Dear @edgarare1
BIG THX for dropping by and sharing your opinion.
Just one more short question: What is your opinion on KYC required by so many airdrops?
Personally I strongly believe that each crypto/ICO that require KYC should be required by law to receive licence that would allow them to proceed with KYC. And in order to receive that licence, they would have to prove to local authorities that they follow some security standard and all collected informations are safe.
My biggest worry is the fact, that right now anyone can claim that they are "forced by regulators" to proceed with KYC and this is currently the easiest way to collect our personal data by 3rd parties. And we cannot know how well secured those datas are. We cannot even know if company is legit and isn't planning to sell those data to another 3rd party.
Appreciate. Enjoy your weekend
Piotr
That’s right my friend @crypto.piotr KYC is also tricky because most ICO companies often don’t know what they are supposed to do.
As a matter of law, only ICO companies pursuing business listed in the AML regulations are “obliged entities” under KYC/AML laws. As a matter of fact, most ICO companies are not “obliged entities”. That means they don’t need to do KYC themselves. But they have to assist their bank...that is the “obliged entity”... to meet its KYC obligations.
This means they have to provide all the information the bank needs to identify the ICO investors. They do not have to identify ICO investors themselves.
Posted using Partiko iOS
Dear @edgarare1
I love your comment! Thank you for taking the time to share your view with me. Absolutely appreciate it.
Yours
Piotr