🔥No KYC Crypto Casinos & Sites | NoToKYC.com | 100$ BTC GIVEAWAY🎲

[NoToKYC]

A new casino was added guys! BitStarz offers exclusively 30 Free Spins just on sign up

[delfastTions]

In the question that the OP asks by defining the name of this topic, in my opinion there is enough uncertainty. 
Therefore, it is probably worth bringing some clarity and a clear understanding of the ongoing identity verification processes. 
So, we can probably now conclude that practically no casino can afford not to mention KYC at all in their documents for the legalization of their work.  Including in ToS, of course.  And what do we have as a result: all casinos that secretly mention the obligation to verify the KYC procedure are disingenuous, or rather misinforming citizens.  This means that for us, players, consumers of their services, these casinos are legally in the so-called “gray zone”.  And for this it means that at any moment related to the transfer of our money, first of all, won at the casino, we can receive from the casino not money, but a KYC requirement.  For many players, remaining anonymous automatically means losing that money. 
My question to the OP is whether there is at least one casino that guarantees the absence of KYC under any circumstances.  Moreover, this guarantee is directly written down in the regulatory documents of the casino and in the ToS too.  Or are there simply no such casinos?  But if they are not there, then the topic itself and the OP website itself are simply meaningless and represent an elementary and primitive marketing technique to attract naive clientele and inexperienced players.  In this case, OP, I think, could tell us that the site is just another selection of casinos that are in the “gray zone” when it comes to KYC verification, and from which the player should always expect an “unexpected gift” in the form of sudden KYC.  But the fact is that any casino seems to either require KYC and warn about it, or is in a “gray zone” for reasons of using a fake “no KYC” as a marketing technique and nothing more.
 In short, such a selection of casinos “without KYC” is simply a pointless idea.

[panjul07]

A new casino was added guys! BitStarz offers exclusively 30 Free Spins just on sign up

Bitstarz has a bad reputation in this forum, didn't you notice it? Check this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=307265
What is the reason why you decided to add them on your list, they are even a casino that will ask their customer to do KYC most of the time especially when users take a bonus.
Do you care about the reputation of the casino or you ignore it as long as you can get benefit by adding the casino into your list?

[LUCKMCFLY]

In the question that the OP asks by defining the name of this topic, in my opinion there is enough uncertainty. 
Therefore, it is probably worth bringing some clarity and a clear understanding of the ongoing identity verification processes. 
So, we can probably now conclude that practically no casino can afford not to mention KYC at all in their documents for the legalization of their work.  Including in ToS, of course.  And what do we have as a result: all casinos that secretly mention the obligation to verify the KYC procedure are disingenuous, or rather misinforming citizens.  This means that for us, players, consumers of their services, these casinos are legally in the so-called “gray zone”.  And for this it means that at any moment related to the transfer of our money, first of all, won at the casino, we can receive from the casino not money, but a KYC requirement.  For many players, remaining anonymous automatically means losing that money. 
My question to the OP is whether there is at least one casino that guarantees the absence of KYC under any circumstances.  Moreover, this guarantee is directly written down in the regulatory documents of the casino and in the ToS too.  Or are there simply no such casinos?  But if they are not there, then the topic itself and the OP website itself are simply meaningless and represent an elementary and primitive marketing technique to attract naive clientele and inexperienced players.  In this case, OP, I think, could tell us that the site is just another selection of casinos that are in the “gray zone” when it comes to KYC verification, and from which the player should always expect an “unexpected gift” in the form of sudden KYC.  But the fact is that any casino seems to either require KYC and warn about it, or is in a “gray zone” for reasons of using a fake “no KYC” as a marketing technique and nothing more.
 In short, such a selection of casinos “without KYC” is simply a pointless idea.

I think the same, in fact one of the things I check this thread for is to see if I can find a casino that has the No KYC requirement, appreciated for privacy and anonymity because they have been very biased currently, I personally don't trust the casino that says yes KYC, because at some point they will say that they have to verify the identity, I don't remember in which forum thread they said that they did not ask KYC only to some random users but come on, we are not children, they can't be fooling us with those things, if they ask, ask and that's it, then sometimes casinos say that for a particular withdrawal they do not ask for KYC, but when it is a very large amount, yes, but that is something that we already know here, the essence and the goal of being a casino that does not require KYC.

For example, like freebitcoi.in, which until recently stopped being a non-KYC site, now you have to comply with it to make any withdrawal, so there are no casinos that do not require KYC, and for me it is a total shame. , because we have all always looked for this.

[delfastTions]

In the question that the OP asks by defining the name of this topic, in my opinion there is enough uncertainty. 
Therefore, it is probably worth bringing some clarity and a clear understanding of the ongoing identity verification processes. 
So, we can probably now conclude that practically no casino can afford not to mention KYC at all in their documents for the legalization of their work.  Including in ToS, of course.  And what do we have as a result: all casinos that secretly mention the obligation to verify the KYC procedure are disingenuous, or rather misinforming citizens.  This means that for us, players, consumers of their services, these casinos are legally in the so-called “gray zone”.  And for this it means that at any moment related to the transfer of our money, first of all, won at the casino, we can receive from the casino not money, but a KYC requirement.  For many players, remaining anonymous automatically means losing that money. 
My question to the OP is whether there is at least one casino that guarantees the absence of KYC under any circumstances.  Moreover, this guarantee is directly written down in the regulatory documents of the casino and in the ToS too.  Or are there simply no such casinos?  But if they are not there, then the topic itself and the OP website itself are simply meaningless and represent an elementary and primitive marketing technique to attract naive clientele and inexperienced players.  In this case, OP, I think, could tell us that the site is just another selection of casinos that are in the “gray zone” when it comes to KYC verification, and from which the player should always expect an “unexpected gift” in the form of sudden KYC.  But the fact is that any casino seems to either require KYC and warn about it, or is in a “gray zone” for reasons of using a fake “no KYC” as a marketing technique and nothing more.
 In short, such a selection of casinos “without KYC” is simply a pointless idea.

I think the same, in fact one of the things I check this thread for is to see if I can find a casino that has the No KYC requirement, appreciated for privacy and anonymity because they have been very biased currently, I personally don't trust the casino that says yes KYC, because at some point they will say that they have to verify the identity, I don't remember in which forum thread they said that they did not ask KYC only to some random users but come on, we are not children, they can't be fooling us with those things, if they ask, ask and that's it, then sometimes casinos say that for a particular withdrawal they do not ask for KYC, but when it is a very large amount, yes, but that is something that we already know here, the essence and the goal of being a casino that does not require KYC.

For example, like freebitcoi.in, which until recently stopped being a non-KYC site, now you have to comply with it to make any withdrawal, so there are no casinos that do not require KYC, and for me it is a total shame. , because we have all always looked for this.

Yeah.  For all players, the time has now come when we all have become confident that we will not be able to find a single casino that is not a fly-by-night casino, or even more so a scam, and when playing in such a casino, under no circumstances will it require KYC.  In my opinion, all casinos have already written relevant clauses in their ToS stating that in some cases they may require KYC.  But all these points of the casino game rules are written so vaguely and vaguely that there is no clear picture in which case you can do without KYC.  Moreover, even if the withdrawal amounts and your wallet are small, less than the limit set by the casino, usually $2K, then the casino may require KYC.  In general, anonymity when gambling has fallen on hard times.  It can be stated that anonymity is dying. 
Therefore, the topic that OP opened becomes meaningless.

[arwin100]

A new casino was added guys! BitStarz offers exclusively 30 Free Spins just on sign up

Bitstarz has a bad reputation in this forum, didn't you notice it? Check this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=307265
What is the reason why you decided to add them on your list, they are even a casino that will ask their customer to do KYC most of the time especially when users take a bonus.
Do you care about the reputation of the casino or you ignore it as long as you can get benefit by adding the casino into your list?

Maybe they are not doing any research on scam accusation section that's why they include that scam casino on their list. Or maybe they just really don't care about its reputation and just try to get money out of referral or payment coming from casino itself.

If they research the bitstarz keyword on scam accusation board there's a lot of threads posted against this casino that's why its crazy that they didn't know that those accusation exist.  For doing that they lose their credibility since they failed to define what is scam casino and what are those legit also best to add on the list.

[LUCKMCFLY]

<snip>

Well, we are people who are always going to see things in the sense that they can bring us benefits, I think that many do not like the idea of leaving their identification, just as there must be people who don't care about leaving their data, it doesn't matter to them. , but when it comes to money, I think one has to be jealous and careful with things, because basically things with their way of seeing money can be different, for example leaving a KYC in a casino implies risks, a hack or something like that, it can be assumed that this data falls into the hands of criminals, they find the addresses, they find the account balances, and they can use that information to intimidate, and although I see the governments almost or equal to the criminals, but with a tie, because for me they are the same, because if they do not fall into the hands of criminals, they will fall into the hands of governments that also in the near future will take advantage of those who carry out operations with crypto, and manifest themselves through taxes.

This scenario is one that the People cannot imagine, perhaps they can say that one is exaggerating, but things are like that, personally, privacy and anonymity are rights that no longer exist, and the worst thing is that people do not They realize it, and if they realize it, then they ignore it, and they don't give them importance, that's why in the world there are so many people who appear dead and we don't know why? What happened? Or what did they do, sometimes we don't know about people's deaths? Some say that the person owed money or was involved in strange things, but it could be that things were like this because of a hack on some platform and from there they extracted that information, I think that people currently do not give importance to this.

[freedomgo]

A new casino was added guys! BitStarz offers exclusively 30 Free Spins just on sign up

Bitstarz has a bad reputation in this forum, didn't you notice it? Check this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=307265
What is the reason why you decided to add them on your list, they are even a casino that will ask their customer to do KYC most of the time especially when users take a bonus.
Do you care about the reputation of the casino or you ignore it as long as you can get benefit by adding the casino into your list?

Maybe they are not doing any research on scam accusation section that's why they include that scam casino on their list. Or maybe they just really don't care about its reputation and just try to get money out of referral or payment coming from casino itself.

If they research the bitstarz keyword on scam accusation board there's a lot of threads posted against this casino that's why its crazy that they didn't know that those accusation exist.  For doing that they lose their credibility since they failed to define what is scam casino and what are those legit also best to add on the list.

The scam accusation was 4 years ago; hopefully, a lot of things have already changed for this casino. But there's a valid reason to call them scammers since their response or action does not solve the problem that was raised with valid evidence. Of course, DT members would not support that flag created against them if the evidence isn't valid enough.

[iv4n]

The scam accusation was 4 years ago; hopefully, a lot of things have already changed for this casino. But there's a valid reason to call them scammers since their response or action does not solve the problem that was raised with valid evidence. Of course, DT members would not support that flag created against them if the evidence isn't valid enough.

I tried logging into my account a while ago, but they no longer accept players from my country... so some things have definitely changed. My experience is only positive, 7-8 years ago Bitstarz was one of the few places with a very long list of providers and slots, unique for that time, it's the place where I won a few "whole BTC" from slots.

Anyway, the Bitstarz team decided not to show up here a long time ago, but they didn't stop advertising in other places. I guess it's their loss, most of us here don't play in casinos that don't have an active representative here on the forum.

[ScamViruS]

The scam accusation was 4 years ago; hopefully, a lot of things have already changed for this casino. But there's a valid reason to call them scammers since their response or action does not solve the problem that was raised with valid evidence. Of course, DT members would not support that flag created against them if the evidence isn't valid enough.

They have not settled the accusation for so many years now they may be interested or not to settle the accusation. If a casino sees any accusations against them they try to settle it, because they are serious about their business. But this casino is not interested in giving a proper reply to any accusations created against them. So gamblers must try to avoid this casino, so as not to face problems after deposit money in this casino. bitstars.net was active in this forum on April 23, 2020, 06:57:58 AM, after that they are no longer active in this forum. That means they realize they can't continue their scams from this forum. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=307265

[delfastTions]

<snip>

Well, we are people who are always going to see things in the sense that they can bring us benefits, I think that many do not like the idea of leaving their identification, just as there must be people who don't care about leaving their data, it doesn't matter to them. , but when it comes to money, I think one has to be jealous and careful with things, because basically things with their way of seeing money can be different, for example leaving a KYC in a casino implies risks, a hack or something like that, it can be assumed that this data falls into the hands of criminals, they find the addresses, they find the account balances, and they can use that information to intimidate, and although I see the governments almost or equal to the criminals, but with a tie, because for me they are the same, because if they do not fall into the hands of criminals, they will fall into the hands of governments that also in the near future will take advantage of those who carry out operations with crypto, and manifest themselves through taxes.

This scenario is one that the People cannot imagine, perhaps they can say that one is exaggerating, but things are like that, personally, privacy and anonymity are rights that no longer exist, and the worst thing is that people do not They realize it, and if they realize it, then they ignore it, and they don't give them importance, that's why in the world there are so many people who appear dead and we don't know why? What happened? Or what did they do, sometimes we don't know about people's deaths? Some say that the person owed money or was involved in strange things, but it could be that things were like this because of a hack on some platform and from there they extracted that information, I think that people currently do not give importance to this.

It should be noted that in global practice there are still areas of human life in which the right to anonymity is even legally enshrined.  I mean the privacy of people's Personal Health Information.  This area even provides for administrative liability for the disclosure of such data.  Thus, it is still worth stating that such medical data is a secret that a person can keep.  And this is even guaranteed by law.  But when it comes to payments in cryptocurrencies, since there are still intersections with fiat money, this right to privacy is completely ignored by governments and, on the contrary, under the guise of taxation, the requirement for personal identification using KYC is being introduced everywhere.
 But I thought that KYC in the form that everyone is used to is now hopelessly outdated.  For example, a photo of a person holding documents in their hands is a completely outdated method and should always be ignored if possible.

[fullhdpixel]

It should be noted that in global practice there are still areas of human life in which the right to anonymity is even legally enshrined.  I mean the privacy of people's Personal Health Information.  This area even provides for administrative liability for the disclosure of such data.  Thus, it is still worth stating that such medical data is a secret that a person can keep.  And this is even guaranteed by law.  But when it comes to payments in cryptocurrencies, since there are still intersections with fiat money, this right to privacy is completely ignored by governments and, on the contrary, under the guise of taxation, the requirement for personal identification using KYC is being introduced everywhere.
 But I thought that KYC in the form that everyone is used to is now hopelessly outdated.  For example, a photo of a person holding documents in their hands is a completely outdated method and should always be ignored if possible.

I think there is nothing much in health information and they are seem less important when we play gambling compared to the food and medical industry, or the likes, no wonder why they are not being asked anymore when we submit our KYC in a casino. Cryptos are still money but they are mostly decentralized so privacy is still there. KYC was introduced not mainly because of taxation but it's about money laundering and then preventing certain people to access the casino as they maybe underage or they are from restricted locations.

When it comes to how KYC is being processed, I don't think a person holding a document is outdated and will ever be outdated because we have been doing this long time ago (if I'm not mistaken) and if you ignore them, it's going to be your loss and not by the platform.

[delfastTions]

It should be noted that in global practice there are still areas of human life in which the right to anonymity is even legally enshrined.  I mean the privacy of people's Personal Health Information.  This area even provides for administrative liability for the disclosure of such data.  Thus, it is still worth stating that such medical data is a secret that a person can keep.  And this is even guaranteed by law.  But when it comes to payments in cryptocurrencies, since there are still intersections with fiat money, this right to privacy is completely ignored by governments and, on the contrary, under the guise of taxation, the requirement for personal identification using KYC is being introduced everywhere.
 But I thought that KYC in the form that everyone is used to is now hopelessly outdated.  For example, a photo of a person holding documents in their hands is a completely outdated method and should always be ignored if possible.

I think there is nothing much in health information and they are seem less important when we play gambling compared to the food and medical industry, or the likes, no wonder why they are not being asked anymore when we submit our KYC in a casino. Cryptos are still money but they are mostly decentralized so privacy is still there. KYC was introduced not mainly because of taxation but it's about money laundering and then preventing certain people to access the casino as they maybe underage or they are from restricted locations.

When it comes to how KYC is being processed, I don't think a person holding a document is outdated and will ever be outdated because we have been doing this long time ago (if I'm not mistaken) and if you ignore them, it's going to be your loss and not by the platform.

All such information about human health is quite important classified information.  It is not for nothing that the concept of “medical confidentiality” has long existed.  And doctors are obliged to keep such information strictly confidential.  By the way, this is due to the fact that some diseases can negatively affect the search for work and employment with an employer, that is, negative consequences on a person’s private life are quite possible. 

As for KYC in any of its manifestations, I continue to believe that when it comes to payments in cryptocurrency, there should be no KYC at all.  As for this notorious fight against money laundering, it must be said that initially no money and no cryptocurrencies are “dirty”.  This money was simply used by criminals for criminal purposes, law enforcement officers should not “dirty” the money, but should catch criminals red-handed, for example, with a drug party or traffickers.  But this is difficult and dangerous, and law enforcement officers themselves came up with this very “money laundering” to make their work and life easier. 
And the “financial crimes” block is a separate topic for a long conversation.  And as a result of such a conversation, it becomes clear that “dirty” money simply does not exist.

[EarnOnVictor]

A new casino was added guys! BitStarz offers exclusively 30 Free Spins just on sign up

Bitstarz has a bad reputation in this forum, didn't you notice it? Check this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=307265
What is the reason why you decided to add them on your list, they are even a casino that will ask their customer to do KYC most of the time especially when users take a bonus.
Do you care about the reputation of the casino or you ignore it as long as you can get benefit by adding the casino into your list?

I was also surprised to see the name among the list of the OP, which is absurd, to say the least. Well, I believe the OP is just doing his business by simply directing traffic to his website, that is the main goal here and not so concerned about the integrity/reputation of the casinos, not to mention the safety of the funds of the directed customers. The BitStarz is not even the name that only has a bad reputation on the forum but also has a bad reputation online, the OP can't tell me that he did not know this unless he doesn't just care since it is all about business.

Although the OP did not add the reputation/reliability of the company to be advertised in his criteria, so he can still be exonerated here. It is those who are reading and following that should be more careful. Imagine dealing with no-KYC casinos, are you not the one who is putting the hook on your neck by yourself? Best of luck to their next victims through the OP.

It's worth sharing that I have tried my best since I joined the Bitcointalk forum not to advertise for m!xers and any company of questionable characters. That is what I call integrity. I think we should also be considering the humanitarian aspect as well and not selfishly about the money coming to us alone.

[LUCKMCFLY]

It should be noted that in global practice there are still areas of human life in which the right to anonymity is even legally enshrined.  I mean the privacy of people's Personal Health Information.  This area even provides for administrative liability for the disclosure of such data.  Thus, it is still worth stating that such medical data is a secret that a person can keep.  And this is even guaranteed by law.  But when it comes to payments in cryptocurrencies, since there are still intersections with fiat money, this right to privacy is completely ignored by governments and, on the contrary, under the guise of taxation, the requirement for personal identification using KYC is being introduced everywhere.
 But I thought that KYC in the form that everyone is used to is now hopelessly outdated.  For example, a photo of a person holding documents in their hands is a completely outdated method and should always be ignored if possible.

I think there is nothing much in health information and they are seem less important when we play gambling compared to the food and medical industry, or the likes, no wonder why they are not being asked anymore when we submit our KYC in a casino. Cryptos are still money but they are mostly decentralized so privacy is still there. KYC was introduced not mainly because of taxation but it's about money laundering and then preventing certain people to access the casino as they maybe underage or they are from restricted locations.

When it comes to how KYC is being processed, I don't think a person holding a document is outdated and will ever be outdated because we have been doing this long time ago (if I'm not mistaken) and if you ignore them, it's going to be your loss and not by the platform.

All such information about human health is quite important classified information.  It is not for nothing that the concept of “medical confidentiality” has long existed.  And doctors are obliged to keep such information strictly confidential.  By the way, this is due to the fact that some diseases can negatively affect the search for work and employment with an employer, that is, negative consequences on a person’s private life are quite possible. 

As for KYC in any of its manifestations, I continue to believe that when it comes to payments in cryptocurrency, there should be no KYC at all.  As for this notorious fight against money laundering, it must be said that initially no money and no cryptocurrencies are “dirty”.  This money was simply used by criminals for criminal purposes, law enforcement officers should not “dirty” the money, but should catch criminals red-handed, for example, with a drug party or traffickers.  But this is difficult and dangerous, and law enforcement officers themselves came up with this very “money laundering” to make their work and life easier. 
And the “financial crimes” block is a separate topic for a long conversation.  And as a result of such a conversation, it becomes clear that “dirty” money simply does not exist.

This topic is beginning to give rise to a lot of debate, but personally we know that this right to privacy and anonymity is biased, now things are not as before, the obgienros saw the way to be able to enter into cryptocurrency issues Through these regulations and those regulations are to remove anonymity for them to control those who carry out operations with crypto in order to be able to charge them large sums of money for taxes, that is the secret of things, then since this is already known, now they want to put the things like that, in the caisnos everything that is privacy should be defended, anonymously that is a very important thing, especially for me who attach importance to these things, I have always believed that we should be a little more irreverent with the fact of KYC in the casinos, because for everything it is KYC, in the Excahnges, it is Mandatory KYC, and that data belongs there.

The truth is that I Really liked the comparison that was made with the data of the people who are in the medical service, if something like this existed it would be Different , but this is in the Hands of governments, of bank entities, so in the hands of whoever is going to Will our data remain if a gambling site is or becomes involved in a possible hack and does the government take action? As our data Shows, the consequences are already seen in level 1A exchanges, in Binance if they have to block funds from the Eprona for 1 day, a sign, they do it if the police of some country ask them to do all the embarrassments, and we don't know if they are Just ´People in their database to add it to theirs, these things are very likely to happen, that's why we are not just People who are always going to see things from the right perspective. sense of Everything, and we Should not be so trusting, that leaving the KYC generates more security , that is pure Lies , that is to Control all those who do or transact with crypto.

[delfastTions]

It should be noted that in global practice there are still areas of human life in which the right to anonymity is even legally enshrined.  I mean the privacy of people's Personal Health Information.  This area even provides for administrative liability for the disclosure of such data.  Thus, it is still worth stating that such medical data is a secret that a person can keep.  And this is even guaranteed by law.  But when it comes to payments in cryptocurrencies, since there are still intersections with fiat money, this right to privacy is completely ignored by governments and, on the contrary, under the guise of taxation, the requirement for personal identification using KYC is being introduced everywhere.
 But I thought that KYC in the form that everyone is used to is now hopelessly outdated.  For example, a photo of a person holding documents in their hands is a completely outdated method and should always be ignored if possible.

I think there is nothing much in health information and they are seem less important when we play gambling compared to the food and medical industry, or the likes, no wonder why they are not being asked anymore when we submit our KYC in a casino. Cryptos are still money but they are mostly decentralized so privacy is still there. KYC was introduced not mainly because of taxation but it's about money laundering and then preventing certain people to access the casino as they maybe underage or they are from restricted locations.

When it comes to how KYC is being processed, I don't think a person holding a document is outdated and will ever be outdated because we have been doing this long time ago (if I'm not mistaken) and if you ignore them, it's going to be your loss and not by the platform.

All such information about human health is quite important classified information.  It is not for nothing that the concept of “medical confidentiality” has long existed.  And doctors are obliged to keep such information strictly confidential.  By the way, this is due to the fact that some diseases can negatively affect the search for work and employment with an employer, that is, negative consequences on a person’s private life are quite possible. 

As for KYC in any of its manifestations, I continue to believe that when it comes to payments in cryptocurrency, there should be no KYC at all.  As for this notorious fight against money laundering, it must be said that initially no money and no cryptocurrencies are “dirty”.  This money was simply used by criminals for criminal purposes, law enforcement officers should not “dirty” the money, but should catch criminals red-handed, for example, with a drug party or traffickers.  But this is difficult and dangerous, and law enforcement officers themselves came up with this very “money laundering” to make their work and life easier. 
And the “financial crimes” block is a separate topic for a long conversation.  And as a result of such a conversation, it becomes clear that “dirty” money simply does not exist.

This topic is beginning to give rise to a lot of debate, but personally we know that this right to privacy and anonymity is biased, now things are not as before, the obgienros saw the way to be able to enter into cryptocurrency issues Through these regulations and those regulations are to remove anonymity for them to control those who carry out operations with crypto in order to be able to charge them large sums of money for taxes, that is the secret of things, then since this is already known, now they want to put the things like that, in the caisnos everything that is privacy should be defended, anonymously that is a very important thing, especially for me who attach importance to these things, I have always believed that we should be a little more irreverent with the fact of KYC in the casinos, because for everything it is KYC, in the Excahnges, it is Mandatory KYC, and that data belongs there.

The truth is that I Really liked the comparison that was made with the data of the people who are in the medical service, if something like this existed it would be Different , but this is in the Hands of governments, of bank entities, so in the hands of whoever is going to Will our data remain if a gambling site is or becomes involved in a possible hack and does the government take action? As our data Shows, the consequences are already seen in level 1A exchanges, in Binance if they have to block funds from the Eprona for 1 day, a sign, they do it if the police of some country ask them to do all the embarrassments, and we don't know if they are Just ´People in their database to add it to theirs, these things are very likely to happen, that's why we are not just People who are always going to see things from the right perspective. sense of Everything, and we Should not be so trusting, that leaving the KYC generates more security , that is pure Lies , that is to Control all those who do or transact with crypto.

In my opinion, if a person who uses cryptocurrency payments and has non-custodial wallets with cryptocurrency, which he honestly earned, is offered a centralized service with KYC and a similar one without KYC verification, then such a person will most likely understand that a service without KYC is preferable for him. 
True, here on the forum, some users are confident that KYC gives them some kind of security and a guarantee of saving their money.  And it is also needed to combat fraud and combat money laundering.  But I think that, on the contrary, disclosing complete information about a person, a casino player, in this particular case, on the contrary, reduces the safety of such a person.  Information about his cryptocurrency may well attract money extortionists and criminals using blackmail.  Yes, even additional measures for declaring cryptocurrency take up your precious time and often this all irritates both you and your loved ones.  By the way, KYC also takes up your time.  In general, now, with this level of development of digital technology, there is no difficulty in identifying a specific person if it is really necessary.  And this does not require any KYC, as was the case 10 years ago.

 I continue to argue that in general KYC is morally outdated and should begin to completely die out, as an unnecessary, superfluous and stupid procedure.

[LUCKMCFLY]

It should be noted that in global practice there are still areas of human life in which the right to anonymity is even legally enshrined.  I mean the privacy of people's Personal Health Information.  This area even provides for administrative liability for the disclosure of such data.  Thus, it is still worth stating that such medical data is a secret that a person can keep.  And this is even guaranteed by law.  But when it comes to payments in cryptocurrencies, since there are still intersections with fiat money, this right to privacy is completely ignored by governments and, on the contrary, under the guise of taxation, the requirement for personal identification using KYC is being introduced everywhere.
 But I thought that KYC in the form that everyone is used to is now hopelessly outdated.  For example, a photo of a person holding documents in their hands is a completely outdated method and should always be ignored if possible.

I think there is nothing much in health information and they are seem less important when we play gambling compared to the food and medical industry, or the likes, no wonder why they are not being asked anymore when we submit our KYC in a casino. Cryptos are still money but they are mostly decentralized so privacy is still there. KYC was introduced not mainly because of taxation but it's about money laundering and then preventing certain people to access the casino as they maybe underage or they are from restricted locations.

When it comes to how KYC is being processed, I don't think a person holding a document is outdated and will ever be outdated because we have been doing this long time ago (if I'm not mistaken) and if you ignore them, it's going to be your loss and not by the platform.

All such information about human health is quite important classified information.  It is not for nothing that the concept of “medical confidentiality” has long existed.  And doctors are obliged to keep such information strictly confidential.  By the way, this is due to the fact that some diseases can negatively affect the search for work and employment with an employer, that is, negative consequences on a person’s private life are quite possible. 

As for KYC in any of its manifestations, I continue to believe that when it comes to payments in cryptocurrency, there should be no KYC at all.  As for this notorious fight against money laundering, it must be said that initially no money and no cryptocurrencies are “dirty”.  This money was simply used by criminals for criminal purposes, law enforcement officers should not “dirty” the money, but should catch criminals red-handed, for example, with a drug party or traffickers.  But this is difficult and dangerous, and law enforcement officers themselves came up with this very “money laundering” to make their work and life easier. 
And the “financial crimes” block is a separate topic for a long conversation.  And as a result of such a conversation, it becomes clear that “dirty” money simply does not exist.

This topic is beginning to give rise to a lot of debate, but personally we know that this right to privacy and anonymity is biased, now things are not as before, the obgienros saw the way to be able to enter into cryptocurrency issues Through these regulations and those regulations are to remove anonymity for them to control those who carry out operations with crypto in order to be able to charge them large sums of money for taxes, that is the secret of things, then since this is already known, now they want to put the things like that, in the caisnos everything that is privacy should be defended, anonymously that is a very important thing, especially for me who attach importance to these things, I have always believed that we should be a little more irreverent with the fact of KYC in the casinos, because for everything it is KYC, in the Excahnges, it is Mandatory KYC, and that data belongs there.

The truth is that I Really liked the comparison that was made with the data of the people who are in the medical service, if something like this existed it would be Different , but this is in the Hands of governments, of bank entities, so in the hands of whoever is going to Will our data remain if a gambling site is or becomes involved in a possible hack and does the government take action? As our data Shows, the consequences are already seen in level 1A exchanges, in Binance if they have to block funds from the Eprona for 1 day, a sign, they do it if the police of some country ask them to do all the embarrassments, and we don't know if they are Just ´People in their database to add it to theirs, these things are very likely to happen, that's why we are not just People who are always going to see things from the right perspective. sense of Everything, and we Should not be so trusting, that leaving the KYC generates more security , that is pure Lies , that is to Control all those who do or transact with crypto.

In my opinion, if a person who uses cryptocurrency payments and has non-custodial wallets with cryptocurrency, which he honestly earned, is offered a centralized service with KYC and a similar one without KYC verification, then such a person will most likely understand that a service without KYC is preferable for him. 
True, here on the forum, some users are confident that KYC gives them some kind of security and a guarantee of saving their money.  And it is also needed to combat fraud and combat money laundering.  But I think that, on the contrary, disclosing complete information about a person, a casino player, in this particular case, on the contrary, reduces the safety of such a person.  Information about his cryptocurrency may well attract money extortionists and criminals using blackmail.  Yes, even additional measures for declaring cryptocurrency take up your precious time and often this all irritates both you and your loved ones.  By the way, KYC also takes up your time.  In general, now, with this level of development of digital technology, there is no difficulty in identifying a specific person if it is really necessary.  And this does not require any KYC, as was the case 10 years ago.

 I continue to argue that in general KYC is morally outdated and should begin to completely die out, as an unnecessary, superfluous and stupid procedure.

What he says is very true, if a casino verifies that the deposit is from a wallet they should not ask for any type of KYC, since if it is from a verified address from an exchange then those reasons can be very different, there it is not possible to approve things are good, because the origin of the funds is repeated, and the casino does not care where the person got the funds from and that is all that should be done, therefore that could be a solution that the casinos should take into consideration , because the journey is not bad.

But I don't know how the casinos can put that clause in their Rivers, that would imply that they redraft it, and that they only give exclusive use to this type of thing, but that would be a very good start, I don't know if the casinos accept something like that , because as I have always said, good things are very few.

Now about the conceptualization and seduction that they have done in favor of KYC, which is more beneficial, well, the truth is, I don't believe that lie for anything, it is obvious that that has nothing to do with it, a person in an exchange, casino, or wherever, it is located faster through an ID that is generated, not by its name, it is a sexualization of things, so I don't like that image they give either, in fact, I have seen people who define the KYC, and they are Legendary , which surprises me.

[delfastTions]

~ snip ~

~ snip ~

~ snip ~

~ snip ~

In my opinion, if a person who uses cryptocurrency payments and has non-custodial wallets with cryptocurrency, which he honestly earned, is offered a centralized service with KYC and a similar one without KYC verification, then such a person will most likely understand that a service without KYC is preferable for him. 
True, here on the forum, some users are confident that KYC gives them some kind of security and a guarantee of saving their money.  And it is also needed to combat fraud and combat money laundering.  But I think that, on the contrary, disclosing complete information about a person, a casino player, in this particular case, on the contrary, reduces the safety of such a person.  Information about his cryptocurrency may well attract money extortionists and criminals using blackmail.  Yes, even additional measures for declaring cryptocurrency take up your precious time and often this all irritates both you and your loved ones.  By the way, KYC also takes up your time.  In general, now, with this level of development of digital technology, there is no difficulty in identifying a specific person if it is really necessary.  And this does not require any KYC, as was the case 10 years ago.

 I continue to argue that in general KYC is morally outdated and should begin to completely die out, as an unnecessary, superfluous and stupid procedure.

What he says is very true, if a casino verifies that the deposit is from a wallet they should not ask for any type of KYC, since if it is from a verified address from an exchange then those reasons can be very different, there it is not possible to approve things are good, because the origin of the funds is repeated, and the casino does not care where the person got the funds from and that is all that should be done, therefore that could be a solution that the casinos should take into consideration , because the journey is not bad.

But I don't know how the casinos can put that clause in their Rivers, that would imply that they redraft it, and that they only give exclusive use to this type of thing, but that would be a very good start, I don't know if the casinos accept something like that , because as I have always said, good things are very few.

Now about the conceptualization and seduction that they have done in favor of KYC, which is more beneficial, well, the truth is, I don't believe that lie for anything, it is obvious that that has nothing to do with it, a person in an exchange, casino, or wherever, it is located faster through an ID that is generated, not by its name, it is a sexualization of things, so I don't like that image they give either, in fact, I have seen people who define the KYC, and they are Legendary , which surprises me.

In general, the world of civilized countries is now so filled with all kinds of surveillance means, video cameras and, above all, digital personal identification technologies have advanced so much that probably in practice any person in such conditions of an urban agglomeration is almost constantly under surveillance.  Total surveillance has already developed so much that even a few years ago in the same SF, for example, there were mass protests against the total surveillance of people using video surveillance and the movement of people corresponding to the software processing of databases. 
Naturally, in such conditions, KYC ceases to be relevant at all, simply because as soon as you log into your computer or mobile phone, it already becomes known that it is you.  And why else is KYC needed here?  This is the side of personal identification under the KYC procedure that I’m talking about.  They are clearly outdated, it becomes unnecessary and only takes away your precious time for nonsense. 
Well, your Personal Data can also be considered simply distributed by you all over the world because it will definitely be stolen by hackers or sold by a corrupt employee of a casino, exchange, bank or any such organization.

[LUCKMCFLY]

In general, the world of civilized countries is now so filled with all kinds of surveillance means, video cameras and, above all, digital personal identification technologies have advanced so much that probably in practice any person in such conditions of an urban agglomeration is almost constantly under surveillance.  Total surveillance has already developed so much that even a few years ago in the same SF, for example, there were mass protests against the total surveillance of people using video surveillance and the movement of people corresponding to the software processing of databases. 
Naturally, in such conditions, KYC ceases to be relevant at all, simply because as soon as you log into your computer or mobile phone, it already becomes known that it is you.  And why else is KYC needed here?  This is the side of personal identification under the KYC procedure that I’m talking about.  They are clearly outdated, it becomes unnecessary and only takes away your precious time for nonsense. 
Well, your Personal Data can also be considered simply distributed by you all over the world because it will definitely be stolen by hackers or sold by a corrupt employee of a casino, exchange, bank or any such organization.

It is very true, in fact this issue of privacy and anonymity has been uncovered for many years and in a great way when the great Edward Snowden did it and launched it to the world, where he made Obama see that he used it to basically spy, which had that program and they used it as the eye of God, then these things are true, the digital age includes videos and cameras everywhere, it is something that the world, especially the most developed countries, have, however, to Sometimes insist to the casino that they do not ask us for so many KYC requirements, because the only thing you can think of is that if this data is hacked, leaked or something like that, it could fall into the hands of criminals who can come to your house. , and if they see that a lot of money is being handled in crypto, they can intimidate you and even kill you, in certain countries this has happened and honestly it is something very serious and that danger should not be taken lightly.

There are criminals who only need to provide people's data to get to their homes, so hearing that can lead to rejection of KYC. As they say here in a saying: "Better safe than sorry", that's why there are so many players who They stopped playing in the casinos just because of the KYC, since they did not like to leave information about themselves in the casinos, in my particular case since I am not a whale or anything like that I think I would not be in danger, but in the same way a criminal It can give us a bad time and that must be avoided.

[delfastTions]

In general, the world of civilized countries is now so filled with all kinds of surveillance means, video cameras and, above all, digital personal identification technologies have advanced so much that probably in practice any person in such conditions of an urban agglomeration is almost constantly under surveillance.  Total surveillance has already developed so much that even a few years ago in the same SF, for example, there were mass protests against the total surveillance of people using video surveillance and the movement of people corresponding to the software processing of databases. 
Naturally, in such conditions, KYC ceases to be relevant at all, simply because as soon as you log into your computer or mobile phone, it already becomes known that it is you.  And why else is KYC needed here?  This is the side of personal identification under the KYC procedure that I’m talking about.  They are clearly outdated, it becomes unnecessary and only takes away your precious time for nonsense. 
Well, your Personal Data can also be considered simply distributed by you all over the world because it will definitely be stolen by hackers or sold by a corrupt employee of a casino, exchange, bank or any such organization.

It is very true, in fact this issue of privacy and anonymity has been uncovered for many years and in a great way when the great Edward Snowden did it and launched it to the world, where he made Obama see that he used it to basically spy, which had that program and they used it as the eye of God, then these things are true, the digital age includes videos and cameras everywhere, it is something that the world, especially the most developed countries, have, however, to Sometimes insist to the casino that they do not ask us for so many KYC requirements, because the only thing you can think of is that if this data is hacked, leaked or something like that, it could fall into the hands of criminals who can come to your house. , and if they see that a lot of money is being handled in crypto, they can intimidate you and even kill you, in certain countries this has happened and honestly it is something very serious and that danger should not be taken lightly.

There are criminals who only need to provide people's data to get to their homes, so hearing that can lead to rejection of KYC. As they say here in a saying: "Better safe than sorry", that's why there are so many players who They stopped playing in the casinos just because of the KYC, since they did not like to leave information about themselves in the casinos, in my particular case since I am not a whale or anything like that I think I would not be in danger, but in the same way a criminal It can give us a bad time and that must be avoided.

It seems to me that often criminals can start blackmailing ordinary people who are not millionaires or cryptocurrency whales but who simply somehow provided their personal data (including their address where they live) as part of the KYC procedure at some crypto casino, and these  the data was stolen and made public on the network. 
After all, the very fact that a player has a cryptocurrency can already indicate that the person has this cryptocurrency, and the fact that he plays in a casino means that he can afford to lose this cryptocurrency.  So the criminal figures out that he can blackmail such a cryptocurrency owner.  And in the process of the crime, find out how much money his victim has. 
So it turns out that the very fact of playing in a casino using cryptocurrency and de-anonymizing the player using KYC is already a potential criminogenic factor and poses a danger to human safety.  And of course, law enforcement agencies must fight such manifestations of crime and extortion.
 And not just fight after a crime has been committed, but carry out preventive measures.
 And by the way, maintaining the anonymity of the player and the absence of public data about him on the Internet is a very high-quality type of counteraction and prevention of this type of crime.