@tecate...
I don't fundamentally disagree with what you say. If the "crypto industry" (sorry - I can't think of a better word) got together as a group (brokers, exchanges etc) and agreed to have standards on their customers (i.e. have a full record of the customers as they come into the crypto world) they could probably make a good case for cooperation with the mainstream banking industry without having to track each transaction fully. But to do that it would require coordinated industry standards. Currently the work of a diligent well run exchange is completely undermined by a careless "fly-by-night" as funds can enter by the later and leave by the former.
Banks have been adapting to change and new technology for centuries. People refer to SWIFT when thinking of the "payments rails" but most banks are supporting a dozen different infrastructures - some dating back decades and some completely new (including blockchain). It isn't a fear of new technology. Most of the large international banks have a much larger tech and fintech element than you seem to give credit for.
I also agree that regulations have to change and adapt. That shouldn't really be too difficult in fact. But generally what doesn't happen is that the principles involved don't change (e.g. preventing proceeds of crime from moving through the mainstream financial system). Your difficulties (if I take you as an example of the broader issue) won't really be addressed by changes in procedures unless the principle the bank is applying is thought about and addressed by the exchanges. If that happens, the practical details can adjust very quickly.
I don't fundamentally disagree with what you say. If the "crypto industry" (sorry - I can't think of a better word) got together as a group (brokers, exchanges etc) and agreed to have standards on their customers (i.e. have a full record of the customers as they come into the crypto world) they could probably make a good case for cooperation with the mainstream banking industry without having to track each transaction fully. But to do that it would require coordinated industry standards. Currently the work of a diligent well run exchange is completely undermined by a careless "fly-by-night" as funds can enter by the later and leave by the former.
Banks have been adapting to change and new technology for centuries. People refer to SWIFT when thinking of the "payments rails" but most banks are supporting a dozen different infrastructures - some dating back decades and some completely new (including blockchain). It isn't a fear of new technology. Most of the large international banks have a much larger tech and fintech element than you seem to give credit for.
I also agree that regulations have to change and adapt. That shouldn't really be too difficult in fact. But generally what doesn't happen is that the principles involved don't change (e.g. preventing proceeds of crime from moving through the mainstream financial system). Your difficulties (if I take you as an example of the broader issue) won't really be addressed by changes in procedures unless the principle the bank is applying is thought about and addressed by the exchanges. If that happens, the practical details can adjust very quickly.