The challenge is that this method can be easily circumvented by creating a new wallet and play again due to anonymity. It is said that this can be fixed by implementing KYC. Blockchain plus KYC will identify the player even if the player creates multiple addresses.
There are existing nonKYC gambling sites to this day. If something like this happened, more people will move towards the nonKYC gambling sites instead.
I think it is clear on the OP that we are not talking about non-KYC gambling sites in this thread. We are talking about how blockchain integration can help minimize gambling addiction.
What is good about this strategy is that blockchain record can be shared globally, so the tagged address can also be blocked by other casinos, preventing the person to deepen its gambling addiction by preventing them from indulging in online gambling.
I do not think gambling sites will cooperate to this extent. Even the gambling sites in each country have not cooperate to this level.
They will if the regulators implement such rulings. But if it is voluntary, yes, I agree that there is a high probability that the casino won't implement these rulings.
So does it mean that gambling site automatically self-exclude their gambler from their site or what?
Yes you mentioned the right way which they should do, that doing auto without the account owner having knowledge of it could be disastrous because they could lose huge amount of money from that site and they aren't able to have access or account is being closed and restricted the operator do not have access it again. Most times the crazy gamblers could sue them for that singular acts.
The idea of automatic exclusion is that there is a pattern in the on-chain activity of problem gambling. I have shown on the OP an article titled:
What Crypto Gambling Teaches Us About On-Chain Behavior and Wallet Psychology, where the casino use this on-chain activity to improve their service, and I believe that this can also be used to determine users' on-chain activity and detect whether the user is developing or experiencing problem gambling.
Casinos can prevent users from depositing and betting, but are open for withdrawal. As far as I know, Stake implements this kind of option when a user has not completed their KYC procedure. So there is no worry of an inaccessible account for withdrawal.
This is truly not possible at all. No one know how much the gambler is rich. Someone like Drake bet huge amount of money because he is very rich. That should not be the reason they should self-exclude him from gambling. This will only be a poor approach against gambling addiction. Gamblers should be the one that should go for self-exclusion on a gambling site by themselves.
Don't forget there is a KYC procedure in here. KYC often asks for the source of funds, from which the casino will be able to tell whether a player is a wealthy person or not.
Exactly, that’s why self-education is really important. The best the government can do is run educational ads for gamblers. It’s just like smoking or drinking, there are ads warning that it’s bad for your health, but those things aren’t banned in most countries. At least people who consume them know the risks.
I agree that self-education is important, but what is more important is self-discipline in combating gambling addiction. The problem oftentimes is that a person tends to indulge themselves in pleasure, or is trapped by a gambling system. There should be no need for these gambling responsibly reminders if all people can do that.
Worst people are getting addicted without them knowing it, or even if they have the feeling of being addicted, they are helpless and can't control their addiction. That is when the platform can step in.
In my opinion, uing Blockchain + KYC for self-exclusion is a strong idea because it combines transparency with identity verification. Blockchain alone can flag addictive gambling behavior, but players can bypass it by creating new wallets. With KYC, casinos can link activity to a verified identity, making it harder to evade restrictions. This is typically efficient whereas a global system where flagged addresses or identities are recognized across platforms could truly reduce problem gambling.
But the question is, will the government really put effort into figuring out who’s addicted or not? I doubt they’d spend their time on that. What they’ll focus on is anti–money laundering, investing in tech and systems to monitor transactions.
As for gambling addiction, they’ll probably just issue warnings or run educational campaigns, but they won’t go deeper since gambling addiction itself isn’t a crime.
If the government is willing to implement such a regulation, do you think the idea is feasible? The action is not on the government side, so the government has nothing to do but make it a regulation. The end work goes to the casino since they have to follow the regulations.
