While there is a certainly a lot of debate over the benefits and downsides of governmental tracking of personal information such as names, addresses, etc. (particularly in terms of its implications for user privacy), the need for KYC must be balanced against the right to privacy. As such, it's important to ensure that KYC regulations are as minimal as possible while still providing enough data for financial institutions to effectively do their jobs. In the case of cryptocurrency casinos, the companies are required to verify user's identities in order to comply with KYC/AML laws. However, there is a growing demand for more privacy-oriented casinos that do not require any personal information from their users.
Ultimately, it's likely going to end up being a mix of both. Complete anonymity may be impossible in the near future as cryptocurrency casinos and other related companies require some degree of individual identification in order to comply with KYC/AML laws. On the other hand, a more private-oriented casino run on blockchain technology might be able to provide an alternative for those who feel strongly about privacy.
That is a very very tough thing to balance. Like maybe instead of having all of our KYC, we could have like some sort of database of "criminals" which means we could give some ID number of us or whatever and then we would compare that with the criminal database and if we are not criminals then we wouldn't have to do the whole KYC thing with pictures and what not.
If you are worried that criminals wouldn't give their ID, then you should realize that they won't give their KYC neither to begin with lol. I mean if I killed someone or dealt drugs or whatever bad thing I did, you really think it could be caught on KYC? No way, that doesn't make sense at all to me for sure.
