All right, i get your point now. It is true that there are more centralized firms and services in the industry than there are decentralized ones, and the government continues to attack the industry with regulations and anti-privacy policies. However, there are still ways we can use BTC privately without giving our data to centralized third party services, the thing is most people in the industry don't care about their privacy, so they choose the 'convenience' of centralized services.

Bitcoin is still decentralized today.  It cannot be challenged as long as we use its blockchain for transaction and not undergoing centralized exchanges.


Only centralized exchanges are affected by this.  The nature of Bitcoin decentralization cannot be hindered by the government as long as the transaction is within its network.



Are we not still enjoying it?  Through P2P exchanges government has no say about the transaction.  Only on the centralized platform KYC can affect the transaction of Bitcoin.  So if we wanted to fully exercise decentralization, avoid centralized platforms, or suffer the extent of KYC procedures.

I think anti money laundering scheme has something to do with privacy of Bitcoin transaction and not really decentralization. When the government want everyone who do crypto transactions identified by their image and any other means of identification, that means the privacy payment of Bitcoin is already defeated, people can't hide transaction from the government because the moment you sent Bitcoin to kyc exchange, it becomes identifiable.

The decentralization has something to do with government been in control of Bitcoin in any form from the network down to its protocol. Right now, if you want to send Bitcoin through the Bitcoin network from your custodial wallet to another wallet address, no government can says otherwise and your transaction can't be flag by anyone, it doesn't have to pass through the government, this is what I think Bitcoin decentralization is about and not necessary the KYC aspect because that's a choice for people that want to use it.

Technically, it’s possible. You need to find sites or services that don’t ask for KYC and can spend the bitcoins there. Alternatively, if you want to trade Bitcoins, then you need to find exchanges that don’t ask for KYC. At last, if you want to convert your Bitcoins to fiat, then use P2P services and exchanges. So these are some possible ways to enjoy freedom through the decentralized nature of the coin. But soon as everywhere KYC is becoming mandatory, I am afraid that the decentralized nature will soon evaporate from everywhere.

AML policy changes very little things. Those who want to launder money can still do what they want with fiat money. They don't need crypto currency solutions for that. The way governments view crypto currencies has started to change positively in recent years. Many have realized that they can't control Bitcoin and are looking for ways to regulate it. Centralized exchanges' KYC/AML solutions are part of this. But it's still possible to use Bitcoin without using anything centralized. I don't think governments have the power, resources, and more importantly the will to change that.

We’re already on that path, and the changes have hit the market hard, especially when it comes to privacy. Before, we could freely gamble using exchanges or online wallets, but now we have to be cautious, as many exchanges are prohibiting gambling transactions. That’s a big shift since it takes away the ease of quickly trading and cashing out your winnings. I get that change is inevitable, and we just have to adapt and not expect things to go back to how they were.

I wouldn't say it killed the decentralised aspect of BTC, but it definitely minimised it to a large extent thanks to constant government interference. These policies can never fully kill off such an important feature which is the silver lining.

Also, I noticed some people actually talking about siding with Trump because of his support for crypto in this thread which is nonsensical since no political leader at that level will ever honestly support BTC and the crypto world.

Yeah, can play that game all he wants, but at the end of the day, he is a politician, not a crypto enthusiast, for a lack of a better word

The government can challenge Bitcoin decentralization but they would never win because Bitcoin can succeed without the government. Why many people think that soon Bitcoin is going to become centralized is because they think that Bitcoin can not succeed without the government approval. You do not need a centralized exchanges to trade Bitcoin and you do not need centralized wallets also. You can use non constodial wallets and P2P exchange to trade your Bitcoin and still you would not have to do any KYC. Bitcoin is not the only currency being used to commit money laundering because fiats is still the biggest currency they use but they do not like Bitcoin because it gives power to us over our finances but the government wants to control our finances and not allowing us to do it ourselves.

From a purely network decentralisation point of view, the KYC requirements indeed don't matter (unless they could get expanded on miners etc), but apart from network decentralisation, there's another crucial feature of Bitcoin  - censorship resistance.
If we sleep-walk into a reality where all Bitcoin transactions are only done by verified users using KYC-compliant exchanges/wallets with any peer-to-peer platforms or non-custodial wallets delegalised, that feature could get heavily crippled.

And I don't think Blackrock or alike would care too much about taking control over Bitcoin's network. It wouldn't make much sense for them to attempt that, unless we're talking about some larger plot involving governments and three-letter agencies.