Topic: AML/KYC Explained - page 24. (Read 473818 times)

I agree that a lot of the AML KYC stuff can sometimes seem pointless. It is like an old system trying to keep track of everyone.

Did anybody catch the article about how 90% of the Bitcoin companies are meaningless because all of them are subject to AML/KYC?

https://news.bitcoin.com/tone-vays-90-bitcoin-cos-meaningless/

This coming from a Wall Street guy too.

What you think? Do we rage against the machine? Or play Trojan horse?

When you fill out one of these forms for KYC how long does it take till the government has a copy?
Just trying to figure out if they file the information or actually send it forward. Hoping its one of those issues where people just make sure they file the information in case of audit but something tells me they send any transaction over 10K forward for further scrutiny.

What an extraordinarily useful "Heads-Up," and seriously so.

I certainly wouldn't want to muddy up the discussion with any too off-hand speculation, but if one may endeavor to extrapolate as towards any application of this knowledge: In noticing that each transaction e.g at Kraken might be, to any extent, publicly - though anonymously - advertised at least via the Kraken web API -- perhaps, with some exceptions?* -- and there may be some fairly novel, if not altogether technical things found online as with regards to any manner of a system of material provenance, ostensibly applicable as towards a manner of a data forensics, namely as among developments of a sort of a Semantic Web standards-making community -- e.g the PROV-O ontology developed in the W3C standards track -- moreover, in considering the essentially transparent though immediately anonymous nature of transactions onto the Blockchain, in short, I believe that the Blockchain is already doing a lot of the book-keeping, itself? Sure, it doesn't all bridge the gap onto individual identity, but I believe it's not as though anyone was trying to keep any Bitcoin transactions "Secret" altogether?

I certainly wouldn't want it to seem like a "Buzkill" that so many transactions on a Blockchain may be already publicly advertised - as may be necessary to the authentication algorithms applied throughout the numerous finite state machines that make up the quintessential "Bitcoin System". I believe it could pose a concern as with regards to data mining, as such, but hopefully such a concern may never develop too tall of a shadow in the Bitcoin community?

Considering that an AML/KYC burden must be legally and somehow shared as a responsibility, shared as by any hypothetical Bitcoin exchange broker extending of any single Bitcoin exchange's own material services, I would like to speculate that it could be - in any semantics - leveraged onto the trust provided/developed by the individual Bitcoin exchange institution? There are some concepts of a Web of Trust, developed in some IS/IT practices?

I believe that the initial post serves to elucidate so much of a legal side of running a formal, commercial service onto a Blockchain. Certainly, it's not all about Unicorns and Silk Superhighways, LoL?

* Maybe not as much publicly available about the "Dark" Bitcoin/altcoin currencies though?

its really just banks piling on imo.

I think AML/KYC are just excuses to keep the smaller ventures away from the main competition (monopoly anyone?). At times the rules and their rigidity can mean hindrance more than facilitating. Most times they just make it harder than ease your transactions.

Does BTC-e.com requires ID and verification?
Do they comply with KYC and AML rules?

Regards

I agree. Rules and regulations for the safety of consumers are always important. Hope more financial companies start diligent efforts to regulate BTC transactions now. Another mt.gox like situation will scare away many potential new entrants towards BTC.

I think we do need certain regulations for Bitcoins as well. too many illegal activities can mar the name. don't you think that will keep newbies away from the market?

Want to improve this sticky? Edits to the sticky may be paid! Please post a quote of this sticky with all of the changes you would like included in the thread linked below:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/completed-003-btc-bounty-write-a-general-amlkyc-process-sticky-357590

Feel free to use this sticky as a general discussion of AML/KYC policies.

A very interesting post, more of this please.

KYC REALLY JUST PROTECTS THE COMPANY AND 50% US THE USERS

I think its implemented in many parts of the world. I'm sure about USA, India, New Zealand, South Africa and U.K.

i think kyc is mostly used in india...
it means know your customer..
it letsan organisation know to whom they are employing, it prevents fraud and illegeal people upon using services for bad or evil purposes.

+1

Yes this is the reason for KYC/AML shit!!!
Soon I will have to bring a sample of my pee or stool to the bank if I would
have to use any of their services!

They recently started to ask fucking questions like
if I'm politically active or where do my relatives live because according to the "law"
they need to update the data they have on me?!

WTF?! 

The clerk gave me some papers to fill in my data and on that papers there
were written some shit about money laundering and terrorism.
I said to the clerk that if they want to get rid of terrorism
they need to seize all accounts belonging to political parties and politicians.

Our current economic system is fraudulent, it's not really about money laundering,, it's really about making sure joe public can't earn money from his labours without Big brother getting a hefty slice of it.

This is a very good question that just came up this week with the revelations that a Secret Service agent was working on the Silk Road case, and also was working for CoinMkt Exchange as their Compliance Officer at the same time. It's quite clear from the unsealed govt documents that the agent was abusing his powers, and using them to his advantage at CoinMkt Exchange. Clearly, there was no measures or controls in place at CoinMkt that prevented or caught this abuse of power in direct relation to compliance/KYC/AML.

So even though an exchange might have KYC/AML procedures in place, as you said, it only makes sense when it's enforced and more importantly, who are overseeing these processes? Here's some more info on what I had said about this yesterday on reddit.

what sort of KYC details would you require from a citizen of Kenya who would like to trade on your exchange/ have some sort of business relationship. This person has no ill intentions and would like to particpate in a HK based exchange and access full features.

Inbox also an option

Thanks.

A very informative post, thanks!

KYC/AML makes sense only when it is enforced. When a company claims that they they are complaint the questions that you have to ask what are they compliant with? and Who do they report to?

I have seen only one company in bitcoin trading that have to comply with these standards dsx.uk. There rest of them can be doing KYC or not no one would care.

I do not really share their views on what Bitcoins is tho.....

http://moneytransmitterlicense.blogspot.com/ - This might just be one of the most $#^$% views on Bitcoin.

In my opinion, just another way to squeeze money out of people, to register for something, that bring little value. {Support us, and we protect you.. bla bla bla}