Topic: OpenNode requires KYC now! - page 2. (Read 507 times)

this is basically the "nothing to hide argument". there are a number of problems with it

I hope the same! But there's really nothing to hide!

why volunteer to give up your privacy when it's never been necessary before? How about the risk of 3rd party compromise of your data, which happens literally every day now? why do government/police have us regular folks under surveillance but we know nothing about them?

Harvey A. Silverglate estimated that the common person, on average, unknowingly commits three felonies a day in the US.

i hope the government isn't watching you too closely, avikz!

This news is very fresh and I know there's a lot of users of OpenNode;

OpenNode was known as bitcoin payment gateway through blockchain or lightning network
But lately, they are requiring KYC now to their users for them to withdraw their money. We all know that most of us disagree by putting KYC on every platform we're in.


So there's a lot of users of opennode who bypassed the platform to withdraw their money. Just by filling the Welcome Back Screen, you can now access the platform and withdraw all of your money in there.

It's temporary only and if you knew that you're one of those users of opennode, withdraw it now.

Contrary to a lot of people here, I would welcome such steps taken by legal merchants and businesses. Because legal businesses are bound to the comply with the local laws and regulations. Also I don't understand why would anyone resist such KYC requirement if that particular individual isn't doing anything illegal. If I have a t-shirt store today and my payment settlement provider is asking for KYC, why would I deny the request and take my business elsewhere?? What's the problem in here??

First, if individuals have privacy rights, then invoking "nothing to hide" is irrelevant. Privacy, understood as a right to control access to and uses of spaces, locations, and personal information, means that it is the right holder who determines access. To drive this point home Moore offers the following case. "Imagine upon exiting your house one day you find a person searching through your trash painstakingly putting the shredded notes and documents back together. In response to your stunned silence he proclaims 'you don’t have anything to worry about – there is no reason to hide, is there?'" Second, individuals may wish to hide embarrassing behavior or conduct not accepted by the dominant culture. "Consider someone’s sexual or medical history. Imagine someone visiting a library to learn about alternative lifestyles not accepted by the majority." Finally, Moore argues that "nothing to hide," if taken seriously, could be used against government agents, politicians, and CEO's. This is to turn the “nothing to hide” argument on its head. Moore argues that the NSA agent, politician, police chief, and CEO have nothing to hide so they should embrace total transparency like the rest of us. "But they don’t and when given the technological tools to watch, the politician, police chief, or CEO are almost always convinced that watching others is a good thing."

Harvey A. Silverglate estimated that the common person, on average, unknowingly commits three felonies a day in the US.

I don't think there is any problem with the KYC since it is somehow necessary , the problems regarding bitcoins is rising and therefore governments are getting strict I don't think not doing KYC is even an option for them.
If you give your information to someone then you for sure won't try and do stupid things , end of the story , people should understand that it can actually help to keep a database of every user and track the activities.
KYC is important.

If the design worked, then absolutely.  But the design is deeply flawed and probably causes more identity theft than it prevents.  How many of these incidents would have been far less serious if it wasn't a legal requirement to hold all that data?  Creating vast treasure troves for criminals to plunder is utterly stupid.

If the design worked, then absolutely.  But the design is deeply flawed and probably causes more identity theft than it prevents.  How many of these incidents would have been far less serious if it wasn't a legal requirement to hold all that data?  Creating vast treasure troves for criminals to plunder is utterly stupid.

I have to say that I completely agree. It's sad that many users don't understand that KYC is actually designed for their protection not against them.

It's sad that many users don't understand that KYC is actually designed for their protection not against them.

Contrary to a lot of people here, I would welcome such steps taken by legal merchants and businesses. Because legal businesses are bound to the comply with the local laws and regulations. Also I don't understand why would anyone resist such KYC requirement if that particular individual isn't doing anything illegal. If I have a t-shirt store today and my payment settlement provider is asking for KYC, why would I deny the request and take my business elsewhere?? What's the problem in here??

Stop spreading misinformation. KYC is a thing made by paranoid people to extract personal info under the guise of protection. You just saying stuff but have nothing to back it up with. Are you some sort of lawyer or professional in this field to be making such vast claims.

No one ever needs your KYC the entire thing is bs and directly supports crime not oppose it. You talk of the dark web. Go look how much KYC stuff is for sale there. IT just makes peoples KYC into a commodity and criminals will thrive off of it by steal trading and otherwise abusing it. Without KYC they would have no access to this info.

Payment processors are not getting any better for both the merchants and users, not sure why would anyone use them at this point.

Payment processors are not getting any better for both the merchants and users, not sure why would anyone use them at this point. instead of using third party service to accept payments from your clients, you could set up your own server, node and use BTCPayServer and the problem is solved.

The only way you can set up a service without kyc/aml is if you set it up as a hidden resource in tor or equivalent "darknet" site, or something entirely p2p like Bisq which uses tor hidden service for publishing.

The only place you could still set up services like that without kyc is in an unregulated country, which will no doubt get pressured to adopt regulations anyway.

In such site only the community itself can patrol funds origin, and you could end buying "tainted coins" (ie. stolen from an exchange/phished wallet).

Interesting times indeed...

The only way you can set up a service without kyc/aml is if you set it up as a hidden resource in tor or equivalent "darknet" site, or something entirely p2p like Bisq which uses tor hidden service for publishing.

The only place you could still set up services like that without kyc is in an unregulated country, which will no doubt get pressured to adopt regulations anyway.

In such site only the community itself can patrol funds origin, and you could end buying "tainted coins" (ie. stolen from an exchange/phished wallet).

Interesting times indeed...