If you’re not concerned about the looming threat of having two categories of #Bitcoin (KYCed bitcoins vs non-KYCed) that are not fungible with each other because you hold non-KYCed bitcoins. Think about how such a division will impact the network effect and liquidity of your holdings. Especially in a scenario where the supply of KYCed bitcoins is ever increasing through recursive covenants for every #BTC output that ever touch a regulated entity (exchange, miner, corporation etc.).
Discussion
that would reduce the supply and dramatically increase the price of KYC'ed bitcoin.
Correct me if I’m wrong but I guess you meant to say that price of non-KYCed #bitcoin would reduce in supply and so increase in price.
I’m not convinced it will play out this way. First it will be interesting to see if we end up with two different exchange rates and whether those rates will be official listings or only surfaced through grey markets.
After, even if we have two rates, it’s not clear at all that non-KYCed Bitcoin will trade at a higher price because that is the Bitcoin that will be excluded from easy access to global liquidity. Also, it is the Bitcoin with the smaller network of acceptance so although non-KYCed Bitcoin will become more rare, their utility may also decrease. Also, non-KYCed bitcoins would directly compete with other #crypto such as #monero that are built for this specific scenario and that have feature that make them more attractive.
It’s also possible that we won’t see two different rates but in this case, it’s critical for non-KYCed #BTC to grow the network of acceptance because off-ramp to the fiat system won’t be allowed. Without a way to spend your bitcoins in a circular economy, you may end-up with a high priced but illiquid asset.
no, KYC'ed bitcoin would skyrocket in price and non-KYC bitcoin would plummet due to lack of demand.