🚨 BIS Proposal: KYC Your Own Coins 🚨

The Bank of International Settlements 🤡🌎 just dropped a dystopian idea:

Every coin tracked, every wallet scored.

🔹 Coins from KYC’d wallets = ✅ usable

🔹 Coins that ever touched a non-custodial wallet = ❌ tainted, blacklisted

Translation: They want you to self-KYC just to keep your own Bitcoin spendable.

Peer-to-peer freedom → turned into compliance policing.

This is surveillance embedded into the money itself.

Financial privacy = treated as suspicious.

Sound crazy? It is.

But give it time, and it’ll creep into FATF rules and EU directives — normalizing the idea that self-custody = criminal.

The Clown World dream: “legal” Bitcoin that’s permissioned and neutered.

The Bitcoin dream: incorruptible, borderless, unstoppable money.

Choose wisely đźź§

#bitcoin

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

How does a central banker hunt elephants...

Building a fence around himself and declare the inside outside.

More and more money will ultimately ignore the system.

they have to do it, they know their time is limited..

Can someone with real understanding of bitcoin tell me if this is technically even possible?

Not on Bitcoin’s base layer.

What BIS is floating is an off-ramp control scheme, not a protocol change. Because Bitcoin’s history is public, exchanges and custodians can already “score” UTXOs and refuse deposits they don’t like. That can make non-KYC’d coins harder to sell into fiat, but it can’t stop you from sending peer-to-peer.

To actually embed KYC in the protocol would require a contentious fork where every node and miner agrees to enforce ID checks — which is basically impossible. Bitcoin doesn’t know who you are, only whether your signature is valid.

So:

âś… Feasible: blacklists, allow-lists, wallet/app restrictions, and exchange refusal.

❌ Not feasible: forcing self-KYC into Bitcoin transactions or making coins “unspendable” if they ever touched self-custody.

The fight is political/regulatory at the edges, not technical at the core.