Privacy almost looking abnormal online.

[Peanutswar]

They will get notice by the government of the country once they become known and seen that they are earning a lot of money without having a proper license to operate. Imagine if a casino does pay a tax to them, it will contribute that to their development _{(well hope so.. and not came from a corrupt officials/country)}. Government has a power to release a license to operate and prohibits them to operate so i guess this is quite fair to the players too because if they arent regulated they can run away the people's money easily.

[Outhue]

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.

Most online casinos today were once unregulated, until they started making more money and getting more popular, the regulators found them and forced them to abide by the law, casinos are a good business not just for making money but for moving legal and illegal funds, to keep an eye on them this is necessary, I can't be that greedy to keep wanting the best for gamblers just because I don't want to pass KYC, I wished there is a way to just gamble without KYC verification but at the same time the world needs to be a better place too.

[DubemIfedigbo001]

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.

Most scams come from unregulated casinos, those who just set up without a license. I don't like KYC but the scam is much nowadays and they prey a lot on users seeking anonymity, if a casino is regulated and has a good license, then you know who to hold responsible in the case of unfair treatment to it's users and at least there's a governing body to report their misconduct. License is good, at least to be sure a casino has enough funding to pay it's winners before certifying them to start operating and without license, no one can validate such and they can go on to scam people, just like we saw in the case of Betmocco that deceived the community that they're awaiting licence, only to end up pulling up a heavy scam.

[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.

Most scams come from unregulated casinos, those who just set up without a license. I don't like KYC but the scam is much nowadays and they prey a lot on users seeking anonymity, if a casino is regulated and has a good license, then you know who to hold responsible in the case of unfair treatment to it's users and at least there's a governing body to report their misconduct. License is good, at least to be sure a casino has enough funding to pay it's winners before certifying them to start operating and without license, no one can validate such and they can go on to scam people, just like we saw in the case of Betmocco that deceived the community that they're awaiting licence, only to end up pulling up a heavy scam.

Licenses issued by serious authorities and countries are not a warranty of security, transparency and liquidity, but they help a lot to filter out most scammers, who do not even care to pay for a license in order to appear more legitimate and get more money from their victims.
In the case of Betmocco, they did not even have an actual license, they pretended to be awaiting for one and lied saying they got it.
If there is anything to learn from the scam pulled off by Betmocco is always to verify on the web.of the issuer whether licenses are valid or forged.

Also, correct me if I am wrong, but I think Betnomi had a valid license and still turned into an exit scam after so many years around this community. Right ?

[Ishicryptic]

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.

Most scams come from unregulated casinos, those who just set up without a license. I don't like KYC but the scam is much nowadays and they prey a lot on users seeking anonymity, if a casino is regulated and has a good license, then you know who to hold responsible in the case of unfair treatment to it's users and at least there's a governing body to report their misconduct. License is good, at least to be sure a casino has enough funding to pay it's winners before certifying them to start operating and without license, no one can validate such and they can go on to scam people, just like we saw in the case of Betmocco that deceived the community that they're awaiting licence, only to end up pulling up a heavy scam.

Most of us don't like KYC but sometimes we decide to go for it inorder to protect ourselves from scams so when it comes to casinos I will rather forgo my privacy for reputable casinos who are regulated because the chances of a regulated casino scamming you is minimal compared to unregulated casinos. The level of online scams is too much and you don't need to take unnecessary chances because you want to protect your privacy and you will leave yourself vulnerable to scam casinos to explore. If you must use an unregulated casino you should make sure that they have good ratings or atleast start gambling with very small amounts so if you get scammed you can easily move on.

[nimogsm]

They will get notice by the government of the country once they become known and seen that they are earning a lot of money without having a proper license to operate. Imagine if a casino does pay a tax to them, it will contribute that to their development _{(well hope so.. and not came from a corrupt officials/country)}. Government has a power to release a license to operate and prohibits them to operate so i guess this is quite fair to the players too because if they arent regulated they can run away the people's money easily.

I also think a lot depends on money. If the country's authorities understand that they are missing out on a good profit, then a tax is needed, but if they don't want to share it, then they can ban it in literally a matter of days.There is simply no point in blocking .those who want to continue playing will find ways to do so and the state loses out on future profits in the form of taxes on winnings.

[Nathrixxx]

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.

We should not talk about the casino alone that denied us of our privacy when it comes to online platforms, what about the exchange that  require us to pass through kyc procedures before we can enjoy their services, I think the alternative exist but many don't even have the consciousness of how they can go about it, as there are casino that don't require for kyc as well as decentralized exchange that don't also require KYC.

[Agbe]

This is not a speculating statement but with fact and reality. Op you can also see what is happening around the gambling industry in the world. So you don't need someone to tell you how it is. We all love No KYC casinos and privacy, but those casinos do not live long before we know they have disappeared and probably with people's money. So it is not something we can say, they said, no. If there is anyone let it come here and operate with an outstanding Signature Campaign for years to come and you will see the number of gamblers there. But non. It is not a matter of government policy but it is their behaviors.

[Leahized]

If a casino is not regulated then it is better not to use such casino to be on a safe side Incase of any situation how do you get yourself and game secured, those casinos cannot be trusted as it can easily be used by scammers and fraudsters, any gambler that falls into them are bound to be risking themselves since no guaranty of privacy, no KYC involvement which exposes you to danger.

Nowadays the number of online casinos is increasing a lot. However, there are very few good and licensed casinos among them. But our main focus is whether everything is going smoothly. But nowadays every gambler wants to bet with safety. I usually look for no KYC casino because there is no NID, passport and driving license required. Because the security of many casinos is weak, these can go to hackers. So in addition to reading the TOS, use less money. This will reduce the risk a lot.

[Rubuchi]

Most online casinos today were once unregulated, until they started making more money and getting more popular, the regulators found them and forced them to abide by the law, casinos are a good business not just for making money but for moving legal and illegal funds, to keep an eye on them this is necessary, I can't be that greedy to keep wanting the best for gamblers just because I don't want to pass KYC, I wished there is a way to just gamble without KYC verification but at the same time the world needs to be a better place too.

you are not saying lies at least I know government for one consistent thing, which is they target businesses that are doing well then they target them with either regulations for businesses that deserved to be regulated or they target them with regulations and for companies or businesses not requiring any form of regulations, they impose taxes on them. That’s how government is able to make its money through levies, taxes and regulations. Some of these implementation are also done to monitor the activities of these businesses so they are kind off on check and on the radar of the government which are sue them once there is any form of foul play.

[cxtreenal]

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.

We should not talk about the casino alone that denied us of our privacy when it comes to online platforms, what about the exchange that  require us to pass through kyc procedures before we can enjoy their services, I think the alternative exist but many don't even have the consciousness of how they can go about it, as there are casino that don't require for kyc as well as decentralized exchange that don't also require KYC.

You cannot fully trust casinos that do not have to go through the KYC process. You are putting your funds at risk in order to maintain personal security. Instead, you should trust online casinos that do go through the KYC process because they try to conduct their business with transparency. They are accountable to their country's government and also to their worldwide customers. In cases where financial matters are involved, having personal information in their possession should not be a problem.

[L E G E N D A R Y]

Most online casinos today were once unregulated, until they started making more money and getting more popular, the regulators found them and forced them to abide by the law, casinos are a good business not just for making money but for moving legal and illegal funds, to keep an eye on them this is necessary, I can't be that greedy to keep wanting the best for gamblers just because I don't want to pass KYC, I wished there is a way to just gamble without KYC verification but at the same time the world needs to be a better place too.

If not that the world is not a place where one can just fold hands and look, there will be no need for one to pass through stress and all that to make sure they do their KYC verification, even when some people don't like the idea, they got no option than for them to do so, that is why one side is a good thing and for the other side it's not. So people gets to choose what will be the best for them both for now and for the future.

[shawonngp]

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.

We should not talk about the casino alone that denied us of our privacy when it comes to online platforms, what about the exchange that  require us to pass through kyc procedures before we can enjoy their services, I think the alternative exist but many don't even have the consciousness of how they can go about it, as there are casino that don't require for kyc as well as decentralized exchange that don't also require KYC.

There is definitely a difference between casino gambling platforms and centralized trading exchanges. For example, in the case of CEXs, licenses are required from the government to run the business; centralized exchanges are under the control of the government, so they require KYC to prevent illegal activities like money laundering. In the beginning, no KYC was required to withdraw a certain amount in each exchange, but now KYC is mandatory in 99% exchanges. In terms of casino platforms, most casino sites are not regulated; they don't have a license, so we don't have to pass any KYC. I think that since everyone wants to remain anonymous in gambling, no one is willing to submit to KYC. Be it a true casino or CEXs, wherever KYC is required, there is a threat to our privacy.

[yhiaali3]

Yes, I agree with you that governments are the ones who cultivate these concepts. For me, if bad casinos mean casinos without KYC, then that would be my favorite. I don't care whether a casino is licensed or not as much as I care whether it requires KYC.

Personally, I prefer to register at an unlicensed casino without KYC over a licensed casino that requires KYC. For me, privacy is more important than licensing and more important than the rest of the features.

They are not always right and usually they always call the casino as bad or illegal if they didn't have license on their jurisdictions. But if people are familiar with the reputation of the casino especially if they operate here for long time without giving any issue to their gamblers, we can say that those statement release by government is a lie and they have hidden agenda on their negative statements.

Personally if I know the casino is really a reputable one and they have solid reputation also great feedback from the community here. I provably continue to gamble in their casino and will ignore those recommendations also warnings release by the government.

Yes, that's right. The government is concerned with keeping everything under its control, and therefore they do not hesitate to lie or mislead in order to keep everyone under their control, and they force people to use the services that are completely under their control.

As you mentioned, trust in a casino is the most important thing, regardless of whether it is licensed or not, or whether it is subject to government standards or not. Trust comes based on the long subjective experience of the user, apart from government statements.

[ZeroVinsonN]

They will get notice by the government of the country once they become known and seen that they are earning a lot of money without having a proper license to operate. Imagine if a casino does pay a tax to them, it will contribute that to their development _{(well hope so.. and not came from a corrupt officials/country)}. Government has a power to release a license to operate and prohibits them to operate so i guess this is quite fair to the players too because if they arent regulated they can run away the people's money easily.

A government does have the right to regulate what their citizens are exposed to especially with things like gambling so it's not out of the ordinary for them to regulate casino and issue licenses to operate to them, it also lowers their chances of scam through these casinos, money laundering too, if these establishments are audited from time to time then their records will not be easily manipulated and they can not serve as fronts to illegal businesses.

[TheUltraElite]

Usually you would want to play in a casino that is regulated, has a license. I have questions as to what you are finding lucrative in a casino that does not have these and are getting tempted to use the ones that are not?

Be careful here because scam sites will come up every now and then and will appear to be nice and profitable - but they cannot be held accountable when the scam happens - you will be losing your money.

Privacy is already given up, what more is there to give away? Google already knows so much about you. Hence just take what you want and leave.

[Strongkored]

This is not a speculating statement but with fact and reality. Op you can also see what is happening around the gambling industry in the world. So you don't need someone to tell you how it is. We all love No KYC casinos and privacy, but those casinos do not live long before we know they have disappeared and probably with people's money. So it is not something we can say, they said, no. If there is anyone let it come here and operate with an outstanding Signature Campaign for years to come and you will see the number of gamblers there. But non. It is not a matter of government policy but it is their behaviors.

Not many casinos without KYC survive for long, or even truly without KYC, because sometimes, even if they claim to be KYC-free, under certain circumstances, KYC will be required.
I only remember one casino that never required KYC and survived for years, but unfortunately, they eventually disappeared, leaving many of their users at a loss. As far as I recall, they were also unlicensed.

Privacy in the online world is very difficult, without a license it will be questioned, but with license KYC mostly will be mandatory.

[TopT3ns]

Not many casinos without KYC survive for long, or even truly without KYC, because sometimes, even if they claim to be KYC-free, under certain circumstances, KYC will be required.
I only remember one casino that never required KYC and survived for years, but unfortunately, they eventually disappeared, leaving many of their users at a loss. As far as I recall, they were also unlicensed.

Privacy in the online world is very difficult, without a license it will be questioned, but with license KYC mostly will be mandatory.

The risk of losing money through the anonymous casinos is a negative bitter taste that has often led down the wrong hole of people who desire to enjoy the benefits of online privacy. With no official licensing, it becomes extremely difficult to impose any of the integrities of operations legally in case of any problems. In fact, the safety of funds is much greater, and obligatory checking of data is a fair trade to pay in order to guarantee a long term search of consumers.

[Free Market Capitalist]

Not many casinos without KYC survive for long, or even truly without KYC, because sometimes, even if they claim to be KYC-free, under certain circumstances, KYC will be required.
I only remember one casino that never required KYC and survived for years, but unfortunately, they eventually disappeared, leaving many of their users at a loss. As far as I recall, they were also unlicensed.

Privacy in the online world is very difficult, without a license it will be questioned, but with license KYC mostly will be mandatory.

Well, I can think of two more recent cases: the casinos owned by Lightlord, which are still operating but are terrible—if you win money and try to withdraw it, you’re in for a world of trouble—and another one is freebitco.in, which for a long time operated without KYC verification or a license, but apparently ended up obtaining some kind of license and introduced theoretical KYC requirements, though as far as we know, they never actually asked for them. It ended up being an exit scam.

Ultimately, casinos have to comply with certain regulations because history has shown time and again that if left unchecked, they will abuse their power. The downside is that this usually goes hand in hand with KYC requirements.

[SPIDERMAN008]

My idea is simple, that is, no one should bet except on popular and trusted casino sites. And there are many betting sites on the forum, most of them are trusted. If a site is a scammer, it is also identify easily . And there are many casino sites now without KYC. And especially I don't think any trusted casino site will do this kind of thing, which will cause any security problems for their users. Where their identity or data will be given to the government or any other organization. However, one should be careful before registering or using any new casino sites.