Of course I'd like decentralization to win and for us to keep our right to privacy. But what can we really do about it?... all that's left is to hope for fully no KYC casinos and there are fewer and fewer of them.
It’s true that there are fewer and fewer casinos that don’t require KYC. That’s why I think Web3 is a great solution.
In my opinion, casinos without KYC are still possible, but such casinos must completely abandon the idea of accepting fiat deposits. Fiat payments are impossible without the involvement of banks, and banks require KYC and AML procedures.🙋
Also, such online casinos will not be able to obtain official licenses. Regulatory authorities in all countries are under pressure from the FATF and will not issue licenses to casinos that demonstratively refuse KYC procedures.
Such casinos may also run into problems with major game providers. Major game providers obtain their own licenses and will likely not cooperate with casinos without KYC.
Therefore, if an online casino wants to operate without KYC, it will have to make significant sacrifices. Deposits will have to be accepted exclusively in cryptocurrency. Over time, in the future, we may even reach a point where such casinos will only accept Monero.💁
I’m afraid this is one of the sadder possibilities. That said, I believe there will still be room for casinos that don’t accept fiat currency and operate without a license. There won’t be many of them, for sure, but I suspect that sooner or later they’ll find a place to hide. I’ve heard a bit about relatively liberal laws in Cambodia (though only for foreigners), but I don’t have any confirmation of that yet.
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.
Not the community I am in on this forum,,, talking about the paid pools and BSFL even. I know almost all my crowd are very anti KYC so much so we only play at casinos that do not ask for it. Personally, I may test a new casino with deposit but as soon as they will ask me for it, goodbye. Before Sportsbet, and now Jackpotter, Rainbet, these are where I play as they honor withdrawals the way they accept deposits,,, without asking for KYC.
Which community are you talking about?
As I mentioned earlier, and you surely recall this, the introduction of regulations and KYC requirements to crypto casinos was not well received by the community on Bitcointalk. And I now notice negative comments and sometimes even accusations of a scam in threads concerning various new casinos because of lack of a license. I am speaking generally about what I have observed in the Bitcointalk Gambling section during years.
I'd say crypto casinos should fight to keep decentralization because that's the whole reason people came to them in the first place. Privacy and control over your own funds are what set them apart from regular casinos and without that they're just another regulated site that happens to take bitcoin...
If the community gives that up without a fight there won't be much left to choose from.
I feel the same way, but unfortunately, I also see the community increasingly choosing the security provided by regulations over freedom. I believe that if we want the community to move back toward a path closer to decentralization, we should promote Web3 more, as, in my view, it is a technology that can help us stay true to the spirit of decentralization.
Even though I don't like the idea of KYC, centralisation and regulation, I do not have sufficient confidence in web3 casinos yet because they are yet to build the type of reputation we see in some centralized casinos. This reputation is what will likely motivate someone to use a casino because everyone wants where to play and be able to get their winning without being exposed to risk.
That is quite understandable. Until we fully grasp and test something, it is always best to proceed with caution. Naturally, there will be Web3 casinos that turn out to be scams, much like in the Web2 space, so conducting proper research is essential. Just as technology evolves, so too do scammers. However, if more people start talking about this and educating others, I believe it could be an opportunity to increase interest in Web3 decentralization. After all, that is precisely why Satoshi created the blockchain and Bitcoin.
Even though I don't like the idea of KYC, centralisation and regulation, I do not have sufficient confidence in web3 casinos yet because they are yet to build the type of reputation we see in some centralized casinos. This reputation is what will likely motivate someone to use a casino because everyone wants where to play and be able to get their winning without being exposed to risk.
Even though there are currently far more casinos that require KYC procedures, that doesn’t mean things will always stay this way. I believe the evolution of AI could influence the development of casinos perhaps, within our lifetime, AI might even create a casino itself (though I’m not sure where the profits would end up, lol). In any case, I think that over time, a balance will emerge between KYC requirements and decentralization one that prevents fraudsters from bypassing AML protocols. I envision a setup that strikes a middle ground between regulatory oversight and the protection of players' personal information.
I must admit that I’m also a bit concerned about the speed at which AI is developing; in this regard, I would lean toward increasing regulation.
However, when it comes to bypassing KYC, I believe Web3 is a good technology for it. Some casinos, in order to obtain a license, include KYC/AML rules in their terms and conditions, but, in practice, they cannot enforce verification when a user plays by connecting directly via a non-custodial wallet. Simply put, they cannot manipulate the blockchain. Most people aren’t aware of this, and I think we should talk about it more to get back on the path toward decentralization.
Decentralization is the best option for those who are very concerned about their privacy, but now the situation has changed, and casinos need KYC regulations. This is because the government requires KYC, if they can't determine where the money comes from, they will never be able to control crime. Another reason is related to licensing and the security of users' money. The government will only grant licenses when KYC is in place, and users now won't trust platforms without KYC because they fear their money could be scammed at any time.
Right, so it all boils down to whether a user wants to play in a licensed/regulated casino or a decentralized one. If someone chooses a regulated casino, I don’t see any need for them to use cryptocurrencies at all. After all, they can just play in a standard, regulated casino using fiat currency, right?
That said, I’ll repeat that there is a Web3 option: casinos that hold licenses - meaning users can turn to the authorities for help if any issues arise, while still allowing for anonymity by letting users play directly from a non-custodial wallet (i.e., a wallet that isn’t registered to anyone). It would be good to talk more about this, as it seems like a very good solution, and not just for casinos, but for many financial services, and perhaps even for banks in the future.
Most casinos didn’t introduce KYC because they like it but because they want to follow government regulations and to avoid problem with laws. But some players ain’t comfortable with sharing their personal information, so they don’t use any casinos that require KYC.
Even though regulation has now become common, reputable web3 casinos that truly maintain decentralization can still attract this kind of players. However players still need to verify that the casino is trustworthy before they use it.
And, of course, every casino should be verified and researched, regardless of whether it’s Web2 or Web3. It would be great, however, to see the spirit of decentralization take a stronger hold, rather than continuing to lean toward centralization. If we all make a greater effort to test and vet these decentralized Web3 options, I believe it could actually work.
