I guess what I mean to say is that *some funding will leak through* and stopping all illegal funding through cryptocurrencies is an impossible task (but perhaps a silly point as maybe you could say similar things about cash).
Right. So terrorism will likely neither be materially helped nor significantly harmed.
I’ve found many Bitcoin mining pools, none of which have KYC. Maybe you could elaborate what you mean here?
Yeah, I didn’t mean that miners themselves would be subject to KYC, I meant that the key stakeholders in Bitcoin will want to ensure that the government won’t ban it, which would hurt its value. That means that the vast majority will support things that require AML/KYC for most bitcoin usage—and if miners were faced with a choice between regulation and rules which hurt prices or KYC, they would pick KYC in a heartbeat. And we see that it’s happened everwhere else—all the exchanges, all the consumer front ends, and a vast majority of transaction go through places which have KYC requirements—meaning that not only is most of it tracked, but the remaining fraction of the blockchain is far easier to deanonymize.
Right. So terrorism will likely neither be materially helped nor significantly harmed.
Yeah, I didn’t mean that miners themselves would be subject to KYC, I meant that the key stakeholders in Bitcoin will want to ensure that the government won’t ban it, which would hurt its value. That means that the vast majority will support things that require AML/KYC for most bitcoin usage—and if miners were faced with a choice between regulation and rules which hurt prices or KYC, they would pick KYC in a heartbeat. And we see that it’s happened everwhere else—all the exchanges, all the consumer front ends, and a vast majority of transaction go through places which have KYC requirements—meaning that not only is most of it tracked, but the remaining fraction of the blockchain is far easier to deanonymize.