Gotta get that KYC!

  • abbadon420@lemm.eeEnglish
    181·
    6 days ago

    I guess they don’t want anonymous reasons for security reasons. Which is somehng I can understand

  • dragnucs@lemmy.mlEnglish
    111·
    6 days ago

    While not the best thjbg for customers, it helps them reduce fraud and keep the service acceptable.

    Since vultr network has a hood reputation, they could be abused to send spam. Having crypto payment only would not prevent them to detect repeat abusers. With a verified payment method they can ID who me they are providing service for.

    In an absence of such limitation, abusers can simply create a new email and wallet then get back to abusing.

            • HelixDab2@lemm.eeEnglish
              2·
              4 days ago

              TLA agencies would have no problem with a cover identity to “prove” who they are. Your average citizen is going to have a hard time buying a slightly used social security number that they can use to get an ID that will pass KYC laws.

              • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                3·
                4 days ago

                I think you misunderstood. TLAs want people to prove their identities to prevent or collect data on victimless “crimes” like ML or being a customer or vendor of substances outside of the US pharma-DEA cartels’ authority.

                I don’t think that’s a good thing, I think criminalising such activity is a way of oppressing the proles on their own tax dime, especially when white collar not-so-victimless crimes are seldom punished, therefore I am against KYC.