I know what you’re talking about, but I still believe that if we keep talking about and educating people on Web3 technology, decentralization will continue to hold a significant share of the cryptocurrency market and, by extension, the gambling industry as well.
Most crypto gamblers want privacy, and Web3 platforms could offer that. But the biggest problem with decentralized gambling is the government. They will always find reasons to regulate the Web3 industry. These platforms would be forced to acquire licenses, which would have provisions for KYC.
These centralized casinos spend so much on promotion that is why they are popular. Educating people about Web3 gambling would require funds for advertising. And I don't know if any of these decentralized platforms have the financial resources to engage in these massive promotions.
The thing is, decentralized Web3 casinos are already licensed (not sure if all of them but I know at least one), yet you can still play anonymously by connecting solely via a non-custodial wallet. In practice, this allows you to bypass KYC
I’m not suggesting a fight against regulations, that would be impossible. Some people will certainly prefer a safe, regulated environment under government protection. My point is that, thanks to Web3 technology, those who wish to remain anonymous will be able to do so.
There’s an even better solution: Web3 casinos that hold licenses, offering the same level of security as traditional deposit-based casinos. The difference is that with Web3 casinos, you don’t make a deposit, instead, you play directly from your own, anonymous non-custodial wallet on the blockchain. This eliminates the risk of having your withdrawals blocked or being asked to complete a KYC verification, simply because, from a technical standpoint, it’s impossible, unless they were somehow able to manipulate the blockchain itself.
I understand you clearly and I know what you are talking about. Even by looking at login of some casino, there is login by "Metamask", this help people to login and make approval from there wallet and that's all. However, when there is an alternative, know that it comes with limits. There are limits to what you can do without a kyc accounts and full and approved kyced accounts. At most, some casino will not give you more than $5k, where is the freedom in the alternate they gave, it is not fair as it was when there was no kyc then.
And the great thing is that in a licensed casino, you can play anonymously, directly from, for example, MetaMask.
As for the limits set by casinos, that is entirely their own private business, how they manage them is up to them. Taking away someone’s freedom to manage their own business is not decentralization.
I agree that the trend is similar, but the timing of regulation is different. When regulations were first introduced for exchanges, Web3 was known to very few people. Exchanges had no choice but to comply. Today, however, Web3 technology is well-developed, all that’s needed is to talk about it and provide education so that people can begin using it safely. I believe this is a good path forward to ensure that decentralization remains a significant part of the cryptocurrency market and in this case also casinos.
You are right here, the regulations is different and again, the casino company doesn't process money as compare to the casino. However, I think there are many casino that are not compliance and they are operating. If the way SEC is strict is the way casino regulations are, there might be more problems.
In my opinion, it would be better if casino remain Dex than trying to combine two services together. A casino can be non kyc and will be able to pull the numbers.
Sure, a casino can be "no KYC" and unlicensed. But in this case, you get the perfect combination: a decentralized Web3 casino that is licensed, yet allows you to remain anonymous and bypass KYC by playing directly via MetaMask. In my opinion, it’s a great solution.
It will get worse, yes. I think the regulation will continue to advance, but I do not think it will reach the 100% of market. I think it is more likely that there will be coexistence between a highly regulated commercial market on one side and a space for open protocols, for self-custody and decentralized applications on the other, obviously with far fewer options and less appeal.
But you know what I find controversial about the thinking of people who say this?
Accept crypto never necessarily meant decentralization... a casino receives Bitcoin, holds the users balance, controls the games and "decides" when release withdrawals. So, even without KYC it remains a centralized intermediary, and that is why governments saw the "weak point" there to target and impose regulations.
It is the same with exchanges... if we stuck to P2P, we would never have these problems.
So, there is no point in blaming casinos or exchanges if we are the ones who chose centralization and the most vulnerable point to trust with our crypto.
Honestly you know how i feel about regulation, casinos try it at all costs to show that they are serious, but regulation or certification is not enough to guarantee that you will not suffer a scam or a robbery of your money.
This is the thing you need to keep in mind, it is not a guarantee.
There is always some level of risk, especially when the human factor is involved. In my view, decentralized casinos minimize this risk as much as possible. With Web3 technology, you don’t have to rely on trust - wondering whether a casino will pay out your funds or not, because you play directly from your own anonymous, non-custodial wallet (such as MetaMask), with everything governed by the blockchain and the smart contracts implemented on it.
