The digital ID for Gambling

[virasisog]

Apparently Denmark is all Set to Launch the new Digital ID rules for Gambling in the upcoming July. They have already been using some sort of identification but apparently this is new and improved and would apply for all the gamblers willing to submit their ID and use the services. easy is now going to be Replaced by MyID. The license holders of online casinos would have to now integrate their systems in the manner that the government prefers. People are still waiting for an update but I would like to know what you think about the system of online ID? Integrating it with gambling might be saving some kids going on these sites but it might also be taking all the privacy away. What are your thoughts on this?
Reference:
https://www.gamblinginsider.com/news/16594/denmark-to-introduce-new-digital-id-rules-in-july

If the gambling addiction for kids is worse in the said country, then it's a good move for the government to control it. If it could save the younger generation then implementing it will be an effective idea but the hard part is all gamblers should submit to it. The government can track gamblers by implementing this since they could have all the details. It will affect the privacy that most gamblers want so I don't think everyone will agree to it.

[1715377487]

1715377487

[1715377487]

1715377487

[pawanjain]

Apparently Denmark is all Set to Launch the new Digital ID rules for Gambling in the upcoming July. They have already been using some sort of identification but apparently this is new and improved and would apply for all the gamblers willing to submit their ID and use the services. EasyID is now going to be Replaced by MyID. The license holders of online casino would have to now integrate their systems in the manner that the government prefers. People are still waiting for an update but I would like to know what you think about the system of online ID? Integrating it with gambling might be saving some kids going on these sites but it might also be taking all the privacy away. What are your thoughts on this ?
Reference:
https://www.gamblinginsider.com/news/16594/denmark-to-introduce-new-digital-id-rules-in-july

The problem is that by using digital ID there are chances of identity theft. Since the IDs will be stored online it might become vulnerable to hackers.
They must have high security on their site if not the outcomes might be disastrous.
Further more, using digital ID the government will be easily tracing the users for how much they gamble.
So that is kind of a privacy issue and the governments can very well take advantage of it.
The only useful thing that I find using digital ID is that it will restrict children under 18 from gambling.
May be if the government put a certain restriction on people from over gambling then may be that can help.

[KTChampions]

The problem is that by using digital ID there are chances of identity theft. Since the IDs will be stored online it might become vulnerable to hackers.
They must have high security on their site if not the outcomes might be disastrous.
Further more, using digital ID the government will be easily tracing the users for how much they gamble.
So that is kind of a privacy issue and the governments can very well take advantage of it.
The only useful thing that I find using digital ID is that it will restrict children under 18 from gambling.
May be if the government put a certain restriction on people from over gambling then may be that can help.

In the name of an incomprehensible "danger" for children under the age of 18, the rights of adults are being destroyed as always 
By the way, I'm wondering if the ID system works, but at one fine moment the corrupt government shows "evidence" that the opposition politician is an avid gambler and lost millions, despite the fact that his official income is much less than these figures. How can you prove that he did not do this if the ID is, as it were, separated from the person but 100% certifies the person in the casino?

[South Park]

I dislike anything that has to do with KYC and submission of documents to anyone. Your documents are always safe with you, you don't know how careless those companies will be that your information may become leak to third party, what is even the assurance that they wouldn't sell your documents to anyone including the government. It will be easier to identify people when they collect their data, I can't imagine my self been identified as a gambler when they want to address me, this is a red flag for those who play privately.
The forum has always discouraged the use of KYC and that's what I will recommend for everyone.

I also hold the same opinion, but when people on their own reveal way more information than any KYC policy every day through social media then it is natural they do not think anything about those measures at all, since they are used to give all of that information away on their own, so when we have a great deal of people which do not understand the concept of privacy anymore then it is almost impossible to convince them about why such a thing is important.

[hahay]

It's the same as kyc but indeed, they do a great job of protecting their kids from getting the right age to gamble. But in the end, the online world will not be easy to control, even if they require digital ID or whatever to limit the age is ultimately less effective too. Because these online users can access whatever they want and don't care about the rules, unless they have a high awareness not to start because the right rule is to make them aware of the good and bad of gambling and guidance for the right age for gambling itself.

[Peanutswar]

It's the same as kyc but indeed, they do a great job of protecting their kids from getting the right age to gamble. But in the end, the online world will not be easy to control, even if they require digital ID or whatever to limit the age is ultimately less effective too. Because these online users can access whatever they want and don't care about the rules, unless they have a high awareness not to start because the right rule is to make them aware of the good and bad of gambling and guidance for the right age for gambling itself.

At some point i agree with this part too this will limit the number of players which is not part of the legal age we know that it is not quiet secured in the gambling in terms of playing of 18 below because mostly it is a textbox that we are agreeing that we are 18 even not we cannot deny it and this KYC implemented is ideal too but it depends now in the player if they are willingly let their information give to the gambling platform itself.

[ipanks]

snip

The online world who doesn't like KYC or digital ID will keep trying to provide something or a website that doesn't require KYC because they understand the market's will to remain anonymous. I think this will run concurrently and the user will be given two choices: to use KYC or stay anonymous. But I'm not sure this will protect 100% of children from all negative things like gambling, sex, or anything illegal because the online world is a world without borders.

[Renampun]

It's the same as kyc but indeed, they do a great job of protecting their kids from getting the right age to gamble. But in the end, the online world will not be easy to control, even if they require digital ID or whatever to limit the age is ultimately less effective too. Because these online users can access whatever they want and don't care about the rules, unless they have a high awareness not to start because the right rule is to make them aware of the good and bad of gambling and guidance for the right age for gambling itself.

looking at the sophistication that continues to emerge today, makes me feel that the rules made to tighten the age of gamblers will not be 100% effective...

kids will continue to find other new ways to pass age verification when it is required on the gambling sites that they usually play. usually by buying someone else's identity (I'm sure in many cities there are still many people who are willing to sell their identity just for money). but I still hope that the rules that continue to be made to limit the age of gamblers can be effective in reducing the number of underage gamblers.

[pawanjain]

The problem is that by using digital ID there are chances of identity theft. Since the IDs will be stored online it might become vulnerable to hackers.
They must have high security on their site if not the outcomes might be disastrous.
Further more, using digital ID the government will be easily tracing the users for how much they gamble.
So that is kind of a privacy issue and the governments can very well take advantage of it.
The only useful thing that I find using digital ID is that it will restrict children under 18 from gambling.
May be if the government put a certain restriction on people from over gambling then may be that can help.

In the name of an incomprehensible "danger" for children under the age of 18, the rights of adults are being destroyed as always 
By the way, I'm wondering if the ID system works, but at one fine moment the corrupt government shows "evidence" that the opposition politician is an avid gambler and lost millions, despite the fact that his official income is much less than these figures. How can you prove that he did not do this if the ID is, as it were, separated from the person but 100% certifies the person in the casino?

Proving that the ID belongs to that person in the casino is another thing but proving that the money was deposited by the same person is where the evidence lies.
The source of depositing the money into the casino will show us whether the money belongs to that person or not.
He can simply get away by telling that he did not deposit the money by himself provided the fact that the money is still there in his gambling account and he did not use it for gambling.

[Peanutswar]

The problem is that by using digital ID there are chances of identity theft. Since the IDs will be stored online it might become vulnerable to hackers.
They must have high security on their site if not the outcomes might be disastrous.
Further more, using digital ID the government will be easily tracing the users for how much they gamble.
So that is kind of a privacy issue and the governments can very well take advantage of it.
The only useful thing that I find using digital ID is that it will restrict children under 18 from gambling.
May be if the government put a certain restriction on people from over gambling then may be that can help.

In the name of an incomprehensible "danger" for children under the age of 18, the rights of adults are being destroyed as always 
By the way, I'm wondering if the ID system works, but at one fine moment the corrupt government shows "evidence" that the opposition politician is an avid gambler and lost millions, despite the fact that his official income is much less than these figures. How can you prove that he did not do this if the ID is, as it were, separated from the person but 100% certifies the person in the casino?

Proving that the ID belongs to that person in the casino is another thing but proving that the money was deposited by the same person is where the evidence lies.
The source of depositing the money into the casino will show us whether the money belongs to that person or not.
He can simply get away by telling that he did not deposit the money by himself provided the fact that the money is still there in his gambling account and he did not use it for gambling.

If this kind of thing is supported by the country i guess it depends on the player now if they will play with those gambling websites or not still at the end of the day is the decision of the player if they want to choose between with KYC or not. Also some of the platform using the KYC because of the authenticity of the player and at the same time preventing suspicious activity of having a multiple account like abusing the promo events.

[KTChampions]

In the name of an incomprehensible "danger" for children under the age of 18, the rights of adults are being destroyed as always 
By the way, I'm wondering if the ID system works, but at one fine moment the corrupt government shows "evidence" that the opposition politician is an avid gambler and lost millions, despite the fact that his official income is much less than these figures. How can you prove that he did not do this if the ID is, as it were, separated from the person but 100% certifies the person in the casino?

Proving that the ID belongs to that person in the casino is another thing but proving that the money was deposited by the same person is where the evidence lies.
The source of depositing the money into the casino will show us whether the money belongs to that person or not.
He can simply get away by telling that he did not deposit the money by himself provided the fact that the money is still there in his gambling account and he did not use it for gambling.

Most online casinos (at least those that I know and those that I deal with) now have the option of depositing an account through cryptocurrency. Taking into account the fact that not all addresses are 100% tracked, anonymous depositing funds to the account is quite possible. The most difficult thing in this scheme is linking the ID to the individual, but when the state controls this system, it is easy for them to implement such an algorithm.

[pawanjain]

In the name of an incomprehensible "danger" for children under the age of 18, the rights of adults are being destroyed as always 
By the way, I'm wondering if the ID system works, but at one fine moment the corrupt government shows "evidence" that the opposition politician is an avid gambler and lost millions, despite the fact that his official income is much less than these figures. How can you prove that he did not do this if the ID is, as it were, separated from the person but 100% certifies the person in the casino?

Proving that the ID belongs to that person in the casino is another thing but proving that the money was deposited by the same person is where the evidence lies.
The source of depositing the money into the casino will show us whether the money belongs to that person or not.
He can simply get away by telling that he did not deposit the money by himself provided the fact that the money is still there in his gambling account and he did not use it for gambling.

Most online casinos (at least those that I know and those that I deal with) now have the option of depositing an account through cryptocurrency. Taking into account the fact that not all addresses are 100% tracked, anonymous depositing funds to the account is quite possible. The most difficult thing in this scheme is linking the ID to the individual, but when the state controls this system, it is easy for them to implement such an algorithm.

In this case it really depends on what the evidence actually is. If the evidence is valid then yes it will be easier for the government to prove that the person is involved in money laundering.
But if the person is actually not aware and if the government is planting the whole thing out then there should definitely be a way to prove the person not guilty.
Anyway, it depends on us how we use the digital ID. For some it might be a good thing while for some it might be bad.
Other than that, there are always other casinos where KYC is not mandatory so people can just use those if they don't want to use this feature.

[KTChampions]

Most online casinos (at least those that I know and those that I deal with) now have the option of depositing an account through cryptocurrency. Taking into account the fact that not all addresses are 100% tracked, anonymous depositing funds to the account is quite possible. The most difficult thing in this scheme is linking the ID to the individual, but when the state controls this system, it is easy for them to implement such an algorithm.

In this case it really depends on what the evidence actually is. If the evidence is valid then yes it will be easier for the government to prove that the person is involved in money laundering.
But if the person is actually not aware and if the government is planting the whole thing out then there should definitely be a way to prove the person not guilty.
Anyway, it depends on us how we use the digital ID. For some it might be a good thing while for some it might be bad.
Other than that, there are always other casinos where KYC is not mandatory so people can just use those if they don't want to use this feature.

When an ID exists, it makes it harder for a person to prove their innocence. It's one thing when we personally sign a document, and another thing when we first agree to "digitize" our personality, and then try to prove that we didn't use it. In any case, I do not see anything useful in this ID for ordinary users, only an increase in risks and a decrease in privacy.

[Silberman]

If this kind of thing is supported by the country i guess it depends on the player now if they will play with those gambling websites or not still at the end of the day is the decision of the player if they want to choose between with KYC or not. Also some of the platform using the KYC because of the authenticity of the player and at the same time preventing suspicious activity of having a multiple account like abusing the promo events.

However while it is true that we still have the freedom of choosing a casino which does not force you to go through KYC, can you imagine how bad things would be if bitcoin did not existed? I do not know of any fiat casino which allows something like that, and apparently things are even worse at Denmark with this digital ID, if it was not because of bitcoin and this market in general there will not be a way to gamble anywhere without having to reveal your identity, and considering the bad reputation gamblers have in some countries this could be incredibly problematic, which is why I am against draconian regulations like this one.

[pawanjain]

Most online casinos (at least those that I know and those that I deal with) now have the option of depositing an account through cryptocurrency. Taking into account the fact that not all addresses are 100% tracked, anonymous depositing funds to the account is quite possible. The most difficult thing in this scheme is linking the ID to the individual, but when the state controls this system, it is easy for them to implement such an algorithm.

In this case it really depends on what the evidence actually is. If the evidence is valid then yes it will be easier for the government to prove that the person is involved in money laundering.
But if the person is actually not aware and if the government is planting the whole thing out then there should definitely be a way to prove the person not guilty.
Anyway, it depends on us how we use the digital ID. For some it might be a good thing while for some it might be bad.
Other than that, there are always other casinos where KYC is not mandatory so people can just use those if they don't want to use this feature.

When an ID exists, it makes it harder for a person to prove their innocence. It's one thing when we personally sign a document, and another thing when we first agree to "digitize" our personality, and then try to prove that we didn't use it. In any case, I do not see anything useful in this ID for ordinary users, only an increase in risks and a decrease in privacy.

Same thing happens when a terrorist deposits money into your bank account or money involved in illegal activities gets deposited to your bank account.
The best thing for a person to do in such a situation would be not to touch the money and file a police complaint by himself.
Similarly, in a gambling site, if someone is trying to frame the person he can simply not touch the account and inform the police about the same.

[rahmad2nd]

I believe by making a new rule like that to limit underage players, and maybe it will be taxed for each player. 
regardless of whether the regulations are good or bad, they will only make it more complicated for users of online gambling services.  The problem that will be very bad is when the players' personal data will be misused

[TheGreatPython]

I believe by making a new rule like that to limit underage players, and maybe it will be taxed for each player. 
regardless of whether the regulations are good or bad, they will only make it more complicated for users of online gambling services.  The problem that will be very bad is when the players' personal data will be misused

Adding tax can be an effective way not only for the minors but also for the general age to stop gambling. Most of them only gamble to have fun but if they will be charge big due to tax, I don't think they will have the motivation or interest to gamble anymore. Some forms of regulations might be good if ever there are others, other than the idea of taxing it.

There are many crypto gambling sites that are now regulated but I don't know if this really feels complicated or not since there's still many gamblers who continue's to bet on those site's but complications were mostly feel at the start or during when you sign up because you might be required for a kyc but after it, you can now login easily.

[South Park]

I believe by making a new rule like that to limit underage players, and maybe it will be taxed for each player. 
regardless of whether the regulations are good or bad, they will only make it more complicated for users of online gambling services.  The problem that will be very bad is when the players' personal data will be misused

Your last statement is the real problem with those measures, governments pass all kind of laws that make it seems as if they are never going to get hacked and ask for all kind of information to be given up by their citizens, but anyone that has ever used a computer knows how easy it is to get a virus so we know that the security online is nowhere near as tight as they want to makes use believe, and as such there is a real chance that data is eventually stolen and then there is nothing we can do to get it back.

[traderethereum]

I believe by making a new rule like that to limit underage players, and maybe it will be taxed for each player. 
regardless of whether the regulations are good or bad, they will only make it more complicated for users of online gambling services.  The problem that will be very bad is when the players' personal data will be misused

Hopefully, the personal data of the players will not be misused by the regulators because they hold all the important data of the players.
Maybe the new rules need time to work properly and the restrictions on underage players depend on how parents can supervise their children who use internet access.
If gambling becomes more popular and more people are involved in gambling, there is a possibility that taxes will be applied so that it will become a new source of income for the state.
Hopefully, the regulations made by the government do not complicate online gambling users and other businesses.

[slaman29]

I think it's better, overall. Pros and cons like all discussed but there are a LOT of predatory online casinos that specifically target kids. I used to see in past years ads on all my mobile aps, all showing young kids gambling at slots and casinos and supposedly winning 100k.

Those ads are gone now I think good riddance but the thing is kids are exposed to a lot of shit these days and if an ID will help prevent that, good.

I mean, if you care about privacy you're gambling crypto anyway.