Topic: How to self exclude from anonymous gambling sites - page 30. (Read 6797 times)

Why make things difficult for yourself with this temporary solution? If you learn self-control and the ability to say no when you need to say no, that's going to be more beneficial to you in the long run and the benefit of locking out your funds isn't that good of a solution anyway because you can still deposit money to fund your gambling habit so besides being a temporary solution, it's a bad one at that. With learning self-control you end up affecting your whole life too, your decision making and being able to stay calm and collected when under the pressure is probably a good way to go so stop with this temporary stuff and go for the permanent albeit difficult one.

I agree, for the the best choice is to just really cash out, in the first hand, you wanted to get out with that self-exclusion, so why still left some, including those tokens? Besides you should take control, I mean if you just stake it there, you still have to check from time to time and if crashes, then you lose all your hardwork.

So it's better to leave no room for error, self-exclude and remove all your coins from that gambling sites.

Even if it reputable, the market is still the one who's going to control, if the coins crashes or not.

There's no doubt about it.  Of course, KYC is persistently and steadily required for crypto-payments by a growing number of casinos and, in general, almost any sites that use crypto-currency payments.  This is obviously simply the implementation of regulations, instructions and laws issued by the governments of many countries.  But even for those who pass such laws, maintaining the anonymity of payments sometimes remains an important option.  And this struggle for the possibility of anonymity of payments, as I think, firstly, is very much in demand by players, and indeed by all people.  Secondly, providing personal data to anyone who asks is not at all safe.  This is even a violation of the safety principle. 

I hope that the world of anonymous payments will still exist parallel to the world of personalized payments, since this is simply what users need quite often.  And the legislature will still find some kind of compromise.

You can't, if you want you can do it in USDT but that's also a risk.
You can also use a fixed deposit in your bank (aka CD in America), the money will be locked but then you gamble on FIAT to appreciate.

So far in the FIAT vs SUZUKI test seems like SUZUKI wins (*SUZUKI = a nickname for Saotshi Nakmokto lol)

 

Well, that can be a good option, but the thing is, how can you be so sure that the asset you stake will grow or be returned to you for the same amount you stake? Of course, you need to make sure first that the platform you will stake on is trusted, realiable, and has a good reputation to make sure your asset is secured. What if your asset value drops while in the staking state and, as you said, it will be locked for a period of days? Then you cannot swap it to a stable or safe currency before it fully drops. In short, there are still pros and cons to staking your assets. If you really want to stop yourself from gambling, then better not think of it at all. Learn to control yourself, not exclude yourself, because it will not help you at all. You are just forcing yourself to stop, not teaching yourself to control.

Totally really depends on the operator if he would really be doing those money laundering things or not, but if we do speak about mixing money literally then we can really say that its inevitable considering about
ins and outs of those funds on a certain platform then it would really be just that a normal operation. Why people do really trying out to compare both things on which we know that their function and business
path would really be that different. It is really just hat gambling platforms are really that known to possible launder money but since these places or things are highly regulated then as an owner then
you wont really be putting up yourself into such huge problem. Pretty sure that they are really that heavily centralized and regulated.

Dont know on whats up into peoples minds on why it is really looking like a big deal when it comes to this, considering that they are really that different business model?

Even though as we all understand that casinos cannot perform the same functions as mixers, but can be used to serve the purpose for some time, when we are to talk also about KYC, then i think there's much to discuss since most of the KYC requirements challenges are coming from the gamblers themselves and not the rate of attacks raged by them because of what they experience when thy are not complying with the mandatory conditions for KYC as well.

I highly agree, it is still best to have a full control of our money.  Trusting our money t to an anonymous owner of the staking site just to prevent us from gambling is very risky.  Although there is profit to be seen in there, I do not think it is worth the risk.  If we do not want to gamble with the money, why not entrust it to our partners if we are married or to our parents if we are still single.  This way at least the people who are holding our money is our love ones.


Any licensed centralized financial service will eventually implement KYC because it is required by the authority to have their service continue operating.  There is nothing a company can do but to follow the authority rules and regulations.

I don't think it is the best option to put all in stacking and consider it as a self-exclusion because the money is still at some kind of risk, if the staking token/coin crashes then we will lose part of the cake, and that just for holding the wrong coin. So, i think is better to change it to fiat or cash, and put it in a safe box, that way if something happens to crypto markets it will not affect us at all.

Many reputable casino sites have self exclusion feature, and also most of us don't gamble on small sites or any other site which is not reputed.
so this question of anonymous casino is not applicable to most of us, or we can directly go to sites like gamble aware, where we can self exclude from signin up for other casinos.
or the user can use some extension, to block gambling sites, this type of lot of methods available if we look online.
staking coins is not very safe for periods like a year.

You are right and @Reatim is also right, only that the scopes at which you guys are right are not the same. There is a school of thought that suggests that casinos are m!xing money as well, this is what makes people start viewing the mode of operation of casinos with that of m!xers, but it is not like that when it comes to the business model itself. If we view it like that, you will hardly see a single company that does not m!x money for money laundry purposes, it only depends on the people operating it. There is no way we can use the two business models to judge each other, and casinos can never be a sole m!xer, that's is not their core duty. But at times, casinos launder money as well, and they get to confuse the government with transactions to achieve their aim internally, this style is never new. This is what I believe that @Reatim is talking about. However, you are right since m!xing is not their core job.

Most casinos accept Monero, which we know hides the origin and the end of a transaction. Considering the concept of a mixer wherein it does the same thing as XMR, then why in the future it won't be made mandatory for every licensed casino to accept KYC. The only difference that I understand about mixing service is that they can only hide transaction of Bitcoin for privacy purpose.

That being said, if you want to hide your transaction made towards casino, you can use XMR for both deposit and withdrawal. This is the reason why casino will always delay any withdrawals that are big and ask for KYC, but if someone wants to launder money they only need to do it in small amounts. This is why we will see KYC made mandatory in the future for crypto casino.

Mixing services can't be compared with casinos... Mixer services serve to hide the origin of the coins, you can cover your traces by using mixers, and it's clear why governments are making moves against mixers. And maybe you are right that casinos will be the next target, but that will not be for the same reasons, in many countries gambling is legal and casinos will just have to register there and pay taxes if they wish to operate.

But I would like to believe that we will always have some casinos around that will not have mandatory KYC, it's the spirit of crypto... to be free and open for all.

It depends much on the context and the numbers you look and how you interpret them. In my opinion, Anti money laundering measures are somewhat enough for criminals to have a harder time trying to conceal the origin of their black money, they will not deposit their funds to launder as eagerly as before in a casino, thanks to those measures and the government agencies behind them. However, we need to also understand the market for money laundering is huge and the demand for money laundered is even bigger, hence why criminals will continue to try to avoid those measures imposed by agencies.

Ironically, because of corruption and all the money out at stake in such Underground Market, there will be always officers and bureucrats willing to do the laundering in behalf of the criminals, in exchange for a good percentage. So, we (the common people who just want to protect our money and personal data) will continuously deal with those AML measures, while those well connected with politicians will do around them easily, without even appearing on the radar.

Money laundered by top politicians and businessmen are meant for significant purpose and these influential men doesn't give up so easily except they're 100% handled by the law. They do everything within measure to relieve pressure. We don't entangle business with fairs of gambling because we ought to produce the necessary information and strategies to ensure we're on a safer side. Gambling can become very risky if we've failed to reach the peak of our targets, thereby leading our aims to become very different from our initial plans. KYC was innovated to safeguard the entire process of verification of a user on gambling site and casino.

You're right, we shouldn't be too far away from the truth, despite the massive presence of the anti money laundering agencies, kyc requirements and other control measures to tackle on this menace of scam and theft, yet we have alot of people engaging in that, should we say th measures in place are not being effective enough or the people were just too being smart over those measures against them

Well, you are right, it's like when we say that authorities or governments hates being challenged, it's like after the launch of bitcoin, and banks discovering that it has the potential to put them out of business in a coupe of years, and they began fighting the technology, looking for all sort of means to destroy bitcoin, they tried  with several bans, hackings and all sort, but none have worked.

It is also same when we talk about money laundering, banks are number one money launders, and they are ever ready and willing to help the rich and powerful launder money as long as they get their cut. But bank hate people laundering money through other means or sources, because it's like taking the potential money they would have made from you to someone else, this is why they fight money launders who launder money through other vices or channel outside their own channel.

Banks are institutions that have become so big that their right hand does not know what their left hand is doing, so even with all of those policies in place, powerful individuals can always convince enough people within the bank in order to allow them to launder some money with them, also while the regulations are strong the punishments against banks coming from governments are always very light, so even if for us a fine of a few billion dollars may seems like a lot of money, this is nothing if the bank earned tens of billions laundering money and no one goes to jail, as in that case the bank has all the incentives to keep laundering money.

Correct  all laundering that happened as far as I know connected either Banks or maybe insider from government if not the officials are the direct involved , there are so much  issues about exchange and mixers and sooner it is gambling sites but launderer will keep working in their launder no matter what happened to those mentioned businesses so in the end? the losers are us who only uses crypto for fun and for living .

This is a misconception, ordinary people are involved in money laundering, if you don't know, you don't know. Also, you don't have to have billions before you launder money, you can launder money in person, or with some people using your business no matter how usual the business is, it could be used to launder the money. Even a barber's shop as small as it is with the view that ordinary people own it is being used to launder money, after all, the government can't take the inventory of how many heads you cut in a day. What those guys do is to build it to taste and employ more hands and keep the business running while the illicit flows continue unabated, that's even if they can detect it at all. The trick of laundering money is enormous and mostly unsuspected, and those launderers are now getting better than using the Shell Corps which the government are now focusing its attention on. You will be surprised how they do this nowadays, even the local farmers and sellers are also used these days for the purpose and you think it's business as usual.

As for KYC, you can't also totally undermine its importance, as much as you do not appreciate it, it's a very good reason why some people do not do legal deals with their accounts. Just like the last post I read and responded to, the guy could not do KYC simply because the law enforcers in his country would catch him. You never can tell how people will get to do as they like without KYC and even duping people unchallenged and using fake identities. But they get to rethink many unlawful actions due to the KYC. And for casinos to ask for KYC and also fully registered and regulated means they are answerable no matter how little it is. You can't take away that as well.