen nothing yet. I believe governments (particularly the US government) will target privacy coins like Monero and Zcash next. They will make an excuse that such coins are being used massively for money laundering and tax evasion. This will be a never-ending war between crypto and mainstream governments. As long ss people stand up and fight, don't expect the revolution to go anywhere soon.

After the regulation of mixers is completed in the US, I suspect that they will move after decentralised exchanges. Laws will be enacted to criminalise its operations using the same outdated excuse of fighting against terrorist financing. They just want to control the financial sector of their country because they think it will make governance easy for them. The best advice still remains "Not your keys, not your coins".    

[BenCodie]

They would need to obey the rule because otherwise, no business, or fines, or court battles. It probably won't be prominent today or tomorrow, but once this is all enforced it will change the landscape. However, they can't control dexes, they can't control code. There will be routes to avoid these rules for for those who don't like them, that goes for both companies and individuals.

This is rediculous. So we know for a fact that they try to control exchanges because they know they can't control bitcoin fundamentally. Which means they know they can't shut it down and they try to control it using otherr techniques. Sounds like they are desperate. P2P exchanges for the win.

They are desperate. They're losing control over money, over the world, and after all, they've essentially been scammed by a system that can never be accurate enough to act one....imagine how much they spent funding or purchasing services from companies like chainanalysis, or on forensics that weren't accurate. So now they've just decided, fuck it, let's go back to censorship.

It's good and bad as said in my last post - those wise enough to stay p2p can win. Those who aren't wise enough will unfortunately get caught in the web.

We even saw that Kraken, a non US exchange, was demanded to provide user data to the IRS for auditing and after a court battle, Kraken lost.

Kraken is a US exchange, and its founder, Jesse Powell, is an American. It is notable for being not only one of the first and longest-standing US-based BTC exchanges, but for also holding out on over-reaching demands from the government, to the farthest extent possible. An example of this would be continuing to list XMR when most other US exchanges have delisted it out of fear of future regulation & compliance issues.

So, the US has power even outside of the US.

This part is still true.

Hey, I do apologize and thank you for correcting me. I had foolishly read and article which made a distinct point out of Kraken not being based in the US and hence being a good example of overreach by the IRS and the US.

I tried to find the article with no luck and this point has me a little confused. Maybe, it has made a point of being able to get the records of even non-US based users. I should have bookmarked the article.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Because this is pretty much admission that they are giving up on the on chain analysis scam that has been pedalled for years!

I very much doubt it. They will continue to use chain analysis for transactions which don't involve centralized exchanges. They aren't going to abandon their mass surveillance just because they're achieved complete surveillance of a subset of transactions.

If it actually worked in all scenarios, why on earth would they come out with this crap?

Because they don't have to pay for this. It's inefficient to continually pay for a block analysis company when you can just make it law for exchanges to hand you the data directly.

I am sure that they will not succeed, just like they haven't succeeded to erode privacy to date.

We have less privacy today than ever before in history, and with each passing year it gets worse and worse. Everything spies on you these days - your computer, your phone, your TV, even your car.

The question is: How will the government be able to enforce KYC in decentralized protocols/services and non-custodial wallets?

Yes, they can't enforce it, but they can make it illegal which as Fiatless points out will be enough to discourage the vast majority of people from buying and owning bitcoin. And it doesn't just stifle adoption for individuals, but will also stifle adoption for business and services who don't want to jump through endless hoops and start having to collect KYC information from their customers, so will just opt not to accept bitcoin at all.

[Abiky]

The link between a transaction/wallet and the real-world identity of a person is meant to be anonymous and known by no one (in fact, there should be no link), but sadly, Centralized platforms (exchanges, etc) don't care about that. I have always distaste platforms that ask for KYC as I see no reason why it is valid for a system that was built to respect privacy. What I find scary is that these centralized platforms have a record of every transaction you make, and then, they have a record of your identity (through KYC) and have tied this together. While they know it's you who is making the transaction (which is bad), the chances of that data getting leaked are still there (which is terrible)!

KYC brings back the "single points of failure" tied to the existing banking system. You can see why Bitcoin was created without the need for a middleman. We should be all using decentralized exchanges for crypto to reach its full potential. Unfortunately, greed/convenience goes above all else. The vast majority of the people don't care about decentralization. They just want what's most convenient for them. Even if that means sacrificing their personal information.

It's this reason why centralized exchanges are the dominant forces of the market. They're the perfect tool for governments to have a full scope of your crypto-related activities. It's surveillance at its fullest. With this, governments have some sort of control over crypto. That includes Bitcoin even if its core Blockchain network is decentralized. There's nothing we can do about it if we want prices to go all the way to the moon. Who knows what the future holds for BTC?

[apogio]

KYC is the only weapon that the current financial system has, in order to control Bitcoin. There is absolutely no other way to control it.

[oktana]

~~~

…
…
It's this reason why centralized exchanges are the dominant forces of the market. They're the perfect tool for governments to have a full scope of your crypto-related activities. It's surveillance at its fullest. With this, governments have some sort of control over crypto. That includes Bitcoin even if its core Blockchain network is decentralized.
…

What’s worse is that this private personal data can be hacked and there’s no greater fear than when such information get info the hands of the wrong ones. Identity theft and financial fraud (the one that most-likely happens) are no joke.

[Abiky]

KYC is the only weapon that the current financial system has, in order to control Bitcoin. There is absolutely no other way to control it.

Governments can also control Bitcoin by controlling the supply or the miners. For what I know, Bitcoin's network hashrate is controlled by a few mining pools owned by mainstream mining companies. Getting ahold of such companies will give governments full control over the network's consensus. Institutional investment companies can also buy and accumulate a large portion of BTC's circulating supply, allowing governments to dominate the network if they want to. After all, these companies are subject to government's rules.

So BTC can easily lose its decentralization "in a blink of an eye". That would be a huge win for banks and governments alike. With the introduction of spot ETFs, centralized exchanges dominating the industry, and mining pools becoming more centralized than ever, I feel that Bitcoin has already moved away from Satoshi's original vision. The whole idea was the remove/eliminate the middleman, wasn't it? 

[cryptosize]

KYC is the only weapon that the current financial system has, in order to control Bitcoin. There is absolutely no other way to control it.

Governments can also control Bitcoin by controlling the supply or the miners. For what I know, Bitcoin's network hashrate is controlled by a few mining pools owned by mainstream mining companies. Getting ahold of such companies will give governments full control over the network's consensus. Institutional investment companies can also buy and accumulate a large portion of BTC's circulating supply, allowing governments to dominate the network if they want to. After all, these companies are subject to government's rules.

So BTC can easily lose its decentralization "in a blink of an eye". That would be a huge win for banks and governments alike. With the introduction of spot ETFs, centralized exchanges dominating the industry, and mining pools becoming more centralized than ever, I feel that Bitcoin has already moved away from Satoshi's original vision. The whole idea was the remove/eliminate the middleman, wasn't it? 

That would nullify BTC if they start censoring transactions... but people can always buy ASICs and form new pools.

[o_e_l_e_o]

For what I know, Bitcoin's network hashrate is controlled by a few mining pools owned by mainstream mining companies. Getting ahold of such companies will give governments full control over the network's consensus.

Miners don't set consensus: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_is_not_ruled_by_miners

Further, mining pools are not a single entity. F2Pool, for example, does not own or operate all its hash power, or even a majority of its hash power. Miners are individuals, businesses, and other entities around the world, which collaboratively point their hash power at a pool in order to simplify the mining process and smooth out their earnings. If a pool is bought over by the government and starts censoring transactions, then the miners who are mining with that pool are free to switch to another pool, and indeed are incentivized to do so since by staying with their censoring pool they will be earning less since they will be deliberately excluding some high fee paying transactions.

[bbc.reporter]

If congress agrees then there might have more laws against self custody, there will be stricter KYC and there will certainly be a certain classification of people who will be banned from using the cryptospace.

As I've said before, this is the clear direction the US government is heading in. They want the only bitcoin to be bitcoin which is bought on fully KYCed exchanges, stored on fully KYCed exchanges, and not sent anywhere except to other fully KYCed exchanges. They want complete control over everything that you "own", and they want complete surveillance of everything that you do. As with this piece of legislation, using any non-KYCed service will be illegal. Hell, even holding your own coins will be illegal.

I understand this has already started in other countries. For example this news story from a few days ago: https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/gemini-uk-to-prohibit-regular-bitcoin-transactions/

Are you implying that under America's jurisdiction, much of bitcoin will be a sanctioned currency where only the addresses that the government approves will be allowed to send and receive coins? This is headshaking, however, I also cannot disagree if we consider reailty. I reckon Monero does not solve this also because the American government can ban it within their jurisdiction and order a crackdown on any exchange that accepts it.

In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Are you implying that under America's jurisdiction, much of bitcoin will be a sanctioned currency where only the addresses that the government approves will be allowed to send and receive coins?

I mean, I don't think I need to imply this - it's already happening. They quite clearly want bitcoin to only be used via fully KYCed exchanges. Just read the proposals. They have even deliberately chosen the words they use to make anything else sound negative. It's no longer "self custody", but rather "non-hosted wallets".

In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace.

Terrorists, foreign governments, criminals, un-patriotic, what are you trying to hide, tHiNk Of ThE cHiLdReN, and a whole variety of other pearl clutching nonsense.

[cryptosize]

Are you implying that under America's jurisdiction, much of bitcoin will be a sanctioned currency where only the addresses that the government approves will be allowed to send and receive coins?

I mean, I don't think I need to imply this - it's already happening. They quite clearly want bitcoin to only be used via fully KYCed exchanges. Just read the proposals. They have even deliberately chosen the words they use to make anything else sound negative. It's no longer "self custody", but rather "non-hosted wallets".

In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace.

Terrorists, foreign governments, criminals, un-patriotic, what are you trying to hide, tHiNk Of ThE cHiLdReN, and a whole variety of other pearl clutching nonsense.

Then I guess people should stop supporting state terrorists (politicians).

The more you comply to their silly, authoritarian demands (from COVID lockdowns to crypto mandates and carbon credits), the more power you give to them.

Are people here willing to turn against the state? Even if it means losing job/university opportunities?

I think very few BTC maxis can truly classify themselves as libertarians. The rest are hypocrites (to put it lightly).

They just wanna get rich thanks to BTC and still keep their job/university position. Sorry, but you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Pick a side, even if it will cost you (either your luxury or your freedom).

[bbc.reporter]

Are you implying that under America's jurisdiction, much of bitcoin will be a sanctioned currency where only the addresses that the government approves will be allowed to send and receive coins?

I mean, I don't think I need to imply this - it's already happening. They quite clearly want bitcoin to only be used via fully KYCed exchanges. Just read the proposals. They have even deliberately chosen the words they use to make anything else sound negative. It's no longer "self custody", but rather "non-hosted wallets".

In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace.

Terrorists, foreign governments, criminals, un-patriotic, what are you trying to hide, tHiNk Of ThE cHiLdReN, and a whole variety of other pearl clutching nonsense.

Then I guess people should stop supporting state terrorists (politicians).

Vote for politicians who have expressed and declared their support for bitcoin and the cryptospace. This forum has the right to speculate and make fun of Robert Kennedy Jr, however, he is certainly the only presidential candidate who might make the executive order to stop cracking down on the cryptospace and create a more reasonable policies.

[cryptosize]

Are you implying that under America's jurisdiction, much of bitcoin will be a sanctioned currency where only the addresses that the government approves will be allowed to send and receive coins?

I mean, I don't think I need to imply this - it's already happening. They quite clearly want bitcoin to only be used via fully KYCed exchanges. Just read the proposals. They have even deliberately chosen the words they use to make anything else sound negative. It's no longer "self custody", but rather "non-hosted wallets".

In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace.

Terrorists, foreign governments, criminals, un-patriotic, what are you trying to hide, tHiNk Of ThE cHiLdReN, and a whole variety of other pearl clutching nonsense.

Then I guess people should stop supporting state terrorists (politicians).

Vote for politicians who have expressed and declared their support for bitcoin and the cryptospace. This forum has the right to speculate and make fun of Robert Kennedy Jr, however, he is certainly the only presidential candidate who might make the executive order to stop cracking down on the cryptospace and create a more reasonable policies.

Why?

[Lucius]

~snip~
In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace.

Isn't the financing of terrorism through Bitcoin a story that has been going on for years, mostly from the US media? It's nothing new, it's just taking advantage of the moment when such stories become relevant again, because it should be noted that the most powerful intelligence organizations in the world failed to prevent terrorists from carrying out such a massive attack, for which they had obviously been preparing for years. I wonder how terrorists were financed before there was Bitcoin?

SAN FRANCISCO — Hamas, the militant Palestinian group, has been designated a terrorist organization by Western governments and some others and has been locked out of the traditional financial system. But this year its military wing has developed an increasingly sophisticated campaign to raise money using Bitcoin.

https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/cryptocurrencies-and-terrorist-financing-risk-hold-panic
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1096851.pdf

[cryptosize]

Why would they use Bitcoin and not Monero?

I call it BS.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Isn't the financing of terrorism through Bitcoin a story that has been going on for years, mostly from the US media?

Yup. It's their current favorite bullshit. A few years ago it was all about how bitcoin is single handedly causing global warming. But now it's about how bitcoin is single handedly funding terrorism. Next up will be something like bitcoin is single handedly going to collapse the economy and your IRA/pension will be worthless.

because it should be noted that the most powerful intelligence organizations in the world failed to prevent terrorists from carrying out such a massive attack, for which they had obviously been preparing for years.

Although their current mass surveillance has achieved nothing, all that proves is that the government needs more mass surveillance, right?

I call it BS.

It's already been disproved: https://nitter.cz/nic__carter/status/1717210060777009636#m. Just more absolutely worthless made up trash from blockchain analysis companies which the government use to justify literally anything they want.

[Lucius]

Yup. It's their current favorite bullshit. A few years ago it was all about how bitcoin is single handedly causing global warming. But now it's about how bitcoin is single handedly funding terrorism. Next up will be something like bitcoin is single handedly going to collapse the economy and your IRA/pension will be worthless.

The worst thing in all of this is that through years of repeating the same claims, an attitude has formed among people that this is true - and to me it looks like some kind of operation that aims to eliminate Bitcoin at some point by simply banning trading through CEXs and mining. It won't literally kill Bitcoin, but most people still do what the authorities say.

Although their current mass surveillance has achieved nothing, all that proves is that the government needs more mass surveillance, right?

I don't think that their current surveillance was unable to prevent what is currently happening in Israel or what happened in the US in the past, but that some things simply had to happen in order to justify all the wars that were fought in the past and which are being conducted today.

Of course, it is a win-win situation for those who want even stronger surveillance, because the "failure" enabled an open reckoning with those with whom they want to settle, and at the same time, human rights and their privacy will fall a few steps lower.

[cryptosize]

I don't think that their current surveillance was unable to prevent what is currently happening in Israel or what happened in the US in the past, but that some things simply had to happen in order to justify all the wars that were fought in the past and which are being conducted today.

Of course, it is a win-win situation for those who want even stronger surveillance, because the "failure" enabled an open reckoning with those with whom they want to settle, and at the same time, human rights and their privacy will fall a few steps lower.

Please don't say that, they'll label you as a "conspiracy theorist".

Governments always care about their citizens, their rights, their freedom. Right?

[Abiky]

Miners don't set consensus: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_is_not_ruled_by_miners

Further, mining pools are not a single entity. F2Pool, for example, does not own or operate all its hash power, or even a majority of its hash power. Miners are individuals, businesses, and other entities around the world, which collaboratively point their hash power at a pool in order to simplify the mining process and smooth out their earnings. If a pool is bought over by the government and starts censoring transactions, then the miners who are mining with that pool are free to switch to another pool, and indeed are incentivized to do so since by staying with their censoring pool they will be earning less since they will be deliberately excluding some high fee paying transactions.

Thanks for pointing that out. I've thought it was the miners who were in complete control of the Bitcoin blockchain. I'm glad nodes also have a say on the future direction of the project. With a balance of power between nodes and miners, Bitcoin can remain decentralized forever.

I guess it's safe to say the cryptocurrency is truly-unstoppable. Governments know this, so they've resorted to regulating centralized exchanges with the hopes of putting everything "under control". Illegal activities can be reduced thanks to strict regulations. As long as decentralization wins, there should be nothing to worry about. Who knows if BTC outlasts many of the coins we know and love today?

[bbc.reporter]

~snip~
In any case, similar to your ideas, terrorist funding will be the next big storyline that will be used against the cryptospace.

Isn't the financing of terrorism through Bitcoin a story that has been going on for years, mostly from the US media? It's nothing new, it's just taking advantage of the moment when such stories become relevant again, because it should be noted that the most powerful intelligence organizations in the world failed to prevent terrorists from carrying out such a massive attack, for which they had obviously been preparing for years. I wonder how terrorists were financed before there was Bitcoin?

SAN FRANCISCO — Hamas, the militant Palestinian group, has been designated a terrorist organization by Western governments and some others and has been locked out of the traditional financial system. But this year its military wing has developed an increasingly sophisticated campaign to raise money using Bitcoin.

https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/cryptocurrencies-and-terrorist-financing-risk-hold-panic
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1096851.pdf

Agreed, it is nothing new and all these allegations of terrorist funding are only allegations without attempting to back them with proof. Also, Chainalysis has already declared that terrorist funding through the use of bitcoin has been overstated. However, my argument is this will not stop the government and the mainstream media from using terrorist funding as their next big storyline to make everyone fearful. Fud has always been something the government uses to trick ignorant people into supporting their oppressive campaigns very much similar to the war on drugs scam.



Reports of tens of millions of dollars in crypto going to fund Palestinian operations in Israel are likely “overstated,” Chainalysis said. The forensics outfit published a blog post arguing that flows of crypto financing to Hamas and affiliated groups have become inflated far beyond reality. While acknowledging that it was crucial to stop any financing of terror through crypto, Chainalysis said it was also important to understand how such funding actually works, lest it lead to misconceptions.

Source https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/10/19/hamas-crypto-funding-likely-overstated-chainalysis/

[Jon_Hodl]

Yup. things are heating up. The travel rule is already in action in the UK. Exchanges have already started seizing bitcoin and crypto deposits if users are unable to verify the source of funds.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/martinrivers/2023/08/31/not-your-bitcoin-uk-crypto-firms-will-now-be-forced-to-seize-some-inbound-payments/
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/10/26/uk-lawmakers-pass-bill-to-help-seize-illicit-crypto/

When you consider that the FCC just voted to takeover all of the internet infrastructure in the US, it's not looking good for bitcoin use in the coming future. The war on Bitcoin is here and it's just getting started.

I hope we can all hang on until the next halving and the next price pump is enough for us to achieve exit velocity and push bitcoin adoption into the early majority phase.

As long as we all keep stacking and moving to cold storage, we should make it but things will get rough.

[Lucius]

Agreed, it is nothing new and all these allegations of terrorist funding are only allegations without attempting to back them with proof. Also, Chainalysis has already declared that terrorist funding through the use of bitcoin has been overstated. However, my argument is this will not stop the government and the mainstream media from using terrorist funding as their next big storyline to make everyone fearful. Fud has always been something the government uses to trick ignorant people into supporting their oppressive campaigns very much similar to the war on drugs scam.

I really wonder how those who claim that terrorism is financed with Bitcoin react when the company whose services they use tells them that this is not the case? The problem is that the average politician usually knows about the term "cryptocurrency", where he puts Bitcoin and all altcoins in the same basket, and demands the same sanctions for all.

I remember that there was a lot of talk about how the cartels use Bitcoin to smuggle drugs from South America more easily, although even today, as in the time of Escobar, the vast majority still use the good old US$, which is of course much safer than Bitcoin transactions (of course when it comes to anonymity).

[bbc.reporter]

@Lucius. The government has always been fear mongerers to control and manipulate the population under their jurisdiction. They do not care about the truth or what is real because behind this there is an agenda to gain more power and control over you and me.

Also, this is not about whether the politicians put bitcoin and altcoins under one basket, this is about the government's agenda to remove self custody from any type of digital currency. If a government cannot control a type of money then the government cannot control the people that uses them.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I really wonder how those who claim that terrorism is financed with Bitcoin react when the company whose services they use tells them that this is not the case?

They only hear what they want to hear. Blockchain analysis companies tell them that bitcoin is financing terrorism? Well then, we better clamp down on any and all bitcoin use which isn't entirely inside our centralized exchanges where we can surveil and censor everyone. Blockchain analysis companies tell them that privacy devs deserve to go to jail? Well then, better throw the entire legal weight of the government at someone for simply writing some open source code. Blockchain analysis companies reveal in court that their entire system is completely made up and has absolutely zero proven methods and absolutely zero evidence behind it whatsoever? Oh, we'll just ignore that bit. Blockchain analysis companies reveal that their initial claims about terrorist financing were in fact completely fabricated and not at all accurate? Lalalalala I can't hear you!

[Abiky]

Yup. things are heating up. The travel rule is already in action in the UK. Exchanges have already started seizing bitcoin and crypto deposits if users are unable to verify the source of funds.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/martinrivers/2023/08/31/not-your-bitcoin-uk-crypto-firms-will-now-be-forced-to-seize-some-inbound-payments/
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/10/26/uk-lawmakers-pass-bill-to-help-seize-illicit-crypto/

When you consider that the FCC just voted to takeover all of the internet infrastructure in the US, it's not looking good for bitcoin use in the coming future. The war on Bitcoin is here and it's just getting started.

I hope we can all hang on until the next halving and the next price pump is enough for us to achieve exit velocity and push bitcoin adoption into the early majority phase.

As long as we all keep stacking and moving to cold storage, we should make it but things will get rough.

We knew from day one this was going to happen. After all, governments don't want to lose power/control over people. By introducing these restrictions, they are hoping to minimize crypto's (particularly Bitcoin) dominance in the mainstream world. Blocking deposits by being unable to verify the source of funds is frustrating to say the least. It will make newcomers' lives much more difficult.

Luckily for us, we have DEXs and P2P trading platforms to get in-and-out of crypto without KYC. The only downside is that these alternatives have lower liquidity than their centralized counterparts. You'd also be paying a small premium. But it's worth it considering that your identity and transaction info will be safe from the hands of the government. Believe me, things are going to get worse in the long run with the approval of spot ETFs. It will concentrate the supply of major cryptocurrencies into the hands of a few (mainly institutional investment companies). This means the crypto market will become more centralized in the future. As long as we have decentralized alternatives, nothing should be able to stop the revolution. Just my thoughts

[NotATether]

Yup. things are heating up. The travel rule is already in action in the UK. Exchanges have already started seizing bitcoin and crypto deposits if users are unable to verify the source of funds.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/martinrivers/2023/08/31/not-your-bitcoin-uk-crypto-firms-will-now-be-forced-to-seize-some-inbound-payments/
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/10/26/uk-lawmakers-pass-bill-to-help-seize-illicit-crypto/

Cliche, but don't use centralized exchanges! They always go down, and when they don't go down, they seize your crypto for one reason or another.

Luckily for us, we have DEXs and P2P trading platforms to get in-and-out of crypto without KYC. The only downside is that these alternatives have lower liquidity than their centralized counterparts. You'd also be paying a small premium. But it's worth it considering that your identity and transaction info will be safe from the hands of the government. Believe me, things are going to get worse in the long run with the approval of spot ETFs. It will concentrate the supply of major cryptocurrencies into the hands of a few (mainly institutional investment companies). This means the crypto market will become more centralized in the future. As long as we have decentralized alternatives, nothing should be able to stop the revolution. Just my thoughts

At this point, if you want to trade between two cryptocurrencies, use a DEX. No reason to use CEX for this unless you're chasing pennies.

Onramp - offramp is a bit more difficult though. From what I've gathered, people use Telegram P2P channels for these kind of dealings (gee, this makes me miss pre-2019 Localbitcoins even more).

[o_e_l_e_o]

From what I've gathered, people use Telegram P2P channels for these kind of dealings (gee, this makes me miss pre-2019 Localbitcoins even more).

This sounds like an awful idea. Telegram is a haven for scams and scammers. Indeed, using social media of any kind to set up trades with complete strangers is incredibly risky and I would avoid at all costs (even if I didn't already avoid social media like the plague).

We have the biggest selection of good peer to peer services that we've ever had, and these services have more features and more volume than they've ever had. https://kycnot.me/?type=exchange. It's never been easier to trade bitcoin and fiat pairs in a safe peer to peer manner.

[Lucius]

@Lucius. The government has always been fear mongerers to control and manipulate the population under jurisdiction. They do not car about the truth or what is real because behind this there is an agenda to gain more power and control over you and me.

Also, this is not about whether the politicians put bitcoin and altcoins under one basket, this is about the government's agenda to remove self custody from any type of digital currency. If a government cannot control a type of money then the government cannot control the people that uses them.

Of course, it is always about controlling the masses, and if you control the central mechanism on which you have made them dependent, then the majority behave as if they are in the collective consciousness. Any deviation from the usual ways of behavior puts you on the black list and increased supervision of Big Brother. Resistance is futile is obviously the message they want to send, but it never worked and it won't even now.

~snip~
We have the biggest selection of good peer to peer services that we've ever had, and these services have more features and more volume than they've ever had. https://kycnot.me/?type=exchange. It's never been easier to trade bitcoin and fiat pairs in a safe peer to peer manner.

Maybe Patriot and similar initiatives are actually doing us a favor and pushing Bitcoin in the direction of greater decentralization? The list is really getting bigger and the good news is that more and more people are using such services. However, when it comes to trading, regardless of all the decentralized options, we still have the "problem" that we have to use centralized services when it comes to the deposit/withdraw of fiat funds, and all these services are mostly under the supervision of state institutions and must report every suspicious transaction.

Of course, there is always the possibility of face-to-face trading, but that brings with it some other risks that many do not agree to.

[Abiky]

At this point, if you want to trade between two cryptocurrencies, use a DEX. No reason to use CEX for this unless you're chasing pennies.

Onramp - offramp is a bit more difficult though. From what I've gathered, people use Telegram P2P channels for these kind of dealings (gee, this makes me miss pre-2019 Localbitcoins even more).

The thing is not everyone is willing to buy/sell crypto P2P using Fiat. There's the risk of getting scammed/robbed by an unknown person. In some sense, CEXs are safer because you're dealing with a "trusted entity". I guess that's why most people prefer a CEX over a P2P exchange. For crypto-to-crypto trades, DEXs are a no-brainer. They might have a slight learning curve and lower liquidity than CEXs, but at least they don't require ID verification (KYC) to use them.

I really hope we find a safe and reliable way to exchange crypto and Fiat in the long run. Once that problem is solved, there would be no need to use CEXs at all. Tighter regulations = more decentralization and less criminal activity. Who knows what the future holds for the entire crypto/Blockchain industry?

[apogio]

There's the risk of getting scammed/robbed by an unknown person. In some sense, CEXs are safer because you're dealing with a "trusted entity". I guess that's why most people prefer a CEX over a P2P exchange.

What if you deposit FIAT, buy BTC and then the CEX blocks withdrawals? You take this risk, even if you don't realise it you depend on CEX being honorable, which is not always the case.

[o_e_l_e_o]

However, when it comes to trading, regardless of all the decentralized options, we still have the "problem" that we have to use centralized services when it comes to the deposit/withdraw of fiat funds

You definitely don't have to. I've traded bitcoin exclusively peer to peer for years, and it is easier today than it has ever been before.

Of course, there is always the possibility of face-to-face trading, but that brings with it some other risks that many do not agree to.

I hear this repeated a lot on the forum, yet I've never had a single issue with face to face trades. As long as you are using a proper P2P exchange such as Bisq to set up the trade and not just finding some random scammer via social media, and you take standard security measures, then you are no more at risk from a face to face trade than you are any time you go out in public:

You are really at no more risk than you are most of the time you go out in public. Anyone on the street could be a criminal out to rob you. People carry cash, bank cards, a mobile phone, jewellery, keys for their car, keys for their house (with their address probably visible on some piece of ID in their wallet), tablets, laptops, and all manner of valuable objects. Lots of things which are far more valuable than a few hundred bucks of bitcoin.

Every time you use an ATM, someone could be waiting with a weapon to relieve of your cash. Every time you step out of a store, someone could rob you of whatever you just bought. Every time you park your car, someone could beat you up for your keys and ride off. A face to face bitcoin trade is really no different.

Take standard precautions and you will be quite safe:

• Choose a highly rated trading partner
• Don't share unnecessary personal info
• Obscure your appearance (easily done in this time of face masks for everyone)
• Arrange your meeting during the day in a busy public location - choose somewhere with CCTV if you want, like a large shopping mall
• Bring a friend with you
• Only bring the amount of money (bitcoin or fiat) that you are trading
• If legal in your jurisdiction, bring some kind of weapon for self defense

In some sense, CEXs are safer because you're dealing with a "trusted entity".

Remind me what is "trusted" about CEXs, exactly? Literally every single one has experienced data leaks or hacks in the past. Dozens have exit scammed. Dozens have gone bankrupt. Dozens more were simply corrupt from the start. More have shutdown. More are currently be fined billions of dollars for illegal behavior. All have arbitrarily locked accounts and frozen coins. They've been caught insider trading, stealing your money, dumping their own bags on their users, listing scams, running fractional reserve, and more. And if you are lucky enough to avoid all of that, you get absolutely ripped off with outrageous fees.

I trust any one of my peer to peer trading partners exponentially more than I trusted the sheer greed of centralized exchanges.

[bbc.reporter]

@Lucius. The government has always been fear mongerers to control and manipulate the population under jurisdiction. They do not car about the truth or what is real because behind this there is an agenda to gain more power and control over you and me.

Also, this is not about whether the politicians put bitcoin and altcoins under one basket, this is about the government's agenda to remove self custody from any type of digital currency. If a government cannot control a type of money then the government cannot control the people that uses them.

Of course, it is always about controlling the masses, and if you control the central mechanism on which you have made them dependent, then the majority behave as if they are in the collective consciousness. Any deviation from the usual ways of behavior puts you on the black list and increased supervision of Big Brother. Resistance is futile is obviously the message they want to send, but it never worked and it won't even now.

This is how they might also do it and I have said this many times in my threads. The government in America and much of the world will support and make their favored centralized stablecoin issuers to be their bridge on controlling how much inflows and outflows enter or leave the cryptospace. This will also give them the power to do something similar to what Tether has done. Freeze assets of their holders over allegations without proof.



Crypto firm Tether said on Monday that it had frozen $225 million worth of its cryptocurrency which it said had been linked to a human trafficking group in Southeast Asia.

Source https://www.reuters.com/technology/crypto-firm-tether-says-it-has-frozen-225-mln-linked-human-trafficking-2023-11-20/

[Lucius]

Of course, there is always the possibility of face-to-face trading, but that brings with it some other risks that many do not agree to.

I hear this repeated a lot on the forum, yet I've never had a single issue with face to face trades. As long as you are using a proper P2P exchange such as Bisq to set up the trade and not just finding some random scammer via social media, and you take standard security measures, then you are no more at risk from a face to face trade than you are any time you go out in public:

I think it also depends on the country you live in, and not only because of the mentality of the people, but also the total population. It may sound strange, but it is not the same if you live in a country with 300+ million people or in a country with 100 times less people where it is much harder to protect your privacy. The higher the price of BTC, the more people are willing to do anything to get it easily.

[l8orre]

I have not read the full thread yet, and will catch up on this over the next few days.

In the meantime, I can't refrain from mentioning that there is an impressive number of privacy oriented projects in the crypto space, which is the way to go.

Including DEXes, SC platforms, mesh networks, naming systems, etc.

Currently I am wondering if this is a forum for a real discussion or if there are Maxi Mullahs already adapting their heresy Fatwahs against all that is not BTCBTC that may appear in the discussion...  

[Abiky]

I have not read the full thread yet, and will catch up on this over the next few days.

In the meantime, I can't refrain from mentioning that there is an impressive number of privacy oriented projects in the crypto space, which is the way to go.

Including DEXes, SC platforms, mesh networks, naming systems, etc.

Currently I am wondering if this is a forum for a real discussion or if there are Maxi Mullahs already adapting their heresy Fatwahs against all that is not BTCBTC that may appear in the discussion...

There may be an impressive number of privacy-oriented projects, but they're still the minority. We can blame mainstream governments for that. Their misinformation and false propaganda have led people to believe that obfuscating their transactions is a very bad thing. Shutting down centralized mixers, and going after non-custodial mixers by sanctioning it  tells us governments really don't want people to get true financial freedom and privacy. By enforcing KYC across all centralized exchanges, they hope to control the on/off ramps between the crypto and Fiat worlds.

All we have left are DEXs and P2P exchanges. You will end up paying a higher premium by using these alternatives, but it's worth it. Especially when you don't need to provide your personal info to use them. If governments' efforts are rendered useless, they might "ban" crypto altogether. There's no reason to be concerned about this, as long as decentralization wins in the long run.

[franky1]

All we have left are DEXs and P2P exchanges. You will end up paying a higher premium by using these alternatives, but it's worth it. Especially when you don't need to provide your personal info to use them. If governments' efforts are rendered useless, they might "ban" crypto altogether. There's no reason to be concerned about this, as long as decentralization wins in the long run.

if using DEX for real world fiat(meaning bank deposits not stable coins) be warned.. if you or the other users of DEX you trade with may be doing ALOT of trades via their bank account but under the guise of personal payments. banks will see these people as operating a money service business and will request they formalise as a MSB and do the compliance or stop operating. they will ask for explanations for all the payments.

this has been the case with localbitcoins.com users years ago. and look what happened to most of those traders

[Abiky]

if using DEX for real world fiat(meaning bank deposits not stable coins) be warned.. if you or the other users of DEX you trade with may be doing ALOT of trades via their bank account but under the guise of personal payments. banks will see these people as operating a money service business and will request they formalise as a MSB and do the compliance or stop operating. they will ask for explanations for all the payments.

this has been the case with localbitcoins.com users years ago. and look what happened to most of those traders

That's the disadvantage of using Fiat. It leaves a trail that quickly helps governments obtain your true identity. Avoiding banks altogether would be the way to go. Unfortunately, the world is still stuck with the Fiat standard. The vast majority of salaries are paid in Fiat, while most merchants and/or businesses accept only Fiat currencies as payment method. If this keeps up, we will never be able to live a truly-anonymous life with crypto.

Fortunately, not all hope is lost. As long as decentralization wins, it will be difficult (if not impossible) for governments to enforce regulatory action. This new "PATRIOT Act" by the US government is a blatant attempt to increase surveillance/control over centralized exchanges. It won't have any effect over DEXs, P2P trading platforms, nor non-custodial mixers. Who knows how crypto (especially Bitcoin) will fare in the future?