So here's the deal, I'm focusing on Bitcoin principles instead of fiat. This means whatever ideas we come up with should at least be non-custodial, even if the platforms aren’t perfectly decentralized. Ideally, we want things to be super decentralized and stick to all the core Bitcoin values.
Let’s face it, governments aren’t gonna like the idea of legalizing Bitcoin without having some level of control. They’ll want to manage things like pricing, developers, code, software, and all that to make sure it fits their regulations. And sure, laws are supposed to be for the benefit of society. That’s what governments are here for enforcing rules. So, it’s likely they’ll want Bitcoin to operate under their laws. If not, they might just ban it in their territories but let people use it elsewhere.
The downside is, if we let governments take charge, we risk losing the essence of Bitcoin. Imagine needing permission to run a node. Whoever grants that permission ends up controlling everything, leading to centralization of power.
We could avoid this by self-regulating enough that governments won’t see a need to step in. One of their main reasons for wanting control is to keep users and society safe. If we can show them that we’re handling things on our own, they won’t have an excuse to take over.
Not really
There's difference between legalizing and making legal tender
Bitcoin is legal in quite alot of country so nothing new.
And here I thought leadership was to serve.
Running Nodes don't work like that
The best they can do is make running nodes illegal and there are ways around it
Not to mention the world government are not united.
This is wishful thinking
First who's regulating? When there's no head
And find a reason? Who wants something will always find a reason
No matter how lawful you act.
Lol like a decentralised KYC?
KYC, Privacy or decentralization don't mix
They contradict.
I think I would stop reading further here
Because I'm shocked someone would even think about No fee with Bitcoin
When it plays a role in its security.
Everything about bitcoin has been made possible for us to engage it use in a decentralized manner, but users feels or decided to choose using its in such a way that they go through a centralized exchange before they can maximize every opportunity of using it, this is why there are decentralized exchanges and we can also make use of a non-costodia wallet to save our save of all unnecessary stress of how to use Bitcoin independently.
With Bitcoin, you can use it without KYC on no KYC exchanges and platforms.
About thieves, it's responsibility of each Bitcoin users to secure their devices, wallets and wallet backups so that they can secure their bitcoin. Additionally, they must have good practice for privacy in order to avoid wrench attacks.
Find no KYC exchanges and platforms.
https://kycnot.me/
https://bitlist.co/
How to manage bitcoin like a whale?
If Bitcoin is going to remain fully decentralised and pseudonymous, there is no way to achieve this. Doing anything else goes against the original plan of Bitcoin. Critics and the government would always find a reason. They have made up so many reasons like electricity consumption and harming the environment. They also made up this "breeding ground for criminals" narrative. It is easier to catch a criminal who does transactions on the Bitcoin network than a criminal who knows how to exploit the fiat system and clean his money.
What alternatives do you have in mind? These are theoretical thinking that are not practical. The alternative to KYC is no KYC. The moment we create things that can identify people or their identities, then there is KYC.
The alternative is there; people just need to use it. All people need to do is have an option to accept payments in bitcoin, and buyers need to be willing to make payments in bitcoin. You can't force people to do what they don't want to do.
I usually dont understand what people want actually when they ask for privacy preserving alternatives again from bitcoin because what do they actually want apart from the already existing methods to actually enhance their own privacy. Do they actually want bitcoin network to be privacy oriented network? If bitcoin has actually been that I think they would have been not this accepted like this because government policies would have been clamping them down by now like the privacy oriented coins like Monero.
Also if the network is actually private then bitcoin will be a more secure place for criminals to exploit. So bitcoin might not be perfect but its actually better like this
Some months ago I started a thread about an ethical mixer / swap protocol which may be close to what you propose.
It is not a direct alternative to KYC. But it is a method for exchanges to prevent getting dirty coins without having to compromise the privacy of the users.
For a "decentralized KYC alternative" the only method I know are pseudonym parties: People can exchange pseudonyms at events like Bitcoin meetings or hackerspaces. This can be useful in situations where not much money is involved, but is probably too weak to prevent scams completely because a person could try to "get" several pseudonyms at such a party.
Goes mainstream is very amazing but it must be achieved in natural ways, not by any intention of anyone. By having approvals for Bitcoin Spot ETFs in January 2024 in the USA, Bitcoin has already achieved very important thing for its mainstream snowball. The most important and biggest barrier was broken for Bitcoin going to mainstream, then the snowball already began since that time, more than two years so far. In this bear market about last one year, Bitcoin has shown its impressive strength and you can expect more amazing show of Bitcoin in a next bull market.
Let Bitcoin grows naturally and on your side, you can focus on yourself, from knowledge, technical and practical skills for securing your wallets, bitcoins and your investment for building up your portfolio and hold your bitcoins well with time over many stress and challenge.
However well the community behaves and however highly developed our self regulation capabilities, a centralized authority will never sit well with an open source financial system that they can never freeze, tax, and mess around at will. Constructing decentralized alternatives to KYC and increasing infrastructure of sidechains are both great technical ends, but we should understand that their use is to fight back, and is not to pursue political approval. Actual penetration of countries will not come through attempt to appease regulators through compromise, but other through developing parallel economy of Bitcoin in ways that are so sound, private, and frictionless that on other hand government restrictions will not be possible. It should also always center on absolute resistance of censorship since any protocol that is dependent on permission or compliance will ultimately end up being co-opted and stamped out by state.
Don't you think you are pushing your thoughts too far?
All these are just over complicated as the government even if they try won't be able to control Bitcoin. What they can control? Exchanges. Its very easy for them to control where the money lies, but they won't be able to touch BTC it self.
It's called decentralized for a reason. Even if they don't legalize the use of Bitcoin, it doesn't stop people from using it. I'm till trying to understand what laws you speak of.
Even if exchanges could try, they still might not be able to get all dirty coins from moving in. Scammers are becoming even more smart, working with tools much advanced.
We should not be moved by all these, scam had been existing before aged and will always be, Bitcoin or cryptocurrency is not what introduced scam for the people, the worst form of it began long ago in fiat currency, they do nothing about all forms of fiat ftaudulency.
This is not even part of the reasons to stop or determine Bitcoin becoming a mainstream digital currency, we have the Bitcoin lightning network introduced to make transactions more suitable for everyone to use, it is fast, reliable and cost less.
I guess one could argue they can make mining illegal or take down the codes or put developers in jail, but they'll face so many resistance if that's where they're going to go. Not to mention some companies worth billions already dip their toes in Bitcoin. Maybe they can make privacy focused wallet illegal too, but it's impossible to control who or where people will host the files. It will be a hassle if that happen, but I'm sure the network will still run properly.
ZK proof KYC identity exist but even then I don't think KYC is good idea to begin with.
Sidechain exist and there are many of them coming out every year, some failed some still running.
If you want to attach to fiat system, you will need KYC, whole premise of bitcoin is uncensored currency. I think it will bring more harm than good for bitcoin.
I don't think this is needed, what you need is to persuade big marketplaces to adopt bitcoin into their system or simply p2p like good old days when we used cash.