I mean if you were trying to force other people to do something why would you patent it?

Although they could also be finding a way to become more profitible by selling on their users' IDs and other personal information, doing chain analytics or trying to track people that are against decentralisation (and they could be doing that one indirectly if there security isn't that good then a bunch of other people might be able to gain access to know who their users are that won't confirm their transactions because it's painted gray...

No rational player will ever join a mining pool that deliberately tends to decrease the revenue of the miners. I mean, bitcoin mining implies certain economic incentives for miners such as block subsidies and transaction fees. If some of the pools start to require KYC from miners, miners can always join other pools that don't. KYCed pools will therefore have fewer miners, less hash power, and less revenue. Moreover, the senders of "suspicious" transactions can always pay more fees to propagate transactions through non-KYC mining pools and thus increase the profit of those. Non-KYC mining pools will always be more profitable, more attractive, faster, and freer.

The censorship aspect has been theorized a long time ago, if you control 51% of mining power, you can refuse to include certain transactions, and then just fork if other miners do include them, forcing them to lose all the block rewards. There is some risk that in the future governments will try to regulate/take over Bitcoin, by forcing miners to do this attack.


They can target not only pools but miners themselves. So miners will have to choose between obeying the regulations by enforcing a blacklist or moving to a different country, which might be not possible. And if Bitcoin market will negatively react to this, some miners will just quit.

I also think this is a conspiracy theories about the government's desire to dominate information. mining has never needed KYC, only wallets work with wallets. Remember, people can fake KYC very easily, and it's very difficult to find out true identities.
I think this is just a new game that the sharks create so they can make money selling users' information. So be careful when you provide KYC to any organization.

GOOD! That should emphasize the community's attention to the development of Stratum V2, and that mining pools should start implementing it, once they're ready.

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/with-stratum-v2-braiins-plans-big-overhaul-in-pooled-bitcoin-mining

I believe it should encourage the use of LN too. For more on-chain privacy to mitigate that kind of censorship.

And this just opens up a new market for miners that couldn't care less on who they are dealing with and might even set up a premium for the fees if a multitude of mining pools start taking this route. Ultimately this is just dividing the network into two distinct groups, but I'm pretty sure most miners will just continue doing what they're doing and would not implement this preposterous idea of taking over privacy just because a government-led pool is doing it.

Well, any platform that wishes to do such thing has to be well decentralized, transparent, censorship resistant, immutable, permissionless/trustless, privacy-friendly, subjected to Bitcoin rules/principles, etc.  Foreign centralized body/platform that lacks this features would only end up violating the ideals/rules and leave Bitcoin vulnerable.
By the way, I think the Bitcoin network could penalize any pool that does that or breaks the censorship resistant rule. Better to have seperate community tag/blacklist coins transparently and the coins can be automatically rejected by miners based on the seriousness/intensity of the crime which could be represented in colours... with the nature of the crime clearly attached to the coin/transaction

yes, in fact, this will actually encourage many fishermen to flock to switching to kumplan which does not enforce KYC. because data and IDs used under the pretext of crime are rampant everywhere. in fact, it is enforced by the government just to avoid data theft. It's really annoying doing KYC, and I'm the one avoiding it a lot

How about if the government enacts a law or an order that forces the large miners to use a pool that is compliant under government standards or the licenses of the miners will be revoked?

That's wrong. Personally, I don't like kyc. I want my online activities to be incognito. And I'm sure there are users in that mining pool who distastes kyc too. Bitcoin supports anonymity so where are they getting their idea from? I'm sure the stats in the back-end would show the number of people they'll lose.