How did AML kill the decentralized market of Bitcoin?

dzungmobile

sr. member

Activity: 854

Merit: 424

I stand with Ukraine!

Quote from: Questat on October 09, 2024, 08:53:07 AM

Of course, I get it, but the point of this thread, which I’ve already updated, is that we’re no longer enjoying the same privacy and freedom we had in the past. I’m sure you’ve been around longer than me, and if you remember, back in 2016, KYC wasn’t strictly enforced on exchanges and casinos. Now, it’s become a big issue, with some platforms even using it to scam people. Things have really changed, though Bitcoin’s system has stayed the same.

Sometimes we have more privacy, and sometimes we have less privacy. I believe governments can change too and in many nations, citizens can use their votes for forcing governments to change. If governments don't change, they will be voted out by citizens.

It's big issue and barrier for Bitcoin and users in future but we see how Bitcoin Spot ETFs were approved in the USA. after more than 10 years of first application. Was Gensler and SEC proactively with their approvals and did they feel happy with their approvals?

We can see clearly in the announcement letter of Gensler, that he was not happy about that, but he was forced to approve Bitcoin Spot ETFs. Privacy is harder to achieve than Bitcoin Spot ETFs, but I don't think it is impossible to have in future.

Questat

hero member

Activity: 2982

Merit: 610

Quote from: seoincorporation on October 08, 2024, 09:14:21 AM

Quote from: Questat on September 28, 2024, 06:54:39 AM

Can we still enjoy the decentralized nature of bitcoin?

Bitcoin is decentralized, and that will not change, but users are not Anonymous, and you are confused about the terms because the fact that it's decentralized doesn't mean it's not traceable. The decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that no one can make decisions alone about the coin and it' future, it means all the people need to agree if there will be a change. That's the decentralized factor of the coin, and if casinos and exchanges require a AML or a KYC, that doesn't affect the decentralization of the coin.

Of course, I get it, but the point of this thread, which I’ve already updated, is that we’re no longer enjoying the same privacy and freedom we had in the past. I’m sure you’ve been around longer than me, and if you remember, back in 2016, KYC wasn’t strictly enforced on exchanges and casinos. Now, it’s become a big issue, with some platforms even using it to scam people. Things have really changed, though Bitcoin’s system has stayed the same.

seoincorporation

legendary

Activity: 3346

Merit: 3125

Quote from: Questat on September 28, 2024, 06:54:39 AM

Can we still enjoy the decentralized nature of bitcoin?

Bitcoin is decentralized, and that will not change, but users are not Anonymous, and you are confused about the terms because the fact that it's decentralized doesn't mean it's not traceable. The decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that no one can make decisions alone about the coin and it' future, it means all the people need to agree if there will be a change. That's the decentralized factor of the coin, and if casinos and exchanges require a AML or a KYC, that doesn't affect the decentralization of the coin.

Koadharber

hero member

Activity: 1065

Merit: 510

Quote from: Synchronice on October 08, 2024, 07:32:02 AM

Quote from: pawel7777 on October 03, 2024, 04:47:53 PM

And I don't think Blackrock or alike would care too much about taking control over Bitcoin's network. It wouldn't make much sense for them to attempt that, unless we're talking about some larger plot involving governments and three-letter agencies.

I don't say that it's directly BlackRock that wants to take control over Bitcoin's network but isn't that what the US and other governments want to do? Maybe through BlackRock and other companies and not directly?
I think, they want to control Bitcoin transactions. If Trump wins and manages to make the rest of the coins mined in the USA, then he will definitely set a censorship on Bitcoin transactions, i.e. will force miners to ignore transactions that he doesn't want to get confirmed.

One of the cons or negative thing about institutional funds are flowing into this market already is that they could possibly be able to start up with that kind of probability that it could really be that going into the path on trying out to centralized the market or something that do talks about having the potential of possible manipulation on which we know that these institutions or even into those billionaires who are really that trying out to accumulate coins as much as they could. This has used to be a decentralized thing but gradually it do really make out those kind of changes due to regulation and dealing up with those institutions that are trying out to accumulate coins as much as they could. We do know that it would really be that hard to stop on the time that they will really be having plans in terms of possible manipulation.
Due to the fact that transactions couldnt be easily be traced up or would be known then we do know on what are the possibilities that they will really be using it on other way.

Synchronice

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 792

Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim

Quote from: pawel7777 on October 03, 2024, 04:47:53 PM

And I don't think Blackrock or alike would care too much about taking control over Bitcoin's network. It wouldn't make much sense for them to attempt that, unless we're talking about some larger plot involving governments and three-letter agencies.

I don't say that it's directly BlackRock that wants to take control over Bitcoin's network but isn't that what the US and other governments want to do? Maybe through BlackRock and other companies and not directly?
I think, they want to control Bitcoin transactions. If Trump wins and manages to make the rest of the coins mined in the USA, then he will definitely set a censorship on Bitcoin transactions, i.e. will force miners to ignore transactions that he doesn't want to get confirmed.

AmoreJaz

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 1102

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: pawel7777 on October 03, 2024, 04:47:53 PM

Quote from: Synchronice on October 03, 2024, 06:09:47 AM

Know Your Customer requirement doesn't ruin the decentralization of Bitcoin, nor does the AML policy. What destroys Bitcoin decentralization is the fact that centralized companies, i.e. companies like Binance, Coinbase, BlackRock, Fidelity and others destroy the decentralization. The fact that Trump (if he wins) plans to make the rest of the Bitcoins labeled as Made In The USA, kills the decentralization.
When centralized companies, that are managed and regulated by a certain group of people or by the governments, take their hands on a majority of coins, miners, nodes and so on, that process is what kills decentralization.

From a purely network decentralisation point of view, the KYC requirements indeed don't matter (unless they could get expanded on miners etc), but apart from network decentralisation, there's another crucial feature of Bitcoin - censorship resistance.
If we sleep-walk into a reality where all Bitcoin transactions are only done by verified users using KYC-compliant exchanges/wallets with any peer-to-peer platforms or non-custodial wallets delegalised, that feature could get heavily crippled.

And I don't think Blackrock or alike would care too much about taking control over Bitcoin's network. It wouldn't make much sense for them to attempt that, unless we're talking about some larger plot involving governments and three-letter agencies.

Would really pose challenges if every bitcoin transaction will require certain kyc requirements. However, it will only happen in platforms where they are regulated under government protocols. But for others, people can still do their transactions anonymously, especially if it is p2p or wallet to wallet txs.

As this currency is going mainstream, we can't eradicate the fact that the government will have certain protocols to implement on this currency. We can treat this market as just any other business, which needs to comply with government protocols to establish their business. Hence, the implementation of AML/KYC can't be prevented.

pawel7777

legendary

Activity: 2436

Merit: 1561

Quote from: Synchronice on October 03, 2024, 06:09:47 AM

Know Your Customer requirement doesn't ruin the decentralization of Bitcoin, nor does the AML policy. What destroys Bitcoin decentralization is the fact that centralized companies, i.e. companies like Binance, Coinbase, BlackRock, Fidelity and others destroy the decentralization. The fact that Trump (if he wins) plans to make the rest of the Bitcoins labeled as Made In The USA, kills the decentralization.
When centralized companies, that are managed and regulated by a certain group of people or by the governments, take their hands on a majority of coins, miners, nodes and so on, that process is what kills decentralization.

From a purely network decentralisation point of view, the KYC requirements indeed don't matter (unless they could get expanded on miners etc), but apart from network decentralisation, there's another crucial feature of Bitcoin - censorship resistance.
If we sleep-walk into a reality where all Bitcoin transactions are only done by verified users using KYC-compliant exchanges/wallets with any peer-to-peer platforms or non-custodial wallets delegalised, that feature could get heavily crippled.

And I don't think Blackrock or alike would care too much about taking control over Bitcoin's network. It wouldn't make much sense for them to attempt that, unless we're talking about some larger plot involving governments and three-letter agencies.

Wakate

hero member

Activity: 1176

Merit: 543

fillippone - Winner contest Pizza 2022

Quote from: Z-tight on September 30, 2024, 01:05:59 PM

Quote from: Questat on September 29, 2024, 10:41:41 PM

it’s not about the network but more about the market. Check out some of the posts above..sorry for any confusion!

All right, i get your point now. It is true that there are more centralized firms and services in the industry than there are decentralized ones, and the government continues to attack the industry with regulations and anti-privacy policies. However, there are still ways we can use BTC privately without giving our data to centralized third party services, the thing is most people in the industry don't care about their privacy, so they choose the 'convenience' of centralized services.

The decentralized exchanges are gradually reducing and ineffective because of the government activities claiming that they are promoting scams and money laundry. This is the language of the government and they want to regulate everything in their palm. The way things are going, we could be surprised that if the government keeps striking decentralized exchanges because of their anonymous transactions, we could be surprised that it will effect our privacy and we will no longer be able to carry out transactions easily without our information being leaked. We are seeing more of centralized exchanges these days and people are forgetting about the centralized ones even when it comes to coins listing.

$weetne$$

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 227

Playbet.io - Crypto Casino and Sportsbook

Quote from: Questat on September 28, 2024, 06:54:39 AM

However, with the current AML (Anti-Money Laundering) policies in place, it seems like Bitcoin’s decentralization is being challenged by regulations, especially with the introduction of KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements.

Can we still enjoy the decentralized nature of bitcoin?

The government can challenge Bitcoin decentralization but they would never win because Bitcoin can succeed without the government. Why many people think that soon Bitcoin is going to become centralized is because they think that Bitcoin can not succeed without the government approval. You do not need a centralized exchanges to trade Bitcoin and you do not need centralized wallets also. You can use non constodial wallets and P2P exchange to trade your Bitcoin and still you would not have to do any KYC. Bitcoin is not the only currency being used to commit money laundering because fiats is still the biggest currency they use but they do not like Bitcoin because it gives power to us over our finances but the government wants to control our finances and not allowing us to do it ourselves.

Synchronice

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 792

Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim

Quote from: Questat on September 28, 2024, 06:54:39 AM

As we all know, Bitcoin is decentralized, and in its early days, we were proud of that fact--believing no government could control it and even thinking it might replace fiat. Those were the days when we were highly optimistic about Bitcoin’s future.

However, with the current AML (Anti-Money Laundering) policies in place, it seems like Bitcoin’s decentralization is being challenged by regulations, especially with the introduction of KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements.

Know Your Customer requirement doesn't ruin the decentralization of Bitcoin, nor does the AML policy. What destroys Bitcoin decentralization is the fact that centralized companies, i.e. companies like Binance, Coinbase, BlackRock, Fidelity and others destroy the decentralization. The fact that Trump (if he wins) plans to make the rest of the Bitcoins labeled as Made In The USA, kills the decentralization.
When centralized companies, that are managed and regulated by a certain group of people or by the governments, take their hands on a majority of coins, miners, nodes and so on, that process is what kills decentralization.

fikrett

jr. member

Activity: 70

Merit: 1

Quote from: Haunebu on October 03, 2024, 04:39:58 AM

I wouldn't say it killed the decentralised aspect of BTC, but it definitely minimised it to a large extent thanks to constant government interference. These policies can never fully kill off such an important feature which is the silver lining.

Also, I noticed some people actually talking about siding with Trump because of his support for crypto in this thread which is nonsensical since no political leader at that level will ever honestly support BTC and the crypto world.

Yeah, can play that game all he wants, but at the end of the day, he is a politician, not a crypto enthusiast, for a lack of a better word Grin

tbct_mt2

hero member

Activity: 2366

Merit: 838

Quote from: Haunebu on October 03, 2024, 04:39:58 AM

I wouldn't say it killed the decentralised aspect of BTC, but it definitely minimised it to a large extent thanks to constant government interference. These policies can never fully kill off such an important feature which is the silver lining.

Also, I noticed some people actually talking about siding with Trump because of his support for crypto in this thread which is nonsensical since no political leader at that level will ever honestly support BTC and the crypto world.

Wanting and pursuing privacy is not a crime, it's basic human rights and it is universally written in many national constitutions. It's only governments respect their national constitutions and actually serve their people or only want to distort constitutions, basic human rights, to gain more power for their administration at national scale.

Governments can not catch all crimes, can not prevent all money laundering activities, and they will not be able to prevent all money laundering through Bitcoin blockchain. But to be clear, Bitcoin blockchain was not created to serve criminals and for money laundering. Governments can not let criminals exist in their countries and only try to break down tools used by criminals. It's like catching things on tip of iceberg but under it deeply, crimes are there and untouched.

Governments will not be able to break down Bitcoin decentralization too.

Haunebu

hero member

Activity: 3178

Merit: 977

www.Crypto.Games: Multiple coins, multiple games

I wouldn't say it killed the decentralised aspect of BTC, but it definitely minimised it to a large extent thanks to constant government interference. These policies can never fully kill off such an important feature which is the silver lining.

Also, I noticed some people actually talking about siding with Trump because of his support for crypto in this thread which is nonsensical since no political leader at that level will ever honestly support BTC and the crypto world.

fikrett

jr. member

Activity: 70

Merit: 1

Quote from: Questat on October 03, 2024, 04:27:02 AM

Quote from: EFS on October 02, 2024, 08:09:32 AM

AML policy changes very little things. Those who want to launder money can still do what they want with fiat money. They don't need crypto currency solutions for that. The way governments view crypto currencies has started to change positively in recent years. Many have realized that they can't control Bitcoin and are looking for ways to regulate it. Centralized exchanges' KYC/AML solutions are part of this. But it's still possible to use Bitcoin without using anything centralized. I don't think governments have the power, resources, and more importantly the will to change that.

We’re already on that path, and the changes have hit the market hard, especially when it comes to privacy. Before, we could freely gamble using exchanges or online wallets, but now we have to be cautious, as many exchanges are prohibiting gambling transactions. That’s a big shift since it takes away the ease of quickly trading and cashing out your winnings. I get that change is inevitable, and we just have to adapt and not expect things to go back to how they were.

Can you tell me a bit more about that? What was considered a gambling transaction and how did they describe it? Never experienced or seen it myself, that's why I am asking, of course.

Questat

hero member

Activity: 2982

Merit: 610

Quote from: EFS on October 02, 2024, 08:09:32 AM

AML policy changes very little things. Those who want to launder money can still do what they want with fiat money. They don't need crypto currency solutions for that. The way governments view crypto currencies has started to change positively in recent years. Many have realized that they can't control Bitcoin and are looking for ways to regulate it. Centralized exchanges' KYC/AML solutions are part of this. But it's still possible to use Bitcoin without using anything centralized. I don't think governments have the power, resources, and more importantly the will to change that.

We’re already on that path, and the changes have hit the market hard, especially when it comes to privacy. Before, we could freely gamble using exchanges or online wallets, but now we have to be cautious, as many exchanges are prohibiting gambling transactions. That’s a big shift since it takes away the ease of quickly trading and cashing out your winnings. I get that change is inevitable, and we just have to adapt and not expect things to go back to how they were.

hd49728

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1018

Not your keys, not your coins!

Quote from: EFS on October 02, 2024, 08:09:32 AM

AML policy changes very little things. Those who want to launder money can still do what they want with fiat money. They don't need crypto currency solutions for that.

They can launder dark money with many methods, with fiat currency or with cryptocurrency. They do money laundering for a long time and will not stop because of AML in cryptocurrency market. If banks can not prevent money laundering, even laws against it in bank field exists a longer time than in cryptocurrency field, it's hard to think AML will block all money laundering with cryptocurrencies as tools for criminals.

Quote

The way governments view crypto currencies has started to change positively in recent years. Many have realized that they can't control Bitcoin and are looking for ways to regulate it. Centralized exchanges' KYC/AML solutions are part of this. But it's still possible to use Bitcoin without using anything centralized. I don't think governments have the power, resources, and more importantly the will to change that.

Governments have their biased regulations against this market because they hate it, and don't want it to grow more and grow with sharp rate. To do this, they pass more new and stricter regulations against this market but their law enforcement shows that they don't treat cryptocurrency market fairly and abuse their power into law enforcement.

2024 Cryptocurrency money laundering report. Dark market has low share of money laundering concentration.

EFS

staff

Activity: 3822

Merit: 2123

Crypto Swap Exchange

AML policy changes very little things. Those who want to launder money can still do what they want with fiat money. They don't need crypto currency solutions for that. The way governments view crypto currencies has started to change positively in recent years. Many have realized that they can't control Bitcoin and are looking for ways to regulate it. Centralized exchanges' KYC/AML solutions are part of this. But it's still possible to use Bitcoin without using anything centralized. I don't think governments have the power, resources, and more importantly the will to change that.

PrivacyG

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 1873

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: DeathAngel on October 01, 2024, 12:59:00 PM

I guess you can’t have ultimate mass adoption without regulation though so it’s tough.

Regulations are one thing, but what they are doing is overkill. By acting every time as if Bitcoin was the basis for drug dealing and Money Laundering it shows how fake the whole scenery is and that they are not setting up all these Regulations for preventing Crime but to monitor us.

Nrcewker

copper member

Activity: 2268

Merit: 539

LuckyDiamond.io - FLAT 50% Deposit Bonus!

Quote from: Questat on September 28, 2024, 06:54:39 AM

Can we still enjoy the decentralized nature of bitcoin?

Technically, it’s possible. You need to find sites or services that don’t ask for KYC and can spend the bitcoins there. Alternatively, if you want to trade Bitcoins, then you need to find exchanges that don’t ask for KYC. At last, if you want to convert your Bitcoins to fiat, then use P2P services and exchanges. So these are some possible ways to enjoy freedom through the decentralized nature of the coin. But soon as everywhere KYC is becoming mandatory, I am afraid that the decentralized nature will soon evaporate from everywhere.

kryptqnick

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1402

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

I agree that a lot of the market is now centralised, as people use major crypto exchanges, and those exchanges are custodial (plus usually have KYC procedures). But to me, it's a matter of having a choice. Many choose centralised services, perhaps because it's convenient and maybe because they feel like they can trust the companies providing those services. But there are non-custodial wallets, and there are ways of exchanging Bitcoin without going through KYC or through centralised platforms which store your funds. And I'm okay with people picking what feels right for them, as long as I can choose what I prefer, which is non-custodial wallets and local exchanges which don't store customers' funds.

Topic: How did AML kill the decentralized market of Bitcoin? (Read 716 times)