KYC sats should be called shitcorns anyone with me??
Discussion
I got some kyc sats under osama bin ladens name
We need to choose sats wisely. Not all are the same.
Sats don’t have a KYC flag. So this is completely wrong
Idk. That’s how most people get them, i know you’re not saying that’s a deathwish for the Corn, so what’s the issue? They gonna go out and take the keys from millions of people? Taxes?
*don’t kill me plebs, i do have both flavors of sats though
I own lots of shitcorns but they're shitty because I have to be careful and aware of them
In my fantasy, everyone with kyc corn dgaf about taxes since it’s fucking money and they all start slinging sats around to each other and businesses that treat it like cash (no kyc) and chainalysis can suck a chode and have a seizure
Then goberment like “well shit, not much we can do about this” and races to adopt a bitcoin standard before other nations
I think the closer reality is chainanalysis gets more advanced and they auto calculated your capital gains and then send to gulag if you don't pay tbh
True true. One of those strength in numbers things perhaps. Can’t send like half+ of the population to gulag. Now’s they’re chance and jokes on them bc i’m just not reporting tax losses so far 🤣
There no KYC sats!
The KYC process is bound to a person not to the sats itself.
If I sell “KYC” sats to you p2p then the link is broken. Which makes KYC for Bitcoin extremely useless
Also CoinJoin
Coinjoin is useless when it comes to KYC.
The KYC process identifies you so that specific transactions can be bound to you. Making a Coinjoin doesn’t delete the Database of the exchange. They will always know that you have bought Bitcoin.
A normal transaction is enough, because no one can tell if it’s your address or not. When you tell someone you habe sold the sats p2p no one can prove the information is right or wrong.
A Coinjoin disconnects transactions from each other. That’s good for privacy but not for KYC. You have given your privacy away with the registration.
I would say a normal transaction is much better than a coinjoin when it comes to breaking a KYC link.
A normal transaction is not suspicious, a coinjoin is. But that’s just my point of view
Depends whether you believe in proof or reasonable doubt.
In a system of proof, CoinJoin removes proof of ownership.
In a system of reasonable doubt, then it is reasonable to assume that you control the equivalent value of coins that participated in a CoinJoin.
Your points are valid. I definitely agree that your purchase at a CEX with KYC links your ID with the certain TX forever.
It’s a little more complicated with TXs afterwards when you either (1) withdraw bitcoin to *your* another address, (2) coinjoin , (3) send bitcoin to * other* persons address.
The consequences of those actions depend on how the government or other entities interpret it.
Some govs will punish coinjoins, some govs will consider every withdrawal as if you send to your own address, some govs will not care at all (like in Portugal).
So, your location and your citizenship matters a lot.
That’s exactly what I wanted to say
At the end of the day, the govs want taxes from the taxable events.
Consider that scenario:
You purchased your BTC for X and then withdrew it to your another address when the BTC price was Y.
If you withdraw to YOUR address, then this event is not taxable. But you will need to PROVE to the taxman that this is YOUR address you withdrew to. If you can’t prove it, then it will be viewed as a taxable event and you need to pay.
So, most probably the govs will just prohibit the withdrawals to the non KYC address and we will have two types of addresses - KYC and non KYC.
I agree but this will make some people sad and grumpy 🤣🤣
