You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: If there must be KYC then privacy must be vastly improved
"There is discussion in the Tezos community to create Chain A and Chain B remaining the official chain causing a fork and letting the community have the first election in the sense of which chain they choose."
So, you're saying that we may have an option to choose an alt chain where we do not have to do KYC/AML? I also wonder, if we do not want to claim and complete KYC/AML if they will just refund us. I'm not giving them my info, they cannot protect it.
https://www.opentezos.com/
The problem with KYC/AML is security and lack of privacy. Imagine Bitcoin emerged in this way where all the earliest participants had their names (and faces) in a database somewhere? How much would that database be worth now to hackers?
I'm mostly concerned about the security aspects. KYC I have no real problem with philosophically if it could be done in a completely secure and private way but if it's going to save all of this into a centralized database then the security is now centralized when we are talking DPOS.
Tezos is a DPOS style chain. So once the identities of the stakeholders are known it turns Tezos into nothing more than a decentralized corporation of a sort only without the protection of banks. So you're submitting for the KYC/AML banks require but you don't get the same level of protection you get from stocks.
If you lose your private keys, if you get hacked, if you get extorted, where you gonna go? What is the Tezos Foundation going to do about it?