Why they need a license if bitcon is not money?

[EarnOnVictor]

Bitcoin users are supposed to be anonymous, and crypto casino users should be as well.

The main reason for regulating casinos is consumer protection.

I disagree! The main reason for regulating anything by the government is for proper accountability (which includes legal/illegal outflow and
security) and taxation. If the protection of the consumer is the main reason for government regulation in casinos, casinos would fear more than they do. How many customers has the government helped so far?

Do we really want casinos to be used as tools for laundering money, especially when those funds could be used for harmful activities like terrorism?

You made a good point and I've iterated it many times even though some careless people will still argue it with you. Privacy and freedom are good but when they are too much, it causes issues, particularly security issues. I will always vote for regulation even as I do not like many government activities, it still helps limit the damage that total freedom would cause.

[Onyeeze]

The thing is that government hates bitcoin right the time bitcoin was established, and I know that bitcoin is money, except that is people who does not know the functions of bitcoin will say that bitcoin is not money base on they are sleeping under the influence of government, but everything that related with gambling, many government officials uses bitcoin to participate in gambling, but yet they kept criticised bitcoin, so bitcoin came to stand, majority of gambling that is been pay tax for them is been gambled with bitcoin, so I don't know  why they will continue to make negative utterance of bitcoin

[fuguebtc]

Bitcoin users are supposed to be anonymous, and crypto casino users should be as well.

The main reason for regulating casinos is consumer protection.

I disagree! The main reason for regulating anything by the government is for proper accountability (which includes legal/illegal outflow and
security) and taxation. If the protection of the consumer is the main reason for government regulation in casinos, casinos would fear more than they do. How many customers has the government helped so far?

I agree that the government wants to regulate casinos not only to protect consumers but also to tax us more. But I think it depends on the country, as Don Pedro Dinero said: if you live in countries with strict regulations and participate in regulated casinos then your interests will be guaranteed if something goes wrong. And if you participate in unlicensed casinos, even trying to evade taxes, then do not expect and criticize when the government does not protect you.

I largely agree with what freedomgo says: I think we are too greedy to want privacy, avoid taxes, but still want the government to protect us. Everything has its price, and benefits need to be shared equally among everyone. We cannot be too greedy and only want the government to protect us while we do not want to contribute anything to the country.

Do we really want casinos to be used as tools for laundering money, especially when those funds could be used for harmful activities like terrorism?

You made a good point and I've iterated it many times even though some careless people will still argue it with you. Privacy and freedom are good but when they are too much, it causes issues, particularly security issues. I will always vote for regulation even as I do not like many government activities, it still helps limit the damage that total freedom would cause.

On this issue, I would also vote for regulation because our privacy could not be more important than fighting terrorism, money laundering...

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Bitcoin users are supposed to be anonymous, and crypto casino users should be as well.

The main reason for regulating casinos is consumer protection.

I disagree! The main reason for regulating anything by the government is for proper accountability (which includes legal/illegal outflow and
security) and taxation. If the protection of the consumer is the main reason for government regulation in casinos, casinos would fear more than they do. How many customers has the government helped so far?

The main reason for establishing such regulations is to collect taxes. That happened in Europe in the 2012 regulations. Online gambling started in the 2000s but governments ignored it until it became more and more important, and they realised that they were no longer taxing it as it was. Accountability and consumer protection is what they sell as a good cause for making regulations but what they are looking to collect.

And in the near future, with crypto casinos, that will be the end of being anonymous. In fact I don't even know why Learn Bitcoin says that when there are hardly any casinos left that don't ask for kyc.

[ethereumhunter]

The thing is that government hates bitcoin right the time bitcoin was established, and I know that bitcoin is money, except that is people who does not know the functions of bitcoin will say that bitcoin is not money base on they are sleeping under the influence of government, but everything that related with gambling, many government officials uses bitcoin to participate in gambling, but yet they kept criticised bitcoin, so bitcoin came to stand, majority of gambling that is been pay tax for them is been gambled with bitcoin, so I don't know  why they will continue to make negative utterance of bitcoin

The government has two sides of face so we don't know if they really support Bitcoin or will leave it when they see many criticized Bitcoin. They only want to search for their safety so will do that for their benefits. We don't have to surprise with what they do because the government wants to control the crypto gambling business which makes the government ask for the casino to have license. The government can force crypto gambling to follow their requirement so having license will be one of that to control crypto casino. Besides that, the government will ask tax to the casino.

[Learn Bitcoin]

That's because you don't know how casinos work in Europe or how crypto casinos will have to work in the not-too-distant future if they want to operate there.

Europe does not operate the world, and I don't care how casinos operate there. There are 195 countries in the world, and Europe has 25% of them. Not more than a half. So, how casinos operate in Europe is irrelevant when discussing online casinos. I can run an online casino today sitting on my couch, and European people will be able to play in my casino without having any issues. I don't give it a shit to the government if they ban my casino or whatever action they try to take. All they can do is ban my domain name so their people cannot access it. They should know that the internet is limitless and nobody can stop people from accessing a website.

I don't know about Russia, but a casino with a Curaçao licence cannot operate in Spain or in most (if not all) EU countries. In order to operate there, or offer its services to citizens there (even if it operates from somewhere else), it needs to acquire a specific Spanish licence, which is much more expensive and involves more paperwork than a Curaçao licence, plus if it gets the licence its operations will be supervised by the Dirección General de Ordenación del Juego from the very beginning.

and what do they actually do when it's an online unregulated casino? What did you mean by saying you cannot operate in Spain? I don't have to open an office in Spain to offer my service there. Anyone can access it. Nobody knows who the owner is. There are thousands of casinos online where European people are playing. 

[Don Pedro Dinero]

That's because you don't know how casinos work in Europe or how crypto casinos will have to work in the not-too-distant future if they want to operate there.

Europe does not operate the world, and I don't care how casinos operate there. There are 195 countries in the world, and Europe has 25% of them. Not more than a half. So, how casinos operate in Europe is irrelevant when discussing online casinos. I can run an online casino today sitting on my couch, and European people will be able to play in my casino without having any issues. I don't give it a shit to the government if they ban my casino or whatever action they try to take. All they can do is ban my domain name so their people cannot access it. They should know that the internet is limitless and nobody can stop people from accessing a website.

I don't know about Russia, but a casino with a Curaçao licence cannot operate in Spain or in most (if not all) EU countries. In order to operate there, or offer its services to citizens there (even if it operates from somewhere else), it needs to acquire a specific Spanish licence, which is much more expensive and involves more paperwork than a Curaçao licence, plus if it gets the licence its operations will be supervised by the Dirección General de Ordenación del Juego from the very beginning.

and what do they actually do when it's an online unregulated casino? What did you mean by saying you cannot operate in Spain? I don't have to open an office in Spain to offer my service there. Anyone can access it. Nobody knows who the owner is. There are thousands of casinos online where European people are playing.  

See, you just don't get it. There are fewer and fewer casinos like cryptocurrency casinos from which you can play in Europe with peace of mind. In some you can't access them because the country's authorities block them. You can try Tor or VPN but many casinos block one or the other as well. In other cases it is the casino itself that blocks your access when it detects your IP. And the rest don't block you but they put in the ToS that you can't play from those countries but they turn a blind eye while you lose money.

It's not as easy as setting up a casino and offering your services in countries where you need a licence because you feel like it. You can get an international arrest warrant for tax fraud, that's why more and more houses have licences and put in the ToS that you can't play from those countries when they don't directly block the players.

And it's not just in Europe, in the civilized world you need specific licences. How many crypto casinos do you see here (Australia)?

https://www.acma.gov.au/check-if-gambling-operator-legal

I could put many examples like this out of Europe.

[ultrloa]

The thing is that government hates bitcoin right the time bitcoin was established, and I know that bitcoin is money, except that is people who does not know the functions of bitcoin will say that bitcoin is not money base on they are sleeping under the influence of government, but everything that related with gambling, many government officials uses bitcoin to participate in gambling, but yet they kept criticised bitcoin, so bitcoin came to stand, majority of gambling that is been pay tax for them is been gambled with bitcoin, so I don't know  why they will continue to make negative utterance of bitcoin

The government has two sides of face so we don't know if they really support Bitcoin or will leave it when they see many criticized Bitcoin. They only want to search for their safety so will do that for their benefits. We don't have to surprise with what they do because the government wants to control the crypto gambling business which makes the government ask for the casino to have license. The government can force crypto gambling to follow their requirement so having license will be one of that to control crypto casino. Besides that, the government will ask tax to the casino.

I think its fine to have two side faces since they should not focus on single narrative only. Since their intentions might get question if they focus on single thing they know. Everything should be balance out so that they can show their fairness to people. Even if we like or not what they implement since there are other group of people would surely like what government implement. But since they implement this licensing thing to a casino then we should think it on more positive side since this could find potential scam casino since getting license might expose the identity of scammers. What government need to do know is to strengthen up their regulation and make sure that they can sue those criminals  since if they can do this for sure every doubts of people towards their action to possible ask every casino to get a license would provably worth it to the eyes of comsumers/players.

[Learn Bitcoin]

It's not as easy as setting up a casino and offering your services in countries where you need a licence because you feel like it. You can get an international arrest warrant for tax fraud, that's why more and more houses have licences and put in the ToS that you can't play from those countries when they don't directly block the players.

As I said in my previous post, I don't have to open an office somewhere to operate my business. It's an online business. The licensed casinos write in the TOS that players from certain countries cannot play in those casinos. But if a casino does not have a license, it doesn't have to block anyone. I am curious how they issue an international arrest warrant for tax fraud while the casino owner is anonymous.

I am giving you an example. Cryptocurrency is banned in Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and some other countries. But crypto exchanges like Binance, Bybit, Kucoin and all other centralized exchanges are operating their business in those countries. The government cannot do anything against the, except for blocking their domain. Millions of people in this region using Binance.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

As I said in my previous post, I don't have to open an office somewhere to operate my business. It's an online business. The licensed casinos write in the TOS that players from certain countries cannot play in those casinos. But if a casino does not have a license, it doesn't have to block anyone. I am curious how they issue an international arrest warrant for tax fraud while the casino owner is anonymous.

Anonymous? Licences in Curaçao are given to anonymous people? A judge sends the request to the Curaçao authorities and that's it

I am giving you an example. Cryptocurrency is banned in Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and some other countries. But crypto exchanges like Binance, Bybit, Kucoin and all other centralized exchanges are operating their business in those countries. The government cannot do anything against the, except for blocking their domain. Millions of people in this region using Binance.

With this example you make it better for me. They can't do anything against a company that operates illegal services? It's like you're telling me that they can't do anything against a guy who sells child pornography to people in Bangladesh or Nepal because he is anonymous and lives in Curaçao. On top of that, in this case he obviously doesn't have a licence.

Maybe they don't want to or they are turning a blind eye but of course they can act against Binance and the others. Besides, the CEO of Binance is not anonymous.

[ethereumhunter]

I think its fine to have two side faces since they should not focus on single narrative only. Since their intentions might get question if they focus on single thing they know. Everything should be balance out so that they can show their fairness to people. Even if we like or not what they implement since there are other group of people would surely like what government implement. But since they implement this licensing thing to a casino then we should think it on more positive side since this could find potential scam casino since getting license might expose the identity of scammers. What government need to do know is to strengthen up their regulation and make sure that they can sue those criminals  since if they can do this for sure every doubts of people towards their action to possible ask every casino to get a license would provably worth it to the eyes of comsumers/players.

The jobs of the government to ensure they can sue those criminals is not easy because they must watch out if their officers related to that criminals and protect them. The government can ask the casino to have license so the government can check and investigate for more if they get a report from people so they can catch them. Besides that, if a casino has a license, they will not do something suspicious or even do something related to a crime such as money laundering or others because the government has their identities and can do many things to them if they break the laws. That can also help customer to check the casino credibility in the government eyes so customer will not worry to playing gambling and even doing KYC in that casino.

[Learn Bitcoin]

Anonymous? Licences in Curaçao are given to anonymous people? A judge sends the request to the Curaçao authorities, and that's it

. I am not talking about casinos that have Curacao licenses. I am talking about unregulated casinos which do not have any kind of license. I am curious how they issue an international arrest warrant when they don't know anything about who is running the platform. As far I understand, all they can do is, block the domain name and that's all.

Maybe they don't want to or are turning a blind eye, but of course, they can act against Binance and the others. Besides, Binance's CEO is not anonymous.

They can take action against Binance because they know who the CEO is. Even if they issue an arrest warrant against the CEO of Binance, I don't think they will be able to catch him. When it comes to anonymous online casinos that do not have licenses, I am curious about what the government will do. They were not able to touch Satoshi's hair. They could not shut down Bitcoin, which threatened the banking sector and the government. What about mixer services? Don't they provide services worldwide? Do they need a license to operate their business?

[Hatchy]

 
Government most time just want to have control of everything that they find is important to the people. And back then when Bitcoin was still with lesser value we didn't hear much about how the government are chasing most crypto firms now and imposing these rules or license on them. I guess they now understand what the future can be with Bitcoin having no central body to control. Most of the time I just feel that they are scared of what they don't know as no one can predict the future. The casinos which uses the kyc are just to protect them self from the government as we know if they don't follow the government rules they might get into bigger trouble when someone or a player goes rouge..

[delfastTions]

Government most time just want to have control of everything that they find is important to the people. And back then when Bitcoin was still with lesser value we didn't hear much about how the government are chasing most crypto firms now and imposing these rules or license on them. I guess they now understand what the future can be with Bitcoin having no central body to control. Most of the time I just feel that they are scared of what they don't know as no one can predict the future. The casinos which uses the kyc are just to protect them self from the government as we know if they don't follow the government rules they might get into bigger trouble when someone or a player goes rouge..

I liked your idea that many people, whom we all consider to be representatives of the authorities or owners of banking businesses and other financial structures, are a little afraid of Bitcoin and this technology itself, which we can safely consider alt-banking. And the legalization of Bitcoin in El Salvador can also increase these people's fears of an attack on their global monopoly on financial transactions and interpersonal trading operations. But this is good precisely from the point of view of the emergence, albeit small, not yet very powerful, but clearly alternative structure, which in fact begins to compete with the basic global financial system. Of course, such fears have real grounds.

[EarnOnVictor]

Government most time just want to have control of everything that they find is important to the people. And back then when Bitcoin was still with lesser value we didn't hear much about how the government are chasing most crypto firms now and imposing these rules or license on them.

You must be one of those who do not value regulation, if you are insightful enough to view how the world would be without regulations, you will be thankful that there are regulations. Also, I do not see how valid the argument that the government did not chase Bitcoin when it was valueless, are you kidding me? When it was valueless, how much patronage/adoption did it have? It was so little, and so was the privacy and anonymity threat to the world. But when it has gotten to its prominence, more adoptions are coming in and more illegality will surely creep in which can aid countless evil.

Lastly, I don't want to believe you want the companies dealing with Bitcoin to have a 100% gain without sharing with the government through tax to better the country they operate from. That thought must have been ill-conceived if you did.

[Onyeeze]

Government most time just want to have control of everything that they find is important to the people. And back then when Bitcoin was still with lesser value we didn't hear much about how the government are chasing most crypto firms now and imposing these rules or license on them. I guess they now understand what the future can be with Bitcoin having no central body to control. Most of the time I just feel that they are scared of what they don't know as no one can predict the future. The casinos which uses the kyc are just to protect them self from the government as we know if they don't follow the government rules they might get into bigger trouble when someone or a player goes rouge..

Actually government is against bitcoin when bitcoin was introduced, but I know quite well that bitcoin is something government kicked against, even till now I believe that government is still kicking against bitcoin, let me refer you in my country, government of my country has already kicking against bitcoin till date, but what I wanted us to understand concerning bitcoin is that we need, to know that government doesn't like bitcoin, you know anything that has to do cryptocurrency generally, government will like a situation whereby they understand the basics ways of it, if casino that make payments with cryptocurrency doesn't have license of operation, some countries government do like to sealed the casino, so that's why government is mandating of the crypto related casino to have license so that they will monitor them but its unfair to me with the way government is making things of cryptocurrency to be tough

[Kavelj22]

Government most time just want to have control of everything that they find is important to the people.

This is not always true because the state basically has a supervisory and regulatory role. As for the licenses for the activities of gambling companies, the state wants to impose control over the activities of these companies, which allows them to impose taxes on their activities in exchange for granting them licenses, and at the same time has the authority to track the financial activity of its citizens in order to deduct a tax percentage.
Example: In another topic here in the gambling board, someone posted how bc.game stopped its activity in Brazil until an agreement will bereached with the authorities. Since Brazilian users can still use other casinos, what we understand from this decision is that bcgame has a large user base in Brazil, which made the authorities think about taking advantage of it.

[Dunamisx]

The thing is that government hates bitcoin right the time bitcoin was established, and I know that bitcoin is money, except that is people who does not know the functions of bitcoin will say that bitcoin is not money base on they are sleeping under the influence of government, but everything that related with gambling, many government officials uses bitcoin to participate in gambling, but yet they kept criticised bitcoin, so bitcoin came to stand, majority of gambling that is been pay tax for them is been gambled with bitcoin, so I don't know  why they will continue to make negative utterance of bitcoin

One thing about government is that they will always prove their way out, no matter how the situation is, they are not going to give up or accept defeat in some cases like this, because cryptocurrency acceptance is what has been a threat to them not to now talk of when they accepted it as a legal tender all over, decentralization is what erase the use of power over the people by government or any other centralized institution.

[Wakate]

The thing is that government hates bitcoin right the time bitcoin was established, and I know that bitcoin is money, except that is people who does not know the functions of bitcoin will say that bitcoin is not money base on they are sleeping under the influence of government, but everything that related with gambling, many government officials uses bitcoin to participate in gambling, but yet they kept criticised bitcoin, so bitcoin came to stand, majority of gambling that is been pay tax for them is been gambled with bitcoin, so I don't know  why they will continue to make negative utterance of bitcoin

One thing about government is that they will always prove their way out, no matter how the situation is, they are not going to give up or accept defeat in some cases like this, because cryptocurrency acceptance is what has been a threat to them not to now talk of when they accepted it as a legal tender all over, decentralization is what erase the use of power over the people by government or any other centralized institution.

The government has the power to make decisions for us and sometimes when they know that they have made mistakes, they come up with some excuses to make it looks like they are not really responsible for such mistake. We all understand what the government is up and we can always see different policies that tend to make us ask questions why such things is happening even when they kept telling us that Bitcoin is not money but need regulation. What is the regulation for? To control users privacy and how we buy and hold while tasking us heavily which is absolutely ridiculous. Although we can't fight the government decisions but we can challenge them to have a rethink because we are not newbies.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

Bitcoin users are supposed to be anonymous, and crypto casino users should be as well.

The main reason for regulating casinos is consumer protection.

I disagree! The main reason for regulating anything by the government is for proper accountability (which includes legal/illegal outflow and
security) and taxation. If the protection of the consumer is the main reason for government regulation in casinos, casinos would fear more than they do. How many customers has the government helped so far?

You are right, mate, @EarnOnVictor. The reason why casinos is being regulated is not to protect consumers. If it was for consumers sake, then what have they been doing to help those addicted gamblers and in which way are they helping to promote the knowledge of responsible gambling? I believe that their main reason for regulations is tax collection and monitoring of money laundering issues.