Topic: Widespread adoption may result to lesser anonymity, one of my biggest fears. - page 2. (Read 245 times)

It is claimed sometimes to be an obstacle, but it's not a very fair concern. For example, cash is not being tracked, people can largely use it with providing zero ID, and sometimes in significant amounts. Moreover, if the matter is IDs, one could try to legalize BTC but demand custodial wallets for it to be used as legal tender, of example. And yet it's not happening, not causing widespread adoption. I think there isn't enough interest in adopting Bitcoin, both in political circles and in populations, often. Also, volatility and scaling are sometimes major issues as well.

Price of adoption, recognition, acceptance, acknowledgment, etc. Some things many say they want for Bitcoin. Would have been naive to expect less anonymity, and this was probably recognised early on (hence cryptocurrency alternatives that are actually aimed at maintaining and increasing anonymity).

I'm happy with private use, which, just like any other activity with desired increase in privacy, will require more deliberate use. To keep the state in check, always.

I'm okay with that.

That's the main pain point for the governments behind their slow movement in making a decision about cryptocurrencies. Banking system is a fully trackable system and work closely with the government agencies. With cryptocurrency, anyone can maintain anonymity if he/she isn't buying from a centralized KYC enabled exchange.

That's why every government is trying to bring in regulations around it. Tgey are not allowing centralized exchanges to operate without having a robust kyc system. Tax reports burdens are increasing etc. I believe that's the way forward here because governments won't allow anything that lowers their control on money circulation.

Well, depends. Bitcoin isn't going to become less anonymous, however the companies, and exchanges operating with Bitcoin will. Since KYC (Know Your Customer) will likely be stepped up specifically on companies transacting in cryptocurrency, and I imagine the reason given by the governments will be the risk of no accountability, and therefore increases the potential for crime.

My argument would probably be that criminals probably don't want their transactions on a public ledger, but maybe that wouldn't be enough. So, while I do agree that KYC in certain circumstances makes sense, you're not going to be seeing me encourage the use of it, because of the privacy invasion, and the fact that users like me, and you are restricted, just because some users use it as a means of paying/selling illegal activities.

I don't know what the solution is to this, if we do want more adoption, then we likely have to come to accept that companies will be heavily scrutinised, and heavy handed KYC will likely be implemented. However, if you aren't planning on using a exchange, and assuming that P2P (Peer to Peer) exchanges aren't required to change by law, then there are ways to do it while keeping your privacy intact. Although, I do believe P2P exchanges will also be required to keep KYC in the future. I'm not sure how they would go about that, since data protection does exist, and you can't rely on someone who knows nothing about keeping sensitive data secure, so it'll likely be through the P2P platform, which again basically defeats the point of P2P since a centralised platform will be keeping your data on file, and very likely selling it.

In my opinion there are two reason why government are not adopting Bitcoin.

1. Those governments which have officially adopted Bitcoin were going through economic crisis and Bitcoin was the best option available in that situation.
2. Government wants to control everything and especially finance and with Bitcoin it is not possible. You need to regulation and it is not that easy as every country has different economic issues.

Depressingly as bitcoin adoption increases so will the loss of anonymity. As bitcoin associated organisations/companies/businesses grow they will be more and more prominent. With this rise in recognition comes a rise in regulation  as governments don’t want to lose out an any tax income. With government envolvement comes AML and KYC. Unfortunately, I believe it’s inevitable - it’s just a matter of time

There may be a lot of users who will be forced to submit their data to platforms to finally withdraw the BTC that is put on hold. I'm currently in a situation which my coins are stuck in a platform that is asking me to send documents. I'm still in a dilemma whether its worth submitting or not. This could be the result of the Central bank and the government tracking users in our country.

But I don't think it will prevent the widespread adoption when people will also be seeking ways to save their money from inflation. The profit to be made when their money is into BTC is much tempting than keeping fiat in the bank.

I do understand why so many governments could not just adopt Bitcoin and let their people use it especially as a currency and it is because this is something that they can't control or manipulate anytime...unlike their own national currencies. However, we are hoping that in the next few years, the success of Bitcoin in El Salvador can make other countries realize that Bitcoin is unstoppable and is not their real enemy and that it can even be helping their country, their people and their economy in the long run.

They could, but they don't seem to be willing to, as it means losing power and control. At first they didn't like the idea of Bitcoin, but since they realized they couldn't get rid of it, they tolerated it, now what they do is try to control it as much as possible with AML/KYC laws to the max.

The way I see it, in a few years the use of Bitcoin with privacy is going to be even less than it is now.

The biggest issue limiting most government consider and majorly the reason why bitcoins adoption has been slow is in my opinion the anonymity involved and the inability for government to directly be a party to your transaction.
If there were no such issues, gaining widespread adoption will not even be a topic for discussion as it would have happened already or almost done being adopted I think.

Can the governments of the world let bitcoin become fully in use in their respective countries without pushing for lesser anonymity and a way for them to monitor the system?