Topic: A question about AML KYC - page 3. (Read 465 times)
KYC purpose is preventing of funds for money launder, and you will see every exchange will require KYC instead of DEX, so I think KYC process should be simple and fast may be online KYC verification is more simple then manually.
No one in this forum support kyc system. People don't wanna be a puppet anymore to the government or the bank. And crypto currency is the best solution for that. It's sad that some upcoming projects and popular exchanges want kyc for transaction (big amount). Although they said it's just a step to remove scammers from crypto currency. I don't know how much it worked.
I didn't gave my any document in any exchange. I always avoid those exchange who prefer to kyc. I think it's people rights, to show their personal document or not.
I didn't gave my any document in any exchange. I always avoid those exchange who prefer to kyc. I think it's people rights, to show their personal document or not.
KYC/AML are a direct assault on our personal freedoms and should be abolished worldwide.
Unfortunately, it goes opposite - as time goes by, more and more elements to KYC are added. And more and more things are subject to KYC. From bank transfers, cryptocurrency exchanges. This is as well why many authorities are calling for a cashless society, so then all the transactions will be 100% traceable.
my problem with KYC and AML rules is that they are only a one way protection meaning it protects the business (like the exchanges) from not getting illegal funds or getting scammed,... specially when they work with the banking system that could easily mean a lot of dirty money going into their system.
but there is absolutely no customer protection! it start from our very personal documents being in the hands of a shady business that easily sells them on the dark market! and there is nobody to answer. then whenever the exchange likes they easily scam their customers and call it a hack or simply run away. then there is nobody to cover our losses.
in short it means these laws don't do anything for the customer so nobody should logically want them except the businesses. those businesses that say otherwise are only advertising their service.
but there is absolutely no customer protection! it start from our very personal documents being in the hands of a shady business that easily sells them on the dark market! and there is nobody to answer. then whenever the exchange likes they easily scam their customers and call it a hack or simply run away. then there is nobody to cover our losses.
in short it means these laws don't do anything for the customer so nobody should logically want them except the businesses. those businesses that say otherwise are only advertising their service.
The CEO of Digitex exchange Adam Todd decided to publicly oppose the KYC system, believing that this system only repels customers from the service and destroys the business. I myself am not a big fan of KYC, but it is definitely not without meaning and helps to prevent laundering and so on. I wonder what goals he can actually pursue by making such a decision.
What do you think about KYC and its appropriateness? Do you separate KYC by the types? Like going through KYC to just get the access to exchange platform (as it is now with Shapeshift), or simply register with any email, but knowing that you might be one of the 0.1% and might be asked to confirm your identity (as it is now with Changelly)?
I have mild KYC concerns. I wouldn't want to go through it because I sort of fear identity stealth and data manipulation, but at the same time, I am fine with places that have mild KYC policies and might enforce them if necessary. I believe that it makes sense to require identification if we're talking about a big amount of money (definitely over $1k). Big transactions might indicate money laundering, so it's reasonable to at least know who performs them. If we're talking about a gambler who spends dozens of dollars or something, it's ridiculous and unfair to require identification. What do you think about KYC and its appropriateness? Do you separate KYC by the types? Like going through KYC to just get the access to exchange platform (as it is now with Shapeshift), or simply register with any email, but knowing that you might be one of the 0.1% and might be asked to confirm your identity (as it is now with Changelly)?
The subject has been discussed here and through articles many times before. Nobody will ever receive personal information from me on a cryptocurrency platform or transaction. You either let me use cryptocurrencies the way they were meant to be used, or I'd rather miss a deal.
It gets harder and harder to avoid giving personal information though. Part of my BTC and alts have been stolen enough times before, but I'm still not giving up and I never will. I want to support the main purpose of cryptocurrencies and to avoid third parties at all, if possible. Hopefully the genius minds out there will successfully develop some systems to sustain exactly this idea so third parties won't be a thing anymore..
It gets harder and harder to avoid giving personal information though. Part of my BTC and alts have been stolen enough times before, but I'm still not giving up and I never will. I want to support the main purpose of cryptocurrencies and to avoid third parties at all, if possible. Hopefully the genius minds out there will successfully develop some systems to sustain exactly this idea so third parties won't be a thing anymore..
I think it's pretty clear that KYC defeats the whole purpose of bitcoin/crypto. It makes no sense to sacrifice your identity to use something pseudonymous.
Also, we have many decentralized/P2P platforms as alternatives...
Trading fiat? LocalCryptos/BISQ
Alts? See this list.
etc.
Sadly, people don't look at these options simply because they're not as convenient and fast as the centralized exchanges.
Also, we have many decentralized/P2P platforms as alternatives...
Trading fiat? LocalCryptos/BISQ
Alts? See this list.
etc.
Sadly, people don't look at these options simply because they're not as convenient and fast as the centralized exchanges.
I'm pretty sure 99% of people here doesn't like submitting KYC/AML information for very obvious reasons. It's just that unfortunately, KYC/AML is required by the government in the US and in some(or most?) countries. So crypto businesses in these said countries really have no choice but to comply or to migrate over to less-strict countries.
Advantages? Yea probably you can get caught a lot easier if you're a criminal, but that's like a very very small percentage of exchange users so I really don't like that the innocent people are the ones having to make sacrifices(by submitting KYC/AML info) to make the government's jobs easier.
Advantages? Yea probably you can get caught a lot easier if you're a criminal, but that's like a very very small percentage of exchange users so I really don't like that the innocent people are the ones having to make sacrifices(by submitting KYC/AML info) to make the government's jobs easier.
The CEO of Digitex exchange Adam Todd decided to publicly oppose the KYC system, believing that this system only repels customers from the service and destroys the business. I myself am not a big fan of KYC, but it is definitely not without meaning and helps to prevent laundering and so on. I wonder what goals he can actually pursue by making such a decision.
What do you think about KYC and its appropriateness? Do you separate KYC by the types? Like going through KYC to just get the access to exchange platform (as it is now with Shapeshift), or simply register with any email, but knowing that you might be one of the 0.1% and might be asked to confirm your identity (as it is now with Changelly)?
What do you think about KYC and its appropriateness? Do you separate KYC by the types? Like going through KYC to just get the access to exchange platform (as it is now with Shapeshift), or simply register with any email, but knowing that you might be one of the 0.1% and might be asked to confirm your identity (as it is now with Changelly)?
Jump to: