Is web3 casino the new trend for casinos?

[South Park]

The only problem for some of those is they have a KYC policy meaning it requires IDs and selfies, another problem with using Web3 casino is you need to connect your wallet online no offline transactions which I think is not safe compared to others casinos here on the forum.

That is never an issue for me. I am not using high amount of money to gamble. Out of my weekly salary, I use less than 5% to gamble. So what should I be afraid of when I use just little amount of money to gamble?

Sometimes I think some people are too privacy conscious. Or if you think that you have huge amount of coins and you want to send part of it to your casino account, you can first send it to a mixer or an exchange before sendimg it to the casino site.

We have no other option but to be this way, after all how many horror stories we have heard over the years about people losing everything because they trusted on the wrong person or company? So we cannot afford to be careless with our money, even if the amount is small, as you never know if that is how a skilled hacker can get access to the rest of your coins, and while such view may seem to be too distrustful, I prefer to be this way than the alternative.

[Antotena]

I noticed that there are a lot of web3 casinos popping up in the gambling section. I'm curious if this is the new trend for casinos, as web3 casinos eliminate the KYC requirement since they promote "Anonymity and Privacy," which crypto casinos (not web3) cannot offer because they are regulated and bound to follow the mandates of their regulators.

However, from my other research, I also read that although web3 casinos are not universally regulated, they could still be compliant with regulators, especially concerning Anti-Money Laundering (AML). This puzzles me because I thought web3 casinos would completely offer anonymous gambling, but the word "compliance" suggests that we will still need to verify KYC.

What are your thoughts on this, and how deep is your understanding of web3 casinos in terms of their legal parlance?

Regulations Crack the box of money laundering, I wouldn't be surprised the traffic and trend coming from web3 gaming is as a result of money laundering, it is there even though it might not be obvious for now but I think this was how gambling use to be on the normal web2 where you just play even though you don't have access to your own funds, there were nothing like KYC then, in fact people were avoiding kyc back then until almost all casino where not operating without the use of KYC.

If Dexes could survive all the attacks of the regulations commission and still functioning to date, I'm not sure web3 gaming will leave sooner, they exist on their own but because of regulations, they might not outshine the normal gambling that we have and for their fear of scams, the growth will take a lot of time before they reach where they can stretch to, regulations can hinder the growth of anything you know.

[_act_]

We have no other option but to be this way, after all how many horror stories we have heard over the years about people losing everything because they trusted on the wrong person or company? So we cannot afford to be careless with our money, even if the amount is small, as you never know if that is how a skilled hacker can get access to the rest of your coins, and while such view may seem to be too distrustful, I prefer to be this way than the alternative.

It is very simple and do not make it hard as long as you go the right way. Use the right gambling site. If you use the right gambling site, you will have no problem from the site. But if it is a fake gambling site, they can go away with your money. Even in Web3, there is a way they can steal all the money that you have on your noncustodial wallet that you connect with the Web3 gambling site. If you are using small amount of money to gamble, this also makes it better because only little amount of money would be on your noncustodial wallet to gamble with.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

This web3 casino cannot be requiring if they are not regulated, and there are casinos that stays unregulated and still operating fine because they kept their good repution that's why they have loyal gamblers on them, could attract new gamblers as well.

So, if web3 casinos are operating and maintaining their good reputation, let's assume that someone actually committed a money laundering crime and started to use any of the web3 casinos to clean up the money. Because he didn't want to be detected, he was doing the deposit little by little, but unfortunately for him, the casino detected what was going on. What do you think the web3 casinos will do? Since they don't have KYC information for such user, even if they lock the account of the user, he must have already withdrawn a lot of the money. In such a case, what will the casino do to keep their reputation clean? 

No, without coordination with the AMLC, casinos cannot effectively spot money laundering activities. While they might be suspicious of certain accounts, they cannot prove anything definitively. In fact, it's difficult to suspect money laundering if the user is smart and gambles little by little, as such transactions are normal for gamblers.

Only when a casino is regulated can the money laundering council detect who the launderers are, thanks to the identity associated with account owners. This is only possible if there's a KYC requirement for every user. Regulators always push for casinos to be registered so they can regulate them. Casinos that do not apply for registration may be considered operating illegally and can be sanctioned by the law if caught.

So, peradventure a money Launder is using web3 casino to clean their stolen money, they may not be notice by casino or AMLC because the casino is not regulated. Which if it's a case where the account involved in the crime has already been marked and finally it got traced to the web3 casino, it would still interfere with their business.

Permit me to use th case of mixers, that lead the authorities to bring down three different mixers because they feel it was majorly used to clean stolen money.

If peradventure, money crime is traced to a web3 casino after several investigations, they will be sanctioned like you said and it will after their business since they can not provide any information of the customer that implicated them.

[Japinat]

Permit me to use th case of mixers, that lead the authorities to bring down three different mixers because they feel it was majorly used to clean stolen money.

You pointed out a relevant example, although there's a huge difference between a mixer and a non regulated casino as mixers job is to mixed the coins so it will be untraceable, or hard to trace, at least. So in terms of the authorities doing their job, if they can't regulate a casino, they'll just likely ban it, but they'll also look the impact of the casino itselt on how big they had catered already, just like the mixers, they only targetted the bigger ones.

[retreat]

I don't really believe in casinos that really enhance privacy and security for users by not imposing KYC on them but still complying with regulators. Because how can they be a regulated casino but not enforce a KYC policy on their platform? KYC is a basic requirement for a casino to be regulated and that is contrary to what they say. And the jargon "Web3: Anonymity and Privacy" is just a gimmick in my opinion to attract interest from potential users to be able to use their services, even though in fact they are the same as other crypto casinos.

[dezoel]

Permit me to use th case of mixers, that lead the authorities to bring down three different mixers because they feel it was majorly used to clean stolen money.

You pointed out a relevant example, although there's a huge difference between a mixer and a non regulated casino as mixers job is to mixed the coins so it will be untraceable, or hard to trace, at least. So in terms of the authorities doing their job, if they can't regulate a casino, they'll just likely ban it, but they'll also look the impact of the casino itselt on how big they had catered already, just like the mixers, they only targetted the bigger ones.

Anything that they think can be used to launder money will either be banned or regulated. Mixers were free from everything for a while until they got the attention of the authorities and then they started cracking them down one by one, if there are casinos that promote web3 technology and decentralization, I'm sure they will be their next targets because they can't let people use decentralized services because they doubt criminals can misuse such things to benefit from them.

Even though they can be right and a person might be able to use a web3 casino platform to launder or mix their money, it doesn't come off as a good thing for us normal users because we do want to have some freedom but they are not going to allow us to have that and they will regulate every single place promoting freedom.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

So in terms of the authorities doing their job, if they can't regulate a casino, they'll just likely ban it,

Yes, we all know how the government love regulations, they prefer what they can easily regulate, they love a transparent system but when they can't regulate any company they want and when the company have become so successful, they will definitely attracte the attention of the government which could result to penalty.

Anything that they think can be used to launder money will either be banned or regulated. Mixers were free from everything for a while until they got the attention of the authorities and then they started cracking them down one by one, if there are casinos that promote web3 technology and decentralization, I'm sure they will be their next targets because they can't let people use decentralized services because they doubt criminals can misuse such things to benefit from them.

You actually sum up my thoughts in these comment. It's not news how the government don't like decentralization. They want to control everything, as long as web3 casinos can be used for some money crime without being detected, the government might one day go after those casinos that support web3 but that might not happen anytime soon. Web3 casino have not really been so popular.

[EarnOnVictor]

I noticed that there are a lot of web3 casinos popping up in the gambling section. I'm curious if this is the new trend for casinos, as web3 casinos eliminate the KYC requirement since they promote "Anonymity and Privacy," which crypto casinos (not web3) cannot offer because they are regulated and bound to follow the mandates of their regulators.

However, from my other research, I also read that although web3 casinos are not universally regulated, they could still be compliant with regulators, especially concerning Anti-Money Laundering (AML). This puzzles me because I thought web3 casinos would completely offer anonymous gambling, but the word "compliance" suggests that we will still need to verify KYC.

What are your thoughts on this, and how deep is your understanding of web3 casinos in terms of their legal parlance?

I would like you to perish the idea of Web 3.0 evading regulations, that's not the purpose for which it was created. Although, there would be some better control by domains, but certainly not the decentralised means that will help them blind the regulator. Yes, it is decentralised, but that is for the purpose of taking full control and avoiding third-party internet mediators like Apple, Google, and Facebook that are reaping them in Web 2.0 initiative.

Mind you, once you are dealing with human beings, you are not out of the reach of the authorities so we should not let Web 3 deceive us. What I believe is happening right now is that when there are new developments like that, some new actors may still start doing whatever they like, this is possible until the rod of the authorities gets to them.

This is not also peculiar to Web 3.0 because the present version they are now trying to fade off still has some unregulated companies. So it is not a big deal, there are always good, ugly and bad or adamant actors everywhere. However, the only benefit and beauty I would like you to focus on with Web 3 is the transition from Web 2.0 which is developmental and will come with a whole lot of advancement technology-wise.

[Slow death]

Honestly, I don't see much of a difference with common casinos, this is because all casinos need to have a license to operate and then they will ask for KYC, so there isn't much difference with common casinos when it comes to legal issues, perhaps in terms of resources the casinos may have difference. but on the legal side, all casinos need to follow the same script: have a license and ask for kyc. something funny is that many of these web3 casinos when they appeared here on the forum, they said that they didn't need a license, they wouldn't ask for kyc and that I kept asking myself how long they would operate without a license knowing that governments could learn the casino and accuse the casino and the owners of being money launderers and operating unlicensed casinos, and I was laughing when a few days ago I saw that web3 casinos already have licenses and ask for kyc

[livingfree]

What are your thoughts on this, and how deep is your understanding of web3 casinos in terms of their legal parlance?

Not that deep.

But we can take the example of early decentralized exchanges. From there, they're known and become one of the best preference of many traders but eventually, they have to go south and require kyc.

I am not expecting a lot with these web3 or decentralized casinos. The demand for them isn't that much and even if they boast about having no-kyc casino.

Still, at some point of their operations that they're going to require it.

[nelson4lov]

I haven't seen a lot of web3 casinos lately as I have only played only a few number of times on one of them. The experience was largely the same with that of traditional crypto casinos except the fact that I wasn't asked to provide KYC docs (yet). I might still give it some try a few times but other than the no-KYC submission, they have some of the worse UX and there really isn't any distinction features that I could point out. Sometimes, the devil you know, is better than the Angel you don't know. (Traditional casinos as the devil and "Web3 casinos" as the angel).

[Weawant]

Maybe they could adopt a policy that allows the gambler stay anonymous until a very irregular activities is carried out in the account and the there's a need to confirm if it's still the person who has been gambling on the account because there are times where the activities on a particular account become suspicious and the only way to Tracking such person is to get their account closed first not allowing them be able to claim the innocence of their account.

There should be casinos rules and policies asides that of their regulators which they will make sure gambler LS stick to and if at any point the gambler is defaulting, he should then do KYC to be able to retrieve back their accounts even with the funds in it, same could also apply when they win max payout so as to be able to protect both the gambler and the casino too aswell, but some may not get to see it in such light as they would want to stay completely anonymous which definitely doesn't happen all the times.

[bhadz]

They are not a new trend but they're also doing something out of this. One example of it is making their own token and that's still gonna be monitored by the regulators whether they should be security or not. Telling that their casino is a web3 won't guarantee them to be whole and 100% a web3 casino. In our current time, no one can skip the chains of the regulators because even the mixers and other anonymous platforms and services, they're being able to get tracked and that's why it's hard to believe that they'd be 100% kyc free.

[freedomgo]

They are not a new trend but they're also doing something out of this. One example of it is making their own token and that's still gonna be monitored by the regulators whether they should be security or not. Telling that their casino is a web3 won't guarantee them to be whole and 100% a web3 casino. In our current time, no one can skip the chains of the regulators because even the mixers and other anonymous platforms and services, they're being able to get tracked and that's why it's hard to believe that they'd be 100% kyc free.

You can't compare a mixer to a casino since, obviously, mixers don't require KYC. For casinos, they can announce that they are non-KYC or KYC compliant, but at the end of the day, we know that those who claim to be non-KYC will eventually become KYC compliant in the future. They don't want to risk their growing business. When your business gets better, the government will easily notice it, so there is a risk of getting banned if they don't secure a license. I think that's the trend now, so there's really no such thing as a "non-KYC" casino. Those who promote it might be lying or are just new in the business, which makes them hard to trust based on their reputation.

[mirakal]

Honestly, I don't see much of a difference with common casinos, this is because all casinos need to have a license to operate and then they will ask for KYC, so there isn't much difference with common casinos when it comes to legal issues, perhaps in terms of resources the casinos may have difference. but on the legal side, all casinos need to follow the same script: have a license and ask for kyc. something funny is that many of these web3 casinos when they appeared here on the forum, they said that they didn't need a license, they wouldn't ask for kyc and that I kept asking myself how long they would operate without a license knowing that governments could learn the casino and accuse the casino and the owners of being money launderers and operating unlicensed casinos, and I was laughing when a few days ago I saw that web3 casinos already have licenses and ask for kyc

Well, when we talk about online casinos, it creates an edge to other casinos if they are considered as web3 casinos as they represent the best trends having online gambling platforms. Compared to some ordinary casinos, these web3 casinos will always gain more thrill and excitement on part of their players. But still having a license to operate and KYC verification are still a must for these type of casinos. Or else, it will be another case subject to money laundering.

[Julien_Olynpic]

The term Web3 means different things to different people. By definition, we must assume that, for example, a Web3 wallet cannot be custodial, but Binance introduced such a wallet, called it Web3, although it was completely custodial and with CUS. To be honest, I don’t understand what prevents Web3 casinos from requesting a KUS check from their clients. Web3 is just a buzzword used for marketing and does not always correspond to its basic meaning in any context. Since casinos in most countries are government-regulated institutions, it would be strange to expect that the government would not require casinos and bookmakers to comply with anti-money laundering policies.

[ethereumhunter]

Honestly, I don't see much of a difference with common casinos, this is because all casinos need to have a license to operate and then they will ask for KYC, so there isn't much difference with common casinos when it comes to legal issues, perhaps in terms of resources the casinos may have difference. but on the legal side, all casinos need to follow the same script: have a license and ask for kyc. something funny is that many of these web3 casinos when they appeared here on the forum, they said that they didn't need a license, they wouldn't ask for kyc and that I kept asking myself how long they would operate without a license knowing that governments could learn the casino and accuse the casino and the owners of being money launderers and operating unlicensed casinos, and I was laughing when a few days ago I saw that web3 casinos already have licenses and ask for kyc

Well, when we talk about online casinos, it creates an edge to other casinos if they are considered as web3 casinos as they represent the best trends having online gambling platforms. Compared to some ordinary casinos, these web3 casinos will always gain more thrill and excitement on part of their players. But still having a license to operate and KYC verification are still a must for these type of casinos. Or else, it will be another case subject to money laundering.

Gamblers will be like if casino have license so they will search for the casino that have license and will make sure that the license is real. They also search for the reputable casino because that can makes them feels calm and no worry when they playing gambling on that casino. KYC verification will implement on the casino, including web3 casino and that's about a matter of time to see web3 casino will apply KYC verification like the other casinos.

The government wants to control every business so they will asks casinos to have license and asks their members to do KYC verification. If the casino doesn't asks KYC for the first time they launched their casino, the casino will do that after they reach many customer because at that time, the government will watch the casino closely and will monitor.

[Hispo]

🍑

..., it would be strange to expect that the government would not require casinos and bookmakers to comply with anti-money laundering policies.

Well, they are already working on the legal bedrock for them to regulate or try to limit the access the public have to decentralized apps and decentralized services which have anything to do with money management, exchange and even gambling. Uniswap is a good example of it, being a decentralized exchange, means the protocol is not supposed to ask or care for the origin of the funds you would try to exchange for other completely different asset, same with decentralized/web3 casinos.
It is just especulation, though, it is very possible many of those so-called web3 casinos will end up complying with regulations which would make them not actually web3, and in the end, it will be just a buzzword as you mentioned.
we are in a state of the industry in which liquidity for money laundering and also privacy are being frontally attacked (look at the case of Monero), decentralized services could be next.

[Fortify]

I noticed that there are a lot of web3 casinos popping up in the gambling section. I'm curious if this is the new trend for casinos, as web3 casinos eliminate the KYC requirement since they promote "Anonymity and Privacy," which crypto casinos (not web3) cannot offer because they are regulated and bound to follow the mandates of their regulators.

However, from my other research, I also read that although web3 casinos are not universally regulated, they could still be compliant with regulators, especially concerning Anti-Money Laundering (AML). This puzzles me because I thought web3 casinos would completely offer anonymous gambling, but the word "compliance" suggests that we will still need to verify KYC.

What are your thoughts on this, and how deep is your understanding of web3 casinos in terms of their legal parlance?

It sounds like a load of gimmicky buzzword rubbish. I ask you - what do you think is the difference between "web2" and "web3" exactly, besides the anonymity and privacy thing you quote but don't actually specify how you think this is achieved. Casinos do not want to impose KYC on their customers and they would make a lot more money if they didn't. They are forced to impose it, if they want to be headquartered in any half decent country, because the financial regulators require it and the owners will be heavily fined or even jailed if they do not collect it. You cannot be anonymous and comply with regulations, as to stop money laundering you have to know who is transferring money around, so please explain why you say otherwise because it makes no sense.