Privacy almost looking abnormal online.

[Judith87403]

I understand the skepticism, mostly with how frequent KYC is used. Yet unregulated is not just a label that was invented by authorities.

A casino that is regulated has license from firms such like the Gambling commission of UK or the Malta Gaming Authority. That mostly implies audited games, rule on handling funds of player, dispute processes, and some level of accountability. Without such oversight, you are depending on trust. When they freeze funds or  terms are changed, there is scarcely any recourse.

KYC is not just all about control. It is connected to laws of  anti-fraud and anti-money- laundering, but privacy is reduced by it.

Therefore not being regulated do not mean scam automatically, yet it does imply higher risk. When you're trading legal protection for anonymity, that there is real cost.

[skarais]

I don't know what the problem is, but government involvement through regulation in any industry basically has a positive impact. We may disagree because their involvement only damages the privacy of customers, but the government is making maximum efforts to close the space for illegal actors who carry out illegal acts in this industry. Look at how many money laundering cases have been solved because of regulations, how many cases have been prevented because of them, so those are some of the reasons why government involvement should not always be seen as negative.

[Fiatless]

Just a brain waving thought for us to reflect on.
For casinos that operates unregulated does that actually makes them illegal casinos (a bad casino to use). Isn't it just one of those socio-economic construct moulded by the centralized authority for usjto believe and generally accepting that once a casino isn't under a regulation through license then it's a red flag and a bad casino.

People will want to use a platform that is registered under a regulatory body. They want to have an organisation that can hold casinos responsible for their errors or misdeeds. In unregistered casinos, you might not have anyone to report the casino to when they fail to abide by the ToS. A license is not a guarantee that a casino is geniune but it gives it some level of reputation.   

[lionheart78]

Just a brain waving thought for us to reflect on.
For casinos that operates unregulated does that actually makes them illegal casinos (a bad casino to use).

From the technical terms, those casinos that don't have a license to operate is operating illegaly, that make them illegal casinos.

Isn't it just one of those socio-economic construct moulded by the centralized authority for usjto believe and generally accepting that once a casino isn't under a regulation through license then it's a red flag and a bad casino.

The government set a standard, and everyone seems to accept these standards.  Those who do not follow these regulations and don't have legal documents are marked illegal.

We can't deny that the primary reason for this formulation is to have every online casino users under KYC, making privacy look abnormal wherever it tries to relatively exist.

If anyone doesn't want to undergo KYC, they can look for a crypto casino that does not implement KYC, or if still in doubt, just avoid online gambling all in all.

[cryptomaniac_xxx]

Just a brain waving thought for us to reflect on.
For casinos that operates unregulated does that actually makes them illegal casinos (a bad casino to use). Isn't it just one of those socio-economic construct moulded by the centralized authority for usjto believe and generally accepting that once a casino isn't under a regulation through license then it's a red flag and a bad casino.

We can't deny that the primary reason for this formulation is to have every online casino users under KYC, making privacy look abnormal wherever it tries to relatively exist.

This is part of the the evolution of crypto, we now have regulations and to move forward, we have to accept it. As you have said, "unregulated", so yeah, it means they are not following the rules and they are illegal by definition.

And as much as it really removed itself from the very tenant of crypto of (pseudo)-anonymity and privacy, now, we are being exposed as regulations mandated KYC for AML. So it's really up to us whether we are going to submit KYC or not and stay away from crypto related sites that ask for it because of regulations. We have a choice.

[Hispo]

Just a brain waving thought for us to reflect on.
For casinos that operates unregulated does that actually makes them illegal casinos (a bad casino to use). Isn't it just one of those socio-economic construct moulded by the centralized authority for usjto believe and generally accepting that once a casino isn't under a regulation through license then it's a red flag and a bad casino.

We can't deny that the primary reason for this formulation is to have every online casino users under KYC, making privacy look abnormal wherever it tries to relatively exist.

It is expected. Regulators and governments alike are pushing and trying very hard to get us accustomed to not having actual privacy in this digital era and give up our information to them, for the sake of fighting money laundering and criminal activity.

It is good for us to recall so now and then that it was not like this in previous years, this is just a new normal which is being pushed upon us.

Casinos are older than Know your client, and money laundering is even older than widespread casinos on the internet.
Obviously, crime won't disappear, but it seems to be too tempting for those casinos and bookies to exchange your information for money.

[btc78]

regulation means registered under the government which means it’s legal so in that context yes the casino is illegal since it’s operating outside the government’s regulations

[gunhell16]

If casinos that are regulated already pose a risk when you engage in play on their platforms, the risk with those that are unregulated is even greater. In our country, the government’s management of affairs is such that one can only shake their head in disbelief; illegal casinos keep running as though they are sanctioned. The reason for this is that the individual orchestrating these unlawful activities is frequently a current officeholder in our government.

This is the reason our government has been labeled a syndicate: our president is viewed as a puppet for oligarchs or syndicate leaders. This is unfortunate, as it is deeply unjust to legal online casinos that pay taxes, while the unregulated ones do not pay anything and yet operate in the same manner as the legal ones.

[Mia Chloe]

~snip

From what I've observed, people actually see centralization as a safe haven. So they just assume it's safe once they have that assurance it is centralized. Most no KYC casinos still have a license but I think these days it depends mostly on what country or region they acquired the licence from because of flexibility.

It's quite difficult for a casino without a license to go really far because of legal issues they might face as time passes. Nevertheless it's not an excuse to accept KYC for literally anything.

[batang_bitcoin]

Just a brain waving thought for us to reflect on.
For casinos that operates unregulated does that actually makes them illegal casinos (a bad casino to use). Isn't it just one of those socio-economic construct moulded by the centralized authority for usjto believe and generally accepting that once a casino isn't under a regulation through license then it's a red flag and a bad casino.

We can't deny that the primary reason for this formulation is to have every online casino users under KYC, making privacy look abnormal wherever it tries to relatively exist.

I think it has become a norm to see casinos that are registered and people often think of them if they're not registered as they're illegal and not genuine. But, there can be some cases that a casino that has been reputable and never thought about licensing gains the trust of its users and became trustworthy but, they didn't settle for licenses for some reasons that they are not in any jurisdiction of country where they're free to operate. Another one is that they don't want their players to be subjected into kyc and that's probably why.

[TypoTonic]

For casinos that operates unregulated does that actually makes them illegal casinos (a bad casino to use). Isn't it just one of those socio-economic construct moulded by the centralized authority for usjto believe and generally accepting that once a casino isn't under a regulation through license then it's a red flag and a bad casino.

It doesn't automatically make them bad, as there are also licensed casinos that turned out to be a scam. The difference is that you get some sort of legal protection, since it's regulated by a governing body. It's more concerning when the casino claims to have a license when they don't actually have one.

We can't deny that the primary reason for this formulation is to have every online casino users under KYC, making privacy look abnormal wherever it tries to relatively exist.

No one else is responsible for our own privacy. It's true that most casinos now require KYC, but keep in mind that the choice whether to play or not is still ours.

[Cantsay]

We can't deny that the primary reason for this formulation is to have every online casino users under KYC, making privacy look abnormal wherever it tries to relatively exist.

There were gambling sites that operated for years without any license and also didn’t have to request kyc from their users and they did so with good reputation. Allot of these sites you see with licenses do so not because they won’t be able to operate without one but simply because having a license would give people the impression that you have some potential of not being a scam as compared to one who just pop up on the internet without an license and government are kinda happy about it since it gives them some sort or sense of being in control.

[freedomgo]

Both sides have risks. No-KYC casinos are usually illegal, and they can easily run away with your money anytime. What you get in return is privacy and more freedom, but the risk is really there, and honestly it’s pretty high.

Compared to KYC casinos, they’re usually regulated by the government, so at least there’s some protection and less chance of getting scammed. It’s like two options being offered to us, and in the end it’s up to us which one we take. We already know we’re taking a risk anyway, so we just need to know how to manage it.

For me, based on what I see in the real world, no-KYC casinos are more likely to turn into scams sooner or later. So I’d rather choose a regulated one, even if I have to give up some privacy because of KYC requirements.

[AVE5]

I don't like KYC and regulation, but I accept KYC and regulation because in the past, when this cryptocurrency market started, scammers had a lot of freedom because they knew they would get away with it online. They created website after website, and this cycle never ended. This caused people to fear this market. But with regulation, scam cases have gradually decreased, and this market is being respected. Crypto casinos are also providing better service and are being recognized in many countries.

Yes I can remember back in the days with crypto casino's when regulations hadn't been in the market, it was really cool as there was no reveal of Kyc due to dominance of decentralization.
But then was very terrifying with how scammers was also launching their fake projects and was lot of vulnerables being scammed and was timely uncontrollable due to the absence of the regulations.
Now that the crypto casino's is becoming total regulated, we can also see the evolution eliminating the scams activities gradually.

[AmoreJaz]

I don't like KYC and regulation, but I accept KYC and regulation because in the past, when this cryptocurrency market started, scammers had a lot of freedom because they knew they would get away with it online. They created website after website, and this cycle never ended. This caused people to fear this market. But with regulation, scam cases have gradually decreased, and this market is being respected. Crypto casinos are also providing better service and are being recognized in many countries.

Yes I can remember back in the days with crypto casino's when regulations hadn't been in the market, it was really cool as there was no reveal of Kyc due to dominance of decentralization.
But then was very terrifying with how scammers was also launching their fake projects and was lot of vulnerables being scammed and was timely uncontrollable due to the absence of the regulations.
Now that the crypto casino's is becoming total regulated, we can also see the evolution eliminating the scams activities gradually.

As casinos and sportsbooks are acquiring their license, and so their implementation of the AML/KYC requirements to their players. I believe, this is better as compared to fly-by-night casinos launch week after week. And they are just exhausting the funds of those naive players. With the regulations, comes with the protocols that need to be followed by the players. And this will mitigate the proliferation of scam casinos.

[FinneysTrueVision]

Making us distrustful of something just because they don’t require KYC is the point of compliance regulation. The goal isn't to stop criminal activity, because KYC is almost entirely ineffective according to every study done on the subject. The intent is to coerce you into using the more easily surveilled option. With that said, most reputable casinos are going to go along with anti-money laundering rules and have strict KYC because they don’t want to see their business destroyed or get thrown in jail.

[letteredhub]

Actually I have taken time to read almost every comments share on this thread and there are quite a few different things I learnt as to why a lot of people would choose using a license casinos operating under regulation even when they are not comfortable with sharing their information, than using a none license casino that's KYC free. Which technically seems illegal by legal functions and not that they're scam by lacking license.

Some comments speak of fear of possible scam exit, no legal obligation to sue and be sued, unprofessional behaviours, not abiding by the established ToS as provided etc, these and many other reasons shift their choice towards centralized casinos.

Nevertheless, I still understood also that there are many users who are willing to use decentralised gambling platforms online despite their not having a license but provided they've already made years of a good track record reputation. And by this it only means that real none KYC casinos exists for users use only on TRUST.  And since building this trust with years becomes challenging for casinos, a lot of them just go direct with being centralised where they can earn trust and large users traffic in no time.

A lot of things now become clearer for me with this thread.

[lovesmayfamilis]

Perhaps many of us, those who are not particularly strong in matters of anonymity on the web, should not delude ourselves too much and believe that playing in a casino without a license, we will remain invulnerable to the issue of confidentiality and anonymity. Any website always sees all the metrics of our devices, and those casinos that value their business are very good at detecting VPNs if someone thinks they can change their IP address. Next, we interact in one way or another with the movement of funds in our wallets. In short, as long as regulators and government agencies are not interested in us, we can pretend to be anonymous. However, if there is interest, it will be quite easy to find us.

[qwertyup23]

Just a brain waving thought for us to reflect on.
For casinos that operates unregulated does that actually makes them illegal casinos (a bad casino to use). Isn't it just one of those socio-economic construct moulded by the centralized authority for usjto believe and generally accepting that once a casino isn't under a regulation through license then it's a red flag and a bad casino.

Generally, if a casino is unlicensed, then expect potential legal issues that may arise anytime soon. Additionally, you put so much risk on your funds given that the unlicensed casino can basically steal all of your crypto/winnings at their pleasure and discretion.

We can't deny that the primary reason for this formulation is to have every online casino users under KYC, making privacy look abnormal wherever it tries to relatively exist.

KYC was created for casinos to be regulated. It’s basically sacrificing your personal information for the security of your information and funds. I do agree that there is a gray area that must be addressed because cryptocurrency casinos were designed to be anonymous in the first place.

The problem is, with the rising popularity of online gambling, the government took notice and mandated online casinos to enable KYC for both regulation and protection of the consumers. While this may be the case, there are still non-KYC casinos that are established and reputable enough for you to choose.

[Oluwa-btc]

We can't deny that the primary reason for this formulation is to have every online casino users under KYC, making privacy look abnormal wherever it tries to relatively exist.

Being reputable means  its trusted but when the casino twbd to be unregulated then there's more possiblity that it can be opened to being altered abruptly. Moreso reasons most gamblers tend to go through casinos that thus undeego KYC verification and regulations so as to safeguard their privacy and documents but when it's not absolutely that'll be a negative sign.