Is anyone else starting to become a bit excited?

makeorbrake wrote: »

Yes, they do - and I've given you more than one example. You provided no solution for the example at hand i.e. how do you provide a utility bill when there is no utility bill.

If you don't have a utility bill, they will ask for other info. I've opened at least two bank accounts abroad without utility bills

https://www.litrg.org.uk/tax-guides/migrants/other-migrant-issues/how-do-i-open-uk-bank-account

* Tenancy agreement (if you have just started to rent a place in the UK but do not have any utility bills)
* A letter or payslip from your employer in the UK confirming your UK address
* If you are staying in a hostel you may be able to use their address as a c/o (care of) address

You can use an old bank statement from a prior address, or even use your family home address in certain cases

Other than that, in terms of friction, the points I made about onboarding in crypto are real. You can dispute that if you wish but you'll be plain wrong to do so.

Cryptos will likely have the same KYC if you want to hold your cryptos with a third party (exchange, safekeeper, custodian, etc)

If you want to hold them on personal wallet, then it's not needed (Although if I had the opportunity to hold my cryptos at a safekeeper, insured and serviced then I would, it's far too risky being responsible for them myself)

Dohnjoe wrote: »

They are going to have a hard time with life in general then, sorry

Well yes, people with autism do tend to have it hard in life. I take it you think it's fine to make it even harder; nice.

Have opened bank accounts in several different European countries, same with friends/colleagues, never had issues apart from administrational wait times and the usual paperwork

That's an 'i'm all right jack' response. I have opened a bank account on the continent myself. People who can readily provide the sort of address proof KYC requires don't have problems. It's pretty pointless talking about you, I and others who don't have problems because that is irrelevant and isn't the issue - which is people who do have a significant problem proving address to the satisfaction of banks.

Most times a passport will do for ID and a bill/contract as proof of address

Done it myself

Bully for you. Passport is not a problem, the latter is.

It's for the bank, they need to know a) who you are and b) have documents proving that and address - otherwise they aren't allowed to open an account for you, by law. A law that protects you from lack of due diligence by the bank.

No sh1t. Trouble is, no documents. You have basically admitted that people who can't establish an address have a problem, and there would be many people in that boat.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Ordinary punters don't get "caught up in this", I've never known anyone who has had significant issues opening a bank account, I mean really? If they do, lord help them buying a car, getting it registered, getting it insured, getting it MOT'd - it's more complex, more paperwork involved. Just because someone is "annoyed" at it doesn't mean squat - the info is needed

You have expended 10x the effort writing these views than it would take sending a utility bill to your bank, or insurance company, or your gas/electricity, or whatever

I think you are trying to imply that people who have a problem with this are a bit thick. The person I was referring to has an honors degree in biochemistry, with a focus on genetics.

I wonder if you have ever noticed that every bank and bill provider is trying their damnedest to get customers to accept paperless communications. That is fine for the moment if the financial institutions accept emailed screen shots. I wouldn't be surprised if people start resorting to photoshop to solving their proof of address problems.

makeorbrake wrote: »

This doesn't seem to be getting thru to you. Every jurisdiction is different and how each bank/financial institution goes about KYC/AML compliance is different. That was your experience but in NO way can you claim that this is how it plays out in every jurisdiction and with every financial services entity.

Indeed, but you appear to be having some individual personal problem which you are trying to paint as some large general issue, which it isn't. Just because I'm having a frustrating issue supplying documents for e.g. car insurance to a particular company doesn't mean the world is.

We're talking about crypto as it interfaces with FIAT. We're not talking about anything else. And to the example I provided (the friction in on-boarding people into the crypto eco-system), their first experience will be to purchase crypto with FiAT (by and large). The KYC being a major point of friction and having held adoption back is indisputable.

Fiat is regulated, if people are going to use it to pay for cryptos, then they will have to abide by those regulations and processes from the fiat side.

Crypto are the other hand is an absolute cesspit of scams, fraud, dodgy devs, scam exchanges, shoddy fiscal responsibility, constant personal risk, it's the Wild West. I've lost cash on half a dozen projects due to coin exploits, devs running off with cash due to smart contract loopholes, mismanagement, that's fine, I know the risks. I've lost coins on one exchange that I was attempting to trade on (that had no KYC) and ended up being run by a complete criminal (and was lucky not to lose more). That's a key barrier to entry for most "normal" people.

The mantra in crypto is "don't put in what you can't afford to lose" - that should be enough of a clue

I'm in a large crypto group by this stage, but I know nobody who actually enjoys dealing with crypto, it can be an awkward risky mess. The sooner people can just walk up to an institution and buy the stuff, have it serviced, insured, kept safe, is the day you'll see a lot more "adoption" (aka people jumping on board for speculative gains). Crypto will inevitably move toward a more regulated environment (as it currently is) or risk becoming more regulated against.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Indeed, but you appear to be having some individual personal problem which you are trying to paint as some large general issue, which it isn't. Just because I'm having a frustrating issue supplying documents for e.g. car insurance to a particular company doesn't mean the world is.

I'm having a problem with KYC/AML - what else are we talking about here? That was one aspect of the discussion. We discussed the friction KYC/AML causes in crypto. That's with what you think is a stand up system. I don't.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Fiat is regulated, if people are going to use it to pay for cryptos, then they will have to abide by those regulations and processes from the fiat side.

I'm talking about KYC/AML across the board - not just in crypto. Are we capable of free thought here. It doesn't serve anyone - it doesn't prevent money laundering - all it does is facilitate financial surveillance and get in the way of peoples lives.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Crypto are the other hand is an absolute cesspit of scams, fraud, dodgy devs, scam exchanges, shoddy fiscal responsibility, constant personal risk, it's the Wild West. I've lost cash on half a dozen projects due to coin exploits, devs running off with cash due to smart contract loopholes, mismanagement, that's fine, I know the risks. I've lost coins on one exchange that I was attempting to trade on (that had no KYC) and ended up being run by a complete criminal (and was lucky not to lose more). That's a key barrier to entry for most "normal" people.

You're away off having a different discussion with yourself. We're talking about money laundering regulation - ONLY.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The mantra in crypto is "don't put in what you can't afford to lose" - that should be enough of a clue

Again, see above. You're having some other discussion with yourself. That has no place here.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I'm in a large crypto group by this stage, but I know nobody who actually enjoys dealing with crypto, it can be an awkward risky mess. The sooner people can just walk up to an institution and buy the stuff, have it serviced, insured, kept safe, is the day you'll see a lot more "adoption" (aka people jumping on board for speculative gains). Crypto will inevitably move toward a more regulated environment (as it currently is) or risk becoming more regulated against.

Once again, you are having some other discussion. The discussion at hand centers on Anti Money Laundering regulation in isolation - nothing else.

Lads this arguing is tiresome and nothing to do with the thread.

Severely off topic dudes

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Yup, it's to prevent banks being used for money laundering, which is ultimately to protect the public/economy from the ill-effects of that laundering. It's being steadily introduced to crypto exchanges, and there's no good argument against that

Dohnjoe - DROP IT!
I like your input on this board - but yer like a dog with a bloody bone on this - when I said at the very start we'd be disagreeing and that we'd need to agree to disagree. We're pissing others off as it's at the edge of the topic area - so park it up.

My final word on it - KYC/AML is a ruse. You think that there would be additional terrorism and whatever else without it. Not on yer nelly. It's there for financial surveillance.
Your experience is not everyone's experience and far from it. Countless thousands have not bothered with crypto because of it.

You don't agree - and that's fine.

END....

Anyone see trumpcoin is up 25% in the last 24 house since trump issued that tweet haha

Just need jesus to make a second coming and with my jesuscoin I'll be loaded

makeorbrake wrote: »

Dohnjoe - DROP IT!
I like your input on this board - but yer like a dog with a bloody bone on this - when I said at the very start we'd be disagreeing and that we'd need to agree to disagree. We're pissing others off as it's at the edge of the topic area - so park it up.

You are entitled to your opinion, as am I, but don't browbeat me thanks.

My final word on it - KYC/AML is a ruse.

Cool, that's your personal opinion. My opinion (working in finance with compliance, AML, risk) is that it's not a "ruse" at all.

Addison Fancy Macrame wrote: »

Just got 7 USD in BAT on brave android browser. Mobile ads now rolled out

Over what period and what kinda use?

Thargor wrote: »

Can you actually earn money using that BAT browser now or is it still that fake balance crap that you cant actually withdraw?

Yes, I've a balance of around 7 usd on it now with relatively unobtrusive ads (and still batting down the really intrusive ads on the web generally). They came up with an excellent concept for sure.