Quote from: bettercrypto on January 23, 2019, 11:19:47 PM

I thjnk the purpose of KYC is to trace every transaction. Traceable transaction can be used to detect any price manipulation. We know that pump and dump are very common here in cryptocurrency. They used KYC to prevent any pump and dump. Now, for some traders and investors, they don't like KYC that exposed their identity. So my stand here is neutral as of now. I still need to check further the pros and cons of KYC.

KYC laws could be both good and bad, depending on the situation. For money launderers and criminals, KYC is good to help track and stop such individuals. However, if you're looking for privacy, then KYC laws are a bad bet. This applies specially to crypto, whose main purpose was to eliminate middleman. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies were designed in a way where it's not required to give personal information to use them. By requiring KYC on crypto-to-crypto exchanges, it greatly defeats the purpose, IMO.

I believe that the fairest approach would be to apply KYC/AML laws to exchanges that trade Fiat vs crypto, instead of crypto-to-crypto exchanges. Sometimes I wonder whenever atomic swaps would require to comply with KYC/AML laws, as governments worldwide see their true potential. Undecided

Quote from: Agapelove on January 23, 2019, 11:41:54 PM

As of now, a lot of traders don't prefer KYC in their cryptocurrency transactions. And I'm not sure if most of them are in favor of having KYC in exchange of a more secured transactions or systems. For me, KYC is necessary for the ones who are putting up crowdfundings. But, for the traders, I don't think it is necessary.

Yes. It's quite troublesome to go through all the process of KYC just to get into trading. I believe that KYC is well-suited for ICOs and crowdfunds, than crypto-to-crypto exchanges, IMO. I guess that we'll have to figure out how everything unfolds in the future, as governments try to apply proper regulatory measures for the Blockchain industry.