You're mistaken because, aside from the fact that website promotes "deep state" conspiracy theories which you seem to believe,
Deep Capture actually published the material that was cited and contentious in the cases.
en.wikipedia.org
Oh, even better, the stuff that was libelous didn't even have anything to do with the actual data on the markets and short selling. So, like I said, you can ignore his opinions and mistakes he makes, and just read the pore dada sourced from SEC and brokerages to come to your own conclusion.
I clearly mentioned exchanges and wallet operators, examples of which are already complying with the new FinCEN guidance.
No, you clearly mentioned wallet developers, suggesting that if a company created a non-custodial wallet where the user is in control of their own money, that the wallet developer would somehow still be responsible for KYCing the money they have no knowledge or control over. Moving goal posts to "operators" where wallet developers control the wallet somehow.
I really don't get why you can't understand that if you don't control someone's money, you're not responsible for what they do with it.
The government has other methods besides that, but it is relevant to the enforcement of KYC regulations, you had asked about.
How is tracking funds relevant to KYC regulations? You know that the public blockchain doesn't show anything about the kind of wallet used, right? It's just transactions with nothing attached to them.
You make the generous assumption you wouldn't prosecuted for breaking those laws here or be extradited to that country because we have a extradition agreement with them.
It's not an assumption, no. I don't have to assume that US is going to fine me for doing something legal in US, or allow another country to extradite me for doing something legal in US. Reminder, it's legal to pay women in US.
Furthermore, with China, India, the EU, the US, Japan, and Australia adopting similar regulations,
They're not adopting regulations making it illegal for women to have bank accounts or get paid. They're not adopting regulations making it illegal to send money to family. They're not adopting regulations making it illegal to fund groups that fight for human rights (well maybe China is).
If you mean general Bitcoin regulations, I don't know how much bigger and bolder I can make this so you'll get it but
BITCOIN IS ALREADY SUBJECT TO ALL THE SAME REGULATIONS AS ALL BANKING AND FINANCE. Bitcoin is NOT unregulated.
If you mean regulations requiring KYC on non-custodial wallets, again, that's impossible to do. It's like regulations that require gravity to be half as strong or that 2+2 be equal 5. You can pass all the regulations you want, but it's just impossible to do and to enforce. You've yet to explain how a wallet would do that. How would you force Microsoft to regulate notepad.exe to force it to collect KYC on people using it to send Bitcoin transactions?
Furthermore, because of the war in Ukraine, most of these countries are coordinating on their cryptocurrency regulations and making sure they overlap.
Regulations already exist, and they already overlap with them being decades old banking and finance regulations.
As a side note, you do realize you're admitting you'd willfully break the law if it suited your interests?
Of course I would. By the same reasoning you're admitting you would turn in a Jewish family to the SS just because the law told you to. Enlightened intelligent people don't follow laws blindly.