Full regulation and centralization, or can decentralization survive?

[Easy.Playw3.com]

Long story short: I remember when regulations first started and casinos began introducing KYC/AML verification. Back then, the community was pretty mad that anyone would even try to regulate decentralized crypto casinos.

I feel like after a few years, things have completely flipped. Now, KYC/AML and licenses are the norm, and the community even expects them.

I wonder if this is an irreversible trend that will lead to total regulation of crypto and casinos, or if fans of decentralization will still fight back against it.

I’d prefer to stay on the decentralized side, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. Do you think Web3 will help the decentralized space survive, or will everything just move toward full regulation and centralization?

[stadus]

I’d prefer to stay on the decentralized side, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. Do you think Web3 will help the decentralized space survive, or will everything just move toward full regulation and centralization?

Though we like decentralization but we cannot deny the power of the government, they want to regulate us. If there's a reputable casino that is decentralized then I will use it, but if none is available I have no choice but to play on regulated casinos, . . Even Web3 casinos are still regulated as well.

[bitbollo]

Imagine satoshibones that would requires a "kyc" check or provenance of coins in early 2012... no one would trust them.
It's evident that the gambling scenario has been changed in these years.
This has created a clear distortion for "early adopters" that have received free coins with airdrops, mining or other operations and now would have to "declare" a provenance unclear.
Issues with current regulations can be seen just as a reason to enforce some random rule against players/a way to be compliance with local regulations.

[Ziskinberg]

From the very start we were not really using a decentralized system in gambling, it's the same casinos and sportsbooks but our payment method is cryptocurrency.

There was this DirectBet.eu that was so popular back then, I liked its setup as a sportsbook because it offered complete privacy but even in its early years it was still shut down. So from there we already know where this will lead. KYC would eventually become normal and just like now, we already doubt casinos without a license, because scams happen mostly on unlicensed casinos.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

KYC casino didn't become a norm because everyone wants it, the casinos wants to be in complaint with government regulations so that they can operate freely in the jurisdiction of their choice and not be declared as illegal casino by the government of that state. Not minding the high number of regulated crypto casino, there are still individuals that hates KYC so much and have never submitted their personal information before to pass KYC requirement on any casino, they definitely will not use a casino that seeks for KYC. The government wants regulations and you can not fight it, so the trend is already irreversible but any web3 casino that truly maintain decentralization will remain the best choice for those players that hates KYC as long as the casino is reputable.

[Questat]

I think casinos and exchanges are no different, because before we used exchanges that were not licensed, but eventually they were required to get a license so the same treatment happened with bitcoin. it's not that we like it but we have just accepted it because we have no choice.

The only decentralized aspect that the government could not touch is how we transact with our crypto, but in terms of platforms, well, they would always take care of that as they want to earn from it, player protection is just a disguise.

[Sandra_hakeem]

There was this DirectBet.eu that was so popular back then, I liked its setup as a sportsbook because it offered complete privacy but even in its early years it was still shut down. So from there we already know where this will lead. KYC would eventually become normal and just like now, we already doubt casinos without a license, because scams happen mostly on unlicensed casinos.

So perhaps the question should be; how well has the new KYC/AML policies moderated the level of scam since its inception?

Nobody is satisfied with giving out their personal information, especially on a crypto casino but, they still do anyway because anything outside the regulatory bodies will eventually get you scammed, someday. I think the goal wasn't to wipe out decentralization because they obviously can't, but to coexist in a larger scale that people would most likely prefer.

[asriloni]

KYC/AML became the minimum requirement for the casino to acquire a license to operate safely without even worrying they will get a legal problem in the future. This is unavoidable thing because any country is getting more strict in controlling gambling and limiting casino.

Beside that the growth of so many scam casinos are also worrying people because once they play in the no KYC casino, they face the bigger risk to get scammed. The question is will you choose to lose your money or do a simple KYC to ensure your safety? I know not all of KYC casino is safe, but it give more confidence for us to use it.

The fact the become a web3 based is not making your platform free from being regulated. The decentralization can't fight the regulation and government due to the how powerful they are.

You don't like it, but it's the truth.

[Accardo]

No strong decentralized body would successfully take up this fight, the big shots all complied to the regulatory duties issued by the government, even if decentralized casinos wake up and scale up, in no distance time they'll have to bend to the regulatory rules. Because players now fear that casinos with zero kyc compliance stand a big risk of getting closed down by the government.

[Smack That Ace]

I don't think this trend is temporary. Rather it has taken irreversible turn.
Reason is very simple, it happened when major project began connecting with mainstream finance and caught attention of regulator. At that time there was no alternative to centralization and compliance.

Whether it's Stake or Rollbit, everyone has to follow game rule.

Who knows what the future hold! But I can clearly see that sustaining any fully decentralized space is getting tougher day by day.

[YOSHIE]

I wonder if this is an irreversible trend that will lead to total regulation of crypto and casinos, or if fans of decentralization will still fight back against it.

If we look at the direction of development and future of online casinos, it seems that they will not only be subject to one extreme pole, on the contrary, the opposite will be a hybrid model, it will be adjusted to comply with regional laws and will also adapt to a decentralized model. pure.

Such a situation is clear when global regulations as well as centralization are getting narrower and tighter for online casino platforms that are hampered by space, not having permits to operate, of course online casinos will not remain silent, they will utilize decentralized technology as we see today for example smart contracts and Web3 casinos will certainly have the durability in certain markets to be able to operate optimally.

But it is necessary to understand that regulated crypto casinos, centralized and decentralized have their respective advantages and disadvantages.
Where, as we know, currently regulated Casinos are generally legally safe for users to make it easier to carry out fiat-to-crypto transactions as they currently exist, Even though decentralized casinos can be said to survive regardless of the challenges, players still prioritize absolute privacy, this certainly does not involve third parties, meaning transparency via blockchain, in contrast to regulated casinos.

[mak013]

Long story short: I remember when regulations first started and casinos began introducing KYC/AML verification. Back then, the community was pretty mad that anyone would even try to regulate decentralized crypto casinos.

I feel like after a few years, things have completely flipped. Now, KYC/AML and licenses are the norm, and the community even expects them.

I wonder if this is an irreversible trend that will lead to total regulation of crypto and casinos, or if fans of decentralization will still fight back against it.

I’d prefer to stay on the decentralized side, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. Do you think Web3 will help the decentralized space survive, or will everything just move toward full regulation and centralization?

This is true everywhere. Everything is gradually becoming regulated. Cryptocurrencies, social networks - soon there will be no privacy left. Casinos are just part of this process. As a result, we'll have to choose between flashy, high-quality KYC-compliant casinos and a handful of small, weak decentralized casinos used only by oddballs.

Most users will accept KYC and take their money to those flashy casinos. As a result, those casinos can grow faster and roll out new features faster.

[free-bit.co.in]

Do you think Web3 will help the decentralized space survive

In my opinion, Web3 will rightly fight for true decentralization or privacy.

But mainstream gamblers and casual players will choose easy and safe option at the end of the day.

Governments tax and AML policies may eventually require most platform to come under full regulation.

No matter how much we clamor for preemption and decentralization, the way corporate grids and global regulation are taking hold, everything is headed for full centralization.

[Pandu Geddon]

I wonder if this is an irreversible trend that will lead to total regulation of crypto and casinos, or if fans of decentralization will still fight back against it.

The government is starting to pay attention to all businesses related to crypto. Even so, I am sure both will still have their own enthusiasts. Like you who still choose to be on the decentralized side, of course there are many users like you as well. But the centralized casino market is also growing rapidly. It doesn't mean they are more trustworthy, but everything becomes a choice for platform users.

[Frankolala]

Since casinos want to continue their business and stay align with government regulations, they have no option than to ask for KYC because the government is a centralised body and loves to control everything they put their hands on.

In the early days, government didn't have interest on bitcion because they thought it's just a hype but as time passes on, bitcoin started paving wave and becoming stronger, they had on option than to accept it in order to regulate any services using crypto. For now, we cannot have a decentralised casino because even the ones that proclaim to be no KYC does the opposite.

[Easy.Playw3.com]

The fact the become a web3 based is not making your platform free from being regulated. The decentralization can't fight the regulation and government due to the how powerful they are.

You don't like it, but it's the truth.

It seems to me that, in this thread, we should also discuss how KYC can be applied in Web3 casinos.
As far as I’m aware, Web3 casinos do indeed include KYC/AML policies in their terms and conditions (Because those are the license requirements). However, these are practically impossible to enforce when you log in using a non-custodial wallet.
Or have I perhaps overlooked something?

Or maybe this topic should be raised in the technical section?

[Orpichukwu]

I wonder if this is an irreversible trend that will lead to total regulation of crypto and casinos, or if fans of decentralization will still fight back against it.

Who is fighting a fight that will not lead to any positive result? We all know that for a casino to exist and stand full well, the government can’t leave it without them being licensed and asked to make KYC compulsory. Who ever that’s not ready can look for web3 casino which they can use that’s not licensed.

I’d prefer to stay on the decentralized side, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. Do you think Web3 will help the decentralized space survive, or will everything just move toward full regulation and centralization?

Some Web3 can still survive, but once they start growing bigger, they will be faced with regulatory hurdles, and when they don’t want to abide by them, they get blacklisted or they go offshore.

[Coyster]

It seems to me that, in this thread, we should also discuss how KYC can be applied in Web3 casinos.

It is mutually exclusive. A web3 casino is built on the blockchain, players connect their wallets and gamble, without the need to create gambling accounts. If a casino requires KYC or can request it at anytime, then it is not a web3 casino.

As far as I’m aware, Web3 casinos do indeed include KYC/AML policies in their terms and conditions (Because those are the license requirements).

That's because as far as i am aware, there are no true decentralized/web3 casinos. It is more of a buzzword, they simply use this term to attract players, but in truth, they are no different from the other regular centralized casinos.

Or maybe this topic should be raised in the technical section?

No! This is the appropriate section for this topic.

[Easy.Playw3.com]

I wonder if this is an irreversible trend that will lead to total regulation of crypto and casinos, or if fans of decentralization will still fight back against it.

Who is fighting a fight that will not lead to any positive result? We all know that for a casino to exist and stand full well, the government can’t leave it without them being licensed and asked to make KYC compulsory. Who ever that’s not ready can look for web3 casino which they can use that’s not licensed.

I’d prefer to stay on the decentralized side, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. Do you think Web3 will help the decentralized space survive, or will everything just move toward full regulation and centralization?

Some Web3 can still survive, but once they start growing bigger, they will be faced with regulatory hurdles, and when they don’t want to abide by them, they get blacklisted or they go offshore.

I see that the same issue I mentioned above is coming up here.
Web3 casinos are regulated, but logging in via a non-custodial wallet cannot force you to undergo KYC verification.
In other words, this is something the regulators did not foresee, and, as it turns out, the community likely does not understand it either.

It seems to me that, in this thread, we should also discuss how KYC can be applied in Web3 casinos.

It is mutually exclusive. A web3 casino is built on the blockchain, players connect their wallets and gamble, without the need to create gambling accounts. If a casino requires KYC or can request it at anytime, then it is not a web3 casino.

In that case, tell me: how would you go about enforcing KYC on a user who logs in via a non-custodial wallet? In my view, that’s practically impossible.
I mean, it would be possible, but only if all wallets were blocked and access to the casino were granted ONLY after completing KYC.

As far as I’m aware, Web3 casinos do indeed include KYC/AML policies in their terms and conditions (Because those are the license requirements).

That's because as far as i am aware, there are no true decentralized/web3 casinos. It is more of a buzzword, they simply use this term to attract players, but in truth, they are no different from the other regular centralized casinos.

This brings us back to the same point I mentioned above. If you can log in using a non-custodial wallet and play directly from that wallet, the casino has no way to stop a transaction. Unless they can manipulate the blockchain. Have you ever encountered something like that? Because I certainly haven’t.

[noorman0]

-snip-
Now, KYC/AML and licenses are the norm, and the community even expects them.

This does not imply an expectation; rather, in certain situations, users require legal certainty when casinos implement AML (Anti-Money Laundering) procedures.
After all, unfair practices by licensed casinos are still frequently encountered.

-snip-
However, these are practically impossible to enforce when you log in using a non-custodial wallet.
Or have I perhaps overlooked something?

Web3 is not always absolutely non-custodial; That is just a casino label, meaning you can log in by authorizing a non-custodial wallet. Moreover, this does not necessarily mean that the casino has obtained all the required wallet authorizations, including whether their architecture will also request authorization to place bets, or if you are instead required to deposit your funds into their "hot wallet" first. Another point to consider is that a smart contract can even be programmed with the capability to freeze funds.