Are no-KYC services banned?

[The Sceptical Chymist]

An exchange that asks no KYC, lets you deposit BTC for trading, naturally lets you withdraw BTC. You deposit dirty BTC, you withdraw "cleaner" BTC. Is that ok?

What if you deposit "clean" LTC, for instance, and receive "dirty" BTC that you weren't expecting?  All this time I've been in the bitcoin space and I don't even know how to tell if coins are on some government's shit list or the like (though I know there's a website somewhere where you can check to see).  There are a lot of small, non-KYC exchanges based out of god-knows-where with god-knows-what kinds of ethics that might just not screen deposits.  In any case, I think it's already been established that the issue here isn't the 'no-KYC' part.

I'm just really, really hoping there isn't a slippy-slide-slope that y'all have mentioned whereby it'll be decreed that no mention shall be made of no-KYC exchanges henceforth, nor signature campaigns to advertise same, nor ANN threads to draw attention to said exchanges and so forth.  At that point, it would be clear the US government will have clubbed bitcointalk so badly that what's left will be a crippled, voiceless, and scared community--likely infiltrated by all sorts of alphabet agencies from around the world, too.

[Synchronice]

Overall, I don't know if you guys pretend things that don't exist or what's your intention but it's not necessary to make a fuss. At the moment only mixers are banned and they are banned because as governments state, they are used for money laundering and for hiding the trace of funds that are used for funding terrorist organizations. Whether this it true or not is another case but the fact is that that's the reason why mixers are banned. Even officials wrote on this forum and warned everyone to not promote mixers.
Money can be laundered via exchanges, casinos, vouchers, NFTs, Ordinals and so on but this doesn't mean that they'll get banned. No casino tells you to deposit Bitcoins on their platform and withdraw to improve your privacy and hide traces, no casino asks you to do that, even not no-KYC ones and even they have a Curacao license. So they are safe.

Just don't make a wrong conclusion. At the moment Bitcoin mixers are banned but soon decentralized exchanges and privacy enhancer wallets might be banned. Any company that runs a financial service without a license will be banned. Theymos can't control whether any institute, business or organization owns a license or asks for KYC documents but he definitely can prohibit marketplaces that sell illegal things and also mixers and privacy enhancer wallets that are entitled as money laundering tools by the government.

[EarnOnVictor]

As far as I know there's no official announcement of no-KYC services being banned in this forum. But perhaps it's coming?

It was not allowed for having too many similarities with a mixing service, the non-kyc part was not the issue.

In addition they also offers a mixing service indirectly, even as they claims not to be a mixer, any service which offers to take your dirty coins and give you a clean one can also be considered a mixer which such is part of the service they offer.

I never opened the website and neither did I take the campaign seriously because of the AML act they boastfully cancelled on their page, as it was no problem with their service. That can only tell you one thing, and that thing is "illegality." I think Bitcointalk has passed that already and kudos to Hhampuz to have painstakingly stopped the cooperation with them.

No service of that status will not mix your coin either directly or indirectly, thereby taking us back to the days when what we advertise here was being frowned upon by the law enforcers for one crime committed and the other.

[pakhitheboss]

I was going through the replies and found most users are condescending to each other. The whole argument again stands on the point, how to find dirty money or how to recognize dirty money? Ultimately it is @Theymos who banned mixer advertisements in the forum and it is his responsibility to decide whether a non-KYC exchange should be allowed to start a signature campaign.

The Sceptical Chymist, argument meant that in the future an exchange like MEXC Global cannot start a signature campaign as they don't know the source of the payment. We know mixers will take Bitcoin and the payment will be in Bitcoin whereas a non-KYC exchange will allow withdrawal in other cryptocurrencies. The problem with mixers is that they allow dirty Bitcoin mixing to get legally white Bitcoin. The concept was always clear but we are making it confusing but now it has been made complicated and in the future, I feel that non-KYC exchanges will not be able to advertise in the forum.

[tranthidung]

Ultimately it is @Theymos who banned mixer advertisements in the forum and it is his responsibility to decide whether a non-KYC exchange should be allowed to start a signature campaign.

The interpretation should be

"If a service is not allowed by forum rules, it will be banned here completely, not only restricted to a signature campaign or a banner advertisement (suspended about two years ago)."

Things are different nowadays because with new forum rules on privacy, mixers, non-KYC exchanges, both the service, their brand account and all types of advertisement in the forum, will be banned in batch.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

Actually, when the new campaign was posted, the notification popped up, but by the time I scrolled down to open it, I discovered that the thread had already been moved to archive, which I wondered why. 

Whether it's a KYC or KYC-free exchange, by right, an exchange is only supposed to trade an asset for another different asset and not the same asset for the same asset. If that exchange (Mrstorck) has the service to trade Bitcoin for Bitcoin, judging by what those who have tested the exchange are saying, then it's true it has a similar service as a mixer. For the record, non-KYC exchanges that don't offer such services are promoted here. 

[348Judah]

I don't know what the era of this current government dispensation is going to work on the digital networks we have today and bitcoin the most, we needed our privacy, government aren't allowing for that, yet we are claiming that bitcoin is not going to be centralized or regulated, but the government are wining edges over the use of bitcoin in such a way that it does not work as expected for our privacy through such compliance, it's better that we consider the needs of everyone involved in bitcoin as to their privacy and freedom which fiat cannot offer and let everyone get to anonymize their use with bitcoin, every one of us will not be engaged in using such privilege for scam or fraud, it's all about our financial privacy.

[TryNinja]

So I'd lean toward banning this particular service even if they didn't meet the mixer definition. "Make your dirty coins clean" is not something that typical no-KYC exchanges advertise.

So basically, talking/marketing about cleaning coins = banned.

No-KYC service *can* be used to clean coins but doesn't publicly talk about this = ok

Is that it?

[LoyceV]

So basically, talking/marketing about cleaning coins = banned.

No-KYC service *can* be used to clean coins but doesn't publicly talk about this = ok

This is my interpretation:
Talking/marketing about committing crimes = banned.

Cars, guns and knives can be used to commit crimes, but as long as you don't talk about this = ok.

Disclaimer: I strongly dislike the notion of taint. There are no bad Bitcoins, but there are bad people.

[TryNinja]

Cars, guns and knives can be used to commit crimes, but as long as you don't talk about this = ok.

Are cars, guns and knives under attack by the government just like privacy tools and crypto are?

Would you say cars, guns and knives are in risk of getting banned just like no-KYC services are?

[dkbit98]

An exchange that asks no KYC, lets you deposit BTC for trading, naturally lets you withdraw BTC. You deposit dirty BTC, you withdraw "cleaner" BTC. Is that ok? Is that a mixer? Is it only a mixer if they claim to clean dirty coins, like MrStork did? At what point is my non-KYC exchange considered a mixer?

This ''exchange'' blatantly cloned another reputable service that exist for years, but I am not sure if it fits directly to mixer category.
By that logic even Lending services between members should be questionable in bitcointalk forum.
Maybe word of advice for everyone is to avoid terms like ''dirty'' and ''clean'' bitcoins in future.
And we wouldn't be in this mess now if Bitcoin was full fungible  

@theymos, See what you have done?

I said before that he opened Pandora's box with latest change in forum rules, but he was probably forced to do it.
You can see that many services are now shutting down their non-kyc business that has any connection with US.

Would you say cars, guns and knives are in risk of getting banned just like no-KYC services are?

They are banned in some countries (or soon will be), believe it or not, especially if cars run on gasoline.

[LoyceV]

Cars, guns and knives can be used to commit crimes, but as long as you don't talk about this = ok.

Are cars, guns and knives under attack by the government just like privacy tools and crypto are?

Like needing training, a license, insurance and MOT? I wouldn't call it an "attack", but it's strictly regulated.

Would you say cars, guns and knives are in risk of getting banned just like no-KYC services are?

Gasoline cares are already banned from some cities, guns are banned in general in my country, and knives aren't allowed to be caried in a growing number of cities either. I'm not sure now if it's the best comparison though: not many people will discuss online about replaying Death Race 2000 in real life. But we do have an ever growing government, and they won't volunteer to give back freedoms.

[Sandra_hakeem]

What if I use Bitcoin to exchange it for a shitcoin, and I use those shitcoins to buy Bitcoin again?

it doesn't really matter what coin you convert your "tainted" BTC into... The major criteria that a mixer possesses is converting whatever coin (dirty or not) into viable coins, and a nonKYC platform does the same - since every user's privacy is somehow guaranteed

There will always be loopholes, and this may become a risk for lenders at some point.

Not just becoming a risk for lenders; It'll only make the governs rejiger thier privacy scrutiny... Fuckin' dictators!!

Are cars, guns and knives under attack by the government just like privacy tools and crypto are?

The annual death rate statistics by guns and knives isn't as disturbing as the percentage of "dirty coins" that are laundered year in year out!

Would you say cars, guns and knives are in risk of getting banned just like no-KYC services are?

guns have been ingrained in the US already, mhan.

[NotATether]

All this non-KYC talk here is bollocks. Do you guys pay attention to how they actually ask you for KYC? Here, I will give you a debreifing if you aren't already aware of it yet:

See, I don’t really have a problem for regulation for buying and selling bitcoins. You gotta prevent money laundering you know.

The problem comes when said regulation requires you to provide identification for performing any kind of bitcoin transaction, whether with a bitcoin mixer or not. This benefits nobody, because inevitably, the regulation is implemented by 3rd party KYC providers who require not just your ID and bank statement, but any or all of the following:

• Employment records as a proof of funds
• A mugshot of you holding your ID
• A picture of you holding your username and current date on a piece of paper
• A live picture of your ID taken from a phone running iOS newestVersion or later
• A live picture of your ID taken from a phone running Android almostNewestVersion or later
• Ditto but a selfie of you choreographically moving your head
• A video call

And even then your application can be denied for no public reason, leaving you stranded with no money, which is exactly what Bitcoin was created to solve. You see, nowadays you need one of the latest smartphones to perform any kind of verification, which is very silly – even banks don’t require that sort of thing!

If it was identification by sending a simple picture of your ID and or a bank statement, its fine. But verifiers make it so complicated to pass verification, by demanding the documentation be sent in certain ways, like in the quote I just pulled, by denying documents for arbitrary reasons, and let's not forget that these entities who verify us are not even governmental authorities, they are private businesses who have no interest in following the law properly as long as they are making a profit. So it is a net loss for users.

It is a quite sorry state of affairs when you have to post a mugshot of yourself holding a piece of paper with your name and random text in order for it to be considered as verification material. Even the banks themselves are not asking for this kind of information!

And that is after you consider the fact that almost all the financial services you would want to verify for are not available for US persons. So while these businesses are de-banking many sections of the world who want to use cryptocurrency (including many third world countries), why are we twerking for them in our recent posts here?


The reason why theymos banned mixers in the first place is because he does not want the forum to be subject to a federal investigation, not because he believes in the nonsense directives of non-KYC exchanges being somehow unsafe. So as long as there is no operation against exchange services, don't expect him to do anything about it.

[pakhitheboss]

After reading all the replies can I say that there is a shadow ban on non-KYC exchange. My straightforward reasoning is that none of us know how to work out to find bad money in the form of Bitcoin. It might be an issue but there are great minds here who could find a solution to this issue. That will be the next step to wipe out Bitcoin's negative fame.

[NotATether]

After reading all the replies can I say that there is a shadow ban on non-KYC exchange. My straightforward reasoning is that none of us know how to work out to find bad money in the form of Bitcoin. It might be an issue but there are great minds here who could find a solution to this issue. That will be the next step to wipe out Bitcoin's negative fame.

If this forum bans all non-KYC exchanges I guarantee you that members are going to be doing a 180 and praising once-reviled exchanges like Binance and Coinbase and stuff.

Not me, though. I don't walk with the crowd.

[joker_josue]

There are many ways to do things, they just don't have to be announced in advance. It is up to each person to find the tools they want to use, to achieve what they want to do.

Whether you like it or not, when you talk about a mixing service, you automatically mean it as being used to move money obtained illegally, in order to lose track of it. Therefore, even if our use is not for this purpose, this is the tag that these services have before the authorities. Therefore, any external platform that carries out any type of promotion/publicity of these services may suffer penalties. I believe that no one wants this to happen to the forum.

Because, just as the forum does not authorize the promotion of markets where drugs, weapons and other illegal items are sold (according to the government), the same ends up happening with "mixers". It's true that sometimes you can be too radical with the etiquette of a particular service. In this, I agree that it should be analyzed in more detail in the future. Either way, I realize that it is an attitude with the aim of "playing it safe".

I look at this situation that is happening with mixers, the same as what happened 10 years ago with torrent sites. And until the dust settles, it will be difficult to explore this market without running into problems with the authorities. Maybe many don't remember the strong attack that torrent sites had, but today things are calmer, and in the end nothing has changed significantly.

Therefore, I think that sometimes it creates more drama than anything else. We must observe events and adjust the way we do the things we want. This does not mean that I agree with the authorities' actions on this topic, but unfortunately at the moment there is not much that can be done if we do not adjust our way of acting a little.

[examplens]

So I'd lean toward banning this particular service even if they didn't meet the mixer definition. "Make your dirty coins clean" is not something that typical no-KYC exchanges advertise.

So basically, talking/marketing about cleaning coins = banned.

No-KYC service *can* be used to clean coins but doesn't publicly talk about this = ok

Is that it?

This confused me too, but based on what I saw with them, they are based on cleaning tainted coins. Check their overview of service
The next thing, they completely took over and copied the exch design, which casts a lot of doubt on the honesty of their service. The biggest part of the code is identical.

After all, I certainly wouldn't trust them and they seem like they are a high-risk scam. It is probably better that they are removed from the forum.

[philipma1957]

Personally, i think all services that are rubbing shoulders with regulators (that we consider privacy focused) are going to be banned at some point. I am seeing the trend and we are headed for that direction. This will include no KYC exchanges, coins like monero etc.

Just a matter of time.

that is the future and it will go back to a paper bag with cash in it when you want to move wealth on the sneak.

crypto will not get used for sneak hidden wealth movement.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Too bad, if Mr.Stork Exchange remove BTC withdrawal, their service would be fine.

Remove BTC > BTC, remove advertising aspect of improving privacy. The service will become a regular exchange service. It will not be that bad, if they want to advertise it in Bitcointalk.