That’s one thing that is never going to happen, as much as we might want it to go, it just wouldn’t go away if we are still stock on using centralized systems.

I get it, I get the risk it posses now and know it’s surely going to be way worst in the future.

One means to catch a criminal has always being having to follow the money, it always leaves a trail. With the content on ma address being public knowledge, if that address is tied to a being, that’s way too much information for criminals meaning to do harm to work with.

Bitcoin just needs to attain that mainstream usage and everyone goes non custodial.

If SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce's leverage verifiable credentials and zero-knowledge proofs identification model is adopted, some crypto laws will have to be amended. Exchanges would be required to require users to present a cryptographic proof from a trusted issuer, such as a government agency or regulated financial institution, instead of personal information.

In some countries, decentralized exchanges are finding it difficult to operate because of strict regulations.

It's a good suggestion by Hester because it would reduce the rate at which personal information is collected from crypto users. It would be safer for one agency to hold my personal information than for it to be in the custody of several crypto-related service providers.

Would such calls warrant to be stopped with immediate effect or just a suggestive rants on the Internet that never goes to the main target?, I never love it when the head of a body declares what never starts, a word in the mouth that doesn't get implemented.

And yes, ending kyc is necessary in the industry, enough is enough. I don't think hackers will do this kind of mess, but physical kidnappers who could know your identity to own a certain type of crypto will break in.

I've often times ask such questions, what's the need for kyc verification? Operation can proceed without it and everyone will be fine.

This is definitely a matter of concern because if hackers later find the wallet user directly, attack him and forcefully steal his Bitcoin, then of course many lives can be lost in the future just because of KYC.
When the price of Bitcoin increases a lot, especially approaching a million dollars, if hackers cannot hack Bitcoin wallets, in this case their target will be to find the owner of the Bitcoin wallet and identify the address and reach him, KYC will be their only reliable source.
Therefore, if it is possible to identify any harmful thing in the future, it is KYC and maybe in the future people will refrain from doing KYC for important things.

Everyone appreciates the fact that one among many appreciates the need for KYC data collection reduction or elimination but however I still believe that it’s just a mere suggestion which will be countered by most of the SEC members since data collection is the means through which control is accomplished in the crypto world, the fact is that it’s very bad how this companies trade KYC data’s and how bad it could be for some whom is exposed to the KYC thing already.

Why did it take this long before someone could speak up? Someone I meant is; someone in power. Is the government suddenly tired of being the government?
Are they tired of controlling and censoring everyone? Well, this is a mere protest call by a SEC commissioner, I'll keep my fingers crossed to see if other big names and portfolios will buy the idea.

I am trying to think out how avoiding mass KyC will be of an interest of the proposer. Are you insinuating that the commissioner might have the intention of doing some illegal stuffs and wanted to end KYC before they do it?

Now we have to do KYC verification on exchanges. If Bitcoin and fiat currency continue to run in parallel in the future and people use it normally for all transactions then this kind of KYC problem may not mandatory. The Bitcoin protocol does not require any personal information from anyone. Rather, it has kept decentralization as its feature which has made Bitcoin popular.

But for the verification of the exchange, KYC verification is mandatory so it is not possible to remain fully decentralized. If you have to convert from Bitcoin to fiat in the future, then KYC verification will still be required. But if you can make transactions through direct Bitcoin wallet to wallet transactions, then this KYC will not be required.

If the amount of funds is very large, then it is important to consciously ensure that the wallet is not connected to the exchange in any way. According to the rules and regulations of the exchanges, your identity will never be revealed. How trustworthy this is also a matter for us to think about. You have to control your own caution and security. If information can be given to an institution, then the risk certainly remains.

KYC isn't the problem. Companies' ways of storing and securing data is. Most of them have terrible security practices. Hackers are aware of the inherent security flaws of centralized exchanges and/or services. Which is why they often exploit them to obtain all of our utmost sensitive KYC info. Crypto was created without the need for a middleman for a reason. Adding KYC or other centralized mechanisms, would bring the risk of a single point of failure.

I wouldn't expect KYC to be eliminated, since it's how governments are able to keep track of every crypto user. They just need to regulate companies/exchanges more to prevent customers' privacy from being exposed. Making use of Zero Knowledge Proofs for KYC would do the trick. I'm sure governments will think of something...

KYC is created to avoid scammers from entering any platform or fakes one. The only problem is the platform security to protect these information cause once an attack happened these data arent safe and falling to the hands of a scammer means a bigger trouble.

Maybe they dont want that to happen thats why the statement is in support to limit the data which I believe is right and better since less information less danger to anyone stake.