kyc

Whenever people romanticize the future of gaming DAOs, they talk about decentralization, community ownership, and player-driven economies. But the moment you start scaling beyond a small circle of enthusiasts, reality hits you in the face regulators are watching, and they are trying to figure out what exactly a gaming DAO even is. If you have been following @Yield Guild Games YGG’s journey closely, you have probably noticed how carefully and deliberately they had to navigate this regulatory maze.

The problem starts with definitions. Regulators love definitions because they determine how something should be taxed, governed, or controlled. But gaming DAOs do not fit neatly into any traditional category. Are they investment groups because they collectively purchase NFTs? Are they gaming communities? Are they crowdfunding pools? Are their tokens securities? No regulator has a straight answer, and that ambiguity creates friction for growth.

Take the issue of token classification. If a DAO issues a token, and that token can be interpreted as promising financial upside related to DAO activities, that’s when the security alarm starts ringing. Most DAOs learned this the hard way. But YGG took a more careful route early on positioning its token around governance, access, and ecosystem utility rather than profit expectations. It’s not perfect, but it keeps them on the safer side of current regulatory language.

Where things get even more complicated is treasury management. Gaming #DAOs often pool funds to buy assets NFTs, tokens from partner games, and sometimes even land in virtual worlds. That sounds harmless in Web3 culture, but from a regulatory perspective, it can look like fund management activity. Fund management usually requires licensing, reporting, compliance checks, and operational transparency. DAOs, traditionally, excel at transparency but not at structured compliance.

YGG’s unique approach has been to decentralize the ecosystem into regional entities YGG SEA, YGG Japan, YGG Pilipinas each functioning within local legal frameworks. It’s not decentralization in the ideological Web3 sense, but it’s decentralization in the regulatory sense. It allows them to be compliant in multiple jurisdictions while maintaining a broader, global DAO identity.

Another major issue is #kyc . The Web3 community hates it. Regulators love it. And gaming DAOs, especially those distributing rewards, find themselves stuck in the middle. If a DAO issues tokens or distributes earnings from participating in games, regulators may require identification to prevent money laundering or tax evasion. YGG eventually introduced stricter KYC requirements for certain reward programs—not because it's anti-Web3, but because it’s the only way to operate legally at scale.

Then there’s the question nobody wants to answer Is play-to-earn considered income? In some countries, the answer is yes taxable income. In others, it’s treated as capital gains. In some places, it’s still a regulatory black hole. During the P2E boom, governments were caught off-guard, and guilds suddenly found themselves responsible for helping players understand complex tax implications. YGG took a hands-off, educational stance, providing guidance without assuming legal liability for individual users smart, but still something most DAOs weren’t prepared to handle.

When scholars played for guilds like YGG, were they workers? Contractors? Contributors? Regulators in some countries raised this question during the height of Axie Infinity’s popularity. YGG avoided the biggest regulatory storm by emphasizing that players maintain control and choice, rather than being contracted labor.

We can’t talk about challenges without addressing decentralization itself. Regulators prefer accountability someone to call, someone to fine, someone to hold responsible. DAOs, by design, blur that responsibility. YGG’s hybrid model, where governance is decentralized but operations are supported by recognizable legal structures, is probably the only sustainable route until regulators catch up.

In the end, gaming DAOs live in a gray zone too innovative for existing laws, but too big to ignore. YGG’s story shows that surviving in this space requires more than decentralization ideology. It requires adaptability, legal awareness, and a willingness to build bridges between Web3 culture and real-world regulations.

To be honest if gaming DAOs want to last, this is the model they will have to follow.
@Yield Guild Games
#YGGPlay
$YGG

PlusToken did not originate in Europe.
But it hit Europe harder than most people realize.

Not through ads...
Not through conferences...
But through exchanges, wallets, and crypto prices.

---

🌍 EUROPE AS A LAUNDERER OF DIRTY BITCOINS

When Chinese authorities dismantled PlusToken in 2019, it left behind a huge footprint:

> hundreds of thousands of BTC were laundered by perpetrators through Western exchanges
and European crypto systems

Where did the money flow?

According to blockchain forensic firms:

European exchanges

European OTC desks

anonymous EU exchanges

It may sound ominous and it may have its downsides, but the travel rule (in crypto and beyond) isn’t that limiting —at least not for average users. As most rules in the financial world, it applies to businesses, and not directly to customers. This regulation now includes cryptocurrencies, but it has existed long before Bitcoin. Likely, you didn’t even know that it was there in the first place.
The travel rule was introduced by the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) in 1996 and later adopted by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an international regulatory entity, as a global anti-money laundering (AML) standard. This rule, also known as Recommendation 16 by the FATF, mandates that financial institutions, such as banks, must collect and share specific information when processing transfers above a certain threshold (typically $1,000 in the U.S.).
In 2019, the FATF extended the Travel Rule to cover cryptocurrencies, requiring Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs), like exchanges and custodial wallet providers, to follow similar guidelines as traditional financial institutions. This expansion aimed to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing in the growing crypto sector.
The term "Travel Rule" comes from the fact that the required customer information must "travel" with the transaction as it moves from one financial institution to another. When a financial institution processes a transfer—whether it's fiat or crypto—it must ensure that key details, such as the sender’s and receiver’s names, account numbers, and crypto addresses, "travel" along with the funds to the receiving institution. This enables authorities to track and investigate suspicious activities across different institutions and jurisdictions.
Who is affected by the travel rule?
As we’ve mentioned above, this rule is primarily targeting Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) —which means crypto businesses. These include crypto exchanges, custodial wallet providers, and firms handling token offerings. Businesses that facilitate asset exchange, transfer, or safekeeping must comply by collecting and sharing sender and recipient details in fiat or crypto transactions. The rule applies to transactions between VASPs or between a VASP and a financial institution. 
This way, though, customers using those regulated platforms are also impacted. They must provide personal details for verification and record-keeping, including their full name, address, and account details, ensuring compliance with anti-money laundering measures. Transaction information such as the sender and recipient's identification, transaction amount, and purpose must also be shared between VASPs. While this enhances transparency, it raises concerns about user privacy, adequate treatment of sensible data, and transaction delays. 

Regions such as the EU, starting December 30, 2024, the U.S., Canada, and Singapore have adopted the Travel Rule for crypto transactions. Although it promotes market legitimacy, compliance can be costly and time-consuming, particularly for smaller businesses. Meeting regulatory requirements often requires significant investment in technology and personnel, potentially hindering growth and innovation within the crypto industry.

Decentralized wallets and the travel rule
As an individual user, at least, you can always choose. The travel rule doesn’t affect non-custodial wallets or peer-to-peer (P2P) operations, only kicking in when you use businesses to store your funds or complete your transactions —e.g., a crypto exchange website. Decentralized services, on the other hand, don't rely on centralized intermediaries, which are typically the target of regulations. 
If users exchange cryptocurrency directly between their non-custodial wallets or use Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs), they won’t be affected by the travel rule. Since DEXs operate without intermediaries and allow direct P2P trading, they generally don’t require verification, which is a key component of the travel rule.
This enables users to maintain greater privacy and anonymity while trading. However, some jurisdictions may still impose certain regulations on DEXs, requiring them to implement specific measures, but as of now, the travel rule mainly impacts centralized exchanges and services that involve intermediaries.

By using the Obyte ecosystem, anyone can conduct secure transactions without middlemen on our popular DEX Oswap.io or directly between individual wallets through conditional payments. In the latter case, transactions are safeguarded by smart contracts that lock funds until predefined publicly verifiable conditions are met. This process ensures that both parties fulfill their obligations before the transfer is completed, promoting trust and security without intermediaries.
For cases where contract performance cannot be publicly verified, Obyte’s arbitration feature, along with the ArbStore, offer another reliable option for decentralized, secure exchanges, this time by adding a human professional to the mix.

Featured Vector Image by Freepik
Originally Published on Hackernoon

#TravelRule #kyc #KYCVerification #DecentralizedTrading #Obyte

If you spend enough time inside #DEFİ lending markets, you eventually realize that bad debt is not just a scary phrase it’s the silent monster that every protocol is trying to outrun. And in permissionless markets, where anyone can borrow, lend, build liquidators, or plug into the system, bad debt becomes even more important to understand. Because it’s not just a technical failure it’s a breakdown of trust, incentives, and risk management all at once.

In traditional finance, bad debt usually happens when borrowers simply fail to repay. But in DeFi, things move at machine speed. A lending protocol can go from fully collateralized to underwater in minutes if liquidity dries up or if asset prices move too fast. The moment a borrower cannot be liquidated profitably, the difference between the collateral value and the debt becomes protocol-owned loss that’s bad debt. And because DeFi is permissionless, the system has no #kyc firewalls, no credit checks, no legal recourse, and no centralized party to chase down borrowers. Everything depends on math, incentives, and mechanism design.

What makes bad debt particularly dangerous is that it does not stay isolated. If one lending pool fails, lenders start losing confidence, liquidity leaves, yields collapse, and suddenly a protocol that looked strong starts spiraling. We have seen this across multiple collapses from cascading liquidations during market crashes to isolated assets that became impossible to liquidate. In many ways, the story of DeFi lending is also the story of trying to eliminate bad debt entirely.

That’s where this new wave of #risk-isolated and minimalist lending primitives comes in @Morpho Labs 🦋 is a major example of this shift. Instead of managing one giant everything pool, Morpho Blue lets anyone create lending markets with their own risk parameters, their own oracle, and their own liquidation logic. This modularity drastically reduces the systemic danger of bad debt because one broken market can’t drag down the whole system.

But even before Morpho Blue, Morpho Optimizers were already exposing how much inefficiency existed in traditional pools like Aave and Compound. The core idea was simple: match lenders and borrowers peer-to-peer to reduce the spread but what people forget is that this also reduces bad-debt vulnerability. When utilization is healthier and liquidity sits closer to borrowers, liquidations happen more smoothly. The protocol doesn’t choke during volatility the way monolithic pools sometimes do.

According to my point of view bad debt is not a bug of DeFi it’s a design failure. When the incentives, liquidations, and oracle dependencies aren’t aligned, the entire system becomes fragile. Permissionless markets amplify that fragility because anyone can deploy a risky pool. But they also empower innovation, like Morpho Blue, where developers can design safer, more specialized markets rather than forcing everything into one shared pool.

If DeFi is going to scale into trillions, bad debt must be engineered out of the equation not with trust, but with smarter mechanisms. We are finally heading in that direction.

@Morpho Labs 🦋
#Morpho
$MORPHO

Here's a quick look at the latest buzz surrounding Pi Network! 🚀
Pi Network is making strides with its Mainnet migration,
a crucial step for users to fully utilize their mined Pi coins.
The focus is heavily on completing #KYC (Know Your Customer) for millions of users, which is essential before their balances can be migrated to the Mainnet wallet.
This process is accelerating, paving the way for the network's open phase. 💪
The ecosystem is also expanding with new decentralized applications (DApps) integrating into the Pi Browser, adding more utility to the network. For instance, a new puzzle game called Fruity Pi has been approved, allowing users to spend Pi tokens within the game. This focus on real-world use cases and utility expansion is a key priority for the #PiCoreTeam Core Team. 🎮🛍️
While an exact date for the Open Mainnet launch isn't confirmed, progress in KYC, migration, and ecosystem growth hint at movement.
#Pi is already being traded on several exchanges via IOU markets, although official listings on major exchanges are still anticipated.
The community is also actively participating in initiatives like the .pi domain auctions and community-driven liquidity pools. 🌐📊
Despite facing challenges like price volatility and the need for broader exchange listings, Pi Network continues to build, emphasizing regulatory compliance and developer support. Pioneers are encouraged to complete their KYC and stay tuned for official announcements as the network moves closer to its full potential. ✨
Stay excited, Pioneers! The journey continue
s! 🎉
#3ALA2
$BTC
$BNB
$XRP

As Pi Network gears up for its next mainnet migration wave on June 28, 2025, users are hitting major roadblocks. Thousands report issues with KYC verification, 2FA problems, and vanishing wallet balances despite completing all steps. 😩
🔍 KYC Nightmares: Users stuck in "tentative approval" limbo or facing syncing errors, even after passing months ago. 🔐
2FA Fiasco: Broken or missing verification emails, expired links, and resets forcing users to start over. 💸 Zero Balance Shock: Migrated tokens disappearing from wallets, with no clear fix from the Pi Core Team.
📉 Pi coin's price has slipped 4-5% in June, trading at $0.60-$0.64, down 78% from its yearly peak. Speculation about insider wallets and liquidity issues is growing, while scammers exploit the chaos with fake support scams. ⚠️
💬 One user vents: “Give me the damn $Pi. I’ve worked hard for six years… Why this constant delay?”
❓ With the Pi Core Team staying silent, will these bugs derail the mobile-first DeFi dream?
$BTC
#CryptoStocks
#PiNetwork #Crypto #MainnetMigration #KYC