{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub12tjaqer27049ejmvf0f3yd7kq6p93gg6ecavgrczge4rlzf59y5q2pye9h","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub12tjaqer27049ejmvf0f3yd7kq6p93gg6ecavgrczge4rlzf59y5q2pye9h","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2016-06-21\n📝 Original message:\u003e Note that \"client supplied identification\" is being pushed for AML/KYC\n\u003e compliance, e.g. Netki's AML/KYC compliance product:\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e http://www.coindesk.com/blockchain-identity-company-netki-launch-ssl-certificate-blockchain/\n\u003e\n\u003e This is an extremely undesirable feature to be baking into standards given\n\u003e it's\n\u003e negative impact on fungibility and privacy; we should not be adopting\n\u003e standards\n\u003e with AML/KYC support, for much the same reasons that the W3C should not be\n\u003e standardizing DRM.\n\u003e\n\u003e\nKYC isn't the only use case. There are other situations in which you would\nwant to confirm who is sending you money. Making it *required* would of\ncourse be a horrible idea, but allowing people to identify themselves, in\nmany cases with an online-only identity that isn't tied to their real world\nidentity, will be very useful to newly-developing use cases.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160621/6984221f/attachment.html\u003e"}