Topic: Kyc is hardly used offline, why not online? - page 2. (Read 589 times)

What human rights are violated if they ask you for your identification before providing service?

There are numerous cases where IDs are asked to buy alcohol or tobacco, buy things over the national cash limit for single purchases when entering a casino when staying at a hotel, or when boarding a plane, I honestly don't know how some of you live that you haven't encountered hundred of these things already! You do a currency swap you need an ID, you pen a bank account you need an ID, you buy a ticket as a student you need ID, you pawn something you need ID, you need to sign a contract for your ISP, electricity, and gas provider you need ID. Hell, even some delivery guys will ask you for an ID if you were to receive a package with higher than usual value that's prepaid.

Even for offline purchases we have been giving our IDs too for example here I have to submit ID while buying or selling Gold and for cars you need to provide ID and other docs that makes that we are giving KYC information for most of the big purchases. Meanwhile you may not be giving ID but look at the invoice of amazon purchase you will be given with all your details that you used to open the account so KYC is kind of mandatory everywhere.

KYC is hardly used offline because in real life, people see your face. Do you walk with a black full face mask? No, right? So, everyone sees your face and knows your identity. Maybe they don't know your name at first but they know your visual appearance. Try and walk in the street with a black full face mask, especially in front of policeman and you'll be asked to give them your ID.

In virtual world, you often get asked to submit KYC documentation because they can't identify you with your IP, it's just a number for them. When you submit your KYC, they know that user X with Y IP is a real person. If they had a database of user with this certain IP is this and this, then they wouldn't ask you to submit KYC.

This kind of work is done in very few countries where most people do not trust others because there are many countries that lend goods because of familiarity. But it will take some time because then it gets used to it and that is what happens in most developing countries like Japan, China, Korea. But if this facility is not available then the money we have will be diverted from here to there which will be your loss and because of this you will prove these companies wrong and do not use for KYC.

When all our data is distributed among people, we have to worry about it. Although our image and many things are used only as a collection, do not use it for our wrong work. This thing is very useful because if you have to create an account and you need it badly because of your money coming into it, you will not be able to do anything except KYC so it is very useful.

Oh lord, don't get me started on this topic.  Seems to me that all of this shit kicked off into high gear after 9/11/01 when dickhead George Bush pushed the Patriot Act onto the masses and after that the US government (and others who followed suit) could surveil their citizens with impunity in the name of fighting terrorism.

Nowadays it's money laundering, but what I'm thinking is that they want to make sure they can stick their hands as deep into our pockets as they can in the form of taxes.  With digital currencies that have some measure of privacy, that's a threat to the tax man--but which reason do you think would be least popular when spouted off by banks, politicians, and whoever else is in the position to give an explanation as to why they need so much of your personal data in order to perform a financial transaction?  Yep, terrorism and money laundering wouldn't be the answer.

I'm pessimistic as to whether we can ever return from our present situation of having no privacy whatsoever in our finances or anything else.  As technology advances, this shit only gets worse--and from what I can tell, a lot of the younger generation doesn't seem to care all that much.  They're not the only ones of course, but they're going to be our future leaders and policymakers, so it's kind of important that they not be apathetic about what's going on.

Ugh^10

Here, when you purchase items using your credit card, there are times that the cashier will have to ask for your ID, so yes, you will have to present your ID before buying at a physical store specially if it's worth like $1000 or higher. Or even for less, like when you buy in a grocery, cashiers will demand some ID for you.

And perhaps this is due to crimes as well, there are a lot of stolen credit cards being used not just online, but physically as well. Criminals here have the audacity to do that, they are not afraid, even they know that there are a lot of CCTV's around.


I agree, with the advancement of technology, there will be laws and regulations that should safeguard our privacy. Again, here in our country, we already have that kind of law, it's just a matter of implementation.

With certain purchases, yeah, ID is required here. Not with daily groceries or anything like that, but with gambling, or buying stocks, cryptos etc. But it's coming more and more mandatory. Probably not with groceries and small purchases, but for expensive stuff it's coming for offline as well.
And reason you haven't asked kyc before is that regulations on that are changing rapidly. In 2016 no one cared if someone holded crypto, and kyc wasn't a thing in most places.

But about your second sentence: How would you know that person who is buying hasn't been involved in crimes or suspicious activities without kyc:ing them?

From my understanding and best of my knowledge I have never seen where kyc is required to sell a physical properties or even in exchange of goods and properties but what I understood is that after the sale of property is successful, they would go in a legal way to write for exchange of ownership, which the property is rightfully belong to, but on other aspects with digital economy we need a form of kyc or any thing that gives us legal representation to have full access to the exchange or be it at the gambling industry to be able to have access to site while either making withdrawal. Now our identify showface whom we are in the real digital world and of course this is the only way we are being spotted out while involving ourselves with exchange or any cryptocurrency platform.

The laws are different on each country, but there are some countries that for big purchases you cannot use cash or you need to identify yourself, and this is done in order to curb money laundering and other similar crimes, so identifying yourself before a purchase is in fact very common, it is just that we have not reached the point in which you will have to identify yourself for every single purchase no matter how small it is, something that we are already seeing on the online world.

Indeed, it is. They will find ways because there is always a hole in the system. Why? IMO, the system allows those holes to serve specific purposes, like corps or other "beneficial" agreements it sees fit. It's up to others to find and use those holes/ windows in the system for their purposes. It's like "The Matrix"...

Physical currency exchange is already quite regulated and KYC verification is almost always required for exchange.

A small digression: when the machine counts banknotes in a currency exchange office, does it record serial numbers on each currency? If so, then in conjunction with a KYC, cash is also partially deanonymized.

Can a person's privacy be violated by the state and government? They also require KYCs everywhere.

There are some countries where the collection of personal data is prohibited by law, of course, except for government organizations.

As for careful handling of personal data, you need to tell this to the government that collects this data, and then, suddenly, this data ends up in the public domain or is sold on the darknet.

There are not many people who prefer not to have any contact with the modern world, relative to the general mass.

Using cryptocurrencies is not at all equivalent to using cryptocurrency exchangers, which, in fact, you can do without. Have you heard of bisq, for example?

Nah, unless it's a credit card. In my country, it has become strict when using a credit card because some are stealing or hacking it. So, they now require a credit card user when buying stuff to present an ID whenever they purchase things from the grocery.

It will be difficult in a remote place you say? No, I don't think so. They are now using the Internet too so they are informed about what is happening to the world. I don't think we should underestimate the people living in the provinces anymore. Some of them are even better than those who live in the cities and they are teaching people in their neighbors so that they won't be left out by the new technology.

Hmmm

There's only one category of items I know of for which there is a likely chance you'll be asked to complete KYC if you buy them online, and that is servers. Not server hardware but renting them. And even that is only done by the really big players like Hetzner, OVH, Scaleway and others.

I guess it's because of the possibility of using stolen credit cards to pay for XMR mining using those servers.

As a rule, KYC (Know Your Customer) is a mandatory requirement for working with cryptocurrency, and the need for this procedure depends on the legislation of a specific country. For example, in Lithuania, which is considered one of the most crypto-friendly jurisdictions, KYC requirements are strictly regulated. Companies seeking a crypto license must comply with all AML (Anti-Money Laundering) and KYC standards to ensure transparency and security in financial transactions.

We obtained our crypto license through https://adamsmith.lt/en/crypto-license/lithuania/, and they provided a lot of useful information about how KYC works in different countries. If you're interested in this topic, I highly recommend reaching out to them—they are well-versed in cryptocurrency market regulations.

Money launderers will always find a way how to evade tax. Of course, humans are smart enough to look for alternative means up until they are not yet getting caught by authorities. I believe it is already innate to humans about this kind of behavior. It will only change the form but still the presence of this activity is still widespread. The technology is getting sophisticated and so their means how to execute it.
The implementation of KYC is only one action how to mitigate launderers. But of course, it is not the ultimate solution. These people will always find a loophole how to go around such requirement.

You are completely wrong. I've been into casinos and betting shops in multiple different countries, each one has required very particular identity checks before allowing you to gamble. These gambling spots were notorious in the past for being used to wash money because they deal in cash, so now the money is meticulously counted so they know where every dollar comes from. You don't have to go into these betting locations, so it's a bit pathetic to claim that your human rights are being violated. If you want to set up a non-KYC casino then go ahead, however you will likely have to restrict citizens from most of the big spender countries or you'll end up being targeted by their regulators.

The story of KYC began in the 1970s when banks (BSA) created it to detect and report suspicious activity. Its purpose was (and supposedly still is) to combat financial crime and money laundering. So, even if you buy general goods, cars, paintings, etc., ordinary things or services, KYC is already in you. You are marked from the start, whether you like it or not. The thing is that every time you will pass it again and again and again in order to "cross-check" you.
We all know though, that this didn't stop black money from moving around, bypassing the system. From 1970 until now, 54 years (soon 55) money laundry still exists and their numbers are bigger every year. Something is not working as they say it will...

I like the question and it makes you wonder as one who dislikes KYC. But I don't think there is that much of a difference. Shopping online or offline never requires ID. Most online shops are hungry for more personal data than strictly required, but entering phony data has never not gotten me the shopped for product.

Nobody would ask for your ID, when you are purchasing ordinary goods and services(excluding weapons or alcohol). It doesn't matter if you are purchasing them online or offline. IDs are required in the financial sector and the gambling industry. Those industries are heavily regulated, because of the risk of money laundering and tax evasion. If you value your privacy that much, just don't open a bank account and never use an online casino. There's no way around those KYC rules and regulations. It's really difficult to stay unbanked in the modern day world.

I don't think that any business establishments will be interested in your KYC, they want to sale their goods and services to you and collect your money, case closed with your transactions. So I believe that any businesses online that requires your KYC requirements is because of government regulations. Normally I don't think that business establishments cares if you stole the money that you want to use to patronize them or whether your deposits with them is a disguise for money laundering, what they're basically after is to make profits off you.

In a centralized system like government structures, they want to be in the know and control how money is being circulated in their economies. They know that criminals will want to launder money through online means where they'll not be detected, that is the reason why governments mandates KYC for none physical transactions. Payments that are made online has to pass through accounts which the banks have the details of every account holders. Also when it comes to businesses like crypto casinos where people can use Bitcoin that is decentralized to fund their accounts, they now need to complete KYC requirements. In essence, the requirements of KYC online is because of the government, not necessarily that business owners are interested in them.