You don't get either from non-KYC sim cards. The privilege is that you have more ways to practice privacy and maybe a feeling of freedom because you don't have to worry about the one thing, but you need to work it to really have it, and privacy and freedom are still attainable even if all internet access is KYC'd. (nothing feels as free as not having any internet connectivity, imo)
For example, if you buy your KYC-free sim card with a card or in a place that has cameras... you're anyway losing your privacy.
I'd say process. You need security and that is a process (both in the physical and digital world) and that needs continuous maintenance. Thus, to have privacy, you have to spend a lot of time on the security of your personal environment. Awareness is key. The downside is that you may not get to experience/perceive all that freedom, because you get a shitton more work that is non-optional.
On April 30, 2026, the FCC adopted a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking stronger KYC rules for voice service providers. The agency says possible measures include requiring providers to verify customer identities before enabling service, including name, address, government ID, and alternate phone numbers.
Seems like major cell providers in the US already require a fair bit of KYC, but I have successfully purchased prepaid lines with cash in the last couple years -- and now they want to get rid of that.
The most chilling parts of the FCC’s proposal go beyond ordinary ID collection. In its section on risk-based KYC differences, the FCC even asks whether providers should consult lists of terrorists, terrorist organizations, and “criminal persons” maintained by law enforcement entities. We've also seen this before and such lists would surely lead to false positives, abuse of innocent people being opaquely added to said lists, and the possibility that people could be denied basic communication infrastructure without a conviction or meaningful due process. Even though the FCC frames this as a question rather than a final decision, it is a dangerous question for a communications regulator to normalize.
The proposal also contemplates long retention periods. The FCC asks about requiring providers to retain KYC information and supporting records for four years after the customer relationship ends. That means the risk does not end when someone cancels service. A person’s identifying information could remain in carrier databases for years, exposed to breach, misuse, subpoena, sale, or mission creep.
We are headed toward a world of kyc gated access to all basic infrastructure. I think it's sad, but I don't see how we avoid it. All the bureaucracy's -- governments and large corporations -- seem to believe they are better served by dragnet surveillance of the population. I don't see any large group with political power and desire to resist this. And the people are too busy flipping through tiktoks to care.
4 years is long? A bank just asked me to provide a salary statement from 2005! What? Yes. And my ex-employer could not give it to me, because they only retain records for 20 years. So I was denied opening an account by some compliance dickheads. This world only needs tagged and locked up slaves.
The paradox here: if you build on permissioned rails, you also need to worry about smart contract access controls. Front-running resistance and governance mechanisms matter when the chain itself is neutral but the contracts aren't. The fight against KYC is partly a fight for self-custody, but self-custody contracts need the same rigor — which is why pre-deployment auditing matters. Hard to advocate for on-chain sovereignty if the code can be drained on day one.
Wait, in the US you are able to buy a sim card without id?
Yes?
Enjoy the privilege while you can.
Freedom and privacy should not be a priviledge
You don't get either from non-KYC sim cards. The privilege is that you have more ways to practice privacy and maybe a feeling of freedom because you don't have to worry about the one thing, but you need to work it to really have it, and privacy and freedom are still attainable even if all internet access is KYC'd. (nothing feels as free as not having any internet connectivity, imo)
For example, if you buy your KYC-free sim card with a card or in a place that has cameras... you're anyway losing your privacy.
Agreed 100%. Although I don't want to go back to the 19th century.
Privacy's not a switch, but a dial right? You cant turn it on and off. However I would like the option and to at least try
I'd say process. You need security and that is a process (both in the physical and digital world) and that needs continuous maintenance. Thus, to have privacy, you have to spend a lot of time on the security of your personal environment. Awareness is key. The downside is that you may not get to experience/perceive all that freedom, because you get a shitton more work that is non-optional.
This was on my list to read today.
Seems like major cell providers in the US already require a fair bit of KYC, but I have successfully purchased prepaid lines with cash in the last couple years -- and now they want to get rid of that.
We are headed toward a world of kyc gated access to all basic infrastructure. I think it's sad, but I don't see how we avoid it. All the bureaucracy's -- governments and large corporations -- seem to believe they are better served by dragnet surveillance of the population. I don't see any large group with political power and desire to resist this. And the people are too busy flipping through tiktoks to care.
4 years is long? A bank just asked me to provide a salary statement from 2005! What? Yes. And my ex-employer could not give it to me, because they only retain records for 20 years. So I was denied opening an account by some compliance dickheads. This world only needs tagged and locked up slaves.
The fuckkey ccc ccc
The paradox here: if you build on permissioned rails, you also need to worry about smart contract access controls. Front-running resistance and governance mechanisms matter when the chain itself is neutral but the contracts aren't. The fight against KYC is partly a fight for self-custody, but self-custody contracts need the same rigor — which is why pre-deployment auditing matters. Hard to advocate for on-chain sovereignty if the code can be drained on day one.