Thanks, @vivek and team. I’m cautiously optimistic about this possibility, though I’ve yet to read the underlying materials.
Why caution?
I’m not here to build tools that have the potential for abuse by overzealous regulatory regimes, and I believe we need a Zcash stack that operates with complete independence - a new system outside the old system. I’m also concerned about sliding into a trap of expectations over time. We must not build anything like identity or censorship tooling into the protocol. It would be the death of this project. Zcash must remain privacy-protecting and permissionless.
That said, I believe in self-sovereignty and giving people a choice. If separate KYC-enforcing pools and supporting software are created on top of the protocol that people can choose whether or not to interact with, I’m all for it. After all, the protocol itself is permissionless and it’s up to each person to make that choice.
Stables for payments are an important innovation, and making it easy to opt into using them while ring-fencing Zcash itself could drive a ton of utility and adoption. I am glad that Qedit is proposing novel and useful options. Ultimately, I’d like to create a world where shielded stables without KYC requirements.