Kryptogamers Hive No KYC Casino

[danadc]

Since 2019, Offers on chain/off chain betting. Spin your luck in Jackpot for 0.1 Hive. Native token called 'Gamer', staking it makes you eligible for 50% casino profits, can bet with Hive, Steem, Dec (Splinterlands currency) and Gamer. Plenty games including Dice, Blackjack, Video pocker, crash, roulette, slots, plinko.  Auto bet also available for applicable games.
-cut-

Maybe i am missing something but i can't find any info about this "Gamer" token. No tokenomics, not even info how can i buy it or should i mine it somehow?
But without tokenomics how would i even know is it worth to mine it as supply can be unlimited for all i can tell.
Site looks good though. Sleek minimalistic graphics so points for that.

Perhaps do I --but It is understandable to feel hesitant about investing in a token when there is a lack of information available about its tokenomics and acquisition methods. Without knowing the tokenomics, it is difficult to assess the potential value of the token and make an informed decision on whether or not to invest in it. Perhaps it is good to reach out to the team behind the "Gamer" token and ask for more information about its tokenomics and how to acquire it. They may be able to provide more information that could help you make a decision about whether or not to invest.

They have thought about PVP games, because they have poker, I don't know if they have to do a lot to be able to play poker among several people, and also if they can do PVP tournaments, I also say this because I have been looking for many sites that have poker with that functionality , and if they put that, it would be the best thing because I am sure that many will want to participate, online tournaments can be scheduled for certain hours, so they have the follow-up of each tournament and assign the prizes that correspond to the first places, there is no loss there.

[1714671493]

1714671493

[1714671493]

1714671493

[1714671493]

1714671493

[libert19]

They have thought about PVP games, because they have poker, I don't know if they have to do a lot to be able to play poker among several people, and also if they can do PVP tournaments, I also say this because I have been looking for many sites that have poker with that functionality , and if they put that, it would be the best thing because I am sure that many will want to participate, online tournaments can be scheduled for certain hours, so they have the follow-up of each tournament and assign the prizes that correspond to the first places, there is no loss there.

They have riddle game, which you can play solo or with friends, It's free and have leaderboard rewards (in Gamer).

Regarding mp poker, I like the idea, always found mp games fun. Depends on dev whether they add it as tournaments might add bit of burden to them, and for normal mp, hive don't have that much of active userbase, casino active players even less so.

[EarnOnVictor]

Of course, no website is completely immune from hacking, am only disappointed that you guys are taking this as an excuse instead of looking elsewhere to the benefits of KYC.

If a website is new, my dear, you are talking 50/50 chance with them if they are without KYC. Because without it, it means they are not regulated. But you have higher rest of mind if they are truly regulated.

Excuse? Nonsense. 50/50 chance without KYC? More nonsense. I already specifically mentioned in my previous post that I have been gambling at several popular sites without providing KYC at any stage.

Also, no KYC requirement and features such as great offers, great customer support etc are what truly make crypto gambling sites popular. Think!

Nonsense? I can see the level of your maturity, children are not hard to know as they don't know how to tame their emotions. Regards of your rants, I maintain that KYC has its protective advantage if you can trace the casino right to the root of its true regulator, it's a layer of security on both sides (gambler and the house) whether you like it or not, it's not about hacking as any website could be hacked.

And I don't care about how many times you had withdrawn from no-KYC casinos, many have been scammed by them too, so what's your point child? Grow up!

[famososMuertos]

I think a big sign that says NO KYC, should be taken with a grain of salt or ignored.

The Casinos that they can really fulfill that requirement for the players (100%), since this is not a favor, they are very few, so, if I write it again:

Know Your Casino:
Casinos that Comply with No KYC for users are few. And they are on the verge of extinction.

What does exist are new conditions in how they are being applied, it can be said that in "some Casinos" there are established amounts and they manage to maintain a deposit and withdrawal standard for players who require no KYC.

We are at a stage where the offer is so varied and competitive, that there is a lot to choose from, the promotions, the VIP systems, the Trust, etc.

Then, the No KYC, results in an easy promotion, which surely is not linked to the experience positve of user.

Extra: we must congratulate the OP, it is one of the Topics best served by a user who is not related to his recommendation. (It is the behavior, of all, in mi case, I have forgotten some of my threads)

On the other hand, under this system that is presented in Hive, it is to see even platforms in the equivalence of YouTube, Poker, for example. I think this had its peak in the years 2016-2017-2018, where later the value of its Tokens fell to the bottom.

For example and that I remember there without using GS, D-Tube. Interesting, if I remember correctly, the likes meant payments (or something like that) directly to your wallet.

[Shamm]

Of course, no website is completely immune from hacking, am only disappointed that you guys are taking this as an excuse instead of looking elsewhere to the benefits of KYC.

If a website is new, my dear, you are talking 50/50 chance with them if they are without KYC. Because without it, it means they are not regulated. But you have higher rest of mind if they are truly regulated.

Excuse? Nonsense. 50/50 chance without KYC? More nonsense. I already specifically mentioned in my previous post that I have been gambling at several popular sites without providing KYC at any stage.

Also, no KYC requirement and features such as great offers, great customer support etc are what truly make crypto gambling sites popular. Think!

Nonsense? I can see the level of your maturity, children are not hard to know as they don't know how to tame their emotions. Regards of your rants, I maintain that KYC has its protective advantage if you can trace the casino right to the root of its true regulator, it's a layer of security on both sides (gambler and the house) whether you like it or not, it's not about hacking as any website could be hacked.

And I don't care about how many times you had withdrawn from no-KYC casinos, many have been scammed by them too, so what's your point child? Grow up!

No license casino offered a NO KYC while a legitimate casino ask for KYC in order to protect you and thier casino as well. But we must always remember that if we are playing in a no KYC casino then we are in risky even though not all Unlicencse casino id scammer but they are many unlicense casino who scam gamblers. So for me Ill prefer to play in the casino who is trusted for many years even though they will ask for KYc.

[delfastTions]

Of course, no website is completely immune from hacking, am only disappointed that you guys are taking this as an excuse instead of looking elsewhere to the benefits of KYC.

If a website is new, my dear, you are talking 50/50 chance with them if they are without KYC. Because without it, it means they are not regulated. But you have higher rest of mind if they are truly regulated.

Excuse? Nonsense. 50/50 chance without KYC? More nonsense. I already specifically mentioned in my previous post that I have been gambling at several popular sites without providing KYC at any stage.

Also, no KYC requirement and features such as great offers, great customer support etc are what truly make crypto gambling sites popular. Think!

Nonsense? I can see the level of your maturity, children are not hard to know as they don't know how to tame their emotions. Regards of your rants, I maintain that KYC has its protective advantage if you can trace the casino right to the root of its true regulator, it's a layer of security on both sides (gambler and the house) whether you like it or not, it's not about hacking as any website could be hacked.

And I don't care about how many times you had withdrawn from no-KYC casinos, many have been scammed by them too, so what's your point child? Grow up!

No license casino offered a NO KYC while a legitimate casino ask for KYC in order to protect you and thier casino as well. But we must always remember that if we are playing in a no KYC casino then we are in risky even though not all Unlicencse casino id scammer but they are many unlicense casino who scam gamblers. So for me Ill prefer to play in the casino who is trusted for many years even though they will ask for KYc.

But for me, just the opposite - I play calmly and with pleasure only in a casino that does not require KYC.

 I really dislike these identity checks and the provision of documents! 
Especially when it comes to casinos with payments in cryptocurrency.  In this case, by providing your personal data several times, you are almost guaranteed to inform the whole world that you own cryptocurrency.  The reason for this is simple and banal.  Leaks of personal data are constantly happening and no one can ever give a real guarantee that a particular casino will not be hacked by hackers and will not steal the data of players who have passed KYC.  And if someone promises strict confidentiality of personal data, then he is lying, there are no such guarantees.  No one can guarantee this 100%.  And it’s not for nothing that the darknet is filled with such lists. 

So KYC is only harm and an extra trouble for any person. 
This is how I think.

[Shamm]

Of course, no website is completely immune from hacking, am only disappointed that you guys are taking this as an excuse instead of looking elsewhere to the benefits of KYC.

If a website is new, my dear, you are talking 50/50 chance with them if they are without KYC. Because without it, it means they are not regulated. But you have higher rest of mind if they are truly regulated.

Excuse? Nonsense. 50/50 chance without KYC? More nonsense. I already specifically mentioned in my previous post that I have been gambling at several popular sites without providing KYC at any stage.

Also, no KYC requirement and features such as great offers, great customer support etc are what truly make crypto gambling sites popular. Think!

Nonsense? I can see the level of your maturity, children are not hard to know as they don't know how to tame their emotions. Regards of your rants, I maintain that KYC has its protective advantage if you can trace the casino right to the root of its true regulator, it's a layer of security on both sides (gambler and the house) whether you like it or not, it's not about hacking as any website could be hacked.

And I don't care about how many times you had withdrawn from no-KYC casinos, many have been scammed by them too, so what's your point child? Grow up!

No license casino offered a NO KYC while a legitimate casino ask for KYC in order to protect you and thier casino as well. But we must always remember that if we are playing in a no KYC casino then we are in risky even though not all Unlicencse casino id scammer but they are many unlicense casino who scam gamblers. So for me Ill prefer to play in the casino who is trusted for many years even though they will ask for KYc.

But for me, just the opposite - I play calmly and with pleasure only in a casino that does not require KYC.

 I really dislike these identity checks and the provision of documents! 
Especially when it comes to casinos with payments in cryptocurrency.  In this case, by providing your personal data several times, you are almost guaranteed to inform the whole world that you own cryptocurrency.  The reason for this is simple and banal.  Leaks of personal data are constantly happening and no one can ever give a real guarantee that a particular casino will not be hacked by hackers and will not steal the data of players who have passed KYC.  And if someone promises strict confidentiality of personal data, then he is lying, there are no such guarantees.  No one can guarantee this 100%.  And it’s not for nothing that the darknet is filled with such lists. 

So KYC is only harm and an extra trouble for any person. 
This is how I think.

We have different aspects and different way of understanding so like you said you are right about that and yes if we give our personal details which some casino ask for then it seems that we show our selves in the whole world that we have crypto currencies. But for me as my experience then it's still okay that I will give some of my information to withdraw my money, but I will give only to those trusted casino for how many years.

[Crypt0Gore]

Of course, no website is completely immune from hacking, am only disappointed that you guys are taking this as an excuse instead of looking elsewhere to the benefits of KYC.

If a website is new, my dear, you are talking 50/50 chance with them if they are without KYC. Because without it, it means they are not regulated. But you have higher rest of mind if they are truly regulated.

Excuse? Nonsense. 50/50 chance without KYC? More nonsense. I already specifically mentioned in my previous post that I have been gambling at several popular sites without providing KYC at any stage.

Also, no KYC requirement and features such as great offers, great customer support etc are what truly make crypto gambling sites popular. Think!

True,  KYC requirement doesn't guaranteed any form of regulation of any online casinos, there is no way a gambling platform will prove to users that they are regulated, many scam projects have stolen users KYC information and they don't know it, these criminals have other use for peoples identity.

At first, I always thought that KYC is the answer, the answer to fraud and other bullshits from platforms, later I found out that KYC requirement could be an idea to scare some people off after they win some money or they have other use for the information they acquired from people. 

[tusandii]

 
So KYC is only harm and an extra trouble for any person. 
This is how I think.

Not all gamblers feel at a loss and get into trouble regarding a KYC.
There are some gamblers who actually don't mind and they easily provide KYC to the casinos they use because they believe the personal data that has been provided will not be misused.
There are also gamblers who don't bother looking for casinos without KYC that are trusted and can be relied upon, so they choose the most popular casinos with KYC to make it easier and faster to use casinos without having to think about it and reset before using the casino.
Maybe you can come to such a conclusion because you yourself don't like KYC and mind if the casino knows personal data because you want to gamble anonymously in a crypto casino.

[BVeyron]

 
So KYC is only harm and an extra trouble for any person. 
This is how I think.

Not all gamblers feel at a loss and get into trouble regarding a KYC.
There are some gamblers who actually don't mind and they easily provide KYC to the casinos they use because they believe the personal data that has been provided will not be misused.
There are also gamblers who don't bother looking for casinos without KYC that are trusted and can be relied upon, so they choose the most popular casinos with KYC to make it easier and faster to use casinos without having to think about it and reset before using the casino.
Maybe you can come to such a conclusion because you yourself don't like KYC and mind if the casino knows personal data because you want to gamble anonymously in a crypto casino.

KYC is a problem for those who use multiple casino platforms, there are difficulties filling in all the data. While those using one platform or only a few, can e en be in favor of KYC service, since it guarantees a bit more security at least in fiat money sector. That's why, I think, in some time both KYC and non-KYC algorithms will be offered by most platforms at the same time, so that it will balance the demands in both groups of gamblers.

[LUCKMCFLY]

Of course, no website is completely immune from hacking, am only disappointed that you guys are taking this as an excuse instead of looking elsewhere to the benefits of KYC.

If a website is new, my dear, you are talking 50/50 chance with them if they are without KYC. Because without it, it means they are not regulated. But you have higher rest of mind if they are truly regulated.

Excuse? Nonsense. 50/50 chance without KYC? More nonsense. I already specifically mentioned in my previous post that I have been gambling at several popular sites without providing KYC at any stage.

Also, no KYC requirement and features such as great offers, great customer support etc are what truly make crypto gambling sites popular. Think!

True,  KYC requirement doesn't guaranteed any form of regulation of any online casinos, there is no way a gambling platform will prove to users that they are regulated, many scam projects have stolen users KYC information and they don't know it, these criminals have other use for peoples identity.

At first, I always thought that KYC is the answer, the answer to fraud and other bullshits from platforms, later I found out that KYC requirement could be an idea to scare some people off after they win some money or they have other use for the information they acquired from people. 

Kyc can disguise himself in many ways, but obviously this came from a requirement of governments or government entities and it is something that he does not like to walk, however we as players sometimes understand that not even Casinio himself is to blame for things how the kyc is implemented, the licenses, the permits, everything requires documentation, and sometimes the jkyc disguises it by saying that it is a security measure so that at the time of a possible hack they can recover the person's funds, that is something that I don't conceive, because in crypto there should never be kyc, that goes against the natural laws of crypto.

[len01]

Of course, no website is completely immune from hacking, am only disappointed that you guys are taking this as an excuse instead of looking elsewhere to the benefits of KYC.

If a website is new, my dear, you are talking 50/50 chance with them if they are without KYC. Because without it, it means they are not regulated. But you have higher rest of mind if they are truly regulated.

Excuse? Nonsense. 50/50 chance without KYC? More nonsense. I already specifically mentioned in my previous post that I have been gambling at several popular sites without providing KYC at any stage.

Also, no KYC requirement and features such as great offers, great customer support etc are what truly make crypto gambling sites popular. Think!

True,  KYC requirement doesn't guaranteed any form of regulation of any online casinos, there is no way a gambling platform will prove to users that they are regulated, many scam projects have stolen users KYC information and they don't know it, these criminals have other use for peoples identity.

At first, I always thought that KYC is the answer, the answer to fraud and other bullshits from platforms, later I found out that KYC requirement could be an idea to scare some people off after they win some money or they have other use for the information they acquired from people. 

Kyc can disguise himself in many ways, but obviously this came from a requirement of governments or government entities and it is something that he does not like to walk, however we as players sometimes understand that not even Casinio himself is to blame for things how the kyc is implemented, the licenses, the permits, everything requires documentation, and sometimes the jkyc disguises it by saying that it is a security measure so that at the time of a possible hack they can recover the person's funds, that is something that I don't conceive, because in crypto there should never be kyc, that goes against the natural laws of crypto.

KYC in crypto casinos is still the pros and cons to date. Indeed, the natural law of crypto is anonymous or it is not clear who owns it, but if I look at some of the cases that have occurred, I consider all of these problems.
indeed casinos shouldn't require KYC for their customers considering crypto is so anonymous. but if the casino doesn't ask for KYC, how can the casino detect customers using money laundering?
on the other hand licensed casinos already have agreements with licensing companies to require KYC from every customer.

maybe this is a little off topic but this is just a real example like the ChipMixer case which is currently being confiscated by the state because of a case where someone mixed bitcoin there even though the funds were the result of a money laundering crime. it is like when a person gambles in a casino using money laundering and if the police investigates the case the funds stop at that casino. wouldn't that also hurt the casino?
of all these problems it's up to everyone whether to do KYC or not because these are still pros and cons.

[tusandii]

 
So KYC is only harm and an extra trouble for any person. 
This is how I think.

Not all gamblers feel at a loss and get into trouble regarding a KYC.
There are some gamblers who actually don't mind and they easily provide KYC to the casinos they use because they believe the personal data that has been provided will not be misused.
There are also gamblers who don't bother looking for casinos without KYC that are trusted and can be relied upon, so they choose the most popular casinos with KYC to make it easier and faster to use casinos without having to think about it and reset before using the casino.
Maybe you can come to such a conclusion because you yourself don't like KYC and mind if the casino knows personal data because you want to gamble anonymously in a crypto casino.

KYC is a problem for those who use multiple casino platforms, there are difficulties filling in all the data. While those using one platform or only a few, can e en be in favor of KYC service, since it guarantees a bit more security at least in fiat money sector. That's why, I think, in some time both KYC and non-KYC algorithms will be offered by most platforms at the same time, so that it will balance the demands in both groups of gamblers.

Wouldn't it be fine if gamblers gave KYC to several different casinos that gamblers used?
But if the gambler has more than one account at one casino then that will make it difficult for the gambler to provide KYC because it is impossible for the gambler to provide the same personal identity for more than one account at one casino.
If the casino that the gambler uses is different, in my opinion, it is legal for the gambler to give KYC to all the casinos that are used. Obviously many KYC and non KYC algorithms are offered by all existing casinos because gamblers always have different choices so they can determine which casino to use.

[slapper]

 
So KYC is only harm and an extra trouble for any person. 
This is how I think.

Not all gamblers feel at a loss and get into trouble regarding a KYC.
There are some gamblers who actually don't mind and they easily provide KYC to the casinos they use because they believe the personal data that has been provided will not be misused.
There are also gamblers who don't bother looking for casinos without KYC that are trusted and can be relied upon, so they choose the most popular casinos with KYC to make it easier and faster to use casinos without having to think about it and reset before using the casino.
Maybe you can come to such a conclusion because you yourself don't like KYC and mind if the casino knows personal data because you want to gamble anonymously in a crypto casino.

KYC is a problem for those who use multiple casino platforms, there are difficulties filling in all the data. While those using one platform or only a few, can e en be in favor of KYC service, since it guarantees a bit more security at least in fiat money sector. That's why, I think, in some time both KYC and non-KYC algorithms will be offered by most platforms at the same time, so that it will balance the demands in both groups of gamblers.

Wouldn't it be fine if gamblers gave KYC to several different casinos that gamblers used?
But if the gambler has more than one account at one casino then that will make it difficult for the gambler to provide KYC because it is impossible for the gambler to provide the same personal identity for more than one account at one casino.
If the casino that the gambler uses is different, in my opinion, it is legal for the gambler to give KYC to all the casinos that are used. Obviously many KYC and non KYC algorithms are offered by all existing casinos because gamblers always have different choices so they can determine which casino to use.

Gamblers gotta hit with that KYC info to keep the game legit and block any shady moves. Philosophically speaking, we should aim for that crystal-clear transparency and realness, particularly when the stakes are high. But, I get how rocking multiple accounts at one casino might make the KYC game a bit trickier.

Imagine if we cooked up a wicked solution like a global KYC system for all the casinos to adopt! Picture it like a passport to ride the casino wave, no matter where you're at. To crank up the fun factor, we could have a wild KYC photo booth for your one-of-a-kind picture to use as your all-access KYC pass. That'd be straight fire, right?!

[traderethereum]

True,  KYC requirement doesn't guaranteed any form of regulation of any online casinos, there is no way a gambling platform will prove to users that they are regulated, many scam projects have stolen users KYC information and they don't know it, these criminals have other use for peoples identity.

At first, I always thought that KYC is the answer, the answer to fraud and other bullshits from platforms, later I found out that KYC requirement could be an idea to scare some people off after they win some money or they have other use for the information they acquired from people. 

If you are too afraid to do KYC even in a trusted casino, you don't need to use big money to play gambling and you may not even need to play gambling at all.
And by playing gambling using small money, you don't need to do KYC because even if you win, your winnings probably won't be too big so you can withdraw the winning money.
But if you start to use big money, especially if you are new to the casino, the casino may ask you to do KYC.
So playing gambling in crypto casinos is a choice for us and doing KYC is also our choice so that if we are asked one day to do KYC, we are ready to do it.

[EarnOnVictor]

Of course, no website is completely immune from hacking, am only disappointed that you guys are taking this as an excuse instead of looking elsewhere to the benefits of KYC.

If a website is new, my dear, you are talking 50/50 chance with them if they are without KYC. Because without it, it means they are not regulated. But you have higher rest of mind if they are truly regulated.

Excuse? Nonsense. 50/50 chance without KYC? More nonsense. I already specifically mentioned in my previous post that I have been gambling at several popular sites without providing KYC at any stage.

Also, no KYC requirement and features such as great offers, great customer support etc are what truly make crypto gambling sites popular. Think!

True,  KYC requirement doesn't guaranteed any form of regulation of any online casinos, there is no way a gambling platform will prove to users that they are regulated, many scam projects have stolen users KYC information and they don't know it, these criminals have other use for peoples identity.

At first, I always thought that KYC is the answer, the answer to fraud and other bullshits from platforms, later I found out that KYC requirement could be an idea to scare some people off after they win some money or they have other use for the information they acquired from people. 

Kyc can disguise himself in many ways, but obviously this came from a requirement of governments or government entities and it is something that he does not like to walk, however we as players sometimes understand that not even Casinio himself is to blame for things how the kyc is implemented, the licenses, the permits, everything requires documentation, and sometimes the jkyc disguises it by saying that it is a security measure so that at the time of a possible hack they can recover the person's funds, that is something that I don't conceive, because in crypto there should never be kyc, that goes against the natural laws of crypto.

This a typical example of why I believe people don't know the reason for KYC as I've read many kicking against it simply because they lie it could protect them from hacking. Who is saying KYC will protect anyone from hacking? it's your cyber security that will do that for you. What KYC does is to be sure that the person holding the account is what he says he is. And this is in turn creating a better society for us to the advantage of the gambler, the company and the government for security and accountability.

Only insensitive and selfish people that don't mean well for the society would kick against KYC.

Of course, no website is completely immune from hacking, am only disappointed that you guys are taking this as an excuse instead of looking elsewhere to the benefits of KYC.

If a website is new, my dear, you are talking 50/50 chance with them if they are without KYC. Because without it, it means they are not regulated. But you have higher rest of mind if they are truly regulated.

Excuse? Nonsense. 50/50 chance without KYC? More nonsense. I already specifically mentioned in my previous post that I have been gambling at several popular sites without providing KYC at any stage.

Also, no KYC requirement and features such as great offers, great customer support etc are what truly make crypto gambling sites popular. Think!

True,  KYC requirement doesn't guaranteed any form of regulation of any online casinos, there is no way a gambling platform will prove to users that they are regulated, many scam projects have stolen users KYC information and they don't know it, these criminals have other use for peoples identity.

At first, I always thought that KYC is the answer, the answer to fraud and other bullshits from platforms, later I found out that KYC requirement could be an idea to scare some people off after they win some money or they have other use for the information they acquired from people. 

Kyc can disguise himself in many ways, but obviously this came from a requirement of governments or government entities and it is something that he does not like to walk, however we as players sometimes understand that not even Casinio himself is to blame for things how the kyc is implemented, the licenses, the permits, everything requires documentation, and sometimes the jkyc disguises it by saying that it is a security measure so that at the time of a possible hack they can recover the person's funds, that is something that I don't conceive, because in crypto there should never be kyc, that goes against the natural laws of crypto.

KYC in crypto casinos is still the pros and cons to date. Indeed, the natural law of crypto is anonymous or it is not clear who owns it, but if I look at some of the cases that have occurred, I consider all of these problems.
indeed casinos shouldn't require KYC for their customers considering crypto is so anonymous. but if the casino doesn't ask for KYC, how can the casino detect customers using money laundering?
on the other hand licensed casinos already have agreements with licensing companies to require KYC from every customer.

It's true that the issue has pros and cons, but you got it wrong by saying casinos must not ask for KYC due to the anonymity of crypto. First, it's not all cryptos transactions that are anonymous, and casinos are companies, not crypto itself, they are only using the crypto as a payment system.

In a sane world, all their activities must be accounted for as a company to avoid illicit flows, so that argument is invalid. Crypto will always act as online money, but the activities of those using it as a payment system for deposit and withdrawal should be regulated.

[len01]

KYC in crypto casinos is still the pros and cons to date. Indeed, the natural law of crypto is anonymous or it is not clear who owns it, but if I look at some of the cases that have occurred, I consider all of these problems.
indeed casinos shouldn't require KYC for their customers considering crypto is so anonymous. but if the casino doesn't ask for KYC, how can the casino detect customers using money laundering?
on the other hand licensed casinos already have agreements with licensing companies to require KYC from every customer.

It's true that the issue has pros and cons, but you got it wrong by saying casinos must not ask for KYC due to the anonymity of crypto. First, it's not all cryptos transactions that are anonymous, and casinos are companies, not crypto itself, they are only using the crypto as a payment system.

In a sane world, all their activities must be accounted for as a company to avoid illicit flows, so that argument is invalid. Crypto will always act as online money, but the activities of those using it as a payment system for deposit and withdrawal should be regulated.

maybe you misunderstood what I said.

I did say that casinos shouldn't ask their customers for KYC, but after that I told the truth that casinos ask for KYC based on agreements with licensing companies to analyze gamblers who use money laundering funds to gamble in casinos.

maybe this seems off topic but to clarify what i'm saying. that licensed casinos require casinos to use KYC to prevent cases of money laundering deposited in certain casinos and especially in curacao licensed casinos.

see below :

Enhanced monitoring and anti-money laundering controls.

source

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5441445.msg61977707#msg61977707

maybe from what i quoted you know what i mean.
but I don't mean to out off topic just to clarify my point.

[tusandii]

 
So KYC is only harm and an extra trouble for any person. 
This is how I think.

Not all gamblers feel at a loss and get into trouble regarding a KYC.
There are some gamblers who actually don't mind and they easily provide KYC to the casinos they use because they believe the personal data that has been provided will not be misused.
There are also gamblers who don't bother looking for casinos without KYC that are trusted and can be relied upon, so they choose the most popular casinos with KYC to make it easier and faster to use casinos without having to think about it and reset before using the casino.
Maybe you can come to such a conclusion because you yourself don't like KYC and mind if the casino knows personal data because you want to gamble anonymously in a crypto casino.

KYC is a problem for those who use multiple casino platforms, there are difficulties filling in all the data. While those using one platform or only a few, can e en be in favor of KYC service, since it guarantees a bit more security at least in fiat money sector. That's why, I think, in some time both KYC and non-KYC algorithms will be offered by most platforms at the same time, so that it will balance the demands in both groups of gamblers.

Wouldn't it be fine if gamblers gave KYC to several different casinos that gamblers used?
But if the gambler has more than one account at one casino then that will make it difficult for the gambler to provide KYC because it is impossible for the gambler to provide the same personal identity for more than one account at one casino.
If the casino that the gambler uses is different, in my opinion, it is legal for the gambler to give KYC to all the casinos that are used. Obviously many KYC and non KYC algorithms are offered by all existing casinos because gamblers always have different choices so they can determine which casino to use.

Gamblers gotta hit with that KYC info to keep the game legit and block any shady moves. Philosophically speaking, we should aim for that crystal-clear transparency and realness, particularly when the stakes are high. But, I get how rocking multiple accounts at one casino might make the KYC game a bit trickier.

Imagine if we cooked up a wicked solution like a global KYC system for all the casinos to adopt! Picture it like a passport to ride the casino wave, no matter where you're at. To crank up the fun factor, we could have a wild KYC photo booth for your one-of-a-kind picture to use as your all-access KYC pass. That'd be straight fire, right?!

Unless the gambler uses all personal identity data from his family, maybe the gambler has multiple accounts in one casino with all KYC verification.
But this rarely happens because gamblers prefer non-KYC casinos, making it easier for gamblers to have multiple accounts in one casino without having to think about the KYC that is enforced.
It is not easy to set up a global KYC system and use fake data or photos because if one day a serious problem occurs it will be more difficult.
Here I am talking for the long term, friends, so whatever you do must be carefully calculated.

[libert19]

Imagine if we cooked up a wicked solution like a global KYC system for all the casinos to adopt! Picture it like a passport to ride the casino wave, no matter where you're at. To crank up the fun factor, we could have a wild KYC photo booth for your one-of-a-kind picture to use as your all-access KYC pass. That'd be straight fire, right?!

I'd imagine a service which encrypts kyc data of user and user can use this data on various casinos in some form which proves his unique identity without exposing the actual data. Such system would help both the privacy conscious individuals and casino platforms.

Only insensitive and selfish people that don't mean well for the society would kick against KYC.

Or may be they are just privacy conscious.

[LUCKMCFLY]

 
So KYC is only harm and an extra trouble for any person. 
This is how I think.

Not all gamblers feel at a loss and get into trouble regarding a KYC.
There are some gamblers who actually don't mind and they easily provide KYC to the casinos they use because they believe the personal data that has been provided will not be misused.
There are also gamblers who don't bother looking for casinos without KYC that are trusted and can be relied upon, so they choose the most popular casinos with KYC to make it easier and faster to use casinos without having to think about it and reset before using the casino.
Maybe you can come to such a conclusion because you yourself don't like KYC and mind if the casino knows personal data because you want to gamble anonymously in a crypto casino.

The only peace of mind I have is that When my data is leaked in a casino, I don't think I'm in Danger, Because the thief's trip to my house would be much more expensive and as soon as he arrived, who knows if the same system would take care of Leaving it bad, and apart from the money that I have to lose is not much, it is actually insignificant if I compare it with the economy of Other players, this may not be an excuse to Give my data in Kyc for a site, but still I am not I agree , and not because I think of myself, I know that there are players who are whales and that if they can compromise their safety and that is something that I Would not like, in fact, if most people do well, at least I am happy.