Topic: KYC and AML Compliance can help cryptocurrencies to earn legitimacy (Read 310 times)
September 21, 2018, 03:16:22 PM
not entirely true, because the monitoring room is still limited to something that is local, this also influences their readiness factor, if indeed it has become an official reference, I am sure they cannot stem many things. I do not really care about this, if there are indeed a number of legal businesses that require it, I will continue to follow them, and this will indeed be very large in conjunction with the potential of legitimacy, but it will not run efficiently overall.
September 19, 2018, 11:36:56 AM
legality is one of the concerns why big businesses are not accepting cryptos as a mode of payment.
I don't think that legalty is the main obstacle, but rather a lack of understanding.
If you ask most stores if they are willing to accept Bitcoin as form of payment, they'll probably say that the volatility prevents them from doing so with how it is a serious concern. The lack of understanding comes down to the point where they don't know that there are payment gateways willing to take that risk away from them, and also that there is no need to deal with Bitcoin 'physically' if you don't want to.
By using a payment gateway as hedge, you in most cases aren't even subject to what the government thinks is right or wrong. You just receive every payment in fiat. That's how merchants in Russia are doing it to avoid government intervention and it seems to work extremely well for them.
September 19, 2018, 10:06:15 AM
I think yes, it will help, because they are more protecting our tokens to hackers, and this is also their assurance that we do not enjoy them, it is often used on ICO's. so it's a big thing in the field of cryptocurrency.
There are no so called protection about hackers. They can breach anything if they wanted to be, they even attacks and defamed *.gov websites, what's more a trading exchange or a ICO project? So there's really the risk that your personal data will be exposed and exploited by them.
I agree that it can bring some air of legitimacy but it will not be the main reason for bitcoin to go mainstream. It boils down as how people used it, whether as currency (what we wanted) or store of value (as investment). So it really cuts both way, somewhat contradictory so for us, we might or might not followed the procedures but as long as we enjoy using bitcoin and crypto then who needs KYC/AML after all?
September 12, 2018, 11:44:07 PM
Basically as a consumer I really don't care for Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrencies to be recognized by our government as long as there is no word of prohibition I will freely use my cryptos in some of my transactions that needs to be paid in crypto. But putting myself in the shoes of producers I know that being recognized by the government as a totally legal way of paying something I will consider that as a green light for me to accept cryptocurrencies as payment in my business, legality is one of the concerns why big businesses are not accepting cryptos as a mode of payment.
September 12, 2018, 09:57:58 PM
The collection of confidential information about holders of crypto-currency, called the KYC check, should be granted only to state bodies or authorized bodies that have undergone special verification. Then it will be useful to people and the state, and crypto currency. However, the requirement to pass the KYC check by the ICO team, which themselves, as a rule, does not pass any verification and 60-80 percent themselves are potential scammers, I just get annoyed. And we are still discussing what will really be good to pass fraudsters our identification data and copies of our passports. First you need to put things in order here to exclude fraud in the ICO area, and only then to talk about the need to check KYC.
July 23, 2018, 11:38:56 PM
I think yes, it will help, because they are more protecting our tokens to hackers, and this is also their assurance that we do not enjoy them, it is often used on ICO's. so it's a big thing in the field of cryptocurrency.
July 20, 2018, 07:40:12 PM
Not necessarily.
Regulation will help cryptocurrency businesses gain legitimacy, for sure. However, I don't think that forcing KYC onto users will help a lot regarding its legitimacy. It's attacking the users that are using the service, not trying to keep the integrity of the business or the coin itself in check.
It's going to restrict access to a lot of things. Crypto is supposed to be an anonymous currency, and when you have KYC/AML, especially over the top measures that we're seeing already (like asking where funds are sourced), it makes it extremely difficult to use the service and drive people away from it altogether.
I think that we're going to go down the path of forced KYC nonetheless on all regulated centralized bitcoin services, which may see decentralized versions pop up in response.
Well to tell you honestly there is not place for assets that are anonymous right now. The idea of anonymity will be a thing of the past for cryptocurrencies as the governments are aware of this features that is why they made kyc and aml in the first place. We cannot really push for unknown transactions in this world anymore it is making us look more suspicious then what we are used to. With crypto being anonymous the potential for illegal transactions like crime funding and money laundering will always be there. Regulation will help cryptocurrency businesses gain legitimacy, for sure. However, I don't think that forcing KYC onto users will help a lot regarding its legitimacy. It's attacking the users that are using the service, not trying to keep the integrity of the business or the coin itself in check.
It's going to restrict access to a lot of things. Crypto is supposed to be an anonymous currency, and when you have KYC/AML, especially over the top measures that we're seeing already (like asking where funds are sourced), it makes it extremely difficult to use the service and drive people away from it altogether.
I think that we're going to go down the path of forced KYC nonetheless on all regulated centralized bitcoin services, which may see decentralized versions pop up in response.
https://www.activism.net/cypherpunk/manifesto.html
July 18, 2018, 01:36:51 PM
Not necessarily.
Regulation will help cryptocurrency businesses gain legitimacy, for sure. However, I don't think that forcing KYC onto users will help a lot regarding its legitimacy. It's attacking the users that are using the service, not trying to keep the integrity of the business or the coin itself in check.
It's going to restrict access to a lot of things. Crypto is supposed to be an anonymous currency, and when you have KYC/AML, especially over the top measures that we're seeing already (like asking where funds are sourced), it makes it extremely difficult to use the service and drive people away from it altogether.
I think that we're going to go down the path of forced KYC nonetheless on all regulated centralized bitcoin services, which may see decentralized versions pop up in response.
Well to tell you honestly there is not place for assets that are anonymous right now. The idea of anonymity will be a thing of the past for cryptocurrencies as the governments are aware of this features that is why they made kyc and aml in the first place. We cannot really push for unknown transactions in this world anymore it is making us look more suspicious then what we are used to. With crypto being anonymous the potential for illegal transactions like crime funding and money laundering will always be there. Regulation will help cryptocurrency businesses gain legitimacy, for sure. However, I don't think that forcing KYC onto users will help a lot regarding its legitimacy. It's attacking the users that are using the service, not trying to keep the integrity of the business or the coin itself in check.
It's going to restrict access to a lot of things. Crypto is supposed to be an anonymous currency, and when you have KYC/AML, especially over the top measures that we're seeing already (like asking where funds are sourced), it makes it extremely difficult to use the service and drive people away from it altogether.
I think that we're going to go down the path of forced KYC nonetheless on all regulated centralized bitcoin services, which may see decentralized versions pop up in response.
July 17, 2018, 06:41:33 PM
Not really, some ICO are requiring KYC from their consumer or customer since there project are often banned from a certain country and they don't like to be affected in the future so they make sure that every person is located on countries that allowed people to invest on crypto.
July 17, 2018, 06:02:03 PM
Yes, with kyc it will make the government easier to accept crypto, but when it happened its mean we are under regulation and our identity is known by others, it destroy the bitcoin feature of anonymity, but at one side we need the government approval to make bitcoin growth expanded, but if the regulation of kyc is implemented, I afraid a lot of investors will leave crypto
July 17, 2018, 08:04:23 AM
Regulations, if written correctly, can help cryptocurrencies earn legitimacy. There are still a lot of people who are convinced that they're a get rich scheme, so if regulations are somehow able to help protect money/people within the cryptospace, people would be more likely to open their minds and engage.
That being said, KYC and AML do nothing for the users themselves and have no direct effect on how they view crypto. They're mostly in place for businesses and governments to be able to prevent abuse and enforce rules -- which, in turn, may help cryptocurrencies earn legitimacy.
That being said, KYC and AML do nothing for the users themselves and have no direct effect on how they view crypto. They're mostly in place for businesses and governments to be able to prevent abuse and enforce rules -- which, in turn, may help cryptocurrencies earn legitimacy.
July 17, 2018, 06:24:41 AM
Not necessarily.
Regulation will help cryptocurrency businesses gain legitimacy, for sure. However, I don't think that forcing KYC onto users will help a lot regarding its legitimacy. It's attacking the users that are using the service, not trying to keep the integrity of the business or the coin itself in check.
It's going to restrict access to a lot of things. Crypto is supposed to be an anonymous currency, and when you have KYC/AML, especially over the top measures that we're seeing already (like asking where funds are sourced), it makes it extremely difficult to use the service and drive people away from it altogether.
I think that we're going to go down the path of forced KYC nonetheless on all regulated centralized bitcoin services, which may see decentralized versions pop up in response.
Regulation will help cryptocurrency businesses gain legitimacy, for sure. However, I don't think that forcing KYC onto users will help a lot regarding its legitimacy. It's attacking the users that are using the service, not trying to keep the integrity of the business or the coin itself in check.
It's going to restrict access to a lot of things. Crypto is supposed to be an anonymous currency, and when you have KYC/AML, especially over the top measures that we're seeing already (like asking where funds are sourced), it makes it extremely difficult to use the service and drive people away from it altogether.
I think that we're going to go down the path of forced KYC nonetheless on all regulated centralized bitcoin services, which may see decentralized versions pop up in response.
July 16, 2018, 02:00:00 PM
If you really want cryptocurrencies to move forward then KYCs and AMLs are nothing, they will only compromise the feature of anonymity of this cryptocurrencies. This is the governments only trade off in ruling in favor for this cryptocurrencies which I think is better compared to completely banning cryptocurrencies because of the way how criminals are using it. Just by knowing all the people who are owning cryptocurrencies is a big step for fighting this illegal activities. Talking about price movements I think that in the long-term we will see that this will bring a positive effect on cryptocurrencies.
July 16, 2018, 08:56:17 AM
The first thing that KFC and AML will do is building of confidence in the investors that there money is safe and to the new customers or those who are inspiring to join, it will legitimate the market in their sight but to existing investors, it won't lead to legitimacy because we know that is difficult to happen with the way cryptocurrency is structured.
July 16, 2018, 03:44:52 AM
The use of crypto is limited to just people who are here to make quick cash. I think KYC and AML compliances by Fincen will give it more legitimacy and general people will move towards it and would use this as a payment method. Read more: https://shuftipro.com/blogs/kyc-aml-compliance-can-help-cryptocurrencies-earn-legitimacy/
What you suggest?
What you suggest?
KYC and AML compliance in crypto market can certainly increase its adoption rate. However, it will be directly against the crypto market framework. Cryptos are not meant to be regulated by a central authority. If it happens, it won't have any difference from fiat money which is stringently regulated by the respective governments. I am having a mixed reaction on this matter because government's regulation is necessary to increase the reach of the cryptocurrency but on the other hand governments won't allow cryptos to be flowed into the system without KYC and AML compliance. So can't really conclude my argument here.
But yes, legitimacy is one factor that will help bitcoin to increase its reach and more people will be interested in the cryptocurrencies. So it will generally increase the cash flow within the system. Probably good for the long run!
July 16, 2018, 03:12:34 AM
Some countries demand KYC and AML compliance for financial affairs, every time we deal with company or business relate to bank.
The surge in interest for bitcoin meant many cryptocurrency exchanges require customers to comply with it.
But it doesn't meant government will legitimate cryptocurrency as conventional means of payment, it just help government to control money flows and counter illegal transactions, at least it is a step towards positive acceptance.
The surge in interest for bitcoin meant many cryptocurrency exchanges require customers to comply with it.
But it doesn't meant government will legitimate cryptocurrency as conventional means of payment, it just help government to control money flows and counter illegal transactions, at least it is a step towards positive acceptance.
Exactly my point. At the end of the day, we should make sure that anything that can be used by bad guys should be compliant or regulated enough to protect the people. In the end it is for the people I believe but do fill out that poll so you guys can get a better idea regarding how many people support this.
July 16, 2018, 02:45:00 AM
Some countries demand KYC and AML compliance for financial affairs, every time we deal with company or business relate to bank.
The surge in interest for bitcoin meant many cryptocurrency exchanges require customers to comply with it.
But it doesn't meant government will legitimate cryptocurrency as conventional means of payment, it just help government to control money flows and counter illegal transactions, at least it is a step towards positive acceptance.
The surge in interest for bitcoin meant many cryptocurrency exchanges require customers to comply with it.
But it doesn't meant government will legitimate cryptocurrency as conventional means of payment, it just help government to control money flows and counter illegal transactions, at least it is a step towards positive acceptance.
July 15, 2018, 09:13:46 PM
if indeed KYC and AML can be a solution of legitimacy for bitcoin in every country then I strongly agree with this rule as long as supported by related government for the security of our personal identity in order not to be misused by irresponsible person
I do support it too because it would mean that people would have the impression that cryptocurrencies are not just another investment scheme but it is actually a currency that can be used for ease of transactions and we would have a leap forward for mass adoption as those who are skeptic about it would trust it since it is regulated.
Governments are powerful and they should be, not only for a single reason. My opinion is a bit contradictory. We can't go against the government for all the time in life. Yet we need to encourage them for taking steps towards legitimacy of Bitcoin and other virtual assets.
People who go against the government rules commit crime. Those people will be happy with a blurred impression of BTC who are involved in unethical and truly illegal activities. But those governments are welcomed who accepts the decentralized model of currency.
People who go against the government rules commit crime. Those people will be happy with a blurred impression of BTC who are involved in unethical and truly illegal activities. But those governments are welcomed who accepts the decentralized model of currency.
Although we are pushing forward the concept that we are freeing ourselves from the control of the government, the truth is that we still need their approval so that we can move forward and more people trust cryptocurrencies which would possibly end up in mass adoption. They are powerful and if ever they decide to just ban cryptocurrency in the country then they can do so.
July 15, 2018, 03:39:07 PM
Not sure about that since KYC is to trace investors and buyers, but if the project team members and adviser of the ICO project will provide KYC to organization where ICO Project is registered then it would be great!! It would be awesome!!
July 15, 2018, 02:10:28 PM
The use of crypto is limited to just people who are here to make quick cash. I think KYC and AML compliances by Fincen will give it more legitimacy and general people will move towards it and would use this as a payment method. Read more: https://shuftipro.com/blogs/kyc-aml-compliance-can-help-cryptocurrencies-earn-legitimacy/
What you suggest?
What you suggest?
The only way the whole of KYC is going to be used to earn legitimacy is when its being coordinated by the legalised government regulatory agency responsible for that until that happened, its just some random people who felt they needed to justify their continued stay in business and need to impress those who will guarantee that existence and that is why even platforms asking for KYCs didn't ask for uniform information despite the fact that they might be operating within the same jurisdiction and serving clients from the same jurisdiction.
Jump to: