Usually when we talk about no-kyc bitcoin, we mean that there is no corporate record of YOU having purchased those sats. If someone else buys them for you and then transfers them to you, those would be no-kyc. If you work for bitcoin or sell something for bitcoin and receive it p2p, those would be no-kyc.

If you buy from an exchange and then mix it, although you’ve likely broken the on chain footprint to your new bitcoin, the exchange will still have a record of you having bought those bitcoin and so any rogue government that pressures exchanges for that info could use it to come after you and then the proof of ownership or not would be placed on you…and they’d probably assume you’re “guilty until proven innocent”. Things would have to get pretty bad for that type of scenario to play out.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Thank. Yyrowwxxzxx mmm man zcvnvbvnzcncZzvn

Thanks, so if I understand that right, as long as I’m cool with my brother we can send bitcoin to each other sat for sat and this would help reduce the traceability of said rouge gov coming after. Or if exchanging with just one peer a pattern that can then be traced? Is the random nature of using non KYC P2P service better. As an example. I have used #[3]​ a few times. It’s a great service but each time I have bought from the same person. So this got me thinking, I’m paying up to 10%+ for swapping BTC but if it’s the same person then might as well just do with my brother and save the commission.

Yeah, as long as your brother doesn’t rat you out if the government puts a little pressure on him lol. I’m not very worried about it though. Most of my stack is kyc because it’s more convient and I don’t want to pay a higher fee for sats.

Zaps non kyc?

Yup, I’d say so.

He better not 🤪 keep up the cool charts. Loved the smash buy vs DCA. Turns out I was preaching DCA whilst actually smash buying day I got paid. 👊🏼