I read over and over about Non-Kyc Bitcoin... using Bisq, Robosats, Hodl Hodl etc etc...
But we need to be honest with ourselves. These tools are 'privacy enhancing' they are NOT privacy preserving if push comes to shove, and government were to get involved requesting information.
For example a buyer on Robosats takes an order from a seller, also using Robosats and they agree to settle the fiat using Strike. Great. Both the Buyer and Seller have an account on Strike so... the 'fiat' will be transferred via Strike and the Bitcoin sent on-chain or possibly over Lightning to complete to deal.
So what's the issue with this?
- Strike knows who BOTH users are, both buyer and seller, and it is a BITCOIN-ONLY exchange. It's not rocket science.
People receiving fiat money from other users, especially in the 500-2000$ range on Strike are OBVIOUSLY NON-KYC TRANSFERS. The Vast Majority. I would guess that 99% of Peer-2-Peer transactions, from one Strike user to another Strike user within the same range, are Non-Kyc buys from one user transferring to another.
Strike can and will provide all of this information, to include amounts, times, dates, and identities to government if they ask. Full stop 100% they have to IF if requesting this information through a warrant or legal means.
Cash App, from what I understand, is exactly the same way. Full-Kyc.
And using a bank through Zelle for example (or the EU equivalent) may be better because it doesn't automatically scream Bitcoin however the names of buyer and seller will probably be shown to both. And at least if the amounts are small (500-2000$) and it's infrequent then it shouldn't matter...
But random, frequent bank transactions from 3rd parties through such a medium could raise suspicion? And with "larger amounts" (whatever that is to you) even more so?
The point I'm trying to make is that by this logic, Non-KYC buys using KYC platforms isn't really Non-KYC. It's "Non-Kyc-Like" but NOT really anonymous if it were to involve a meaningful government investigation or request for information.
Bitcoiners shouldn't delude themselves about this. Strike has every record (why wouldn't they?) of every transaction between users even if they don't know what it's "for".
Actual Non-Kyc transactions would involve things like... gift cards that are purchased with Cash or actual "Cash transactions", completely offline, where no identities are provided in busy public places using other tradecraft or privacy-preserving techniques.
Part of Bitcoin's integrity depends on discussing what is, and isn't anonymous and what does, and does not work. We need to be honest with ourselves and the "Strike" "CashApp" transactions although they are 'privacy-like...' are not meaningfully private in my opinion. We can and should do better.
Thanks