Regulations in online Gambling sites

[fiulpro]

I very recently read a news regarding how one has to prove that , they can afford the loss of even 100 euro.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5266925.msg54941310#msg54941310

Now I was going through the news and found some indepth idea of how the casinos will be regulated online. The one am sharing is regarding the slot games being regulated online in Great Britain.

https://www.gamblingnews.com/news/slot-games-in-gb-to-receive-betting-and-deposit-limit-suggests-a-new-report/

-Mandatory limit between 1£-5£
-Soft cap of 100£ monthly

This changes a lot of things like :

Gambling content
Gambling affordability
Licenses for gambling
Gambling tax
The regulatory framework for gambling

This is paving a new way towards centralization of online Gambling sites by the government.

The report suggests the implementation of controls for online (remote) gambling. According to the paper, limits on both stake and speed of play need to be introduced. Online slots should have limits of £1 and £5 per bet. On the other hand, according to the report, non-slot content should receive limits on game design. This is because if non-slot content receives bet limits, it may become: “commercially non-viable.“

_*_

The authors of the report further outlined a suggestion for the implementation of a “soft cap” limit of £100 per month on deposits. According to them, this amount represents the sum of what gamblers spend but it also introduces a “socially acceptable” spending limit per threshold. Such limit ensures that spending on gambling does not exceed poverty thresholds for lower income households, says the report.

^ This one I might agree with somehow , as it will control the gambling addiction but at the same time it won't stop people from using other methods to gamble . They will just hide it from the government and use sites which doesn't follow up and end up getting scammed.

But 100£ cap is too low.

According to them they are looking forward for controlling the gambling of low income households and for the high income households they want to show them how they have to control their habits of gambling per-se

People are not bots.
They are very aware of what they are doing at the same time they could have opened the care system or something for them instead of controlling them like this , Because at the end of the day they cannot influence each and everything just like that .

It is done with good intentions but forcing people to follow rules will never go well with anyone.

What is your take on this ?

This news actually paves a way further into how the governmental bodies plan on regulating the online casinos especially the crypto ones .

[1715362437]

1715362437

[1715362437]

1715362437

[1715362437]

1715362437

[1715362437]

1715362437

[1715362437]

1715362437

[swogerino]

I think 100 Eur is a really low limit but as an idea it is a good one.It is designed to stop people becoming addicted and losing everything in gambling.I am a strong advocate of limiting to a certain amount the maximum money you can spend in a gambling site as it safeguards you for going even deeper.I think major websites have such option but is optional to the player and not mandatory.

[Genemind]

I am not sure if this is a mistake or not, but you have the same topic posted. I think you should delete either one of your posts since the topic is the same, or you can just reply to the first topic you have started if you want to add or reiterate your idea or opinion. Cheers, have a great day.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5266925.0

I think 100 Eur is a really low limit but as an idea it is a good one.It is designed to stop people becoming addicted and losing everything in gambling.I am a strong advocate of limiting to a certain amount the maximum money you can spend in a gambling site as it safeguards you for going even deeper.I think major websites have such option but are optional to the player and not mandatory.

Agree, since some problem gamblers don't have a stable income or those who are of low-income individuals, this will limit them for going beyond what they can spend.

[fiulpro]

I am not sure if this is a mistake or not, but you have the same topic posted. I think you should delete either one of your posts since the topic is the same, or you can just reply to the first topic you have started if you want to add or reiterate your idea or opinion. Cheers, have a great day.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5266925.0

I think 100 Eur is a really low limit but as an idea it is a good one.It is designed to stop people becoming addicted and losing everything in gambling.I am a strong advocate of limiting to a certain amount the maximum money you can spend in a gambling site as it safeguards you for going even deeper.I think major websites have such option but are optional to the player and not mandatory.

Agree, since some problem gamblers don't have a stable income or those who are of low-income individuals, this will limit them for going beyond what they can spend.

Well apparently you did not read the same , even here I have stated above the aforementioned topic that you are talking about.

Both of them are Preety different therefore I did not think that it would be good if I did post there only. Plus I did put up a link of the previous topic the fact that you told me that justifies that you did not even read the first 4 lines 😂.

I think 100 Eur is a really low limit but as an idea it is a good one.It is designed to stop people becoming addicted and losing everything in gambling.I am a strong advocate of limiting to a certain amount the maximum money you can spend in a gambling site as it safeguards you for going even deeper.I think major websites have such option but is optional to the player and not mandatory.

Strongly agreed , but the problem is they are putting very low limit , see if someone wants to gamble away 1000£ ,they won't stop him , he can most likely use good sites to 100£ but the person can get involved with the dark market and stuff .

At the same time get scammed.

But they cannot keep a track of each and every individual's net worth therefore the idea should be different for everyone , for some100£ is very low to begin with.

This is paving way for Centralization , soon enough online crypto casinos will be heavily regulated , at the same time Government will be asking for taxes from these sites which will shut off small business. It's like a whole new strategy.

Rest they have defined it as helping people break the addiction , I do think it's not really how people get out of an addiction.

You have to give :
Time
Attention

At the same time addiction for everyone is quite different thus should be handled differently. They could have made a helpline or something where people can reach them and talk about it. As far as I understand the human psychology does not allow for forced regulations, it only creates problems.

[Ucy]

I don't think the government is ready to fix the problem of gambling in casino once and for all. You can't say you are regulating drunkenness or heavy drinkers while calling places people go to drink "drunkenness spots". Betting ≠ Gambling. Taking too much risk in betting centers (& with non-betting related things) is gambling. It's a mistake that needs to be corrected in the laws first, in order to avoid more confusions and mistakes.
I worry they will continue to run around in circles trying to understand and fix a problem.

By the way, the wealthy and poor gamble with their money in casino/betting centers. It seems the government is only focused on poor casino gamblers? They could as well do thesame thing with gamblers in stock/forex/crypto trading and good traders would be limited from trading with sufficient funds. A good sports bettor for example should be able to bet above those limits placed by the government.

[BALIK]

I think it's a fair piece of legislation. It simply aims to prevent people who cannot afford to lose money from losing more money than they can afford.

In turn, this should prevent these same individuals from applying to extortionate payday loan companies in order to pay off their gambling debt—which actually ends up sending them further into the hole.

Not sure how they're going to able to enforce this minimum across multiple sites though. I imagine that a problem gambler would simply register to a new site to get another 100 EUR limit again.

Unless there's some sort of centralized gamblers database (which seems highly unlikely), then it's just not going to work.

[Becky666]

Actually, am surprise to see how this can be implemented by the government of Great Britain regarding to this online slots games. What I see can be done is the government centralizing the online gambling casinos to be able to effectively implement this regulations without which can't be possible. Also, the efforts which will yield possible result on this; will be a tougher one for the government of Great Britain across all online gambling websites. But, if this yield good result; there will be more peace among homes and even among gamblers. Let wait to see how it all play out.

[Ziskinberg]

100 EUR per month is very low, it's going to help reduce the gambling problem of most people but how about those who can really afford to risk more than 100 EUR, these people are gamblers, they can even afford to risk that amount in just a single bet, and believe me, in our country there is no regulation like that but I experience putting a bet or $1000 in just a single bet.

Damn this regulation, if the government will intervene, it's taking our freedom to gamble.

[avikz]

Government can certainly regulate online casinos if they want to but that doesn't mean they will have the power to regulate crypto related casinos. The reason is very simple,

1. Majority of the crypto casinos are not registered.
2. Since crypto casinos use many different cryptocurrencies, it is not always possible to cap it within a certain monetary value. They will have to be in units

Now the question comes if it is good for the industry. The soft cap of 100 euros will effectively kill the crypto casino business in the same way regulation will do. Crypto casinos are mostly for them who doesn't want to be identified or capped by any means. It will probably not hurt fiat based casinos because it is already regulated by the local regulatory bodies, but not at all good for the crypto casinos!

[mu_enrico]

The one am sharing is regarding the slot games being regulated online in Great Britain.

I understand why the Government wants to limit users' exposure to the slot games since it is the most addicting gambling games (much wow). Yes, 100 EUR is too low for British, and we can expect the real regulation would introduce a limit of at least 250 EUR (250 spins * 1 EUR).

IMHO, it would be better if the Government limit the bet size to 0.1 EUR and introduce maximum spins per minute, like 10 per minute. So let's do the math; users can only spend 1 EUR per minute. That's only 60 EUR per hour if he is a cursed slots player.

[VanityWallets2015]

Agreed. Taking into consideration that is not usual for the government to be pro cryptocurrencies.
I also think that if online casinos will be regulated legally, then crypto casinos would possibly be affected as well.
Keeping in mind that it is not just about mandatory limits but regulations regarding general operations.

[aioc]

This one I might agree with somehow , as it will control the gambling addiction but at the same time it won't stop people from using other methods to gamble . They will just hide it from the government and use sites which doesn't follow up and end up getting scammed.

But 100£ cap is too low.

According to them they are looking forward for controlling the gambling of low income households and for the high income households they want to show them how they have to control their habits of gambling per-se

People are not bots.
They are very aware of what they are doing at the same time they could have opened the care system or something for them instead of controlling them like this , Because at the end of the day they cannot influence each and everything just like that .

It is done with good intentions but forcing people to follow rules will never go well with anyone.

What is your take on this ?

This news actually paves a way further into how the governmental bodies plan on regulating the online casinos especially the crypto ones .

This is like a totalitarian rule they are intruding someone's else preferred activity of entertainment people are very different when it comes to gambling there are people who spent a lot of money because they want to be entertainment and they want the excitement brought by gambling they don;t intrusion to their private lives, let's see if this succeed. 

[yazher]

100 EUR per month is very low, it's going to help reduce the gambling problem of most people but how about those who can really afford to risk more than 100 EUR, these people are gamblers, they can even afford to risk that amount in just a single bet, and believe me, in our country there is no regulation like that but I experience putting a bet or $1000 in just a single bet.

Damn this regulation, if the government will intervene, it's taking our freedom to gamble.

I think they are going to make something good decision for the majority of the people and when this thing works out, they will have other rules to implement for anybody who can afford to lose more than 100 EUR. Anyway, this is good decision by the upper hand since gambling addiction can lead to people's death if not resolve immediately. anyone has different opinions regarding this one, the only way to stop the suicidal problem of a gambler addict is to test this kind of rules to see if it works or not.

[Questat]

100 EUR per month is very low, it's going to help reduce the gambling problem of most people but how about those who can really afford to risk more than 100 EUR, these people are gamblers, they can even afford to risk that amount in just a single bet, and believe me, in our country there is no regulation like that but I experience putting a bet or $1000 in just a single bet.

Damn this regulation, if the government will intervene, it's taking our freedom to gamble.

I think they are going to make something good decision for the majority of the people and when this thing works out, they will have other rules to implement for anybody who can afford to lose more than 100 EUR. Anyway, this is good decision by the upper hand since gambling addiction can lead to people's death if not resolve immediately. anyone has different opinions regarding this one, the only way to stop the suicidal problem of a gambler addict is to test this kind of rules to see if it works or not.

There are good side and bad side of this regulation, this will bring inconvenience to gamblers who can really afford as they will have to go to a process to prove that they can afford to lose more than 100 EUR a month, and to think that Europe has a bigger minimum salary compared to other countries, I think 100 EUR is small for them, it looks like they are telling people to quit gambling.

Based on my research, the minimum wage in this country is around £8, I think this is per hour, therefore, one can earn £100 in at least 2 days if he works a minimum of 8 hours per day. So IMO the law doesn't makes sense.

https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates

[hatshepsut93]

I'm looking forward to seeing scientists analyzing the results of this regulation in the future, to determine whether it worked or not. It's easy for us to say right now what effects it might have, whether it will be positive or not, but who knows how it all work on practice?

My view, such harsh method would likely not fully work, as people will start looking for illegal/unregulated gambling more. It's kinda like war on drugs or prohibition - simply banning or severely limiting a thing doesn't work. But anti-smoking campaigns are quite effective, they made the prices of cigarettes really high and now a lot of people just can't afford it. They are actually trying something like that with gambling by adding taxes on winnings, and maybe this approach could be more effective.

[Ryker1]

Well, let see what will happen to this regulation, it is now clear that gambling is just a form of entertainment not for the chasing money. This regulation perhaps will help to reduce the number of being addicted to gambling. Perhaps the government of Britain saw that there are a lot of people spending their time in gambling also the same their money. I don't think this will solve their problem, as many say, --gamblers will always looking and find ways just to gamble.
This perhaps will have a huge impact on cryptocurrencies, I have an insight that gamblers on Britain will witch into crypto because this is unregulated and no one knows when it comes to personal information. But I think, this kind of implementation is those online gambling that only accepts fiat not the crypto gambling online.

[Oilacris]

100 EUR per month is very low, it's going to help reduce the gambling problem of most people but how about those who can really afford to risk more than 100 EUR, these people are gamblers, they can even afford to risk that amount in just a single bet, and believe me, in our country there is no regulation like that but I experience putting a bet or $1000 in just a single bet.

Damn this regulation, if the government will intervene, it's taking our freedom to gamble.

I think they are going to make something good decision for the majority of the people and when this thing works out, they will have other rules to implement for anybody who can afford to lose more than 100 EUR. Anyway, this is good decision by the upper hand since gambling addiction can lead to people's death if not resolve immediately. anyone has different opinions regarding this one, the only way to stop the suicidal problem of a gambler addict is to test this kind of rules to see if it works or not.

There are good side and bad side of this regulation, this will bring inconvenience to gamblers who can really afford as they will have to go to a process to prove that they can afford to lose more than 100 EUR a month, and to think that Europe has a bigger minimum salary compared to other countries, I think 100 EUR is small for them, it looks like they are telling people to quit gambling.

Based on my research, the minimum wage in this country is around £8, I think this is per hour, therefore, one can earn £100 in at least 2 days if he works a minimum of 8 hours per day. So IMO the law doesn't makes sense.

https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates

It does make sense but they didnt consider out on looking in a larger scope but rather only focuses into those things that they had in mind. 100 euro limit  month? it is indeed an indirect way

of telling or saying that people should stop gambling.We know on what their intentions are but it is just too low if they do impose such laws yet we know that there are indeed people

who do spend much more into that threshold.I wont be surprised if gambling companies would surely hide out transactions yet they would be the number one that wont like on said
new limitations.

[Pmalek]

Guys the limit is proposed at £100 not 100€. It's for Great Britain, they don't use EURO. The limit makes sense for those living just above the poverty threshold. It makes no sense for those who don't.

They are just asking for trouble. This will just signal a new era where more people will move from regulated gambling companies to unregulated ones. It could also mean more business for Bitcoin casinos. Unfortunately, it will also open ways for unknowing UK gamblers to get scammed.

At the moment this is just a proposal, who knows what will happen.

[johhnyUA]

People are not bots.

Yes, often they're most stupid.

What is your take on this ?

In one hand, any "care" is more bad than good for active people, because it's act something like damping of your will of power. This is if we are talking about trading, investments, business and so on. But in case of slots and casinos maybe this is not so bad, because in that case people don't get better, they get far worse because of gambling addiction. So maybe this time the arrow hit a right target.

Also, as i understood this regulation will affect only slots and such kind of gambling. And will not affect normal gambling like poker or Blackjack.

[TimeTeller]

Government can certainly regulate online casinos if they want to but that doesn't mean they will have the power to regulate crypto related casinos. The reason is very simple,

1. Majority of the crypto casinos are not registered.
2. Since crypto casinos use many different cryptocurrencies, it is not always possible to cap it within a certain monetary value. They will have to be in units

Now the question comes if it is good for the industry. The soft cap of 100 euros will effectively kill the crypto casino business in the same way regulation will do. Crypto casinos are mostly for them who doesn't want to be identified or capped by any means. It will probably not hurt fiat based casinos because it is already regulated by the local regulatory bodies, but not at all good for the crypto casinos!

And in addition, most crypto casinos don't require KYC.
So I don't think they can regulate those online casinos who don't have the real info of their players.

Guys the limit is proposed at £100 not 100€. It's for Great Britain, they don't use EURO. The limit makes sense for those living just above the poverty threshold. It makes no sense for those who don't.

They are just asking for trouble. This will just signal a new era where more people will move from regulated gambling companies to unregulated ones. It could also mean more business for Bitcoin casinos. Unfortunately, it will also open ways for unknowing UK gamblers to get scammed.

At the moment this is just a proposal, who knows what will happen.

As this is just a proposal in the meantime, expect that there will be more revisions in this regulation.
Also, if you are a true-blooded gambler, you already know by now how to get by on this rule.
Definitely, online casinos don't like their gamblers to have spending limit.
But since a lot of crypto casinos are not licensed and do not require KYC, these gamblers have their vast options if they don't want to be confined with this limit.

[Wexnident]

They should really put out said regulations even without the problem of quarantine. Well, at least, they should ask for proofs ( those that already have KYC anyway) like something of a monthly salary, monthly expenses OR just introduce a formula where they have to put out salaries and expenses, let the machine calculate, and let the user themselves follow whether such cap should be accepted or not, or casinos themselves could introduce caps using that.

The report suggests the implementation of controls for online (remote) gambling. According to the paper, limits on both stake and speed of play need to be introduced. Online slots should have limits of £1 and £5 per bet. On the other hand, according to the report, non-slot content should receive limits on game design. This is because if non-slot content receives bet limits, it may become: “commercially non-viable.“

True, if they limited something like poker with 1 or 5 per bet? The hell would that make the game be. They could potentially lower the limit of raises and the like, to an acceptable range anyway. Or once the pot reaches a certain amount, game automatically picks up pace to get the river without asking players for more berts.

But 100£ cap is too low.

Well, it is supposed to limit them from spending too much. Using something like what I said, calculating salaries and expenses makes calculating a bit too different since some have almost no income, while some has a bit of income and the like, so I guess they just met at the middle and made a compromise.

[Janation]

Does this mean every online casinos would require KYC?

If that is the case I guess there would be a problem to some crypto gamblers since I know the majority of the gamblers using cryptocurrencies wants themselves to be anonymous or just doesn't want to send their information.  I am fine with the cap or the requirement to provve but this is different.

[sunsilk]

 £100 as a monthly cap is really a low limit for those gamblers that are even reaching more than this cap per month. There are good purposes and reasons why they are looking into making this happen.

But for now, let's wait for the future updates.

At the moment this is just a proposal, who knows what will happen.

[Coin_trader]

Does this mean every online casinos would require KYC?

I don’t see that KYC will be mandatory. Casino that have a license was already regulated which don’t required KYC. Only the amount of bet in Slot was being discussed to be regulated to control addiction of the player, This will be beneficial to the players because they can play without worrying about big loss. Actually this not a big deal because if ever the player reach the 100$ cap per month then they can just play other gambling games like dice, sportsbet and card games.

[Darker45]

100£ monthly deposit is just a soft cap. By giving that amount a label, there must be a higher cap probably depending on certain conditions. Furthermore, 100£ is low but gambling expenses should be low. It shouldn't be allocated with a budget that may get near the amount spent for necessities.

Also, it may actually accumulate because that monthly deposit limit probably discounts the fact that within a month that amount could actually double, triple, or even more.

While I am not a fan of rules, it is my general observation that people are better subjected to them rather than left absolutely free on their own. Yeah, people are no bots; they have awareness. But the thing is they are also very prone to spiral out of control.

[shoreno]

Does this mean every online casinos would require KYC?

I don’t see that KYC will be mandatory. Casino that have a license was already regulated which don’t required KYC. Only the amount of bet in Slot was being discussed to be regulated to control addiction of the player, This will be beneficial to the players because they can play without worrying about big loss. Actually this not a big deal because if ever the player reach the 100$ cap per month then they can just play other gambling games like dice, sportsbet and card games.

unlicensed casinos are less strict than those who have a license and they are mainly that dont require a kyc upon my observation .

only slot bets are being restricted ?  hmm naybe people get addicted on slots more than any other games and we can see how the number of slots grow  but it shouldnt be slots only because every other games there are those players that bet huge enough .

[maydna]

Does this mean every online casinos would require KYC?

I don’t see that KYC will be mandatory. Casino that have a license was already regulated which don’t required KYC. Only the amount of bet in Slot was being discussed to be regulated to control addiction of the player, This will be beneficial to the players because they can play without worrying about big loss. Actually this not a big deal because if ever the player reach the 100$ cap per month then they can just play other gambling games like dice, sportsbet and card games.

I think the KYC can be applied in the casino based on fiat, but in the casino based on crypto, that won't be easy because it needs regulation from the government, and many countries still not accept crypto. Perhaps, slots can attract many gamblers to spend much money in the games because to gamble on that game will no need to use big money in one bet. But I think all gambling games should be regulated because if only one gambling game regulated, people can still use the other gambling games to gamble, and there is a chance to see another addiction from other people. I think $100 per month will be too big to gamble for one person, but that can happen to the addiction gamblers because he can use more money to gamble, so he thinks that he can have more chances to win.

[lebregone]

Regulations are not bad especially if it cannot damage the profit of the casinos owner while protecting the people to become addicted in gambling.

But putting a mandatory limit which is very low is not a good sign also as the casinos owner will be in disadvantage, if it will continue then the casinos will likely to close and stop operating.
As a gambler, I am not against about the regulations as it can also prevent the fake casinos to operate and only the genuine one will be left.

[Debonaire217]

Regulations are not bad especially if it cannot damage the profit of the casinos owner while protecting the people to become addicted in gambling.

But putting a mandatory limit which is very low is not a good sign also as the casinos owner will be in disadvantage, if it will continue then the casinos will likely to close and stop operating.
As a gambler, I am not against about the regulations as it can also prevent the fake casinos to operate and only the genuine one will be left.

Perhaps, it is not just in the side of the house or casino that will not be in favor since most of the gambler spend lots of time in gambling especially if they don't have anything to do as they just want to have fun.

Mandatory limits should be increase especially depending on the deposit amount of the gambler, and not on how many game he/she could play. Why? a gambler could deposit high and play small amount of game because of his high betting amount, he could also play lots of game if he will reduce his bet amount. What makes it bad is when the gambler is depositing too much to the platform. So it is a good advise to limit deposit in order to discipline the gambler to bet not too much.

[Insanerman]

But 100£ cap is too low.

For me this is a much better regulation idea. Why? It is simply because it would limit the gambling activities you can do per month and as well as limit how much you can spend on gambling in a month. The fact that most gamblers are often get addicted onto it and spend almost half to even every money or belongings they have (some sells those so they can have money to gamble), it is a better way to eradicate such instances, not for the government, but for the gamblers as well.

[Natalim]

But 100£ cap is too low.

For me this is a much better regulation idea. Why? It is simply because it would limit the gambling activities you can do per month and as well as limit how much you can spend on gambling in a month. The fact that most gamblers are often get addicted onto it and spend almost half to even every money or belongings they have (some sells those so they can have money to gamble), it is a better way to eradicate such instances, not for the government, but for the gamblers as well.

You probably referring to the irresponsible gamblers, how about the professional gamblers, their main job is gambling, they can't live with that limitation.
The thing is, the government sees gambling as a business for the operators and just an entertainment to gamblers, they don't consider those people who are serious with their gambling activities.

[Becky666]

Does this mean every online casinos would require KYC? <snip>

The government had long ago agitated for all online gambling casinos to embark on compulsory know your customers(KYC) but some gambling platforms still decline this request and contributed to what has eaten deep into gamblers these days. As per the current regulations from the government, is to ensure gamblers are gambling minimally. Government can enforce this regulations through a minimal deposit from every gambler and not otherwise.

[carriebee]

Does this mean every online casinos would require KYC? <snip>

The government had long ago agitated for all online gambling casinos to embark on compulsory know your customers(KYC) but some gambling platforms still decline this request and contributed to what has eaten deep into gamblers these days. As per the current regulations from the government, is to ensure gamblers are gambling minimally. Government can enforce this regulations through a minimal deposit from every gambler and not otherwise.

This has been impose actually by the government to do kyc but as been said others o even users don't want to comply to provide personal identification. Actually, gambling laws and regulations continue to evolve these days. With the amount to limit even, it's low still good to avoid overspending by gamblers and to avoid addictions. So everyone can monitor how much they can only spend monthly.

[Lakai01]

It could also mean more business for Bitcoin casinos. Unfortunately, it will also open ways for unknowing UK gamblers to get scammed.

Exactly. This will only lead to the fact that no online casino will apply for a license in the UK. The majority of casinos are already operating on smaller islands with very lax laws around gambling.

So I don't really understand the point of the proposal, and in my opinion the "protection" of customers is just as little given as it is now. People who want to avoid the 100 pound limit can do so very easily.

[plvbob0070]

£100 as a monthly cap is really a low limit for those gamblers that are even reaching more than this cap per month. There are good purposes and reasons why they are looking into making this happen.

But for now, let's wait for the future updates.

At the moment this is just a proposal, who knows what will happen.

I guess it may vary from the amount of income you have, and how financially capable a gambler is. Maybe this £100 is for those who barely have a stable income or something since I think they are just trying to prevent gambling addiction. But if a gambler is rich enough to afford more than £100, then they can probably have a bigger monthly cap.

They have a good intention about this but for sure, we will see some gamblers and operators who will disagree with this proposal.

[FlightyPouch]

Actually this not a big deal because if ever the player reach the 100$ cap per month then they can just play other gambling games like dice, sportsbet and card games.

Makes sense. Most of the gamblers here doesn't just stick with dice or slots, they have a huge array of games they can play making $100 cap per month not that much. But not most of us can afford to lose that so I guess this might be nothing to some but to some, it is something.

[Botnake]

This seems to be a very rare regulation, I have not heard similar to this regulation before.
Come on, 100£ monthly limit seems not fair for gamblers, why are the government now controlling gamblers when it comes to spending money?

Honestly, I believe if they really care for the people, why not just think of banning gambling than making this kind of very complicated regulation just to give gamblers a chance to gamble at a very low amount. These regulators do not understand the gambling's principle which is "only bet what you can afford to lose", it doesn't state their a specific amount as everyone has different status financially.

Personally, I would disagree with his law.

[yazher]

Does this mean every online casinos would require KYC?

If that is the case I guess there would be a problem to some crypto gamblers since I know the majority of the gamblers using cryptocurrencies wants themselves to be anonymous or just doesn't want to send their information.  I am fine with the cap or the requirement to provve but this is different.

If we are talking about the KYC method regulations on gambling, we will have different views by the people all around the internet but we will find the majority will be against this implementation because no one wants to show their true identity just to play gambling online. anyway, in this era of crypto gambling online, we don't see it'll gonna implemented soon since a lot of people will be against it. but we cannot say after they finalized their decision, if that happened, then I guess the market in the online gambling will be greatly subsided.

[AicecreaME]

This changes might be boring to some people who don't have any problem regarding about financial status, that can gamble how much they want every single day. I know that gambling sites and government are just trying to limit or prevent everyone's from getting too deep in the abyss of gambling. However, this might backfire to them, they might get bankrupt in worst case scenario because many of their players might lose interest in this changes that are being implemented by both parties (Gambling sites and Government).

In my opinion, the result of this new policies may give other countries ideas on how much money they will put as a limit every single day and depends on a person's financial status background.

[Sadlife]

I dont understand why governments want to regulate casino's and gambling site by limiting betting especially when the economy is in critical situation due to businesses closing. In fact i dont understand, why governments still insist on this law when they are trying to revitalized the economy. This is a good move to help people but it's also bad in macroeconomics.

[Gotumoot]

I don't think that the high roller would agree to having a cap on gambling or regulating it and besides how would it actually help?
The gambling sites would have a limited plays for each of their user so that would cut down their profit.
And also I think it could be cheated if they would limit the it then the players could create multiple account to bypass the limit and play however they want.

[Shasha80]

Of course, with the government regulating online gambling by limiting bets to reduce the number of gambling addicts,
it is a good thing. But this will have an effect on tax revenue, because as a result of this regulation online gambling
income will decrease drastically. Even though the economy is currently in crisis, it should be reviewed in relation to
this online gambling regulation. Because I think it should be the government is thinking of other more effective ways to
deal with gambling addicts.

[mardaed]

Agreed. Taking into consideration that is not usual for the government to be pro cryptocurrencies.
I also think that if online casinos will be regulated legally, then crypto casinos would possibly be affected as well.
Keeping in mind that it is not just about mandatory limits but regulations regarding general operations.

I understand your thoughts. And I think that even if the government decided to take position in regulating online casinos, it is not that easy to be able to reach all of these online casinos, especially crypto related.

[Slow death]

honestly I see many obstacles in this matter of regulating online casinos.

1 - How will governments carry out periodic inspections at online casinos if these online casinos have no physical headquarters?

2 - in case of disputes between the client and the casino, how will governments manage to resolve if cryptocurrencies are not regulated?

[Ucy]

honestly I see many obstacles in this matter of regulating online casinos.

1 - How will governments carry out periodic inspections at online casinos if these online casinos have no physical headquarters?

2 - in case of disputes between the client and the casino, how will governments manage to resolve if cryptocurrencies are not regulated?

Things could be easily and efficiently regulated in a decentralized crypto network without the need for centralized governments. I think it's a matter of having the proper rules for the visible/known betting world  to stick to, and having good enforcement for rule breakers.

[mersal]

I don't think that the high roller would agree to having a cap on gambling or regulating it and besides how would it actually help?
The gambling sites would have a limited plays for each of their user so that would cut down their profit.
And also I think it could be cheated if they would limit the it then the players could create multiple account to bypass the limit and play however they want.

Casinos will moves to gambling heaven country if their country is starting to implement these kind of non sense regulations, if they don't want their people to gamble then they should ban it but they want to have limiting the amount of bets which i going to affect the gambling sites and not going to give any benefits to the people because still people who are supposed to addict will become one.

[johhnyUA]

It's interesting to watch, how opinions divided: some people butthurt about that fact, some people tell that government will not be able to do that. And noone (except me earlier) trying to think about legitimacy of such action. Casino is robbery in law, meaning, that you're going there and know (if you're not too stupid) that you will lost your money. And casino knows it pretty well. So here is a question: Why government should   allow casino to steal big amounts? If people want to be robbed, maybe this will be better to decrease amount of funds that they will lost?

Especially in online casino, where you never know how fair it is.

[Twentyonepaylots]

honestly I see many obstacles in this matter of regulating online casinos.

1 - How will governments carry out periodic inspections at online casinos if these online casinos have no physical headquarters?

Casinos will have to submit any documented papers that happens in a certain period of time so the government will know what's going inside and outside of the casino such as transactions and player's data (at least the IP in case of any suspicion) Buy this the government can easily track and monitor the casino. In short casinos will be the one who will report to the government.

2 - in case of disputes between the client and the casino, how will governments manage to resolve if cryptocurrencies are not regulated?

Well that will be a two party arrangement and will definitely based on the terms that the client have agreed to. Besides we have an existing law about scam and fraud so that's a win for every one.

[adzino]

I very recently read a news regarding how one has to prove that , they can afford the loss of even 100 euro.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5266925.msg54941310#msg54941310

Now I was going through the news and found some indepth idea of how the casinos will be regulated online. The one am sharing is regarding the slot games being regulated online in Great Britain.

https://www.gamblingnews.com/news/slot-games-in-gb-to-receive-betting-and-deposit-limit-suggests-a-new-report/

-Mandatory limit between 1£-5£
-Soft cap of 100£ monthly

-snip-

I am not sure why others are saying this is going to be a good thing, but to me this law is totally stupid and absurd. Lol, seriously? One has to prove that they are financially capable of gambling? That is hilarious!
Lol the government trying to control the financial aspects of a grown up adult. I mean the person is an adult and he knows what he should do and what he shouldn't. The government shouldn't be taking care of them like a baby.

[carlfebz2]

I am not sure why others are saying this is going to be a good thing, but to me this law is totally stupid and absurd. Lol, seriously? One has to prove that they are financially capable of gambling? That is hilarious!
Lol the government trying to control the financial aspects of a grown up adult. I mean the person is an adult and he knows what he should do and what he shouldn't. The government shouldn't be taking care of them like a baby.

Government does show up some concern into its citizens but they should at least rising up a considerable limit not just on £100.Yeah its stupid but i doubt that this one would be fully
or surely be followed nor implemented.If not then expect that there would be other ways on how gambling businesses will still able to get those high rollers.

There would be some petition of this rule or law in gambling business about raising up the limit.Surely this affects the business and knowing that gambling business does
generate big taxes unless if they dont care about.

[dothebeats]

It seems as if this regulation is pushing gamblers towards traditional casinos and gambling houses. First off, the soft cap limit mentioned is too low for someone to enjoy FOR A MONTH. That isn’t socially-acceptable, that’s kinda restricting people to spend on things they earned. Second, why do people need to verify/confirm that they are financially-capable of spending money to gamble? This isn’t some sort of investment scheme where a ‘show money’ should be imposed. Just let people deposit money and lose it on whatever things they enjoy. This isn’t regulation at all—this is outright controlling people’s financial decision masked by a fake concern.

[AmoreJaz]

It's interesting to watch, how opinions divided: some people butthurt about that fact, some people tell that government will not be able to do that. And noone (except me earlier) trying to think about legitimacy of such action. Casino is robbery in law, meaning, that you're going there and know (if you're not too stupid) that you will lost your money. And casino knows it pretty well. So here is a question: Why government should   allow casino to steal big amounts? If people want to be robbed, maybe this will be better to decrease amount of funds that they will lost?

Especially in online casino, where you never know how fair it is.

gambler's choice whether he wants to lose big amount or not. anyway, that regulation is there but i dont think many gamblers will follow once it is implemented. tbh, there are so many ways how to break that rule. so i guess, gamblers should not be too worried about it. what they should worry is, do they have that extra money to spare in gambling or are they using the money supposedly for his family's needs?

[Mahanton]

It seems as if this regulation is pushing gamblers towards traditional casinos and gambling houses. First off, the soft cap limit mentioned is too low for someone to enjoy FOR A MONTH. That isn’t socially-acceptable, that’s kinda restricting people to spend on things they earned. Second, why do people need to verify/confirm that they are financially-capable of spending money to gamble? This isn’t some sort of investment scheme where a ‘show money’ should be imposed. Just let people deposit money and lose it on whatever things they enjoy. This isn’t regulation at all—this is outright controlling people’s financial decision masked by a fake concern.

This is what im thinking too on where its concerns is fake and just really trying to control people on how they should spend up.Its just really too small for someone to spend up on an entire month yet it can even be spent out on an entire day on playing which would already consumed out on your limit for the entire month which is absurd.It wont really be that controversial if they had just ban nor prohibit it rather than giving out small limits on where it would really be just as good as none.

[ralle14]

I dont understand why governments want to regulate casino's and gambling site by limiting betting especially when the economy is in critical situation due to businesses closing. In fact i dont understand, why governments still insist on this law when they are trying to revitalized the economy. This is a good move to help people but it's also bad in macroeconomics.

It's because online gambling is becoming more popular now and there's only a few solutions available to stop gambling addiction. While it's bad for the country it could improve the people's quality of life as they're forced to spend it somewhere else. You're right a lot of business are struggling but the proposal is focused in online casinos which is still going strong regardless of the pandemic.

This would be good if it's an optional solution like the self exclusion instead of forcing it on everyone imo.

[Finestream]

honestly I see many obstacles in this matter of regulating online casinos.

1 - How will governments carry out periodic inspections at online casinos if these online casinos have no physical headquarters?

I don't think it's hard to do it, as long as the casino is given a license to operate, they are under the regulation of the government, and they can ask the casino to give them a pass to check their system if they complied, it's easy, they'll only check the amount of bets as what we are talking here is only the limits, with the advance technology now, this is not hard to do.

2 - in case of disputes between the client and the casino, how will governments manage to resolve if cryptocurrencies are not regulated?

Like I mentioned above, this is only for regulated casinos which is under their jurisdiction, they have no access nor control of the crypto casinos when not regulated.

[jademaxsuy]

honestly I see many obstacles in this matter of regulating online casinos.

1 - How will governments carry out periodic inspections at online casinos if these online casinos have no physical headquarters?

I don't think it's hard to do it, as long as the casino is given a license to operate, they are under the regulation of the government, and they can ask the casino to give them a pass to check their system if they complied, it's easy, they'll only check the amount of bets as what we are talking here is only the limits, with the advance technology now, this is not hard to do.

2 - in case of disputes between the client and the casino, how will governments manage to resolve if cryptocurrencies are not regulated?

Like I mentioned above, this is only for regulated casinos which is under their jurisdiction, they have no access nor control of the crypto casinos when not regulated.

Regulating online based or crypto based casino is very simple. Many would wonder how they will be able to see the transactions being done withou POS? Well we know that casino are using blockchain and if not they should be required to use blockchain before they can get their license to operate. Then what happen next? Simply online casino could not evade tax on it for all the transactions being done are being made public due to blockchain. So, meaning regulating this and taxing casino were very easy for them and there could be more ways for the goverment to regulate online casino. And as expected if online casino violated their rulings then high penalty awaits. This is how they make sure that online casino should follow the protocols and their mandate. Usually penalty is so high that if you are the owner of the casino you would not mind following the rules and regulations rather than getting fine on the high penalties. 

[Finestream]

honestly I see many obstacles in this matter of regulating online casinos.

1 - How will governments carry out periodic inspections at online casinos if these online casinos have no physical headquarters?

I don't think it's hard to do it, as long as the casino is given a license to operate, they are under the regulation of the government, and they can ask the casino to give them a pass to check their system if they complied, it's easy, they'll only check the amount of bets as what we are talking here is only the limits, with the advance technology now, this is not hard to do.

2 - in case of disputes between the client and the casino, how will governments manage to resolve if cryptocurrencies are not regulated?

Like I mentioned above, this is only for regulated casinos which is under their jurisdiction, they have no access nor control of the crypto casinos when not regulated.

Regulating online based or crypto based casino is very simple. Many would wonder how they will be able to see the transactions being done withou POS? Well we know that casino are using blockchain and if not they should be required to use blockchain before they can get their license to operate. Then what happen next? Simply online casino could not evade tax on it for all the transactions being done are being made public due to blockchain. So, meaning regulating this and taxing casino were very easy for them and there could be more ways for the goverment to regulate online casino. And as expected if online casino violated their rulings then high penalty awaits. This is how they make sure that online casino should follow the protocols and their mandate. Usually penalty is so high that if you are the owner of the casino you would not mind following the rules and regulations rather than getting fine on the high penalties.  

That point is very much valid, it's easier to track online transactions of a crypto casinos as there is a blockchain which we called a public ledger, and regulators can just follow the wallet the casinos are using as they'll have to register that wallet and it's easy as doing bank reconciliation in accounting.

The only thing that bothers me is, what if these gamblers will gamble on a non regulated casinos? how would the government implement the law?

We know it's not impossible as most crypto casinos online does not require KYC.

[Barnabe]

I very recently read a news regarding how one has to prove that , they can afford the loss of even 100 euro.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5266925.msg54941310#msg54941310

Now I was going through the news and found some indepth idea of how the casinos will be regulated online. The one am sharing is regarding the slot games being regulated online in Great Britain.

https://www.gamblingnews.com/news/slot-games-in-gb-to-receive-betting-and-deposit-limit-suggests-a-new-report/

-Mandatory limit between 1£-5£
-Soft cap of 100£ monthly

-snip-

I am not sure why others are saying this is going to be a good thing, but to me this law is totally stupid and absurd. Lol, seriously? One has to prove that they are financially capable of gambling? That is hilarious!
Lol the government trying to control the financial aspects of a grown up adult. I mean the person is an adult and he knows what he should do and what he shouldn't. The government shouldn't be taking care of them like a baby.

Once the "grown up adult" runs out of money and cannot afford his rent anymore guess to who he will turn to ? I'm against a social welfare state, but if you are governing one it makes sense to implement this sorts of regulations.

[imstillthebest]

I very recently read a news regarding how one has to prove that , they can afford the loss of even 100 euro.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5266925.msg54941310#msg54941310

Now I was going through the news and found some indepth idea of how the casinos will be regulated online. The one am sharing is regarding the slot games being regulated online in Great Britain.

https://www.gamblingnews.com/news/slot-games-in-gb-to-receive-betting-and-deposit-limit-suggests-a-new-report/

-Mandatory limit between 1£-5£
-Soft cap of 100£ monthly

-snip-

I am not sure why others are saying this is going to be a good thing, but to me this law is totally stupid and absurd. Lol, seriously? One has to prove that they are financially capable of gambling? That is hilarious!
Lol the government trying to control the financial aspects of a grown up adult. I mean the person is an adult and he knows what he should do and what he shouldn't. The government shouldn't be taking care of them like a baby.

Once the "grown up adult" runs out of money and cannot afford his rent anymore guess to who he will turn to ? I'm against a social welfare state, but if you are governing one it makes sense to implement this sorts of regulations.

implementing it makes you smell good to the public especially to the people that dislikes the idea of gambling and for those parents who dont like the gambling addiction of thier kids .

having a casino regulated is also a plus point to you because you can tax them  but why only britain ? not familiar of this country and i didnt saw them being involved heavily on gambling but there are more countries that needs a help like this .

[panganib999]

Such concept of limiting the amount of expenses being spent on online gambling will surely not agreeable to the gamblers out there for they will surely be feeling that they are being controlled on the way they were supposedly enjoying which is playing gambling. Although the idea was clear to lessen the gambling addiction and too much expenditure on playing gambling, still gamblers will surely not agree on this for they will feel more pressure that they must limit their bets to be able to make their gameplay last longer.

Also, the control on gambling plays will not be proven by this because it is already a certain regulation that will leave them no choice but to agree to be able to still play. The control on playing will not be testified by limiting the amount they must spent on gambling because addiction is kind of psychological manner and limiting gamblers will add more pressure on them since they know they are being limited on their gameplays.

[erikoy]

Such concept of limiting the amount of expenses being spent on online gambling will surely not agreeable to the gamblers out there for they will surely be feeling that they are being controlled on the way they were supposedly enjoying which is playing gambling. Although the idea was clear to lessen the gambling addiction and too much expenditure on playing gambling, still gamblers will surely not agree on this for they will feel more pressure that they must limit their bets to be able to make their gameplay last longer.

Also, the control on gambling plays will not be proven by this because it is already a certain regulation that will leave them no choice but to agree to be able to still play. The control on playing will not be testified by limiting the amount they must spent on gambling because addiction is kind of psychological manner and limiting gamblers will add more pressure on them since they know they are being limited on their gameplays.

Well I agree not all gamblers will settle for less. I know that the government also will not go after in online gambling casino for they are busy doing their stuff(corruption). Besides they only react on to something if there are numerous complains against that online gambling platform. For now the regulations does not really affect on online gambling and it only will depending on the country that are strict when it comes to gambling as it is not their traditions and culture. 

[FlightyPouch]

Such concept of limiting the amount of expenses being spent on online gambling will surely not agreeable to the gamblers out there for they will surely be feeling that they are being controlled on the way they were supposedly enjoying which is playing gambling. Although the idea was clear to lessen the gambling addiction and too much expenditure on playing gambling, still gamblers will surely not agree on this for they will feel more pressure that they must limit their bets to be able to make their gameplay last longer.

Also, the control on gambling plays will not be proven by this because it is already a certain regulation that will leave them no choice but to agree to be able to still play. The control on playing will not be testified by limiting the amount they must spent on gambling because addiction is kind of psychological manner and limiting gamblers will add more pressure on them since they know they are being limited on their gameplays.

Well I agree not all gamblers will settle for less. I know that the government also will not go after in online gambling casino for they are busy doing their stuff(corruption). Besides they only react on to something if there are numerous complains against that online gambling platform. For now the regulations does not really affect on online gambling and it only will depending on the country that are strict when it comes to gambling as it is not their traditions and culture. 

We shouldn't need to overreact to this because as far as I know, these regulations are for those gamblers within UK. For the other gamblers online not within UK, then we doesn't need to abide those regulations unless our country decided to do the same. It is fine for me if it is the cap since I don't gamble that much money.

[AmoreJaz]

Such concept of limiting the amount of expenses being spent on online gambling will surely not agreeable to the gamblers out there for they will surely be feeling that they are being controlled on the way they were supposedly enjoying which is playing gambling. Although the idea was clear to lessen the gambling addiction and too much expenditure on playing gambling, still gamblers will surely not agree on this for they will feel more pressure that they must limit their bets to be able to make their gameplay last longer.

Also, the control on gambling plays will not be proven by this because it is already a certain regulation that will leave them no choice but to agree to be able to still play. The control on playing will not be testified by limiting the amount they must spent on gambling because addiction is kind of psychological manner and limiting gamblers will add more pressure on them since they know they are being limited on their gameplays.

Well I agree not all gamblers will settle for less. I know that the government also will not go after in online gambling casino for they are busy doing their stuff(corruption). Besides they only react on to something if there are numerous complains against that online gambling platform. For now the regulations does not really affect on online gambling and it only will depending on the country that are strict when it comes to gambling as it is not their traditions and culture. 

We shouldn't need to overreact to this because as far as I know, these regulations are for those gamblers within UK. For the other gamblers online not within UK, then we doesn't need to abide those regulations unless our country decided to do the same. It is fine for me if it is the cap since I don't gamble that much money.

also as far as i know it is not yet implemented, they are just drafting the proposals and recommendations. if there are a lot of people against it, they may do some adjustments on this proposal. so right now, players from that region can still enjoy the no cap limit. and it is for their own sake anyway, if they have the money to waste, why not?

[DarkDays]

Any kind site that would require you to prove you can lose a certain amount of money would eventually have direct or indirect indication of your finances. If such a site ever got hacked then your credentials would be leaked. Typically that might not be a problem but in this case, your financial strength could be used to attack you in the future.

The policy that they are talking about, in that other thread, was proposed by a foundation called Social Market Foundation, they themselves have a shady history when it comes to who funds them. It's just a shitty policy by a hypocritical foundation if you ask me.

I don't think we'll see any major crackdown on crypto casinos, since they don't want the tax deductions people would need to get if they lose money.

[iTradeChips]

Gambling addiction can really lead to serious mental and emotional consequences if left unchecked, especially if the player loses a very big amount of money. The amount that was proposed is low but it is already, for me, an acceptable amount that can be implemented so that we can achieve the necessary aim of helping potential victims stay in good mental state. They can try to increase the amount depending on the players means, but I think the best is still to educate the gamblers and advise them to control the amount of money they put in.

[bitbunnny]

Gambling addiction can really lead to serious mental and emotional consequences if left unchecked, especially if the player loses a very big amount of money. The amount that was proposed is low but it is already, for me, an acceptable amount that can be implemented so that we can achieve the necessary aim of helping potential victims stay in good mental state. They can try to increase the amount depending on the players means, but I think the best is still to educate the gamblers and advise them to control the amount of money they put in.

It's true, addictive gambling can leave serious consequences. There are many attempts to prevent and control addiction but we have to be honest and admit that we can only help victims if they want to. First they need to recgonize and admit they have a problem that is why I think that education and prevention are the most important elements in the whoke process

[2double0]

Nobody (not even governments) should have the right to intervene into everything a person does, else some day they will ask for proof of breathing that you are alive or not. I get to understand that this is needed to stop gamblers pay the price of losing what they cannot afford to lose and make them better gamblers, but this will also make casinos lose some customer base as every single gambler will not co-operate in this and may stop gambling or take some alternative steps to gamble anonymously.

[bitcoinisbest]

Each country has their own rules and regulations and accordingly one must abide by it. This law as only applicable for the UK citizens so rest of them continue the way it has being functioning but only ensuring that one does not overboard and gamble that in the end it become difficult to survive. The overall reason for government to intervene is that people are rationale to take decisions wisely.

[LbtalkL]

I am just curious does this regulated gambling platforms requires KYC? I am seeing two things here, If they will require KYC they will have fewer users since some users does not like KYC and prefer being anonymous, but if they don't implement KYC that 100 euro limit per account is useless because 1 user can create multiple accounts and bypass those limitations.

[BITCOIN4X]

Each country has their own rules and regulations and accordingly one must abide by it.

I agree with this. Gambling status in my country is illegal according to applicable law. However, the government also cannot completely eradicate hidden gambling site or venues. Some online gambling site have been blocked but we still have a way to enter.

So far, crypto gambling has really helped to increase our privacy and is much more fun because we dont deal with bank account. Although our activities can still be traced, at least crypto gambling has helped many gambler in term of hiding identity (anonymous).

OP, I dont know if the UK government will actually enforce that rule on cryptocurrency-based online gambling. It would be very unpleasant for most gambler if the government restricted and controlled the bet of all gambler. When gambler dont feel free when betting, I think there will be a lot of one-sided losses and that is the gambler.

[2double0]

I am just curious does this regulated gambling platforms requires KYC? I am seeing two things here, If they will require KYC they will have fewer users since some users does not like KYC and prefer being anonymous, but if they don't implement KYC that 100 euro limit per account is useless because 1 user can create multiple accounts and bypass those limitations.

If they are levying these limitations, what will stop them from adding a 'KYC mandatory' tag under the hood? They simply cannot steal a gambler's rights and the reason is - it is the gambler's money and they have the right to spend or throw away their money wherever they want to. Why are they robbing a gambler's rights this way?

[MFahad]

I am just curious does this regulated gambling platforms requires KYC? I am seeing two things here, If they will require KYC they will have fewer users since some users does not like KYC and prefer being anonymous, but if they don't implement KYC that 100 euro limit per account is useless because 1 user can create multiple accounts and bypass those limitations.

All these restrictions are not possible to implement in online casinos. The only thing these rules does is that some people take them seriously and follow them. Even if 20% of the people follow it, there purpose is fulfilled.

[pixie85]

I am just curious does this regulated gambling platforms requires KYC? I am seeing two things here, If they will require KYC they will have fewer users since some users does not like KYC and prefer being anonymous, but if they don't implement KYC that 100 euro limit per account is useless because 1 user can create multiple accounts and bypass those limitations.

If they are levying these limitations, what will stop them from adding a 'KYC mandatory' tag under the hood? They simply cannot steal a gambler's rights and the reason is - it is the gambler's money and they have the right to spend or throw away their money wherever they want to. Why are they robbing a gambler's rights this way?

Private casinos can add any requirements they want but as it was said they will be reluctant to do so because more regulation means less clients. After all we all want to make money and avoid KYC.

Casinos want to add minimum requirements forced on them by the authorities so it's lika a game between a cat and a mouse.

[2double0]

Private casinos can add any requirements they want but as it was said they will be reluctant to do so because more regulation means less clients. After all we all want to make money and avoid KYC.

Casinos want to add minimum requirements forced on them by the authorities so it's lika a game between a cat and a mouse.

End result is that, a gambler is the one who suffers between these two. Before taking these decisions, isn't it fair for the government to ask their citizens if they are comfortable doing what they are supposed to do? And if told about KYC upfront, why would a gambler agree on this?

[Mahanton]

Private casinos can add any requirements they want but as it was said they will be reluctant to do so because more regulation means less clients. After all we all want to make money and avoid KYC.

Casinos want to add minimum requirements forced on them by the authorities so it's lika a game between a cat and a mouse.

End result is that, a gambler is the one who suffers between these two. Before taking these decisions, isn't it fair for the government to ask their citizens if they are comfortable doing what they are supposed to do? And if told about KYC upfront, why would a gambler agree on this?

You can really say that government does really want for it citizens to completely stop gambling and to think on giving out that very little limit on monthly basis which is really good for 1 day use
on most gamblers and also they do possibly able to ask out KYC upfront? As a citizen on such country then you would have no choice because no matter how hard you do oppose on that possible law to be implemented then theres no still option for you to play without the need of complying things up.There are ways but we know that it would be underground but if you can take the risk
then go ahead.

[Becky666]

I am just curious does this regulated gambling platforms requires KYC? I am seeing two things here, If they will require KYC they will have fewer users since some users does not like KYC and prefer being anonymous, but if they don't implement KYC that 100 euro limit per account is useless because 1 user can create multiple accounts and bypass those limitations.

All these restrictions are not possible to implement in online casinos. The only thing these rules does is that some people take them seriously and follow them. Even if 20% of the people follow it, there purpose is fulfilled.

For those in UK the government us very much serious about this regulations and their citizens will definitely obey these regulations. What the UK government want is for the gamblers to have good life and their families, but if they will implement some regulations and omits some then those plans to regulates the gambling process will end in futility.

[rexxarofmoknathal]

I think 100 Eur is a really low limit but as an idea it is a good one.It is designed to stop people becoming addicted and losing everything in gambling.I am a strong advocate of limiting to a certain amount the maximum money you can spend in a gambling site as it safeguards you for going even deeper.I think major websites have such option but is optional to the player and not mandatory.

As you say major casinos have the option but it's up to the customer if they want to use it or not. While I understand the government would like to regulate this in some way capping the gambler in my opinion would lead to both unhappy casinos owners and gamblers as such. So much so that together they might even conspire against the regulation.

There's also the idea that gamblers would gamble at the casinos without this type of restriction since these casinos are online after all. I think the idea overall is OK but in practice I fear it won't do so well.

[Botnake]

I think 100 Eur is a really low limit but as an idea it is a good one.It is designed to stop people becoming addicted and losing everything in gambling.I am a strong advocate of limiting to a certain amount the maximum money you can spend in a gambling site as it safeguards you for going even deeper.I think major websites have such option but is optional to the player and not mandatory.

As you say major casinos have the option but it's up to the customer if they want to use it or not. While I understand the government would like to regulate this in some way capping the gambler in my opinion would lead to both unhappy casinos owners and gamblers as such. So much so that together they might even conspire against the regulation.

There's also the idea that gamblers would gamble at the casinos without this type of restriction since these casinos are online after all. I think the idea overall is OK but in practice I fear it won't do so well.

I think it will not be compulsory for major casinos, the name itself implies they are a takers of major bets from gamblers.
You can't call it major casino if there's a limit on it that is implemented, you are right, it should be optional, depends on the gamblers only as casinos who like to maximize their profit would not force gamblers to limit their bets, that's insane and against their goal to be more profitable.

Gambling capital of the word which is Macau, I think they are the real definition of gambling without limit.

https://gamblersdailydigest.com/gambling-capital-of-the-world/

[freedomgo]

I think 100 Eur is a really low limit but as an idea it is a good one.It is designed to stop people becoming addicted and losing everything in gambling.I am a strong advocate of limiting to a certain amount the maximum money you can spend in a gambling site as it safeguards you for going even deeper.I think major websites have such option but is optional to the player and not mandatory.

As you say major casinos have the option but it's up to the customer if they want to use it or not. While I understand the government would like to regulate this in some way capping the gambler in my opinion would lead to both unhappy casinos owners and gamblers as such. So much so that together they might even conspire against the regulation.

There's also the idea that gamblers would gamble at the casinos without this type of restriction since these casinos are online after all. I think the idea overall is OK but in practice I fear it won't do so well.

I think it will not be compulsory for major casinos, the name itself implies they are a takers of major bets from gamblers.
You can't call it major casino if there's a limit on it that is implemented, you are right, it should be optional, depends on the gamblers only as casinos who like to maximize their profit would not force gamblers to limit their bets, that's insane and against their goal to be more profitable.

Gambling capital of the word which is Macau, I think they are the real definition of gambling without limit.

https://gamblersdailydigest.com/gambling-capital-of-the-world/

It's only one country that limit its gamblers, I'm sure not every government will follow the same regulation, some government were able to educate their people well so they are responsible when they are gambling.

There's always a warning that goes " Gambling Responsibly ", if there's a limit, it might be chance because whatever we do, we are just allowed to fixed maximum in a monthly basis, you don't need to to be careful as you are on limit.

Honestly, real gamblers are already complaining with this law.

[Ridwan Fauzi]

Gambling addiction can really lead to serious mental and emotional consequences if left unchecked, especially if the player loses a very big amount of money. The amount that was proposed is low but it is already, for me, an acceptable amount that can be implemented so that we can achieve the necessary aim of helping potential victims stay in good mental state. They can try to increase the amount depending on the players means, but I think the best is still to educate the gamblers and advise them to control the amount of money they put in.

I think there is no money management in gambling, you just need to spend money that you can afford to lose. Using money for basic need is not good idea, the gambler should avoid that. When we play gambling, we just have one focus, we have win the gambling no matter how much money that we spend. So, I myself get used to play gambling with take the money that I can afford to lose and I always have a budget for this once a week. I won't accept if I include as a gambling addict because I can leave it sometime but I take it as my hobby, that is my though maybe it will be different for those gambling addict.

[MCobian]

In my opinion, the way the government handles gambling addicts by regulating online casinos is not a good idea. Because doing limit
amounts for gamblers when playing gambling at online casinos is not the best solution to overcome gambling addicted. That makes
gamblers uncomfortable and will look for unlicensed online casinos which are not regulated by the government. If this happens, of course
it will be a new problem, in fact we have to find other ways that are effective and acceptable to overcome gambling addicts by all parties.

[Japinat]

In my opinion, the way the government handles gambling addicts by regulating online casinos is not a good idea. Because doing limit
amounts for gamblers when playing gambling at online casinos is not the best solution to overcome gambling addicted. That makes
gamblers uncomfortable and will look for unlicensed online casinos which are not regulated by the government. If this happens, of course
it will be a new problem, in fact we have to find other ways that are effective and acceptable to overcome gambling addicts by all parties.

They would not think of this law if they think it's not the best solution.

Gamblers who doesn't want to be regulated will certainly look for other options, like you mentioned, they will look for an unlicensed casino but that would put them in risk of getting arrested and not everyone can afford to risk on that. So it would minimize the gamblers activity, and think that there's no perfect law, there are still some violators but since they are subject to the law, it's easy for the government to penalize them.

[LogitechMouse]

If you are an gambling addict then that soft cap is very low knowing that some of the gamblers are throwing far more money than that amount in the casinos. For sure this will lead to some negative effects to them.

On the other hand, this will prevent the low money gamblers to prevent from getting addicted. This will help lessen the gambling addiction of most people who are involved into gambling in general. Although this will be implemented, I think the government will having a hard time doing it and for sure the revenue of the gambling sites will greatly affected by this.

[TopT3ns]

In my opinion, the way the government handles gambling addicts by regulating online casinos is not a good idea. Because doing limit
amounts for gamblers when playing gambling at online casinos is not the best solution to overcome gambling addicted. That makes
gamblers uncomfortable and will look for unlicensed online casinos which are not regulated by the government. If this happens, of course
it will be a new problem, in fact we have to find other ways that are effective and acceptable to overcome gambling addicts by all parties.

well I really agree with what is being said because of course the government will know the advantages and disadvantages that players get at the gambling place and of course the government will make a way for them to pay profit tax also means that the government wants to enjoy the profits that have been obtained and I think regulations for gambling establishments do not really matter.

[ultrloa]

In my opinion, the way the government handles gambling addicts by regulating online casinos is not a good idea. Because doing limit
amounts for gamblers when playing gambling at online casinos is not the best solution to overcome gambling addicted. That makes
gamblers uncomfortable and will look for unlicensed online casinos which are not regulated by the government. If this happens, of course
it will be a new problem, in fact we have to find other ways that are effective and acceptable to overcome gambling addicts by all parties.

well I really agree with what is being said because of course the government will know the advantages and disadvantages that players get at the gambling place and of course the government will make a way for them to pay profit tax also means that the government wants to enjoy the profits that have been obtained and I think regulations for gambling establishments do not really matter.

Not only that players could also assure their safety since the casino is been well regulated by the government, we already know how many times scam casinos come and wreck people here so if regulation will implemented we might gonna see a big changes on gambling industry and legit business will come to the scene.

[robelneo]

But 100£ cap is too low.

According to them they are looking forward for controlling the gambling of low income households and for the high income households they want to show them how they have to control their habits of gambling per-se

People are not bots.
They are very aware of what they are doing at the same time they could have opened the care system or something for them instead of controlling them like this , Because at the end of the day they cannot influence each and everything just like that .

It is done with good intentions but forcing people to follow rules will never go well with anyone.

What is your take on this ?

This news actually paves a way further into how the governmental bodies plan on regulating the online casinos especially the crypto ones .

This is prejudging the lower income people they have an equal rights like those with high income earners too, there are a lot of circumstances where these people lower income will play on the threshold, like they got a gift from a gambler as a form of tips and they can play as high as 500 Euro or it's his birthday and he wants to be entertained by using cash gifts lower income people are monnitored and limited because of this.

[maydna]

In my opinion, the way the government handles gambling addicts by regulating online casinos is not a good idea. Because doing limit
amounts for gamblers when playing gambling at online casinos is not the best solution to overcome gambling addicted. That makes
gamblers uncomfortable and will look for unlicensed online casinos which are not regulated by the government. If this happens, of course
it will be a new problem, in fact we have to find other ways that are effective and acceptable to overcome gambling addicts by all parties.

well I really agree with what is being said because of course the government will know the advantages and disadvantages that players get at the gambling place and of course the government will make a way for them to pay profit tax also means that the government wants to enjoy the profits that have been obtained and I think regulations for gambling establishments do not really matter.

Not only that players could also assure their safety since the casino is been well regulated by the government, we already know how many times scam casinos come and wreck people here so if regulation will implemented we might gonna see a big changes on gambling industry and legit business will come to the scene.

When something worst happens to that casino, they can complain to the casino and the government. If the casino doesn't respond to their complaints, people can ask the government to help them investigate the problem. The gambling industry will grow bigger because, with the government's regulations, the casino and the gambler will have protection, so both the casino and the gambler don't have to feel worried if the bad things happen.

But still, that will need more effort to invite the online casino to register their site to the government because they think that their business operates online. Perhaps, the government doesn't have jurisdiction to investigate or to know who they are. But we hope that the gambling industries, offline and online, will be better in the future.

[Darker45]

This is prejudging the lower income people they have an equal rights like those with high income earners too, there are a lot of circumstances where these people lower income will play on the threshold, like they got a gift from a gambler as a form of tips and they can play as high as 500 Euro or it's his birthday and he wants to be entertained by using cash gifts lower income people are monnitored and limited because of this.

Lower income people or even the poor have the rights over their own money but what they don't have as a right is to squander away their money on gambling despite the fact that they can't even barely provide a decent life to their family.

It is quoted in the OP that "such limit ensures that spending on gambling does not exceed poverty thresholds for lower income households..." And I agree with this, with the government being the entity which primarily looks after the welfare of its own people.

The reality is that a huge part of the poor population, especially in the most squalid and overcrowded urban slums, is maintaining all kinds of vices while regularly failing to make ends meet. They can barely manage to eke out a living and yet they still have the gall to burn what little money they have on gambling.

Anyway, this is just a "soft cap," which means that other people may in fact increase their own limits provided they can prove that they can pretty much afford to lose such amount.

[erikoy]

Not only that players could also assure their safety since the casino is been well regulated by the government, we already know how many times scam casinos come and wreck people here so if regulation will implemented we might gonna see a big changes on gambling industry and legit business will come to the scene.

Well, that is ideal actually but if we put government as a third party and to meddle with gamblinh activities then it is expected to see high fees and possible setting of minimum bet for the casino to earn or add the expenses to be paid to the third party (government). This expenses may include taxes and other fees for protection like insurance and permits or licenses. This will make the gambling casino a worst place to gamble.

However, if we remain gambling casino unregulated then it is up to the consumer to join an establish gambling casino to make sure the security of the funds and because most good casino are using cryptocurrency this will ensure that no one can access your fund except yourself. This can be determine as the same level of security or could be much secured than having the government protection in gambling.

The good thing should let the consumer to chose whether to bet in an crypto casino or casino that is being regulated by the government. Well try to see which casino will get higher numbers of gamblers. For all I know gambling is unregulated eveb before but the system works perfectly.

[Casdinyard]

...instead of controlling them like this..

Making a regulation to minimize gambler's activity and his maximum possible bet amount per day isn't something that can be justified as controlling them. But instead, it is just to "regulate" meaning that to lessen the increasing possibilities of addiction, and overspending of gamblers in their gambling habits. No matter what would be the minimum nor maximum amount on the final law, it shouldn't bother gamblers as long as they wouldn't tax all online gamblers based by their activities and earnings.

[Kupid002]

Not only that players could also assure their safety since the casino is been well regulated by the government, we already know how many times scam casinos come and wreck people here so if regulation will implemented we might gonna see a big changes on gambling industry and legit business will come to the scene.

Well, that is ideal actually but if we put government as a third party and to meddle with gamblinh activities then it is expected to see high fees and possible setting of minimum bet for the casino to earn or add the expenses to be paid to the third party (government). This expenses may include taxes and other fees for protection like insurance and permits or licenses. This will make the gambling casino a worst place to gamble.

However, if we remain gambling casino unregulated then it is up to the consumer to join an establish gambling casino to make sure the security of the funds and because most good casino are using cryptocurrency this will ensure that no one can access your fund except yourself. This can be determine as the same level of security or could be much secured than having the government protection in gambling.

The good thing should let the consumer to chose whether to bet in an crypto casino or casino that is being regulated by the government. Well try to see which casino will get higher numbers of gamblers. For all I know gambling is unregulated eveb before but the system works perfectly.

Regulating it for taxes is Ok as long you know you are safe playing  that casino online it will  add more security for  players  since its regulated by the government meaning they are legal business running in your country.

Add taxes for extra security is ok. Other gambling sites is just afraid because they know that there are country make online gambling or any kind of gambling as illegal .

[Lakai01]

Add taxes for extra security is ok. Other gambling sites is just afraid because they know that there are country make online gambling or any kind of gambling as illegal .

What exactly do you mean by " add taxes for extra security is ok"?
Taxes have absolutely nothing to do with making a business like an online casino safer or not. Just take a look at the latest major exits, for example Wirecard. The company has paid taxes just like big banks and still they could cause this massive damage.

[Ucy]

...instead of controlling them like this..

Making a regulation to minimize gambler's activity and his maximum possible bet amount per day isn't something that can be justified as controlling them. But instead, it is just to "regulate" meaning that to lessen the increasing possibilities of addiction, and overspending of gamblers in their gambling habits. No matter what would be the minimum nor maximum amount on the final law, it shouldn't bother gamblers as long as they wouldn't tax all online gamblers based by their activities and earnings.

Or simply make regulations to ban gambling altogether and allow only safe betting. That is the easiest way to solve the confusion in laws and misunderstanding concerning betting or prediction markets.

You don't gamble while betting in betting centers.  You bet responsibily and safely.

Bet but Don't Gamble!

[Pamadar]

In my opinion, the way the government handles gambling addicts by regulating online casinos is not a good idea. Because doing limit
amounts for gamblers when playing gambling at online casinos is not the best solution to overcome gambling addicted. That makes
gamblers uncomfortable and will look for unlicensed online casinos which are not regulated by the government. If this happens, of course
it will be a new problem, in fact we have to find other ways that are effective and acceptable to overcome gambling addicts by all parties.

And we all know that this will likely to happen if the government will start this kind of actions. Gamblers who doesn't want
to deal with this will find unregistered gambling site, internet always have ways that will add to government concerns as tracking
those illegal sites are really tough unless they will block everything. The only sites that will be allowed are those registered and
regulated by the government. 

[Google+]

...instead of controlling them like this..

Making a regulation to minimize gambler's activity and his maximum possible bet amount per day isn't something that can be justified as controlling them. But instead, it is just to "regulate" meaning that to lessen the increasing possibilities of addiction, and overspending of gamblers in their gambling habits. No matter what would be the minimum nor maximum amount on the final law, it shouldn't bother gamblers as long as they wouldn't tax all online gamblers based by their activities and earnings.

Or simply make regulations to ban gambling altogether and allow only safe betting. That is the easiest way to solve the confusion in laws and misunderstanding concerning betting or prediction markets.

You don't gamble while betting in betting centers.  You bet responsibily and safely.

Bet but Don't Gamble!

when gambling is not safe, everything has a risk and the government should not be able to minimize that risk because the risk can be minimized by the gambler himself, so be careful when you want to gamble and as much as possible to be able to control your emotions when you lose, take a short break .

[freedomgo]

because the risk can be minimized by the gambler himself, ...

That's not what the government are seeing, the reason why the law is created is because they believe gamblers are not responsible anymore and it has already affected the quality of their lifestyle, so government are making ways for people to live a good lifestyle, and unfortunately, at the expense of everyone as even the responsible gamblers are now affected.

[jademaxsuy]

because the risk can be minimized by the gambler himself, ...

That's not what the government are seeing, the reason why the law is created is because they believe gamblers are not responsible anymore and it has already affected the quality of their lifestyle, so government are making ways for people to live a good lifestyle, and unfortunately, at the expense of everyone as even the responsible gamblers are now affected.

yes, this is the usual reason they will make so as to convince that regulation is very important but their hidden agenda is clearly to earn more from gambling establishment.  The government know how much cash will flow in every casino that could let them take a part of it by mandating a tax of a percentage to which other owners will not declare the original market of their gambling and the government will approve given that there will be an under the table payment for the one that manage and sign the document for the casino to continue its operation. There are always corruption and this is why we will never get a bettee life with the government and the corrupt officials of the government.

[arwin100]

because the risk can be minimized by the gambler himself, ...

That's not what the government are seeing, the reason why the law is created is because they believe gamblers are not responsible anymore and it has already affected the quality of their lifestyle, so government are making ways for people to live a good lifestyle, and unfortunately, at the expense of everyone as even the responsible gamblers are now affected.

yes, this is the usual reason they will make so as to convince that regulation is very important but their hidden agenda is clearly to earn more from gambling establishment.  The government know how much cash will flow in every casino that could let them take a part of it by mandating a tax of a percentage to which other owners will not declare the original market of their gambling and the government will approve given that there will be an under the table payment for the one that manage and sign the document for the casino to continue its operation. There are always corruption and this is why we will never get a bettee life with the government and the corrupt officials of the government.

It's somehow a good move from the government since if they can get a money by regulating the casinos then it's a win win situation for the citizens since they might see or have a good project created by the tax came from gambling taxes. Also don't ever think bad on the action since regulation is a good protection to the bettors.

[ethereumhunter]

when gambling is not safe, everything has a risk and the government should not be able to minimize that risk because the risk can be minimized by the gambler himself, so be careful when you want to gamble and as much as possible to be able to control your emotions when you lose, take a short break .

But only a few gamblers can minimize the risk by not using too big money, and they can control emotions while gambling. The rest of them will use more money to gamble because they can not control emotions. If the government can protect the gambler, maybe the government can prevent the number of addicted people in gambling. But still, that is hard to see that will happen because the gambler will search the other website to still gambling.

[South Park]

I very recently read a news regarding how one has to prove that , they can afford the loss of even 100 euro.

snip


According to them they are looking forward for controlling the gambling of low income households and for the high income households they want to show them how they have to control their habits of gambling per-se

People are not bots.
They are very aware of what they are doing at the same time they could have opened the care system or something for them instead of controlling them like this , Because at the end of the day they cannot influence each and everything just like that .

It is done with good intentions but forcing people to follow rules will never go well with anyone.

What is your take on this ?

This news actually paves a way further into how the governmental bodies plan on regulating the online casinos especially the crypto ones .

I have read about that as well and I do not like it, I understand intention behind this proposed law but it is ridiculous, if people want to gamble their money away then that it is their choice, they earn the money that they are using to gamble and they should be free to use their money as they see fit, this is just another attempt by governments to try to control the behaviour of people through money, fortunately for us those days are coming to an end as they are not going to be able to do the same with the gamblers that prefer to use bitcoin.

[RokokGudangGaram]

I very recently read a news regarding how one has to prove that , they can afford the loss of even 100 euro.

snip


According to them they are looking forward for controlling the gambling of low income households and for the high income households they want to show them how they have to control their habits of gambling per-se

People are not bots.
They are very aware of what they are doing at the same time they could have opened the care system or something for them instead of controlling them like this , Because at the end of the day they cannot influence each and everything just like that .

It is done with good intentions but forcing people to follow rules will never go well with anyone.

What is your take on this ?

This news actually paves a way further into how the governmental bodies plan on regulating the online casinos especially the crypto ones .

I have read about that as well and I do not like it, I understand intention behind this proposed law but it is ridiculous, if people want to gamble their money away then that it is their choice, they earn the money that they are using to gamble and they should be free to use their money as they see fit, this is just another attempt by governments to try to control the behaviour of people through money, fortunately for us those days are coming to an end as they are not going to be able to do the same with the gamblers that prefer to use bitcoin.

I have just read this now but I highly think that you are right. People are capable to think rationally, and if they let their emotions lead their way, it is their decision. With the history of the government interfering with things to be advantageous on their end, it is hard not to think that they have hidden agendas.

[bitbunnny]

when gambling is not safe, everything has a risk and the government should not be able to minimize that risk because the risk can be minimized by the gambler himself, so be careful when you want to gamble and as much as possible to be able to control your emotions when you lose, take a short break .

But only a few gamblers can minimize the risk by not using too big money, and they can control emotions while gambling. The rest of them will use more money to gamble because they can not control emotions. If the government can protect the gambler, maybe the government can prevent the number of addicted people in gambling. But still, that is hard to see that will happen because the gambler will search the other website to still gambling.

Exactly, addicted gamblers will always find their way to gamble and I don't see how this could be prevented in efficient way. Gambling addiction is aa serious as amy other addictiin so it's reasonable that governments try to find the way to keep that under control. However, I don't know how this could be possible in reality and not to cut some rights for everyone else which is not good.

[Twentyonepaylots]

when gambling is not safe, everything has a risk and the government should not be able to minimize that risk because the risk can be minimized by the gambler himself, so be careful when you want to gamble and as much as possible to be able to control your emotions when you lose, take a short break .

But only a few gamblers can minimize the risk by not using too big money, and they can control emotions while gambling. The rest of them will use more money to gamble because they can not control emotions. If the government can protect the gambler, maybe the government can prevent the number of addicted people in gambling. But still, that is hard to see that will happen because the gambler will search the other website to still gambling.

When you're playing low you just need to stick on the single idea that you don't need to rush or else accept that you can lose easily. Being a gambler is more of what most of the people think, it is a profession itself that needs some aspect to function properly like discipline, management, etc. Playing with a decent amount of money has to be always on the safe side, not risking all or much more than the half, just a small bits can be a huge winning. Government protecting the gamblers? We already have a state laws about it, don't need to worry with that stuff.

[freedomgo]

Exactly, addicted gamblers will always find their way to gamble and I don't see how this could be prevented in efficient way.

Do you think that addicted gamblers breaking the law will not get the sanction or penalty if they got caught?
This would at least give addicted gamblers a hard time to gamble until they realized their mistakes and give up as the restriction is actually to prevent people from getting addicted and for addicted to minimize their gambling habit.

Gambling addiction is aa serious as amy other addictiin so it's reasonable that governments try to find the way to keep that under control. However, I don't know how this could be possible in reality and not to cut some rights for everyone else which is not good.

Government should also build a lot of gambling addictive rehabilitation as they need it, I don't know about the country but it's a rich country so probably they have this program already aside from the new law.

[DoublerHunter]

~snip~
Government should also build a lot of gambling addictive rehabilitation as they need it, I don't know about the country but it's a rich country so probably they have this program already aside from the new law.

^ There's no need to have this if everyone will follow the rules and regulations by the government. I agree on the post of OP related to the government that every gambler should have a limit to spend in gambling. It means there is no become gambling addict if everyone will follow. It is a simple regulation but I think had a good result. Nevertheless, this also has an effect on online gambling casino, since in traditional casinos have regulation and using cryptocurrency is unregulated, probably gamblers will switch to a crypto online gambling casino.

[peter0425]

when gambling is not safe, everything has a risk and the government should not be able to minimize that risk because the risk can be minimized by the gambler himself, so be careful when you want to gamble and as much as possible to be able to control your emotions when you lose, take a short break .

But only a few gamblers can minimize the risk by not using too big money, and they can control emotions while gambling. The rest of them will use more money to gamble because they can not control emotions. If the government can protect the gambler, maybe the government can prevent the number of addicted people in gambling. But still, that is hard to see that will happen because the gambler will search the other website to still gambling.

Government has no power against gamblers specially in online gaming because players can always find place to play without government interference .
this is how hard the situation is why people continues to become addicted because of their own stupidity,i should have known because i am a former addict as well but now i have recovered and living happy with gambling only occasionally .

[ethereumhunter]

Exactly, addicted gamblers will always find their way to gamble and I don't see how this could be prevented in efficient way. Gambling addiction is aa serious as amy other addictiin so it's reasonable that governments try to find the way to keep that under control. However, I don't know how this could be possible in reality and not to cut some rights for everyone else which is not good.

+ for that. But if the government wants to reduce the addicting people, they need to be serious and need to regulate the casino. Maybe the casino will use their people who will contact the online casino to ask about the regulation. But maybe besides regulation from the government, every people needs to control themselves because that is the important thing that the gamblers must do.

When you're playing low you just need to stick on the single idea that you don't need to rush or else accept that you can lose easily. Being a gambler is more of what most of the people think, it is a profession itself that needs some aspect to function properly like discipline, management, etc. Playing with a decent amount of money has to be always on the safe side, not risking all or much more than the half, just a small bits can be a huge winning. Government protecting the gamblers? We already have a state laws about it, don't need to worry with that stuff.

When you use gambling as your profession, you will see the difficulty of controlling yourself and making money from gambling. Even if you can limit your money, it will be difficult to make money. But if you can use gambling as a way to have fun and do the best for you, then gambling will not be dangerous for you. State law will be like that, but protecting the new people in gambling will be difficult too, as they can feel curious about the win money. That can make them play longer because of their curiosity.

Government has no power against gamblers specially in online gaming because players can always find place to play without government interference .
this is how hard the situation is why people continues to become addicted because of their own stupidity,i should have known because i am a former addict as well but now i have recovered and living happy with gambling only occasionally .

I am happy to know that you can recover from your addict. I think you can spread the info to other people or make counseling to help people who have a problem with addiction. That will worth doing when the government can not play their role in the gambling industry because it's related to personal. The more people can educate the other about the danger of playing gambling, and more people can be saved.

[Viscore]

~snip~
Government should also build a lot of gambling addictive rehabilitation as they need it, I don't know about the country but it's a rich country so probably they have this program already aside from the new law.

^ There's no need to have this if everyone will follow the rules and regulations by the government. I agree on the post of OP related to the government that every gambler should have a limit to spend in gambling. It means there is no become gambling addict if everyone will follow. It is a simple regulation but I think had a good result. Nevertheless, this also has an effect on online gambling casino, since in traditional casinos have regulation and using cryptocurrency is unregulated, probably gamblers will switch to a crypto online gambling casino.

Limiting the allowable amount to gamble is likely effective to think than sending gambling addicts into rehabilitation. By strict implementing the rules, it for sure gamblers have no chance to overspend their money and time in gambling. It could be a lot of works for the implementing body but I can see a positive result of that. Of course, it never works that fast and easy, it is a long process for sure.

[Lakai01]

However, I don't know how this could be possible in reality and not to cut some rights for everyone else which is not good.

This is regulated quite simply in the country where I live, only state-controlled casinos are legal, everything else (including online gambling) is illegal.
When you enter a state-controlled casino you have to identify yourself, usually with your passport. If you appear in a database of gambling addicts, you will be denied access to the casino.
In the casinos themselves, you cannot play with cash, but must first convert it into chips, so it is also tracked how much money you bet in a certain period of time. If this is conspicuous (eg thousands of euros in a month) so you are also denied access to all casinos.

[DoublerHunter]

~snip~
Government should also build a lot of gambling addictive rehabilitation as they need it, I don't know about the country but it's a rich country so probably they have this program already aside from the new law.

^ There's no need to have this if everyone will follow the rules and regulations by the government. I agree on the post of OP related to the government that every gambler should have a limit to spend in gambling. It means there is no become gambling addict if everyone will follow. It is a simple regulation but I think had a good result. Nevertheless, this also has an effect on online gambling casino, since in traditional casinos have regulation and using cryptocurrency is unregulated, probably gamblers will switch to a crypto online gambling casino.

Limiting the allowable amount to gamble is likely effective to think than sending gambling addicts into rehabilitation. By strict implementing the rules, it for sure gamblers have no chance to overspend their money and time in gambling. It could be a lot of works for the implementing body but I can see a positive result of that. Of course, it never works that fast and easy, it is a long process for sure.

^ Gambling is meant to take risk and no amount of value is reasonable to the word risk it is gambling as it is.  How about if they peak to a 1Million euro for individual gamblers in 1 month but has a limit to bet? for example a certain user can gamble His/her 1m euro for 1 month but only limited to 50 bets? and before they try to regulate they must require gambling sites to do KYC. No KYC required gambling site should be closed, But I bet you can't do it.

[Mahanton]

~snip~
Government should also build a lot of gambling addictive rehabilitation as they need it, I don't know about the country but it's a rich country so probably they have this program already aside from the new law.

^ There's no need to have this if everyone will follow the rules and regulations by the government. I agree on the post of OP related to the government that every gambler should have a limit to spend in gambling. It means there is no become gambling addict if everyone will follow. It is a simple regulation but I think had a good result. Nevertheless, this also has an effect on online gambling casino, since in traditional casinos have regulation and using cryptocurrency is unregulated, probably gamblers will switch to a crypto online gambling casino.

Limiting the allowable amount to gamble is likely effective to think than sending gambling addicts into rehabilitation. By strict implementing the rules, it for sure gamblers have no chance to overspend their money and time in gambling. It could be a lot of works for the implementing body but I can see a positive result of that. Of course, it never works that fast and easy, it is a long process for sure.

^ Gambling is meant to take risk and no amount of value is reasonable to the word risk it is gambling as it is.  How about if they peak to a 1Million euro for individual gamblers in 1 month but has a limit to bet? for example a certain user can gamble His/her 1m euro for 1 month but only limited to 50 bets? and before they try to regulate they must require gambling sites to do KYC. No KYC required gambling site should be closed, But I bet you can't do it.

Even if they do set on prohibiting gambling sites then they cant surely do it because they do like it or not there would be still people who would gamble on illegal means or would totally oppose into the laws that had been set out.When it comes to such regulation which had they set some limit which is very small and i dont see the point on why the do give out such law if its just really be just good to have nothing at all.Government does have the power and citizens wont really have any choice but to abide on whats being mandated.
On the situation you had exampled out on giving that 1million limit with several amount of bet then lots of people will surely prefer this one rather than on the current.

[South Park]

I have read about that as well and I do not like it, I understand intention behind this proposed law but it is ridiculous, if people want to gamble their money away then that it is their choice, they earn the money that they are using to gamble and they should be free to use their money as they see fit, this is just another attempt by governments to try to control the behaviour of people through money, fortunately for us those days are coming to an end as they are not going to be able to do the same with the gamblers that prefer to use bitcoin.

I have just read this now but I highly think that you are right. People are capable to think rationally, and if they let their emotions lead their way, it is their decision. With the history of the government interfering with things to be advantageous on their end, it is hard not to think that they have hidden agendas.

It is very obvious what they are trying to do, at first they are trying to pass laws to try to control money of the people that seem to have no control over their decisions, other people see this as a good thing but then they begin to pass more and more intrusive laws until it gets to the point that you cannot do anything without the government approval, fortunately for us satoshi was able to see through this and created bitcoin at the right moment to give us an option to get out of that oppressive system if we want.

[travwill]

Definitely, Slots games are so addictive not only here in my country, totally I saw the impact, seems like good but sometimes you almost forget all the important things first, I think it is the effect as casino lovers, and I respect that, maybe my mind is turned to that hopefully aside from me, our government also really needs to control it, Actually with a good reason through regulation for balancing to all activities between life and games. Because in reality it just a game that can give pleasure and happiness.

A couple of days ago, I made an appointment with a friend, for which he was late as a result because he lost track of time playing in slots in a casino.
Moreover, my friend never visits a casino, this was his first time. He was late for an hour and did not even call back, referring to the fact that there was no connection.
Gambling turns people into addicts very quickly.

[plr]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

[alani123]

This type of control over gambling sites is going to bring the barrier of entry higher and reduce the drive for cutting edge innovation. Those established as a top site and in good terms with the government, will have incentive to keep funding the government to keep their position. And the main incentive of top casinos would rather be to sabotage competitors other than innovate to attract more gamblers.

Over regulation will just create further drive for a black market. This is part of the reason gambling with crypto became so big. It's so easy to circumvent blocks that nowadays all skilled gamblers are doing it. Casinos would have to increase revenues in less creative ways like increasing house edge. Governments are probably unaware that these measures are probably going to give more gamblers a worse deal when gambling.

[erikoy]

Well I agree with the soft cap of 100Euro per month as socially acceptable spending limit of a certain gambler. But, I guess it is hard for the rich kids to make an adjustments to this because they usually tend to deposit on more than that as they had enough resources or money to enjoy in betting. But, if this will be implemented then many gamblers will be able to benefit with this especially to those who get addicted in playing the casino. Another thing that government should consider the decentralization of the gambling sites because as to what they did it will turn out to be that gambling site will be centealized for beimg under their watch, taxes will follow, licensed and etc. to protect the gamblers.

[peter0425]

Government has no power against gamblers specially in online gaming because players can always find place to play without government interference .
this is how hard the situation is why people continues to become addicted because of their own stupidity,i should have known because i am a former addict as well but now i have recovered and living happy with gambling only occasionally .

I am happy to know that you can recover from your addict. I think you can spread the info to other people or make counseling to help people who have a problem with addiction. That will worth doing when the government can not play their role in the gambling industry because it's related to personal. The more people can educate the other about the danger of playing gambling, and more people can be saved.

Thanks for the Kind words mate but yes that is what i am doing for years now,telling people i met that i know who's involving into gambling to try controlling their self specially when demand of betting comes to them because this will lead to addiction .
and also Here in crypto whenever i across and see some thread that needs advice?without hesitation and second thoughts i am giving them advises and perseverance that they can handle the problem just to listen to themselves and dedications.

[South Park]

Well I agree with the soft cap of 100Euro per month as socially acceptable spending limit of a certain gambler. But, I guess it is hard for the rich kids to make an adjustments to this because they usually tend to deposit on more than that as they had enough resources or money to enjoy in betting. But, if this will be implemented then many gamblers will be able to benefit with this especially to those who get addicted in playing the casino. Another thing that government should consider the decentralization of the gambling sites because as to what they did it will turn out to be that gambling site will be centealized for beimg under their watch, taxes will follow, licensed and etc. to protect the gamblers.

I disagree, when a law is passed that only brings benefit to a very small minority while the other 99% is affected negatively by such law then it is clear that such law is unfair, but as I have said this is not really about gamblers this is about control, governments want to eliminate cash, why do you think that is? That is because if you are forced to use the banking system they can create all kind of regulations on how you can use your money and if you don't follow them they can freeze your money with a few clicks.

[Debonaire217]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted. When gambling sites becomes regulated and gamblers still choose to play in decentralized and non registered ones, it could be two things, they have tons of money and they don't care about losing, they just want to earn, have fun by testing their luck. Or, their funds didn't come from legal source that is why they don't want it to be publicly seen being betted in regulated online gambling sites.

[Saisher]

People are not bots.
They are very aware of what they are doing at the same time they could have opened the care system or something for them instead of controlling them like this , Because at the end of the day they cannot influence each and everything just like that .

It is done with good intentions but forcing people to follow rules will never go well with anyone.

What is your take on this ?

This news actually paves a way further into how the governmental bodies plan on regulating the online casinos especially the crypto ones .

Gamblers are one of the people that is hard to control they should know that, they can fake things so they can continue playing,just like smokers who can hoard cigarettes, so he can satisfy himself, especially if the gamblers can afford to play a big amount, and now he is restricted to a fraction of what he is betting they will always find a way to escape or past those regulations.

[iTradeChips]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted. When gambling sites becomes regulated and gamblers still choose to play in decentralized and non registered ones, it could be two things, they have tons of money and they don't care about losing, they just want to earn, have fun by testing their luck. Or, their funds didn't come from legal source that is why they don't want it to be publicly seen being betted in regulated online gambling sites.

Well, I think aside from massive losses that will be the effect of the gambling industry being regulated, I think another consequence of this is the proliferation of illegal gambling sites and illegal gambling places that would be run by gambling syndicates. As people are being controlled in playing inside casinos, they will try to go to the illegal places and sites so that they can have more "freedom" in gambling. Of course there would be crackdowns by police, so I think the whole scenario will be nasty and dangerous in the long run.

[mardaed]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted. When gambling sites becomes regulated and gamblers still choose to play in decentralized and non registered ones, it could be two things, they have tons of money and they don't care about losing, they just want to earn, have fun by testing their luck. Or, their funds didn't come from legal source that is why they don't want it to be publicly seen being betted in regulated online gambling sites.

Well, I think aside from massive losses that will be the effect of the gambling industry being regulated, I think another consequence of this is the proliferation of illegal gambling sites and illegal gambling places that would be run by gambling syndicates. As people are being controlled in playing inside casinos, they will try to go to the illegal places and sites so that they can have more "freedom" in gambling. Of course there would be crackdowns by police, so I think the whole scenario will be nasty and dangerous in the long run.

I get your point and I agree with you. Being dictated and controlled can have negative impacts most of the time. Considering that gambling is one of the recreational activities that people do, they want want at least the freedom to do and enjoy it.

[Lanatsa]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted. When gambling sites becomes regulated and gamblers still choose to play in decentralized and non registered ones, it could be two things, they have tons of money and they don't care about losing, they just want to earn, have fun by testing their luck. Or, their funds didn't come from legal source that is why they don't want it to be publicly seen being betted in regulated online gambling sites.

Well, I think aside from massive losses that will be the effect of the gambling industry being regulated, I think another consequence of this is the proliferation of illegal gambling sites and illegal gambling places that would be run by gambling syndicates. As people are being controlled in playing inside casinos, they will try to go to the illegal places and sites so that they can have more "freedom" in gambling. Of course there would be crackdowns by police, so I think the whole scenario will be nasty and dangerous in the long run.

I get your point and I agree with you. Being dictated and controlled can have negative impacts most of the time. Considering that gambling is one of the recreational activities that people do, they want want at least the freedom to do and enjoy it.

Always been part and the reality that do happen not only today but in the past as well where these illegal places will surely exist due to prohibition on such place.

Syndicates will really consider on making these underground places yet they do able to see the money or profit making opportunity due to demand.Its impossible into a certain place that wont

really seek out towards gambling and as exampled into this one where limitations had been set out which isnt really that enough even for a day.This will really trigger out this kind of scenario.

[AicecreaME]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted.

I'm afraid this can't happen. Government has all the power on its entire country, if a gambling site or a physical gambling casino will not follow the requirements that their Government gave to them, automatically they will be shutdown. And for the statement you said that it's for the tax and to help gamblers not to get addicted, it's more likely for taxes. The percentage of their pity towards gamblers are just 20-30%, because Governments mostly are corrupted.

[pikkie]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted.

I'm afraid this can't happen. Government has all the power on its entire country, if a gambling site or a physical gambling casino will not follow the requirements that their Government gave to them, automatically they will be shutdown. And for the statement you said that it's for the tax and to help gamblers not to get addicted, it's more likely for taxes. The percentage of their pity towards gamblers are just 20-30%, because Governments mostly are corrupted.

well, that is the weakness of gambling places that have physical locations while online gambling places will make it difficult for the government to collect taxes or any information requested by the government so maybe one solution that could be an option is to build an online gambling place.

[shoreno]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted.

I'm afraid this can't happen. Government has all the power on its entire country, if a gambling site or a physical gambling casino will not follow the requirements that their Government gave to them, automatically they will be shutdown. And for the statement you said that it's for the tax and to help gamblers not to get addicted, it's more likely for taxes. The percentage of their pity towards gamblers are just 20-30%, because Governments mostly are corrupted.

well, that is the weakness of gambling places that have physical locations while online gambling places will make it difficult for the government to collect taxes or any information requested by the government so maybe one solution that could be an option is to build an online gambling place.

its not a weakness but its a normal requirement not only for a gambling place but also to any other business . its not money that are given to someone else for them to use personaly but its a tax that will be used for important occasions .

 legal sites online are still being tax , so you cant say that building sites online can make you escape those obligations.

[jademaxsuy]

If regulatory to online gambling casino will be push through then high chances that it will going to centralization. This is the problem with the government because they are not really at help when they will just make online gambling casino as milking cow getting taxes and licences for them but the service for protection is not being done and mosy government are reactive to phenomenon. Since online gambling is new then high chances that government could be facing difficulties in solving the problems that will be encounter.

its not a weakness but its a normal requirement not only for a gambling place but also to any other business . its not money that are given to someone else for them to use personaly but its a tax that will be used for important occasions .

 legal sites online are still being tax , so you cant say that building sites online can make you escape those obligations.

Yes, no one can escap taxes unless you want to get a hufe penalty from the government. Most of business owners are aware of huge penalty so they do not have choice but to follow the government mandate.

[Questat]

What kind of protection you are talking here?
I think when a gambling site is regulated, they will have to follow a certain rules and once they break that rules, they will have to face the consequences according to the law/rules. I think that's the kind of protection we can get from the government.

If regulatory to online gambling casino will be push through then high chances that it will going to centralization. This is the problem with the government because they are not really at help when they will just make online gambling casino as milking cow getting taxes and licences for them but the service for protection is not being done and mosy government are reactive to phenomenon. Since online gambling is new then high chances that government could be facing difficulties in solving the problems that will be encounter.

its not a weakness but its a normal requirement not only for a gambling place but also to any other business . its not money that are given to someone else for them to use personaly but its a tax that will be used for important occasions .

 legal sites online are still being tax , so you cant say that building sites online can make you escape those obligations.

Yes, no one can escap taxes unless you want to get a hufe penalty from the government. Most of business owners are aware of huge penalty so they do not have choice but to follow the government mandate.

It's up to the tax payers if they will pay or not, but at least they should make themselves aware of the consequences if they got caught, that's too risky but there are still people who are evading taxes.

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted. When gambling sites becomes regulated and gamblers still choose to play in decentralized and non registered ones, it could be two things, they have tons of money and they don't care about losing, they just want to earn, have fun by testing their luck. Or, their funds didn't come from legal source that is why they don't want it to be publicly seen being betted in regulated online gambling sites.

I don't know why other gamblers don't want regulations in online gambling sites because this will only lead to massive losses, so it's much better to let them be and ignore them if they hate it. I understand that there are some gamblers or people who hates rules/laws, but this kind of laws will protect us from fraud and scam.

[Mauser]

If regulatory to online gambling casino will be push through then high chances that it will going to centralization. This is the problem with the government because they are not really at help when they will just make online gambling casino as milking cow getting taxes and licences for them but the service for protection is not being done and mosy government are reactive to phenomenon. Since online gambling is new then high chances that government could be facing difficulties in solving the problems that will be encounter.

The problem with online regulation is that all countries would need to work together. As long as countries keep doing their taxation and regulation for online casinos only on a national level, we will see casinos just exploiting countries. It's very easy in todays times to move the headquarter of a company abroad. We need all major countries to work together on a fair regulation for online casinos. This would increase security for gamblers and also help governments to control the market.

[freedomgo]

The problem with online regulation is that all countries would need to work together.

I don't think that's true, not every country has the same law when it comes to regulating online casinos (fiat or crypto), and even if let's say that some countries have the same regulation, cooperation might also not possible as there are countries who are not allies with each other.

[MCobian]

The problem with online regulation is that all countries would need to work together.

I don't think that's true, not every country has the same law when it comes to regulating online casinos (fiat or crypto), and even if let's say that some countries have the same regulation, cooperation might also not possible as there are countries who are not allies with each other.

I agree that not all countries have the same rules regarding online gambling sites, so it is impossible for all countries to cooperate
define the same rules regarding gambling sites. I also think that online gambling sites should be regulated by each country, so let be
more effective and efficient. Because every country has a different policy, so regarding the rules of gambling also different.

[South Park]

People are not bots.
They are very aware of what they are doing at the same time they could have opened the care system or something for them instead of controlling them like this , Because at the end of the day they cannot influence each and everything just like that .

It is done with good intentions but forcing people to follow rules will never go well with anyone.

What is your take on this ?

This news actually paves a way further into how the governmental bodies plan on regulating the online casinos especially the crypto ones .

Gamblers are one of the people that is hard to control they should know that, they can fake things so they can continue playing,just like smokers who can hoard cigarettes, so he can satisfy himself, especially if the gamblers can afford to play a big amount, and now he is restricted to a fraction of what he is betting they will always find a way to escape or past those regulations.

I agree, this is why this law is useless, those that are addicted to gambling and that cannot control themselves are never going to abide by that law and they're going to try to find any way they can to get around it and we know that anyone with just a modicum amount of knowledge is going to be able to surpass those limits and keep gambling as if nothing is happening, it is for this reason that I do not really think that this is to help addicted gamblers this is just another attempt to try to control your money and what you can do with it.

[johhnyUA]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted. When gambling sites becomes regulated and gamblers still choose to play in decentralized and non registered ones, it could be two things, they have tons of money and they don't care about losing, they just want to earn, have fun by testing their luck. Or, their funds didn't come from legal source that is why they don't want it to be publicly seen being betted in regulated online gambling sites.

You're forget about another reason: When addicted gambler can't play (due to regulations and restrictions) on legal online casino sites, then he using such decentralized platforms. Just to fulfill his unstoppable desire to gamble 

And i think that most of players is my type described above. 

[Natalim]

You're forget about another reason: When addicted gambler can't play (due to regulations and restrictions) on legal online casino sites, then he using such decentralized platforms. Just to fulfill his unstoppable desire to gamble 

Which is not good and which is why regulation is necessary to help them.

If they will continue to gamble despite being irresponsible, they will become a problem to people around them, their family and friends and worst to the community, and seeing that possibility, government has stepped up with a regulation.

And i think that most of players is my type described above. 

Addicted to gambling? Noh,

[Oilacris]

If they regulate how much money they are going to bet, these gamblers will turn to non registered gambling sites because people will not like restrictions, gamblers are different to each other there are those who can afford to gamble because they have excess money and they want to be entertain more.

This will lead to massive losses, if they don't want to be regulated, let them be, because one of the purpose of regulation is to control taxes as well as to help the gamblers not to be addicted. When gambling sites becomes regulated and gamblers still choose to play in decentralized and non registered ones, it could be two things, they have tons of money and they don't care about losing, they just want to earn, have fun by testing their luck. Or, their funds didn't come from legal source that is why they don't want it to be publicly seen being betted in regulated online gambling sites.

You're forget about another reason: When addicted gambler can't play (due to regulations and restrictions) on legal online casino sites, then he using such decentralized platforms. Just to fulfill his unstoppable desire to gamble 

And i think that most of players is my type described above. 

-Desire to gamble
-Financial capacity
-Fun/Profit aims

People cant really be stopped no matter how strict the regulation is, yet we know that we can access those unregulated online casinos without any hiccups specially here on
crypto space. Government cant get rid into these businesses so it wont really typically a total shutdown if these laws or prohibitions would be imposed.

[kawetsriyanto]

I also think that online gambling sites should be regulated by each country, so let be
more effective and efficient. Because every country has a different policy, so regarding the rules of gambling also different.

Yep, every country should have its own policy regarding gambling. We cannot expect that all countries in the world to apply the same policy. Each country may have different considerations to decide the most appropriate policy for gambling. Also, the need for gambling may vary among countries in the world. In some countries, gambling may be needed as it is the source of income or many people are interested in playing it. But in other countries, it may be not needed as it doesn't fit with the culture of society.

[Twinkledoe]

I also think that online gambling sites should be regulated by each country, so let be
more effective and efficient. Because every country has a different policy, so regarding the rules of gambling also different.

Yep, every country should have their own policy reagrading gambling. We cannot expect that all countries in the world to apply the same policy.

So if you are a gambler, make sure that you are familiar with your country's regulations when it comes to online gambling. Otherwise, you will be screwed and potentially lose your funds by honest mistake. Every country has their own set of rules, so just respect whatever they have to avoid facing problems.

[maydna]

So if you are a gambler, make sure that you are familiar with your country's regulations when it comes to online gambling. Otherwise, you will be screwed and potentially lose your funds by honest mistake. Every country has their own set of rules, so just respect whatever they have to avoid facing problems.

Usually, when people know about their country's regulations, they will not use their real IP when they visit the online gambling site. They prefer to use private VPN to play gambling because that can hide their real IP from the ISP's tracking. But some people still use their real IP to playing gambling, and so far, there is no tracking from the ISP. But the ISP still monitor them, just in case if they are using the internet connection just to play online gambling.

But I think it will difficult to regulate online gambling sites because the sites will choose to open their business in the country, which allows gambling, and they will not have a problem with the user that comes from many countries.

[Janation]

I also think that online gambling sites should be regulated by each country, so let be
more effective and efficient. Because every country has a different policy, so regarding the rules of gambling also different.

Yep, every country should have their own policy reagrading gambling. We cannot expect that all countries in the world to apply the same policy.

So if you are a gambler, make sure that you are familiar with your country's regulations when it comes to online gambling. Otherwise, you will be screwed and potentially lose your funds by honest mistake. Every country has their own set of rules, so just respect whatever they have to avoid facing problems.

I don't think we need to since this is just for UK.

Another thing is that they regulate this law because of the problem that they have in gambling. Since we are still affected by the pandemic, most of the online sites we are using are from the other countries so I think the regulation of those sites will be held by that country and not ours. Still, those gamblers are still a few and so I don't think we will be having that kind of regulation any time soon.

[Distinctin]

I also think that online gambling sites should be regulated by each country, so let be
more effective and efficient. Because every country has a different policy, so regarding the rules of gambling also different.

Yep, every country should have their own policy reagrading gambling. We cannot expect that all countries in the world to apply the same policy.

So if you are a gambler, make sure that you are familiar with your country's regulations when it comes to online gambling. Otherwise, you will be screwed and potentially lose your funds by honest mistake. Every country has their own set of rules, so just respect whatever they have to avoid facing problems.

I don't think we need to since this is just for UK.

Another thing is that they regulate this law because of the problem that they have in gambling. Since we are still affected by the pandemic, most of the online sites we are using are from the other countries so I think the regulation of those sites will be held by that country and not ours. Still, those gamblers are still a few and so I don't think we will be having that kind of regulation any time soon.

This is a unique regulation so I am not expecting it will also happen in our country.

Gambling is illegal in our country but we can gamble online using crypto, I just don't know the consequences if we ever get caught as I have never seen anyone who got punished yet for doing it. I'd like to assume that crypt gambling regulation in our country is not that strong compared to other countries where they are already taking this matter seriously.

[Kupid002]

I also think that online gambling sites should be regulated by each country, so let be
more effective and efficient. Because every country has a different policy, so regarding the rules of gambling also different.

Yep, every country should have their own policy reagrading gambling. We cannot expect that all countries in the world to apply the same policy.

So if you are a gambler, make sure that you are familiar with your country's regulations when it comes to online gambling. Otherwise, you will be screwed and potentially lose your funds by honest mistake. Every country has their own set of rules, so just respect whatever they have to avoid facing problems.

I don't think we need to since this is just for UK.

Another thing is that they regulate this law because of the problem that they have in gambling. Since we are still affected by the pandemic, most of the online sites we are using are from the other countries so I think the regulation of those sites will be held by that country and not ours. Still, those gamblers are still a few and so I don't think we will be having that kind of regulation any time soon.

They can do that if they want but in their own country only, it will be difficult  for them to follow others countries rules Because they are not covered by others countries laws not unless they are running it there .

[sunsilk]

So if you are a gambler, make sure that you are familiar with your country's regulations when it comes to online gambling. Otherwise, you will be screwed and potentially lose your funds by honest mistake. Every country has their own set of rules, so just respect whatever they have to avoid facing problems.

The proposal is for the UK so if you're not from there no need to worry, true to that, that there's a different rules and regulations is applicable within your country. Each country has different perspective towards online gambling so if you're not aware of the rules in your country and you have gambled without knowing it, you're not an exemption.

The regulation doesn't have somethig to do with losing your finds. Regulated or not, if you're a reckless gambler, you can still lose all of your funds if you have no control to yourself.

[buwaytress]

Usually, when people know about their country's regulations, they will not use their real IP when they visit the online gambling site. They prefer to use private VPN to play gambling because that can hide their real IP from the ISP's tracking. But some people still use their real IP to playing gambling, and so far, there is no tracking from the ISP. But the ISP still monitor them, just in case if they are using the internet connection just to play online gambling.

But I think it will difficult to regulate online gambling sites because the sites will choose to open their business in the country, which allows gambling, and they will not have a problem with the user that comes from many countries.

Your ISPs always monitoring you, even if they say they're not. Their software and hardware can do nothing but track you, it's up to the ISP whether or not they keep this information, and whether the law requires them to or not (and they do, they like being on the good side of enforcement). Think it's only Switzerland that has enough privacy laws to not require ISPs to track you.

It's up to us to protect our privacy in the end.

[Kasabus]

Usually, when people know about their country's regulations, they will not use their real IP when they visit the online gambling site. They prefer to use private VPN to play gambling because that can hide their real IP from the ISP's tracking. But some people still use their real IP to playing gambling, and so far, there is no tracking from the ISP. But the ISP still monitor them, just in case if they are using the internet connection just to play online gambling.

But I think it will difficult to regulate online gambling sites because the sites will choose to open their business in the country, which allows gambling, and they will not have a problem with the user that comes from many countries.

Your ISPs always monitoring you, even if they say they're not. Their software and hardware can do nothing but track you, it's up to the ISP whether or not they keep this information, and whether the law requires them to or not (and they do, they like being on the good side of enforcement). Think it's only Switzerland that has enough privacy laws to not require ISPs to track you.

It's up to us to protect our privacy in the end.

Can our ISP still do that even if we are using VPN to mask our real IP address? I mean, can they know that we are accessing the gambling sites? It would be helpful to me if I get the right answer as I have friends that has an static IP who gambled without using VPN.

[BuNga_cute]

I am including those who support online gambling regulated by each country, so besides preventing fraud. Regarding the issue of users
under 18 years of age, prevention can be taken so that they cannot access online gambling sites. Although I am quite disappointed in
my country online gambling banned, but fortunately I can still access online gambling sites via VPN.

[finaleshot2016]

Usually, when people know about their country's regulations, they will not use their real IP when they visit the online gambling site. They prefer to use private VPN to play gambling because that can hide their real IP from the ISP's tracking. But some people still use their real IP to playing gambling, and so far, there is no tracking from the ISP. But the ISP still monitor them, just in case if they are using the internet connection just to play online gambling.

But I think it will difficult to regulate online gambling sites because the sites will choose to open their business in the country, which allows gambling, and they will not have a problem with the user that comes from many countries.

Your ISPs always monitoring you, even if they say they're not. Their software and hardware can do nothing but track you, it's up to the ISP whether or not they keep this information, and whether the law requires them to or not (and they do, they like being on the good side of enforcement). Think it's only Switzerland that has enough privacy laws to not require ISPs to track you.

It's up to us to protect our privacy in the end.

Can our ISP still do that even if we are using VPN to mask our real IP address? I mean, can they know that we are accessing the gambling sites? It would be helpful to me if I get the right answer as I have friends that has an static IP who gambled without using VPN.

I guess not, those ISP can block some certain websites that are prohibited in this country so I guess they can't track on what platform you are using. Using a VPN, they can hide the IP and the platform you are using so it's safe to browse prohibited platforms.

Any ISP can't determine those contents on your internet when you are using VPN.

[maydna]

Usually, when people know about their country's regulations, they will not use their real IP when they visit the online gambling site. They prefer to use private VPN to play gambling because that can hide their real IP from the ISP's tracking. But some people still use their real IP to playing gambling, and so far, there is no tracking from the ISP. But the ISP still monitor them, just in case if they are using the internet connection just to play online gambling.

But I think it will difficult to regulate online gambling sites because the sites will choose to open their business in the country, which allows gambling, and they will not have a problem with the user that comes from many countries.

Your ISPs always monitoring you, even if they say they're not. Their software and hardware can do nothing but track you, it's up to the ISP whether or not they keep this information, and whether the law requires them to or not (and they do, they like being on the good side of enforcement). Think it's only Switzerland that has enough privacy laws to not require ISPs to track you.

It's up to us to protect our privacy in the end.

Yes, they will not tell us they track us, but if the government asked about the data, the ISP would give it for the investigate reason. The track will be given to the government if something bad happens, such as hacking, carding, or illegal activities. The government will track the IP that is connected to the victim, and if the government found the target because of using one ISP, they will ask the data.

But so far, I guess many people already visit on many websites, including porn and gambling, using their real IP or VPN, and the ISP is not doing something except blocking the connection to that sites.

~snip~

~snip~

Can our ISP still do that even if we are using VPN to mask our real IP address? I mean, can they know that we are accessing the gambling sites? It would be helpful to me if I get the right answer as I have friends that has an static IP who gambled without using VPN.

I guess they can still track it. We can ask our ISP to know the real answer, but I think they will not tell you since that will be their secret, and they don't want the public to know about that. The ISP bond with the regulation from the government, and they need to obey the regulations.

I think the ISP of your friend knows about that, but they don't do anything because perhaps, your friends don't use too big money.

[buwaytress]

Can our ISP still do that even if we are using VPN to mask our real IP address? I mean, can they know that we are accessing the gambling sites? It would be helpful to me if I get the right answer as I have friends that has an static IP who gambled without using VPN.

It would depend on your VPN, yes, but your ISP always tracks you the moment you connect, and not all VPNs are private enough or good enough that they can hide your trail. You've got to do a lot more than connect to a VPN these days (unless it's a good one). Every visit leaves an electronic breadcrumb.

[AicecreaME]

<...>

Agree. 100 EUR is indeed a low limit especially to those who can afford to bet and lose as much. However, this is a nice idea for those who are addicted to gambling that are not really capable to lose such amount.

This regulation could somehow limit their money spending and will force them to bet on a certain amount without hurting their pockets. I think their state is just protecting their people from the harmful effects of gambling too much. If this was implemented rightfully, they can also implement another policy to those who can afford to bet higher than 100 EUR.

However, it can be a conflict if they would just stick to 100 EUR maximum bet for those household and individulas with higher income. Since this would somehow be a plain restriction without a sense at all, because they can afford it.

Again, this is a good move to eliminate and lessen people having gambling addiction, but it should have to be fair and not totally dictating and controlling. I hope they'll just base the maximum bet depending on the income of the gambler per month to be more logical.

[Becky666]

I am including those who support online gambling regulated by each country, so besides preventing fraud. Regarding the issue of users
under 18 years of age, prevention can be taken so that they cannot access online gambling sites. Although I am quite disappointed in
my country online gambling banned, but fortunately I can still access online gambling sites via VPN.

The fact still remains that, if any country embark on online gambling sites regulations many gamblers will still ho into it through VPN. Most of my colleagues aren't up to the age of 18+ but yet still gamble with us, banning those teenagers can only work with traditional casinos and not online platforms. Taking the forum as an example age wise, many gamblers here aren't upto that age per se but yet still gamble online.

Conclusively, any government that get tax from traditional casinos will put mechanism in place to stop online gambling sites casinos because of their tax invasion.

[Janation]

They can do that if they want but in their own country only, it will be difficult  for them to follow others countries rules Because they are not covered by others countries laws not unless they are running it there .

This will still depend on the online casino.

Despite the different country your living, if you are playing at that online casino, you should follow and respect their regulations. Even if the country you are in doesn't have that regulation, if those casinos have, you still need to follow that and that also means having limitations and proving that you could also take those losses.

[skarais]

This will still depend on the online casino.

Despite the different country your living, if you are playing at that online casino, you should follow and respect their regulations. Even if the country you are in doesn't have that regulation, if those casinos have, you still need to follow that and that also means having limitations and proving that you could also take those losses.

Every online gambling has internal rules that correspond to the regulations by which the online gambling country is passed, if those rules conflict with your country's rules then leaves and if following them means you are prepared to respect those rules and accept the consequences.

[Ayiranorea]

Very few gambling sites function fulfilling the norms and regulations created by the country. In most cases the gambling sites gets registered on the gambling free country, which makes the usage legal. In my country we've got slot Machines which are being placed on shops privately. At times police seize it, and once again the owner goes for a new one.

[Twentyonepaylots]

This will still depend on the online casino.

Despite the different country your living, if you are playing at that online casino, you should follow and respect their regulations. Even if the country you are in doesn't have that regulation, if those casinos have, you still need to follow that and that also means having limitations and proving that you could also take those losses.

Every online gambling has internal rules that correspond to the regulations by which the online gambling country is passed, if those rules conflict with your country's rules then leaves and if following them means you are prepared to respect those rules and accept the consequences.

This is why some casinos are restricted from operating on all the countries since we do have law and regulation differences on each country which conflicts on some casino regulations that theeir country have been set. I'm lucky I'm living in a democrat country, we can enjoy our freedom here with some rules to obey and not be detained 

[Waffen]

100EUR/mo is really low, also if you are a true-blooded gambler, you already know by now how to get by on this rule. Cant really understand why the gov's want to limit gambling since the economy isnt in good standings right now.

[Debonaire217]

Usually, when people know about their country's regulations, they will not use their real IP when they visit the online gambling site. They prefer to use private VPN to play gambling because that can hide their real IP from the ISP's tracking. But some people still use their real IP to playing gambling, and so far, there is no tracking from the ISP. But the ISP still monitor them, just in case if they are using the internet connection just to play online gambling.

I don't get the reason why it seems to be illegal to gamble, because if we have tons of money and we use our own IP while gambling, there's still nothing wrong with it. ISP's will not broadcast it anyway because of privacy reason. But the reason why I think most of the gambler who does this is because they want to hide to avoid paying taxes. Or maybe, they have funds that are't came from legal ways.

ISP's do actually store your browser history for about 90 days, just in case the government needs to see or monitor you.

[swogerino]

Can our ISP still do that even if we are using VPN to mask our real IP address? I mean, can they know that we are accessing the gambling sites? It would be helpful to me if I get the right answer as I have friends that has an static IP who gambled without using VPN.

It would depend on your VPN, yes, but your ISP always tracks you the moment you connect, and not all VPNs are private enough or good enough that they can hide your trail. You've got to do a lot more than connect to a VPN these days (unless it's a good one). Every visit leaves an electronic breadcrumb.

I agree that not all Vpn providers adhere to what they promise for example they all say complete privacy but very few keep their promises.I have found a good one so far for Linux only and it is Riseup Vpn and it is completely free and from what I have seen looks like one who doesn’t hand out your private information.

[Wawa2013]

It seems the online gambling regulations contained in the opening post only for UK countries, if it's like that I feel relieved
that I don't have to follow these rules. Each country has its own policies regarding online gambling, but based on the information
I get. There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

[South Park]

So if you are a gambler, make sure that you are familiar with your country's regulations when it comes to online gambling. Otherwise, you will be screwed and potentially lose your funds by honest mistake. Every country has their own set of rules, so just respect whatever they have to avoid facing problems.

The proposal is for the UK so if you're not from there no need to worry, true to that, that there's a different rules and regulations is applicable within your country. Each country has different perspective towards online gambling so if you're not aware of the rules in your country and you have gambled without knowing it, you're not an exemption.

The regulation doesn't have somethig to do with losing your finds. Regulated or not, if you're a reckless gambler, you can still lose all of your funds if you have no control to yourself.

While you are correct the problem is that many countries look at the regulations passed in other jurisdictions and then they imitate them, so it is entirely possible that this law will be passed in several countries after this and this really bothers me because how can governments pass this kind of laws when there is no study that demonstrates that what they are trying to do will be effective in making people to drop the time and money that they use in their gambling activities.

[skarais]

It seems the online gambling regulations contained in the opening post only for UK countries, if it's like that I feel relieved
that I don't have to follow these rules. Each country has its own policies regarding online gambling, but based on the information
I get. There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

You cannot access online gambling sites directly if state regulations have blocked them, the choice is to use a VPN to freely surf all sites on the internet. This action has violated applicable state regulations and is prepared to accept the consequences if something unwanted happens.

[maydna]

~snip~

I don't get the reason why it seems to be illegal to gamble, because if we have tons of money and we use our own IP while gambling, there's still nothing wrong with it. ISP's will not broadcast it anyway because of privacy reason. But the reason why I think most of the gambler who does this is because they want to hide to avoid paying taxes. Or maybe, they have funds that are't came from legal ways.

ISP's do actually store your browser history for about 90 days, just in case the government needs to see or monitor you.

Yes, it is nothing wrong with that. But probably, the government wants to remind people not to gamble because gambling can make you have big losses. So in some countries, gambling is prohibited, and besides, some of the religion also prohibits gambling. But people still don't care about that, and they still playing gambling.

The ISP will keep the record for themselves, but if the government suspicious with one or more accounts in the bank, they will track it, even they will ask the ISP to give the record to them. I think some gamblers do not want to avoid paying taxes, but they are playing gambling because they want it.

[jademaxsuy]

Yes, it is nothing wrong with that. But probably, the government wants to remind people not to gamble because gambling can make you have big losses. So in some countries, gambling is prohibited, and besides, some of the religion also prohibits gambling. But people still don't care about that, and they still playing gambling.

The ISP will keep the record for themselves, but if the government suspicious with one or more accounts in the bank, they will track it, even they will ask the ISP to give the record to them. I think some gamblers do not want to avoid paying taxes, but they are playing gambling because they want it.

Gamblers were not having the same stand on this because some gamblers wanted to get centralized to get protected from the government from the gambling abuses and others does have trust that much for they think they do not need the government or any third party protection.

In this case OP have stated that it is all about regulation on limiting bers per month every gambler. I think it is possible but mind you that it will not going to happen because gambling platform that has no regular gamblers will going to take losses operating and getting small ROI or no ROI at all. However, limiting bets will possibly be done to bigger gambling platform. And if it will going to happen pretty sure that gamblers or gambling sites will find loopholes to bet on the way they wanted.

[maydna]

~snip~

Gamblers were not having the same stand on this because some gamblers wanted to get centralized to get protected from the government from the gambling abuses and others does have trust that much for they think they do not need the government or any third party protection.

In this case OP have stated that it is all about regulation on limiting bers per month every gambler. I think it is possible but mind you that it will not going to happen because gambling platform that has no regular gamblers will going to take losses operating and getting small ROI or no ROI at all. However, limiting bets will possibly be done to bigger gambling platform. And if it will going to happen pretty sure that gamblers or gambling sites will find loopholes to bet on the way they wanted.

I wonder what kind of protection that the gamblers wanted because I think the gamblers only need to protect their money from the loss, and they don't need to spend too much money. If we talk about the online gambling website, we will have the option to choose online gambling, and we have a recommended online gambling site to play.

But unfortunately, many people don't want to just on the recommended gambling website, but they are trying to play on the new gambling website, and in the end, they got scam by that site.

Limiting bets should be a job for the gamblers itself. The gambling website can do that, but they need approval from the gamblers because they have that money and want to spend that money. But some gamblers forgot to limit their money, so we see many of them losing their money in the end.

[smyslov]

It seems the online gambling regulations contained in the opening post only for UK countries, if it's like that I feel relieved
that I don't have to follow these rules. Each country has its own policies regarding online gambling, but based on the information
I get. There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

I don't want to discriminate but it seems the UK people are very much into gambling and the regulations are meant to curb or slow down how people gamble, it's quite harsh if you are living in the UK, like your country we don't have so many regulations on how people should gamble here although I wish we have one, it's because our government run the casinos and lottery here and its revenues are a big help to our government's coffer.  

[bitterguy28]

It seems the online gambling regulations contained in the opening post only for UK countries, if it's like that I feel relieved
that I don't have to follow these rules. Each country has its own policies regarding online gambling, but based on the information
I get. There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

I don't want to discriminate but it seems the UK people are very much into gambling and the regulations are meant to curb or slow down how people gamble, it's quite harsh if you are living in the UK, like your country we don't have so many regulations on how people should gamble here although I wish we have one, it's because our government run the casinos and lottery here and its revenues are a big help to our government's coffer.  

Nope Your wrong,European people does not a total gambler and this move of government is to at least prevent more bad thing comes from gambling showing concern to their People .
it is not because a government is tightening their rules and laws meaning they are most involving in gambling.
This may come as preventive measure since the Pandemic really ruins the economy of many country including europe on whos recently one of the most infected continent of Corona virus.

100EUR/mo is really low, also if you are a true-blooded gambler, you already know by now how to get by on this rule. Cant really understand why the gov's want to limit gambling since the economy isnt in good standings right now.

For None Gamblers?this is big enough lol.

But of course Gambling activities require more money when you are a active gambler but this is not our concern now instead providing more money is what we want for safer and sure tomorrow while waiting for the Cure in this Covid19.

[shoreno]

it is not because a government is tightening their rules and laws meaning they are most involving in gambling.
This may come as preventive measure since the Pandemic really ruins the economy of many country including europe on whos recently one of the most infected continent of Corona virus.

in what way ? to limit gambling expense in order to save money ? because this move done by them cant be a good solution if for the purpose of lessening the infection because the regulation were only imposed online  . they should regulate offline casinos because that is more important  but i think they already done that and they need to foccus more online due to the growing demand for  gambling sites during these times .

[peter0425]

it is not because a government is tightening their rules and laws meaning they are most involving in gambling.
This may come as preventive measure since the Pandemic really ruins the economy of many country including europe on whos recently one of the most infected continent of Corona virus.

in what way ? to limit gambling expense in order to save money ? because this move done by them cant be a good solution if for the purpose of lessening the infection because the regulation were only imposed online  . they should regulate offline casinos because that is more important  but i think they already done that and they need to foccus more online due to the growing demand for  gambling sites during these times .

Every casinos must be regulated and that is what the way comes though this is not happening everywhere specially to those countries that has no strict rules in gambling(mostly those gambling lovers countries).

Government must protect gamblers because we all know how addicting gambling is and human mostly cannot deny the call.

[South Park]

It seems the online gambling regulations contained in the opening post only for UK countries, if it's like that I feel relieved
that I don't have to follow these rules. Each country has its own policies regarding online gambling, but based on the information
I get. There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

You cannot access online gambling sites directly if state regulations have blocked them, the choice is to use a VPN to freely surf all sites on the internet. This action has violated applicable state regulations and is prepared to accept the consequences if something unwanted happens.

VPNs are a great way to surf the way without any country restriction and to add a layer of privacy, however when it comes to online gambling most casinos, if not all, forbid the use of VPNs and while you could probably play in the casino as soon as you try to withdraw your money you will face a KYC request or in the worst cases scenario you will be accused of having multiple accounts, violating the terms of service of the casino and you will be denied your money, so be careful.

[Twentyonepaylots]

There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

You have less chances of getting caught using a VPN however VPNs is also risky in gambling, you'll fall in not very ideal situation when the casino caught you using a VPN and found out that you are from a restricted country with strict ruling in online gambling. I call it not fortunate coz you can access using a VPN, I call it gambling yourself to gamble.

[alani123]

It seems the online gambling regulations contained in the opening post only for UK countries, if it's like that I feel relieved
that I don't have to follow these rules. Each country has its own policies regarding online gambling, but based on the information
I get. There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

VPN puts you at risk if you use it to circumvent censorship and blocking. Many sites ban it directly in their TOS. Maybe they don't enforce it all the time but if you're caught with big winnings they're in their rights to deny you.

[Questat]

It seems the online gambling regulations contained in the opening post only for UK countries, if it's like that I feel relieved
that I don't have to follow these rules. Each country has its own policies regarding online gambling, but based on the information
I get. There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

VPN puts you at risk if you use it to circumvent censorship and blocking. Many sites ban it directly in their TOS. Maybe they don't enforce it all the time but if you're caught with big winnings they're in their rights to deny you.

Well, that's sort like a cheating method of the gambling sites.

I've seem that kind of scenario many times, first they will allow you to deposit and bet on the site despite knowing you are already violating in the first place, but if you win big money, that's where they act telling you that you violated their TOS, and that's a big BS, but we can't complain since we really violate, so let's just make sure we know what we are doing so we won't complain.

[maydna]

There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

You have less chances of getting caught using a VPN however VPNs is also risky in gambling, you'll fall in not very ideal situation when the casino caught you using a VPN and found out that you are from a restricted country with strict ruling in online gambling. I call it not fortunate coz you can access using a VPN, I call it gambling yourself to gamble.

Although you have fewer chances of getting caught, you need to be careful because your ISP has your access data, so your ISP can still know what sites you are browsing. And if you lived in the country which gambling is prohibited, your government can ask the data from your ISP, and they will investigate every customer's data.

Perhaps, we will be okay if we don't use too big money to playing gambling, so we can avoid the investigating by the government. But still, it is not easy to regulate online gambling because that means related to the regulation of gambling on the internet. After all, the gambling website itself will not try to host the site in the country which gambling is prohibited.

[iamsheikhadil]

I think it's a good move to have a cap of 100 euros deposit from own pocket. The reason is as gamblers our greed is beyond infinity. Now, we think we can win a lot. So if we deposit 50 euros and make a profit of 500 euros, that's cool. And we can continue to play with the 500 euros to make more. But, in end we lose. The cap isn't on how much we can play from any profits we can make from casino but only on the amount we can deposit from our own pocket!

[buwaytress]

It seems the online gambling regulations contained in the opening post only for UK countries, if it's like that I feel relieved
that I don't have to follow these rules. Each country has its own policies regarding online gambling, but based on the information
I get. There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

VPN puts you at risk if you use it to circumvent censorship and blocking. Many sites ban it directly in their TOS. Maybe they don't enforce it all the time but if you're caught with big winnings they're in their rights to deny you.

Plus, you'll often be asked to KYC anyway and if your IP address and actual access location don't match, it's another can of worms. It's not a very fair case at all in most circumstances with ToS and it's well known, so yeah. If you can't play it normally, you shouldn't. VPN should be a way to protect your privacy, rather than using it to circumvent ToS.

[lebregone]

Your are referring to soft cap, I wonder why you have said that it is low? If I am not mistaken it is not hard cap right? where the owners of the casinos will be permitted to have a maximum of 100£ monthly.

I am not against to any regulations in online gambling sites as long as it will give the gamblers the security of their money and for the casino owners to earn a decent amount of profit even if they will pay some taxes to the government.

[Debonaire217]

I think it's a good move to have a cap of 100 euros deposit from own pocket. The reason is as gamblers our greed is beyond infinity. Now, we think we can win a lot. So if we deposit 50 euros and make a profit of 500 euros, that's cool. And we can continue to play with the 500 euros to make more. But, in end we lose. The cap isn't on how much we can play from any profits we can make from casino but only on the amount we can deposit from our own pocket!

What about those bigtime gamblers who have huge fund in their wallets to play with? I can suggest, there should be a transparency in gambler's fund and take a percentage of it that is allowed to be gambled for a day. because mainly having a cap of 100 euros will be so little.

Or else, they limit the number of bets a gambler could make depending on his losses. If I am not mistaken, the rules are so favorable for the gambler as they will not be addicted and could save their funds in the future.

[Becky666]

It seems the online gambling regulations contained in the opening post only for UK countries, if it's like that I feel relieved
that I don't have to follow these rules. Each country has its own policies regarding online gambling, but based on the information
I get. There are so many countries that have banned online gambling, including the country where I live. But fortunately it still can
accessed using a VPN.

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

[BITCOIN4X]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Of course its not fun when a gambler have baned of account because he doesnt read the sites rules carefully. I have logged in several times and gambled on sites that are blocked in my country using a VPN, its just that I didnt experience any problem because all of my bet were lost. Supposedly if the site prohibit the use of VPNs then they also dont accept any bet from the account. I believe the gamblers fault belong, as the site has stated it on the rules. Avoiding risks is the best option.

[semobo]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Of course its not fun when a gambler have baned of account because he doesnt read the sites rules carefully. I have logged in several times and gambled on sites that are blocked in my country using a VPN, its just that I didnt experience any problem because all of my bet were lost. Supposedly if the site prohibit the use of VPNs then they also dont accept any bet from the account. I believe the gamblers fault belong, as the site has stated it on the rules. Avoiding risks is the best option.

Site is not going to recognize the usage of VPNs and users are violating their laws for their benefits, still someone can use VPN safe if they are using premium version static dedicated IP proxy so you will never get caught that you are faking your server and 99% you won't get any issues with this method but it still goes against their terms so account will be banned if they found the violations.

[johhnyUA]

Can our ISP still do that even if we are using VPN to mask our real IP address? I mean, can they know that we are accessing the gambling sites? It would be helpful to me if I get the right answer as I have friends that has an static IP who gambled without using VPN.

It would depend on your VPN, yes, but your ISP always tracks you the moment you connect, and not all VPNs are private enough or good enough that they can hide your trail. You've got to do a lot more than connect to a VPN these days (unless it's a good one). Every visit leaves an electronic breadcrumb.

For example, clean your cookie at first. Good VPN extensions also changing browser language and so on, but they can't to change for example system time (which is needed to do if casino using tracking not through cookies, but "browser signature") so you need to do all of that by your own hands.

And yeah, casinos often uses the best soft, so with a big probability it will be "browser signature" tracker.

[MFahad]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Of course its not fun when a gambler have baned of account because he doesnt read the sites rules carefully. I have logged in several times and gambled on sites that are blocked in my country using a VPN, its just that I didnt experience any problem because all of my bet were lost. Supposedly if the site prohibit the use of VPNs then they also dont accept any bet from the account. I believe the gamblers fault belong, as the site has stated it on the rules. Avoiding risks is the best option.

Site is not going to recognize the usage of VPNs and users are violating their laws for their benefits, still someone can use VPN safe if they are using premium version static dedicated IP proxy so you will never get caught that you are faking your server and 99% you won't get any issues with this method but it still goes against their terms so account will be banned if they found the violations.

The main issue is that if you are playing at a prohibited site with a VPN and lets suppose you won a jackpot or a big win. The site may hold your withdraw and ask for your KYC. Since you will produce the KYC of a prohibited country, all your winning may be seized and you will be denied of your current balance too. Probably you account will be terminated once they see you violating their terms and conditions.

[maydna]

The main issue is that if you are playing at a prohibited site with a VPN and lets suppose you won a jackpot or a big win. The site may hold your withdraw and ask for your KYC. Since you will produce the KYC of a prohibited country, all your winning may be seized and you will be denied of your current balance too. Probably you account will be terminated once they see you violating their terms and conditions.

If that person wants to withdraw all of his win money, yes, the casino will ask about the KYC. But if he can withdraw for small money and not withdraw all money in one time, he will avoid the alarm for withdrawing big money. But what we see many times, people don't delay to withdraw all of the money, but they try to withdraw the money, which makes the casino check their account. And from that, we see many gamblers have a problem in withdrawing the money.

So from that, I think it's about how we can control ourselves, not just in losing the money, but also in winning the money because we don't want to get investigated by the casino or government. Even if the government wants to regulate using limitations of the money that can be used for gambling, we don't have to worry because we can control ourselves.

[Becky666]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Of course its not fun when a gambler have baned of account because he doesnt read the sites rules carefully. I have logged in several times and gambled on sites that are blocked in my country using a VPN, its just that I didnt experience any problem because all of my bet were lost. Supposedly if the site prohibit the use of VPNs then they also dont accept any bet from the account. I believe the gamblers fault belong, as the site has stated it on the rules. Avoiding risks is the best option.

Site is not going to recognize the usage of VPNs and users are violating their laws for their benefits, still someone can use VPN safe if they are using premium version static dedicated IP proxy so you will never get caught that you are faking your server and 99% you won't get any issues with this method but it still goes against their terms so account will be banned if they found the violations.

Premium version of VPN can't holdback your reward if such gambler find luck to win huge amount from the gambling platform and request be made to know his real identity before withdrawal. Faking stuff on the internet looks good whenever you have nothing to lose, in this case, as a gambler luck can shine on you and win big.

Many of these victims( those using VPN and fortunately win big) always put services on forum service section to find someone from the region to help do KYC, sometimes they don't find and their winnings get lost. 

[DoublerHunter]

~snip~
Many of these victims( those using VPN and fortunately win big) always put services on forum service section to find someone from the region to help do KYC, sometimes they don't find and their winnings get lost. 

^ Using this VPN belongs to the most strictly prohibited in many gambling sites, they dont want their costumers to give a chance to exploit their site that possible abuse by the users, it is likely they monitored your internet used. It just a sort of your all data are encrypted to them and they know your device use upon creating the account and login session. Therefore, always read the term of condition or term of use before will start register.

[AicecreaME]

~snip~
Many of these victims( those using VPN and fortunately win big) always put services on forum service section to find someone from the region to help do KYC, sometimes they don't find and their winnings get lost. 

^ Using this VPN belongs to the most strictly prohibited in many gambling sites, they dont want their costumers to give a chance to exploit their site that possible abuse by the users, it is likely they monitored your internet used. It just a sort of your all data are encrypted to them and they know your device use upon creating the account and login session. Therefore, always read the term of condition or term of use before will start register.

I disagree.

Gambling sites doesn't have any power to know of you're using a VPN or not, even if you do, well you could use only one server to change your IP address for them not to know where you really are and who you really are. And upon the devices you use, they also do not restrict users to only use one device to gamble (in this age, who only use 1 device)

And I think using multiple devices won't do any harm on their sites, therefore what you have said is all lie.

[tyz]

Can our ISP still do that even if we are using VPN to mask our real IP address? I mean, can they know that we are accessing the gambling sites? It would be helpful to me if I get the right answer as I have friends that has an static IP who gambled without using VPN.

It would depend on your VPN, yes, but your ISP always tracks you the moment you connect, and not all VPNs are private enough or good enough that they can hide your trail. You've got to do a lot more than connect to a VPN these days (unless it's a good one). Every visit leaves an electronic breadcrumb.

Good VPN extensions ...

If you mean with "good VPN extensions" browser plugins which says they are VPNs then you are wrong. Such extensions are not really VPS, they are proxies which claim to be VPNs. That's why they are for free. If you want to have a good VPN you need to sign a plan at an established VPN provider.

[livingfree]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Yes, there are casinos that don't allow the use of VPN.

Be sure to read the terms and regulations of that casino before using it. It seems that it's not just about the news that was shared in the original post as there are other regulations of an online casino that can be brought by other members.

Just like the usage of vpn.

[Shasha80]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Yes, there are casinos that don't allow the use of VPN.

Be sure to read the terms and regulations of that casino before using it. It seems that it's not just about the news that was shared in the original post as there are other regulations of an online casino that can be brought by other members.

Just like the usage of vpn.

Talking about using a VPN when it comes to accessing gambling platforms, I have bad experiences. It is true that not all online
gambling sites allow users to use VPN, there are some gambling sites that prohibit them. I have experienced withdrawal pending
for a long time because I access using a VPN, even I have to do KYC procedure for prove to the gambling sites that the account
belongs to me. So be careful using a VPN to access gambling sites, And make sure to read the terms and regulations of gambling
sites, are there any restrictions on using a VPN or not.

[Twinkledoe]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Yes, there are casinos that don't allow the use of VPN.

Be sure to read the terms and regulations of that casino before using it. It seems that it's not just about the news that was shared in the original post as there are other regulations of an online casino that can be brought by other members.

Just like the usage of vpn.

Talking about using a VPN when it comes to accessing gambling platforms, I have bad experiences. It is true that not all online
gambling sites allow users to use VPN, there are some gambling sites that prohibit them. I have experienced withdrawal pending
for a long time because I access using a VPN, even I have to do KYC procedure for prove to the gambling sites that the account
belongs to me. So be careful using a VPN to access gambling sites, And make sure to read the terms and regulations of gambling
sites, are there any restrictions on using a VPN or not.

This is the most common problem when someone is using VPN. Because sometimes you will not see that kind of restrictions when you visit the site and you will only know it once withdrawal time comes. So if you will use VPN, make sure you inquire that from the gambling site as well. Better prepare for what's to come rather than lose your funds for simple mistake.

[livingfree]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Yes, there are casinos that don't allow the use of VPN.

Be sure to read the terms and regulations of that casino before using it. It seems that it's not just about the news that was shared in the original post as there are other regulations of an online casino that can be brought by other members.

Just like the usage of vpn.

Talking about using a VPN when it comes to accessing gambling platforms, I have bad experiences. It is true that not all online
gambling sites allow users to use VPN, there are some gambling sites that prohibit them. I have experienced withdrawal pending
for a long time because I access using a VPN, even I have to do KYC procedure for prove to the gambling sites that the account
belongs to me. So be careful using a VPN to access gambling sites, And make sure to read the terms and regulations of gambling
sites, are there any restrictions on using a VPN or not.

Thank you for sharing that experience of yours.

What's the casino which you have used VPN? they are very strict for users who are using VPN and they have to verify it through KYC. If someone will experience this with a casino that has strict implemention of their VPN rules.

You have no choice but to comply their KYC requirement.

[freedomgo]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Yes, there are casinos that don't allow the use of VPN.

Be sure to read the terms and regulations of that casino before using it. It seems that it's not just about the news that was shared in the original post as there are other regulations of an online casino that can be brought by other members.

Just like the usage of vpn.

Talking about using a VPN when it comes to accessing gambling platforms, I have bad experiences. It is true that not all online
gambling sites allow users to use VPN, there are some gambling sites that prohibit them. I have experienced withdrawal pending
for a long time because I access using a VPN, even I have to do KYC procedure for prove to the gambling sites that the account
belongs to me. So be careful using a VPN to access gambling sites, And make sure to read the terms and regulations of gambling
sites, are there any restrictions on using a VPN or not.

Thank you for sharing that experience of yours.

What's the casino which you have used VPN? they are very strict for users who are using VPN and they have to verify it through KYC. If someone will experience this with a casino that has strict implemention of their VPN rules.

You have no choice but to comply their KYC requirement.

VPN is not illegal, that's a way to hide our real ip address and it could give us some good security, if we can comply with the KYC since the requirement was only KYC, then I don't think a site would hold the withdrawal, unless they are a scam site.

[Becky666]

~snip~
Many of these victims( those using VPN and fortunately win big) always put services on forum service section to find someone from the region to help do KYC, sometimes they don't find and their winnings get lost. 

^ Using this VPN belongs to the most strictly prohibited in many gambling sites, they dont want their costumers to give a chance to exploit their site that possible abuse by the users, it is likely they monitored your internet used. It just a sort of your all data are encrypted to them and they know your device use upon creating the account and login session. Therefore, always read the term of condition or term of use before will start register.

I disagree.

Gambling sites doesn't have any power to know of you're using a VPN or not, even if you do, well you could use only one server to change your IP address for them not to know where you really are and who you really are. And upon the devices you use, they also do not restrict users to only use one device to gamble (in this age, who only use 1 device)

And I think using multiple devices won't do any harm on their sites, therefore what you have said is all lie.

Based on what you have said, how come gambling casinos often seize accounts in some certain jurisdiction?(those who never reads platforms TOS before getten actively involve in their service)  This also include cryptocurrency exchanges too. I think when you create account with a gambling casino your logs session should be recorded, how do you outsmart them by switching to VPN when a session has be recorded?.

Multiple device can't do magic IMO; assume such a gambler win big and make withdrawal which result to KYC?. "Prevention as they said is better than cure".

[livingfree]

VPN is not illegal, that's a way to hide our real ip address and it could give us some good security, if we can comply with the KYC since the requirement was only KYC, then I don't think a site would hold the withdrawal, unless they are a scam site.

It is not illegal and nobody says that it is illegal.

The hassle is, you want to hide your real ip address then the casino finds you are using a VPN then they have a VPN rule which they don't allow it.

The ending is you have to follow KYC if you have already deposited or you have pending balance for withdrawal.

[AjithBtc]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Yes, there are casinos that don't allow the use of VPN.

Be sure to read the terms and regulations of that casino before using it. It seems that it's not just about the news that was shared in the original post as there are other regulations of an online casino that can be brought by other members.

Just like the usage of vpn.

Talking about using a VPN when it comes to accessing gambling platforms, I have bad experiences. It is true that not all online
gambling sites allow users to use VPN, there are some gambling sites that prohibit them. I have experienced withdrawal pending
for a long time because I access using a VPN, even I have to do KYC procedure for prove to the gambling sites that the account
belongs to me. So be careful using a VPN to access gambling sites, And make sure to read the terms and regulations of gambling
sites, are there any restrictions on using a VPN or not.

Thank you for sharing that experience of yours.

What's the casino which you have used VPN? they are very strict for users who are using VPN and they have to verify it through KYC. If someone will experience this with a casino that has strict implemention of their VPN rules.

You have no choice but to comply their KYC requirement.

VPN is not illegal, that's a way to hide our real ip address and it could give us some good security, if we can comply with the KYC since the requirement was only KYC, then I don't think a site would hold the withdrawal, unless they are a scam site.

Agreed, by the time we need to be sure of following and sticking within the rules and regulations framed by the gambling websites itself. In that if the website allows access through VPN, then it isn't an issue. If not at times when arises issue, the support team will indicate the use of VPN as the reason and end the support ticket.

[maydna]

Agreed, by the time we need to be sure of following and sticking within the rules and regulations framed by the gambling websites itself. In that if the website allows access through VPN, then it isn't an issue. If not at times when arises issue, the support team will indicate the use of VPN as the reason and end the support ticket.

I think if we use a private VPN, the gambling site will not be a problem. But if we use a free VPN, perhaps, that could be a problem for us since many people access the same IP at the same time. But so far, I don't use a VPN to visit the gambling site because my ISP is not blocking many gambling sites, and it seems, and the ISP is okay with that.

But if there will be regulations from the government, I think that will be a problem for the gamblers because they will hard to visit on the gambling website through their real IP. So they need to use private VPN to visit on the gambling site.

[Debonaire217]

Of course its not fun when a gambler have baned of account because he doesnt read the sites rules carefully. I have logged in several times and gambled on sites that are blocked in my country using a VPN, its just that I didnt experience any problem because all of my bet were lost. Supposedly if the site prohibit the use of VPNs then they also dont accept any bet from the account. I believe the gamblers fault belong, as the site has stated it on the rules. Avoiding risks is the best option.

It makes me confuse and doubtful at the same time, because sometimes, I use VPN even if my country isn't blocked by the casino themselves. I am wondering if there's a possiblity that my accounts could be banned in this way, even if I created the account in my country with an inactive VPN, then login to another country? Perhaps, I am just fortunate to also get IP from another country where the platform is legal.

But if I am not mistaken, there are gambling sites that also detects malicious IP's (IP's who uses VPN) and they also prohibit users to use the platform, maybe it is a precautionary measure to avoid users who are abusing welcome offers.

[3meek]

Agreed, by the time we need to be sure of following and sticking within the rules and regulations framed by the gambling websites itself. In that if the website allows access through VPN, then it isn't an issue. If not at times when arises issue, the support team will indicate the use of VPN as the reason and end the support ticket.

I think if we use a private VPN, the gambling site will not be a problem. But if we use a free VPN, perhaps, that could be a problem for us since many people access the same IP at the same time. But so far, I don't use a VPN to visit the gambling site because my ISP is not blocking many gambling sites, and it seems, and the ISP is okay with that.

But if there will be regulations from the government, I think that will be a problem for the gamblers because they will hard to visit on the gambling website through their real IP. So they need to use private VPN to visit on the gambling site.

Private IP may also not be able to help when bypassing locks... As wrote above, some sites may track VPN usage via special software...

For example, clean your cookie at first. Good VPN extensions also changing browser language and so on, but they can't to change for example system time (which is needed to do if casino using tracking not through cookies, but "browser signature") so you need to do all of that by your own hands.

And yeah, casinos often uses the best soft, so with a big probability it will be "browser signature" tracker.

[maydna]

~snip~

Private IP may also not be able to help when bypassing locks... As wrote above, some sites may track VPN usage via special software...

No, I think it is working to bypassing the locks. Some sites don't mean all sites

I don't know if they use special software to track the VPN, but I don't have a problem to gamble on the gambling sites as far as I use the VPN.

But when the regulations are applied on the online gambling sites, whether it's fiat or crypto online gambling sites, we can't do anything except follow the regulations. Perhaps, some online gambling sites don't use that regulation so that we can search for another online gambling.

[Gotumoot]

I like their idea to limit the gambling bets for those who couldn't really afford it but couldn't also stop on gambling but the question here is it is really effective?
People would still find a way to cheat it we already see so many KYC policy that has been cheated by so many people so I think this could also be cheated too.
And if this kind of policy would be implemented then I think plenty of people would also make a business out of it making some accounts for the gamblers to buy so that they could continue to gamble.

[Bezobraznike]

I like their idea to limit the gambling bets for those who couldn't really afford it but couldn't also stop on gambling but the question here is it is really effective?
People would still find a way to cheat it we already see so many KYC policy that has been cheated by so many people so I think this could also be cheated too.
And if this kind of policy would be implemented then I think plenty of people would also make a business out of it making some accounts for the gamblers to buy so that they could continue to gamble.

   Legal casinos can limit gambling bets, and they will do that if there is a law about it, they will respect it and follow the rules,
better that than inspection to come and close them. But there will be underground casinos, privacy casinos, they will not ask
any questions, you can spend your money and nobody will ask you about your limits, where you got money from.
   Gotumoot even you say how there will be new business opportunity for people to create accounts for other people, so they
can gamble.

[Ucy]

I like their idea to limit the gambling bets for those who couldn't really afford it but couldn't also stop on gambling but the question here is it is really effective?
People would still find a way to cheat it we already see so many KYC policy that has been cheated by so many people so I think this could also be cheated too.
And if this kind of policy would be implemented then I think plenty of people would also make a business out of it making some accounts for the gamblers to buy so that they could continue to gamble.

They actually should be banning/preventing gambling in betting sites. There is a clear difference between Betting and Gambling. Not all bettors are gamblers and not all gamblers are bettors. Allowing this confusion to persist in the law will only continue to lead to more confusions and problems.
Understanding the difference between Gambling and Betting will obviously help them solve lots of gambling problems not just in betting sites/casino, but in other spheres of life, like foods, health, finances, education, etc

[erikoy]

They actually should be banning/preventing gambling in betting sites. There is a clear difference between Betting and Gambling. Not all bettors are gamblers and not all gamblers are bettors. Allowing this confusion to persist in the law will only continue to lead to more confusions and problems.
Understanding the difference between Gambling and Betting will obviously help them solve lots of gambling problems not just in betting sites/casino, but in other spheres of life, like foods, health, finances, education, etc

I am confused with betting and gambling. All i know is that betting is an act of gambling even if we will going to ask google dictionary clearly states that gambling is play games of chance for money; bet. When you bet you are already gambling because when you gamble it means that your money may lose or win. When you bet, you are taking risk in the hope of a desired result - google dictionary

Maybe you are talking about gamblers that gamble moderately and  gamblers that are really gambling addicted.

[semobo]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Of course its not fun when a gambler have baned of account because he doesnt read the sites rules carefully. I have logged in several times and gambled on sites that are blocked in my country using a VPN, its just that I didnt experience any problem because all of my bet were lost. Supposedly if the site prohibit the use of VPNs then they also dont accept any bet from the account. I believe the gamblers fault belong, as the site has stated it on the rules. Avoiding risks is the best option.

Site is not going to recognize the usage of VPNs and users are violating their laws for their benefits, still someone can use VPN safe if they are using premium version static dedicated IP proxy so you will never get caught that you are faking your server and 99% you won't get any issues with this method but it still goes against their terms so account will be banned if they found the violations.

Premium version of VPN can't holdback your reward if such gambler find luck to win huge amount from the gambling platform and request be made to know his real identity before withdrawal. Faking stuff on the internet looks good whenever you have nothing to lose, in this case, as a gambler luck can shine on you and win big.

Many of these victims( those using VPN and fortunately win big) always put services on forum service section to find someone from the region to help do KYC, sometimes they don't find and their winnings get lost. 

Gambling site is not going to ask you to complete KYC for every winning bets, if they do that then no one is going to be gamble on it.They will ask for identity verification only if there is suspicious activities on the account logins but when someone is using dedicate VPN all the time then they are going to be safe with that I guess.

[bobyhodob]

I like their idea to limit the gambling bets for those who couldn't really afford it but couldn't also stop on gambling but the question here is it is really effective?
People would still find a way to cheat it we already see so many KYC policy that has been cheated by so many people so I think this could also be cheated too.
And if this kind of policy would be implemented then I think plenty of people would also make a business out of it making some accounts for the gamblers to buy so that they could continue to gamble.

   Legal casinos can limit gambling bets, and they will do that if there is a law about it, they will respect it and follow the rules,
better that than inspection to come and close them. But there will be underground casinos, privacy casinos, they will not ask
any questions, you can spend your money and nobody will ask you about your limits, where you got money from.
   Gotumoot even you say how there will be new business opportunity for people to create accounts for other people, so they
can gamble.

well, if you get such a limit, it will not give freedom to gamblers, and what is worse is that the government can find out who has a very large amount of money assets because surely gambling places that have legality will have their own records and usually records. it is deposited by the government for reporting the data as an archive.

[South Park]

Of course you can switch-on to VPN: though not advisable. This has caused so many displeased stories on this forum in which gamblers( victims) where queried for not properly read the TOS of some gambling platforms. The use of this VPN can cause frozen of account with some gambling platforms or when detected during withdrawal process funds will be seize and forfeited for violation. While use VPN, be ready for the outcome.

Yes, there are casinos that don't allow the use of VPN.

Be sure to read the terms and regulations of that casino before using it. It seems that it's not just about the news that was shared in the original post as there are other regulations of an online casino that can be brought by other members.

Just like the usage of vpn.

I will change that to all casinos, I know that from the point of view of the player this is bothersome but we need to put ourselves in the position of the casinos as well, there are players that for their citizenship cannot play on their casino and the only way they can verify this without forcing you to go through a KYC check is with your IP address and if you mask it then they have no way to know if you are from the same place your IP shows and when you add that many players try to use VPNs to abuse bonuses then it is very clear why casinos do not like their players to use VPN and for the most part prohibit their usage on their TOS.

[DarkDays]

I like their idea to limit the gambling bets for those who couldn't really afford it but couldn't also stop on gambling but the question here is it is really effective?
People would still find a way to cheat it we already see so many KYC policy that has been cheated by so many people so I think this could also be cheated too.
And if this kind of policy would be implemented then I think plenty of people would also make a business out of it making some accounts for the gamblers to buy so that they could continue to gamble.

   Legal casinos can limit gambling bets, and they will do that if there is a law about it, they will respect it and follow the rules,
better that than inspection to come and close them. But there will be underground casinos, privacy casinos, they will not ask
any questions, you can spend your money and nobody will ask you about your limits, where you got money from.
   Gotumoot even you say how there will be new business opportunity for people to create accounts for other people, so they
can gamble.

well, if you get such a limit, it will not give freedom to gamblers, and what is worse is that the government can find out who has a very large amount of money assets because surely gambling places that have legality will have their own records and usually records. it is deposited by the government for reporting the data as an archive.

The ability to remain anonymous in crypto is a growing concern not only for people who make a good amount of money but for any individual who wants no tracing as this was the purpose of decentralization.

Defeating that core value that crypto is known for is going to cut the traffic on a gambling/casino site right down. But in a way it still is an issue if these places want to operate within legal bounds. It is a conundrum and the solution isn't as simple as keeping verifiable records.

The growing issue for this much needed solution is the need for standard grounds, that will apply to places outside of a certain area.
Will we see this happen?  I think this depends on the regulatory bodies lining up with crypto space and as we have seen this is already challenging, alas greater efforts must be made.