Topic: The PATRIOT Act comes to cryptocurrency - page 3. (Read 2102 times)

The question is: How will the government be able to enforce KYC in decentralized protocols/services and non-custodial wallets? For what I know, it's impossible to do such a thing. There's nothing stopping a person from acquiring BTC (or any other crypto) without KYC and storing it in a non-custodial wallet. Even if it's "illegal". People from China have already been doing this, even when the country outright rejected crypto/Blockchain tech. In fact, crypto has become more popular in the region.

Tighter crypto regulations will only make decentralization stronger in the long run. It's already too late to put a stop to the revolution. If you thought censoring mixers was enough, then you haven't seen nothing yet. I believe governments (particularly the US government) will target privacy coins like Monero and Zcash next. They will make an excuse that such coins are being used massively for money laundering and tax evasion. This will be a never-ending war between crypto and mainstream governments. As long ss people stand up and fight, don't expect the revolution to go anywhere soon.

United States want to maintain their authoritative behavior in every place in the world and that is why they are so eager to enact such laws. When they are unable to take control, they try to impose by enacting various laws. The SEC is working as a major tool for them. Trying to take control crypto currency but only in BTC they could not control. They will certainly fail to control it if we move away from those centralized platforms. No matter how hard they try, they can't control it. Bitcoin would completely collapse if it was controlled by such an entity.


https://bitcoiner.guide/nokyconly/

The main enemy in the cryptocurrency world is “KYC” and this KYC completely diverts the religion of cryptocurrency. Only one major feature of cryptocurrency is that it would work against the conventional financial system. It would have no centralization. It is completely independent, anonymous and supports transparency. But if users are made KYC then that freedom, transparency, anonymity everything will be disappear.

US Senators Elizabeth Warren and Roger Marshall were the first to propose such legislation that would require every cryptocurrency-related corporation or those associated with such services to perform KYC as a bank. ‍So i think The purpose for which cryptocurrency was born that will go in vain. It can be said that KYC is like killing cryptocurrency by strangulation.

Kraken is a US exchange, and its founder, Jesse Powell, is an American. It is notable for being not only one of the first and longest-standing US-based BTC exchanges, but for also holding out on over-reaching demands from the government, to the farthest extent possible. An example of this would be continuing to list XMR when most other US exchanges have delisted it out of fear of future regulation & compliance issues.


This part is still true.

This is rediculous. So we know for a fact that they try to control exchanges because they know they can't control bitcoin fundamentally. Which means they know they can't shut it down and they try to control it using otherr techniques. Sounds like they are desperate. P2P exchanges for the win.

I assume US. We even saw that Kraken, a non US exchange, was demanded to provide user data to the IRS for auditing and after a court battle, Kraken lost. So, the US has power even outside of the US.

In relation to this topic we are talking about US exchanges in any case, so to answer your question shortly: the US government.

They would need to obey the rule because otherwise, no business, or fines, or court battles. It probably won't be prominent today or tomorrow, but once this is all enforced it will change the landscape. However, they can't control dexes, they can't control code. There will be routes to avoid these rules for for those who don't like them, that goes for both companies and individuals.

Which government though?

I mean an exchange is an exchange. It's a business that exchanges from one currency to another. In our case, a crypto exchange buys FIAT and sells crypto and vice-versa.

That said, how can Gemini know which other exchanges are "permitted" by the government and more importantly, why do they need to obey to this rule? I mean why would they need to allow incoming funds only from certain other exchanges? That's stupid. It would also decrease their incoming liquidity.

This is good news in a sense...Why? Because this is pretty much admission that they are giving up on the on chain analysis scam that has been pedalled for years! If it actually worked in all scenarios, why on earth would they come out with this crap?

I am sure that they will not succeed, just like they haven't succeeded to erode privacy to date.

Now, this is even more validation that we need a board for cyber security and privacy here. If we don't add it, ignorant people who don't respect thus rule when it is implemented will be unfairly punished, and this is the downside. If we all have good practice, I say good luck to them! If we are weak and allow them to succeed, it will be detrimental for many.

---

If you agree with a board in bitcointalk for cybersecurity and privacy:
Discuss here | Vote here

---

Whoever bows down to permitting full surveillance to government and pays the fee to get the approved badge...like any other form of government approval.

What makes an exchange approved or non-approved? Who approves an exchange?

As I've said before, this is the clear direction the US government is heading in. They want the only bitcoin to be bitcoin which is bought on fully KYCed exchanges, stored on fully KYCed exchanges, and not sent anywhere except to other fully KYCed exchanges. They want complete control over everything that you "own", and they want complete surveillance of everything that you do. As with this piece of legislation, using any non-KYCed service will be illegal. Hell, even holding your own coins will be illegal.

I understand this has already started in other countries. For example this news story from a few days ago: https://www.nobsbitcoin.com/gemini-uk-to-prohibit-regular-bitcoin-transactions/

I had a similar argument against someone before about self custody and how the government wants to take this away from us. It appears this thread might teach him.

There are also news updates that treasury officials want congress to help fight against the illegal use of the cryptospace. If congress agrees then there might have more laws against self custody, there will be stricter KYC and there will certainly be a certain classification of people who will be banned from using the cryptospace.

However, everything from the treasury department is allegedly without the promise of showing proof.



A senior Treasury Department official said the Biden administration wants new powers from Congress to aid in a crackdown on the illicit use of cryptocurrencies, citing digital asset flows allegedly connected to Palestinian militant group Hamas.

Treasury has been in communication with Democrats and Republicans about actions that they could take, Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo said Tuesday in Washington at the annual meeting of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, a trade group.

Source https://www.wsj.com/articles/congress-must-aid-fight-against-illicit-use-of-crypto-treasury-official-says-1bebab02

I took all my hard drives, hardware wallets, paper wallets, steel engravings, and other back ups out with me for my semi-regular camping trip. I think it's good for them to get some fresh air now and then and feel the wind in their circuits. I like to sail to a secluded island in the middle of a nearby lake where I definitely haven't buried my 8 tonnes of gold (which were previously in my basement until I also unfortunately lost that in a tragic boating accident). Unfortunately my boat sank since I hadn't bothered to repair it after it sank three months ago, and I lost everything, including the map to the gold I don't have.

I'm not too beat up about it because I hadn't accumulated too much since I last lost all my keys in the aforementioned identical accident three months ago.

Could you share some details?

I'm really curious. I know several similar stories from the news, but I have never met a person who could just talk about it like that. I don’t know what amount we’re talking about, but I think your sense of regret is simply immeasurable. My condolences! In the end, everything that doesn't happen happens for the better.

Oh, me too. I guess boating accidents happen quite often nowadays, or perhaps we 've been in the same accident.

Seriously though:


How exactly do you think they can bitcoin? I don't judge you, I ask for a reasonable way to do it. You will realise that one of the reasons why Bitcoin is superior to Gold is this. They can't confiscate Bitcoin like gold, unless of course they ban the internet everywhere on planet earth.

P.S Even if they ban internet on the planet, thanks to blockstream satellite (https://blockstream.com/satellite/), Bitcoin may survive. 

You have entirely misunderstood that post. It is GitHub which was acquired by Microsoft, not Samourai. The only coinjoin implementation which bans certain coins is Wasabi.

This is just the usual nonsense from the government misusing some current event to justify their mass surveillance machine. The evidence shows Hamas have raised barely any money via cryptocurrency: https://nitter.cz/nic__carter/status/1717210060777009636#m

Good luck confiscating bitcoin like they confiscated gold. I unfortunately lost all my private keys in an unfortunate boating accident.

The Biden Administration has been fighting against crypto real hard with its strict regulations. First it was Tornado.Cash, then the SEC's aggresive stance towards crypto (by classifying almost every digital asset as a security), and now the enforcement of KYC/AML across all crypto exchanges. I've read somewhere that the US Treasury Department wants to target crypto mixers as they can be used by Hamas for money laundering/terrorist financing. Isn't Fiat currencies like the USD and EUR used for said purpose? All of this could stifle innovation/growth for the crypto industry in the long run.

I believe the US government is doing this because it doesn't want people to embrace the full benefits of decentralization + censorship-resistance that comes with using Bitcoin. If this keeps up, people will end up trading BTC through P2P or truly-decentralized exchanges. It will be a "headache" for the government, because it's much harder to identify people using these alternatives (after all, there's no KYC). One can only imagine the US government will eventually "ban" Bitcoin like it banned Gold a few decades ago. I really hope Americans in support of crypto stand against the new legislation for the healthy growth of the industry. Who knows what will happen in the future?

That should be a joke, or is this another samourai we are talking about? I haven't verified this, but apparently they work for microsoft and ban sanctioned countries.

---

Ever since the invention of CCTVs, and smart phones, achieving privacy has become expensive, you can have it, but you have to pay the price.
One thing our mentally happy elites running the governments can't understand is the fact that, more you censor and try to control people, more privacy oriented projects such as Monero, Tor etc would gain adoption, they don't realize that they are slowly digging their own graves.

The exact thing they are hiding is still unknown to the general public but it's glaring that know the potential of Bitcoin, they also know that people investing in it are inevitable, and approving the spot ETF will give them international competitiveness, economic gain, and regulatory control that's why they will want to the ETF to IOU form of investment.

I have not encountered any problem with it as well, so far at least. But if the point is privacy and completely staying away from KYC, I'm afraid this kind of transaction isn't an option. Even if you choose P2P all the time, if you're receiving or sending money through banks whenever you sell or buy Bitcoin, respectively, your identity is still known and you can easily be traced. That's why I'm seeing it as somehow pointless. A third party is still involved and that party has your complete personal information.

What I see here is that governments, once they have realised that bitcoin is unstoppable, are interested in people owning them with custodial services, such as ETFs, which could be seized at any given moment, as opposed to people getting used to holding their bitcoins with their private keys.  That way, something like Executive Order 6102 would be much more easily enforceable.

I'm sure there were those at the time who had small gold pieces that they were able to hide and save from seizure, but they would be of little use to them, unless they could find someone trustworthy to do a P2P deal, unlikely at the time, and the most they could do is hold out until possession was legal again, which, given that it was legal in the 1970s, they might have been dead by then.

This legislation is bad news.

Ook sorry!


I have the same point of view but I try to also understand people who will prefer buying ETFs rather than self custody bitcoin. Anyway, my point is nothing forces us to interact with those services. At least I hope so