Topic: Gambling and KYC - page 2. (Read 284 times)

Given that most crypto gambling sites operate outside of the law KYC isn't really required.
Very few site operators even bother making a person sign off that they are of legal age.

KYC is safety program to avoid money laundry and multiple account, I agree with that but in gambling world KYC can become the worst thing. Theory and reality are different, there's fact gambling users is people under 18 or person who want to do criminal in gambling site. Gambling is industry and only need fresh fund to run money circulation fast, if KYC become rules, money will send into their competitor who not include KYC. Not all people want their ID save by other even for fun and money, included me.

so fauecethub did shutdown ? oh damn i didnt knew it but i was using it a long time ago and the site was succesful  .

this site were mainly a faucet and not really a gambling site but they are being forced to do a kyc while the actual gambling site arent really  . however a real gambling site are also being enforced to have thier licenses  . having a licenses is i think not also easy and harder than enforocing a kyc but still many gambling sites dont have a license and a kyc yet but this makes thier credibility lessen compare to those who have it .

If I am not wrong more than 85% gambling site have ventage on their terms and conditions regarding KYC even though they aren't forcing you for KYC at the beginning. Very rarely you will found gambling site who is against KYC. Those do not ask KYC totally then most likely they have no license or they aren't forced from government or licensed authorities to implement KYC system. To be honest I am really not familiar why governments, exchange, gambling or any other crypto related sites asking for KYC, what is the exact goals expect so called money laundering.

I think it's because of the money inside the exchanges and gambling site. Perhaps, the exchanges save the customers money, and that money is not going anywhere, so they need to implement KYC/AML. People give the money to the exchanges in large amounts, so the exchanges feel it requires them to know who their customers. But for the gambling site, the money will be at the house or the players, so when the house gets the profit from the player, they will keep that profit from themselves. That will be the same if the player wins, they will keep the profit for them, and they will withdraw the money.

Presumably the cost of implementing KYC/AML runs into billions or either because it is "hassle" at somehow to the gamblers that would like to play, but requires first to do KYC in which is embarrassing.

In general, majority of the gamblers hate KYC. They tend to avoid those gambling sites that demands it, so that's why gambling owners don't implement it because gamblers will just avoid them and just go through other gambling sites that don't require KYC.

You mean, possession here? But you have a point here. Very few gamblers can really win big time and most of the time when that happens, the casino will ask for certain documentation to validate the user. And I think, that is unfair. But we can't argue with them because in their Terms and Conditions, they will put a statement that they have the right to request further details from their player, when the situation calls for. And they have all the right to do that because they are holding your funds. And if the site has no intentions of releasing the funds, they will make all sort of excuses.

Like the famous saying " the house always wins" the chances of losing all your money to them is high so KYC isn't really a priority because it will remain in their procession except in a few instances where players win and forced to undergo KYC before being able to withdraw their winnings.

There is some slight difference.
Chances of someone losing money in gambling sites is very high as compared an exchange(some people store money in them then withdraw while others exchange for other coins, very few actually do active day trading). That's why there is no pressure by gambling sites to impose KYC/AML on customers because many never get to withdraw it.

But i think you have already seen a number of cases where someone makes a big winnings and tries to withdraw. That's when you start seeing KYC verification kicking in most gambling platforms.

Definitely. Since they are online gambling, the government will be hard to control or give pressure to them. Moreover, some of them may be totally anonymous and don't know where they basically. So, in this case, who will force them to implement KYC/AML? While for exchanges, they are commonly known to register in a certain country. Then, it will be easy to handle them doing KYC/AML. (IMHO as an amateur) 

In my own view, it's because there is no pressure from the government. No hard and strict regulations imposed. Different from how fiat gambling is regulated.

Unlike in exchanges, gambling sites don't really hold their user's funds for a long time. It's like a gambler will just deposit on their gambling session, play and withdraw right away. If their user loses, no one to blame but themselves. Compare to exchanges where sometimes it was treated by a wallet by anyone, users here at least need protection.

But this is only my view as we all know gambling sites and exchange site does have a different nature on which the latter really needs a strong implementation of KYC for an obvious reason.

Is there really such a big difference ? I don't think so.

Now with payment processors it is maybe different, but with exchanges vs. gambling sites, I don't see any differences. It depends on what the people behind those sites are trying to do and what are their longterm plans. And if they are bothered with laws and authorities can get a hold of them, when they break or not follow the laws

There are exchanges and gambling sites that are run anonymously more or less, so forcing them to implement KYC/AML is not easy, if they feel safe and are ok with operating in a grey area.  

Lets assume, there was indeed a difference. You would then have to think about, what customers are trying to achieve by using their service, because there is a big difference imo. When using a payment processor/exchange, you are getting something in return, that has more or less the same value and people are thus more worried with the legitimacy of the site. KYC/AML, like it or not, gives your site just this legitimacy to a certain extent. So to grow and get some market share, implementing KYC/AML will help you. You will lose some customers, who refuse to go through this process, but the majority will swallow it and it gets you a lot of possible customers in the future (because your site is considered legit and people trust you with their money).

In contrast to that, people who use a gambling site, will get nothing in return (just some fun maybe ), they will lose their money sooner or later. This leads to them not being too worried with the legitimacy of the site they are playing at. The gambling site itself doesn't have to worry too much with KYC, because their business is just running fine without KYC/AML.

There is certainly more to it, but in the end it comes down to business decisions, if you are surrendering to the pressure from governments or not.

I'm a bit curious here. Why is it easier (compared to exchanges, payment processors, etc.) to run a gambling site without being forced to implement KYC/AML?

I even remember FaucetHub (A service that allowed you to create your own faucet) shutting down some time ago because they were being pressured into implementing KYC just because they were "storing" funds for users, even though, most of the payments that the users were receiving were "dust payments". So again, how is this any different from gambling sites?