I’ve once attempted to open a bank account where they wanted video proof, and expected me to say a randomly assigned phrase, to solve the issue you mention.
Reddit is doing this as a response to regulation as well (1). Governments all around europe (2) are turning communications into a highly regulated environment (“for the children”), because they’re afraid of people communicating and having thoughts. UK is just one of the early adaptors.
Banks have many safeguard to protect clients for example PCI DSS. On the other hand as far as I know this is a law requiring them to verify people and I don’t think there is a standard for this. Every company will do its own thing. Highy regulated would require them to have some standard, and I don’t see that.
Seems like you use the phrase “highly regulated” differently then me. You use it to describe solely the amount of control a government exercises on companies. For me it also includes the control a government exercises on people.
From my point of view the law heavily restricts, as in highly regulates, people’s freedom to be. That’s the mistake. Doesn’t matter the specific implementation, acronym, task force, …
An example for highly regulated for me would be a periodic audit to insure security and compliance with security control.
This law is honestly dangerous in regards to privacy and endangers miners not help them. There no safety guards whatsoever.
I’ve once attempted to open a bank account where they wanted video proof, and expected me to say a randomly assigned phrase, to solve the issue you mention.
I didn’t do it. Fucking KYC is BS.
Banks are highly regulated so it is not surprising that they would be strict in this, reddit on the other hand has no business doing it.
Reddit is doing this as a response to regulation as well (1). Governments all around europe (2) are turning communications into a highly regulated environment (“for the children”), because they’re afraid of people communicating and having thoughts. UK is just one of the early adaptors.
Banks have many safeguard to protect clients for example PCI DSS. On the other hand as far as I know this is a law requiring them to verify people and I don’t think there is a standard for this. Every company will do its own thing. Highy regulated would require them to have some standard, and I don’t see that.
Seems like you use the phrase “highly regulated” differently then me. You use it to describe solely the amount of control a government exercises on companies. For me it also includes the control a government exercises on people.
From my point of view the law heavily restricts, as in highly regulates, people’s freedom to be. That’s the mistake. Doesn’t matter the specific implementation, acronym, task force, …
An example for highly regulated for me would be a periodic audit to insure security and compliance with security control. This law is honestly dangerous in regards to privacy and endangers miners not help them. There no safety guards whatsoever.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5208739
You are correct that this law is dangerous regardless lf implementation though.
As much as I dislike it, it makes sense for banks to do that.