Why do you want to play on casinos without KYC requirements?

[Zlantann]

I am glad this discussion sparked this much discussion, because we need to speak about these thing.

I did not post this thread to discuss the reasons why KYC are evil in so many ways, but rather why you want to gamble on a site without KYC verification.

A lot of people used "privacy" as a reason and I can agree with that, but anonymity also provides "privacy" for criminals and scammers. So, would you rather have "privacy" over some kind of protection that KYC provides?

We have to remember that KYC verification are not without loopholes and criminals exploit that, but it makes things more difficult for the majority of the smaller criminals to bypass it.

The pseudo anonymity of Bitcoin has the same PROs and CONs ....and we know governments hate Crypto currencies because of that, but some protection is better than having nothing at all. (You hate it, until you get scammed or hacked or you lose access to your account)  

Someone whose wallet is hacked will be happy if the fund is transferred to an exchange. If he can prove that his wallet has been hacked, the exchange can seize the fund and return it to the victim. This recovery was possible because of centralization. If a fraudster is caught using casinos for money laundering and he is arrested and money returned to his victims, this is the beauty of KYC.

The point is that anything that has advantages will also have disadvantages. KYC will help to reduce the activities of criminals but it also has some consequences. Some people are not criminals and want to maintain privacy, KYC is treating them like criminals. Casinos should have advanced security systems and gamblers should protect their accounts from attacks. People should be given the option of to choose if they want KYC or not and each one should take responsibility for their choice.

[piebeyb]

The point is that anything that has advantages will also have disadvantages. KYC will help to reduce the activities of criminals but it also has some consequences. Some people are not criminals and want to maintain privacy, KYC is treating them like criminals. Casinos should have advanced security systems and gamblers should protect their accounts from attacks. People should be given the option of to choose if they want KYC or not and each one should take responsibility for their choice.

If you don't want to provide full identity or KYC, it's best to be a small gambler because you won't be asked to complete KYC in full, but for big gamblers there will usually be suspicion from the casino when the user makes a big deposit so they have to emphasize the user to do KYC. This is to prevent money laundering and other criminal acts, so in fact this will never end to be discussed.

It all comes back to the existing regulatory requirements, which gamblers should avoid if they want to prioritize their privacy so that there are no problems and demand that the casino change the existing regulations and requirements. There is no compulsion for casinos to ask users to play on their site, if they want to play on their site they must comply with existing rules and requirements. I think discussing this there will be no mutual finding of common ground but one of them must understand and give in. 

[rodskee]

I was thinking about this question over the weekend and I cannot seem to find legitimate reasons why people would want to play at casinos that do not require KYC verification.

1. KYC requirements reduce money laundering.
2. KYC requirements reduce under age gambling.
3. KYC requirements increase the possibility to hold people to account for their actions. (Exploiting casino systems)
4. KYC requirement reduce scamming
5. KYC requirements can be used to restore accounts after it has been hacked. (Using the documents that were used by the original owner)
6. KYC requirements adhere to government regulations and legitimize a casino.
7. KYC requirements can be used to reduce gambling addiction. (Identifying people that self-excluded or people trying to create new accounts)
8. KYC requirements can be used to enforce regional gambling restrictions.  

Why would you want to avoid being identified, if you gamble legally and if you are not a criminal? Let's discuss the reasons why KYC are not advantageous for the gamblers and casinos?

Ps. I am playing Devil's advocate... if you did not notice it. 

the discussion about KYC will actually be eternal, everyone will have the right arguments to support their opinion about KYC.  In my view, KYC is personal, whatever reasons you use to avoid or support KYC are all correct.  on the one side, i support KYC because i don't want minors gambling, they don't have time to know about it yet, but on the other side i reject KYC because it relates to a person's privacy and personal data which of course is vulnerable to misuse or abuse / bought and sold.  Now it's up to you how you look at KCY!!

Yup that is what it is, this will never ends because all of us have our own opinion and decisions

KYC verification for me is sacred but I am willing to comply if the casino is for me trusted one.

Non KYC is what I mostly check and yes I have list of them in which I visited everytime I wanted to play.

we can choose whatever we wanted , there are tons of casino there to decide which to play .

[Assface16678]

The major reason why I play in those casinos that require KYC is because.


1: I don't have any choice if that casino is the only reputable casino that I feel safe and secure to play on and without any other choice, so for that, I may allow myself to go through the verification process just to get everything in place and set before I make any deposits.


In fact, I don't play in a casino unless I already have my KYC verifications done and approved before anything else, unless I am gambling on a decentralized casino that doesn't require my KYC.

Which is a good decision? I don't know why a lot of gamblers don't want KYC. I understand they are still hesitant about this concept, maybe because of security or because they are concerned about their personal information, but think again: you are connected to the internet and social media platforms; do you think you are safe there? As social media platforms require your personal information, does that contradict most of the pro-KYC casinos' policies? I know there's a lot more concerning about KYC, but try researching the purpose of KYC; you only see the bad side of KYC, not why it's being implemented.

KYC is being implemented to protect the user and the business owner itself. Imagine being anonymous in an online casino and earning a lot of money; don't you think no one will be suspicious of that? KYC serves as a tracker if the gambler is engaging in illicit activity using the online casino, anyway everyone has their own opinion about KYC.

[BenCodie]

I was thinking about this question over the weekend and I cannot seem to find legitimate reasons why people would want to play at casinos that do not require KYC verification.

1. KYC requirements reduce money laundering.
2. KYC requirements reduce under age gambling.
3. KYC requirements increase the possibility to hold people to account for their actions. (Exploiting casino systems)
4. KYC requirement reduce scamming
5. KYC requirements can be used to restore accounts after it has been hacked. (Using the documents that were used by the original owner)
6. KYC requirements adhere to government regulations and legitimize a casino.
7. KYC requirements can be used to reduce gambling addiction. (Identifying people that self-excluded or people trying to create new accounts)
8. KYC requirements can be used to enforce regional gambling restrictions.  

It all depends on how you look at it. These are more excuses for KYC than measures. Alternative ways to beat these problems can be done. KYC is just the lazy way, with the bonus of profit for casinos when people

1. Money laundering can be reduced without KYC, rather with open and transparent rules before withdrawal, time limits. Etc. KYC is the lazy way of combatting money laundering.
2. Asking for KYC is not a legitimate reason for age proof. Porn is illegal in most countries for underage viewers, yet all you need to do is click "I am over 18 to enter" - why is gambling any different? Most underages do not have the funds to gamble anyway, and you can't use a parents credit card if it's a cryptocurrency casino.
3. Hacks, exploits etc are a part of the internet. Measures should be in place to lock and correspond with the user if there is an exploit or hack, KYC is not needed in this dispute resolution process.
4. Scamming? I don't understand at all as to how KYC prevents scamming between a player and a casino. If anything, it promotes scamming by the casino by holding user balances hostage at the cost of their privacy.
5. If you lose your password, use forgot password. If you lose 2FA, use the backup phrase. If all else fails, contact support and verify in other ways, like signing a message from a deposit address. Ultimately, this is the users responsibility. KYC is not an appropriate measure for this purpose.
6. KYC regulation is up to a certain amount of money in a period of time. Look at Bybit, no KYC users can withdraw up to 2 BTC per day with no limit on deposits.
7. It is up to the user to manage their gambling habits, it is not a sensible measure to reduce gambling addictions.
8. It is up to the user to follow regional gambling restrictions, and regulators to enforce them. Costing privacy for this reason is unacceptable and has never been the way of the internet.

Why would you want to avoid being identified, if you gamble legally and if you are not a criminal? Let's discuss the reasons why KYC are not advantageous for the gamblers and casinos?

You are storing your identity and your sensitive documents online. That never has and never will be safe. Every internet user has the right to privacy, and KYC-by-default violates that privacy.

Ps. I am playing Devil's advocate... if you did not notice it. 

I didn't notice until you stated it. If you didn't I would not have noticed. I hope I shed some light on the other side of the coin.

[kotajikikox]

The major reason why I play in those casinos that require KYC is because.


1: I don't have any choice if that casino is the only reputable casino that I feel safe and secure to play on and without any other choice, so for that, I may allow myself to go through the verification process just to get everything in place and set before I make any deposits.


In fact, I don't play in a casino unless I already have my KYC verifications done and approved before anything else, unless I am gambling on a decentralized casino that doesn't require my KYC.

so you are a safety gambler mate? you wanted to play in casino that has complete document or License in which I believe best for not so private person but since many of us wanted to remain private then only few has your attitude.
But that is best to deal with in case  then there will never be a problem in the future not unless that casino even asking KYC is a scammer so best to deal with legit and secure casino.
also better if you will  only play in Older casino that has proven everything in good providing here in forum.

[Chato1977]

Because I wanted to be more safer , at least less scam if the casino is asking for KYC though it is not 100% safe
because a scam will always be scam even if they are asking for KYC.

[Hispo]

Because I wanted to be more safer , at least less scam if the casino is asking for KYC though it is not 100% safe
because a scam will always be scam even if they are asking for KYC.

I am sorry man, but what you just said does not make any sense. You just admitted that you believe a casino can be a scam, regardless whether they decide to ask you to submit KYC data about you, so what is the point of going through a process of differentiation between those casinos which ask for those documents and those which do not. ?
Scams and KYC only make sense in the same context if you are worried to be asked to submit your personal information by those scammers themselves, in that case then I can understand you would not trust anyone to hold your personal data.

However, as you said is a casino asks for KYC does not mean it is less or more likely to be a scam. In order to rule out a casino being a scam or not one is supposed to rely on other information: time they have got in the market, the volume they manage, how fast and reliable is their process of withdrawing funds, etc.

If that is your only reason for not to send your information to any casino, then you surely do not gamble in many places and only on one or two webpages. Nothing wrong with it, though.

[lionheart78]

I am glad this discussion sparked this much discussion, because we need to speak about these thing.

I did not post this thread to discuss the reasons why KYC are evil in so many ways, but rather why you want to gamble on a site without KYC verification.

A lot of people used "privacy" as a reason and I can agree with that, but anonymity also provides "privacy" for criminals and scammers. So, would you rather have "privacy" over some kind of protection that KYC provides?

I wonder what kind of protection does KYC provide?  The most it can do is to secure your account but it does not recover the fund stolen from that account.  What would you gain from getting back the account that is drained of its funds?

If you are talking about account ownership security, I think the security implemented on one of the threads here in Bitcointalk is much better.  By staking a Bitcoin address through a Bitcoin message, the staking of Bitcoin address can do the trick without sending our personal information to the platform.  If there is a dispute on the ownership of the account, sending a message from the staked address published on that thread can solve the problem.  I believe the effectivity of the ownership of the account is not different if the casino also implements staking of Bitcoin address instead of KYC.

I believe the use of money laundering as a reason why many casino platforms is asking for KYC is just a front for the regulatory board to pry on our financial activities within the casino platform.

[3kpk3]

KYC is being implemented to protect the user and the business owner itself. Imagine being anonymous in an online casino and earning a lot of money; don't you think no one will be suspicious of that? KYC serves as a tracker if the gambler is engaging in illicit activity using the online casino, anyway everyone has their own opinion about KYC.

Nonsense. Most gamblers gamble in the crypto world with the intention of earning big money anonymously. Why in the world would the site suspect an anonymous person earning big money when they can easily check his bet history?

KYC does help reduce illicit activity to some extent, but criminals will always find ways to circumvent it. Also, your KYC information is vulnerable to hackers in some sites.

[bakasabo]

I was thinking about this question over the weekend and I cannot seem to find legitimate reasons why people would want to play at casinos that do not require KYC verification.

1. KYC requirements reduce money laundering.

Does this really works? I mean how can this work properly, if a person is asked to pass KYC only after he wins and tries to withdraw his balance. I have never seen a casino sending funds back, because they were transferred from some kind of a "grey" wallet. I have never seen any casino refusing to accept gamblers funds because the origin of the funds is questionable.

[Jawhead999]

Does this really works? I mean how can this work properly, if a person is asked to pass KYC only after he wins and tries to withdraw his balance. I have never seen a casino sending funds back, because they were transferred from some kind of a "grey" wallet. I have never seen any casino refusing to accept gamblers funds because the origin of the funds is questionable.

I haven't experienced yet and I have never read someone posted this, I think it's make sense since if the casino refunds back the money, the gambler will don't have to say that as his case is already resolved.

Usually it happens when the gambler want to withdraw their profit, the casino will do many investigation toward the accounts. Maybe the casino will reject and refund back the deposit money, if the gambler send a huge amount of money.

[Wapfika]

I was thinking about this question over the weekend and I cannot seem to find legitimate reasons why people would want to play at casinos that do not require KYC verification.

1. KYC requirements reduce money laundering.

Does this really works? I mean how can this work properly, if a person is asked to pass KYC only after he wins and tries to withdraw his balance. I have never seen a casino sending funds back, because they were transferred from some kind of a "grey" wallet. I have never seen any casino refusing to accept gamblers funds because the origin of the funds is questionable.

The main purpose of KYC on AML policy is to track gamblers after they do the money laundering not before because casino doesn’t care about the source wallet of the funds. It’s for recording purposes so that they can present evidence once a certain person that doing laundering is being trace by the authorities.

This why some user really hate KYC because they will leave traces once the authorities track them down. AML policy is the main reason why the casino ask KYC since they shouldn’t really care if their player launder if they will not be liable to the law by being accessory to the crime.

[noormcs5]

I was thinking about this question over the weekend and I cannot seem to find legitimate reasons why people would want to play at casinos that do not require KYC verification.

1. KYC requirements reduce money laundering.
2. KYC requirements reduce under age gambling.
3. KYC requirements increase the possibility to hold people to account for their actions. (Exploiting casino systems)
4. KYC requirement reduce scamming
5. KYC requirements can be used to restore accounts after it has been hacked. (Using the documents that were used by the original owner)
6. KYC requirements adhere to government regulations and legitimize a casino.
7. KYC requirements can be used to reduce gambling addiction. (Identifying people that self-excluded or people trying to create new accounts)
8. KYC requirements can be used to enforce regional gambling restrictions.  

Why would you want to avoid being identified, if you gamble legally and if you are not a criminal? Let's discuss the reasons why KYC are not advantageous for the gamblers and casinos?

Ps. I am playing Devil's advocate... if you did not notice it. 

Although we do not have much options when it comes to choosing between KYC and NON-KYC casinos, but one thing which always worries me and it should be a concern for everyone who submitted their KYC documents that what if those KYC documents are misused by the casino ?

Yes, we believe that trusted and well reputed casino will have no such intentions but then the data can be hacked and it may reach to the people with criminals minds. We never know as how much they use that data and what financial damage can be done if that KYC data reaches criminal hands.

Also some people may want to hide this information that they are gambling but when they do KYC then they can be exposed as that data can be reproduced to any leqal entity on demand.

[palle11]

KYC really is not the true spirit of cryptocurrency and playing in a casino asking you for KYC identification is same as asking for your name, location and total identification that you can be trapped or traced which doesn't represent decentralisation system. Those who won't like that follow the real purpose. The purpose now is changing with the casinos that ask for identification because of regulation.

[fullhdpixel]

This is the same reason why you don't want to use centralized exchanges when the requirements you provide are the same reason centralized exchanges use KYC. Once you consider that your privacy can be abused when using centralized exchanges or other centralized platforms, the same can happen with casinos that are asking you for KYC. There is no guarantee or evidence that the casino will secure your personal information and privacy any more than other centralized exchanges.

But, I think only a few users can follow these principles. Can not you see? A lot of CEX and centralized gambling platforms are still booming compared to the decentralized one's? It is like there is something on them that can't possibly be found on their decentralized counter parts but there must also be something that can only be found on the decentralized platforms.

This is why there are still a demand on them, even if it isn't that huge enough. A user can disregard some things as long as they can use their favorite platforms. I think this is the reason why these centralized platforms didn't bother on giving a proof that they are truly trusted in terms of data handling.

[Rabata]

Your points are certainly logical. KYC at the casino offers many advantages. A gambler is especially wary of any kind of illegal activities. Because he knows that if he commits any crime there, he will be detected. While KYC has advantages, it also has disadvantages for gamblers who try to play anonymously. But the main reason crypto gambling became popular because of  anonymity. But when some bad people try to use this opportunity in reverse, the government tries to make KYC mandatory to control those people. If gambling company do not abuse KYCs then I think KYCs will not have much effect. But the question that many raise is that if KYC is made mandatory then what is the difference between fiat gambling platform and crypto gambling?

[Nrcewker]

The simple answer to the question is privacy. People don’t want to give away their id verifications on random online casinos. Moreover in many countries Bitcoins or cryptos are not legalised, so they don’t want their id documents to get linked with crypto transactions. This is main reason for which many people hate to do KYC while playing on online casinos. But on the other hand casinos need to follow some protocols in order to know their each customers and their source of money. Hence if we see both sides have their own reasons for KYC and no KYC.

[pawanjain]

It's simple for me. I gamble for fun and I don't want to under go the hassle of going through a KYC just to have some fun.
Besides that there are risks of getting our KYC data leaked through hackers. The lesser sites we provide our KYC the lesser the risk.

[dezoel]

I was never against KYC verification, I have never been, because I know that I'm not doing anything wrong and if that isn't the case, there should be no issues as long as you know that the platform you are using is trusted and reputable and they won't misuse your personal identification. Some people are so much against it, I don't understand why. I know that it's good to stay anonymous and private with your activities but the same people would be seen using decentralized exchanges after completing their KYC verification.

And, there will soon be a time when almost every single person will be compelled to complete KYC verification if they want to make use of a certain platform or service online because everything will be regulated and authorities wouldn't allow no-KYC platforms to operate anymore after that point.