Topic: Roobet.com | Crypto’s Fastest Growing Casino 🦘 - page 7. (Read 84425 times)

TBF, even when bitcoin's mempool is congested AF players pretty much just turn to low fee altcoins as they are more familiar with them hence, easier to use as oppose to LN which needs a decent amount of time for the learning curve.

Though I still have a theory that a very few folks could be using LN to gain more privacy since tumbling and mixing are prohibited in most crypto services.

the thing with time is curious
we never want to lose money specially for a scam or for a bad bet but it happens some times, the main thing is being ok with it and don't losing your mind
remaining centered and remembering that life is more than only money.

Yes, I'm just going by my own experience. 
I used LN for a while when Bitcoin fees were really high.  But, to be honest, I just got tired of using it later, since I didn’t notice any serious savings on transaction fees, simply because there weren’t too many payments themselves.  In my case, it was clearly not thousands of transactions per month.  Eventually I just got tired of it and stopped using LN. 
The majority of cryptocurrency users apparently do the same thing.
[/quote]

Why you get tired - is it more time/effort consuming?

So what's the consensus on LN usage fro crypto casinos? When the network is stable - LN is not necessary, right? so the majority of time...

Yes, I'm just going by my own experience. 
I used LN for a while when Bitcoin fees were really high.  But, to be honest, I just got tired of using it later, since I didn’t notice any serious savings on transaction fees, simply because there weren’t too many payments themselves.  In my case, it was clearly not thousands of transactions per month.  Eventually I just got tired of it and stopped using LN. 
The majority of cryptocurrency users apparently do the same thing.

Lightning Network can satisfy people with not too small fund too as I know and if you see centralized exchanges accept Lightning Network for deposits and withdrawals widely, people will choose LN.

The main barrier is limited adoption on Lightning Network on centralized platforms.

Your post reveals a fact that if transaction fee is feasible to pay, people will mostly choose Bitcoin blockchain for their transactions. Why?

It's because Bitcoin blockchain is a strongest and safest one for on chain transactions. People who move funds through Bitcoin blockchain will not have to fear that there will be reverse on their confirmed transactions. A bigger a fund need to move is, more reasons to choose Bitcoin blockchain.

In my opinion, too much time has already passed since the invention of LN and the implementation of the corresponding protocol. 
Taking into account the general pace of development of the cryptocurrency payment industry, we must admit that LN was still unable to occupy the required volume of the payments market with a small commission.  Indeed, during a quiet Bitcoin mempool, when average commissions do not exceed $1-2, all users are accustomed to paying in the mainnet and do not use LN.  You should also take into account the unnecessary difficulties with opening/closing channels in LN, and also take into account that the service is actually custodial.  Therefore, many users do not want to use this protocol.  And in general, in everyday life, few players need hundreds or thousands of cryptocurrency transfers when commissions are already starting to cost quite a lot.  So for now, the prospect of introducing LN as a whole looks at least controversial.
 I think that Roobet shouldn’t take this too seriously either.

There are platforms supported it in the past bull run, when Lightning Network was something hot with its suddenly adoption growth, but later Lightning Network feature for deposits and withdrawals were removed. It means something about demand from users and technical resources of platform to handle LN transactions.

That is true, for Lightning Network and for Segwit addresses too.

It takes like four to five years ^{since September 2017} for centralized exchanges to start support Segwit addresses for their customers. It's a long waiting time and their widely support only comes after Segwit adoption grew significantly.

See Lightning Network and Segwit adoptions.
https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-segwit-adoption/
https://www.lookintobitcoin.com/charts/lightning-network-capacity/

Yes.  This is true. 
Here, however, it is not possible to somehow decide so that the number of altcoins and stablecoins themselves used in crypto payments would be small.  And it is desirable that there be one or two Altcoins, which would be for most casinos the main alternative to Bitcoin specifically to save players on commissions.  It is also necessary that there should be one main stablecoin, accepted by almost all casinos.  This would make it possible to structure cryptocurrency payments throughout the entire gambling industry and would be convenient for players. 
But I still don’t understand which Altcoin is best suited for widespread adoption in almost all casinos as a “gambling coin”

I mean it makes sense not to do it because it is not that widely accepted or used. Even a lot of exchanges do not have that option for bitcoin, which shows you that there is no demand for it. Exchanges are great tools to see if something is popular or not, they would list even the worst coin possible, a scam coin, literally just for money laundering, as long as it has some trading volume or a profit making possibility for them.

If we are talking about something that even they do not really end up using, then it means that we are not going to get that anywhere near it. So, let's focus on the real thing, the best solution to this is always altcoins and stablecoins, just add them as an alternative and every casino will be fine about it in the end.

You're probably right, USDT has partly solved payment problems and has advantages over using LN.  
However, this coin is in any case a coin with insufficient reliability, which should not be compared with Bitcoin.  I also think that some players, of whom there are many, simply do not want to rely entirely on payments in USDT, because they understand that holding large amounts of this stablecoin is quite risky.  This is all of course a minus in using USDT.  Well, commissions for transfers are also not exactly “dust”, as they say


Yeah!  Exactly!  This is exactly the topic that I remembered about.  By the way, when reading it you come to the conclusion that not a single large reliable casino has yet implemented LN.  All these projects can be said to be at the experimental stage.


Unfortunately, we have not yet heard about any new, revolutionary development of the L2 protocol for BTC.  So far, everyone in this matter refers to LN.  In general, I believe that L2 for BTC with the necessary scaling for mass payments is simply impossible to do.  Even theoretically, with a full load of Bitcoin blocks, the load from LN channels alone can only provide approximately 50-60 million users for household payments.  So it is unlikely that it will be possible to make a successful L2 for BTC and promote the mass addition of Bitcoin payments.  
So far, in any case, this is so, a brilliant inventor of Satoshi’s level apparently has not yet been born.


However, if we return to the topic about Roobet.com, then I think the devs are doing the right thing in not bothering to use LN. 
And they do not announce the use of such technology in their casino.

I hope other L2 solutions for bitcoin becomes more known like on liquid network for instance.

There are those that are beginner friendly and does not struggle with fairly huge amounts like LN hence it's possible more people might opt for it once awareness has increased but maybe it's just a matter of time.

In addition to everything you've already said, since casinos added usdt, it's become easier for people to play more freely without worrying about large sudden drops in the price of bitcoin and altcoins and the usdt withdrawal fee at my signature casino. Is just 1$ which is worth it, especially since you only need less than 3$ as a minimum withdrawal, so it is more advantageous for casinos and customers to use usdt rather than still struggling to place LN, such as card games. Chance is not a means of getting rich quick and is not even a place for a person to think or plan to play with the aim of making a profit, so for casinos, adding what gives them the most advantage with less cost is the best way

I remember this thread compiling the list of casino that have Bitcoin lightning network feature check this thread https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoin-lightning-network-casinos-5489548

Also the his site https://top69cryptocasinos.com/bitcoin-lightning-casino/ although the main purpose is to gather a traffic for his site but its good to see that list since maybe there's some casino that can catch people's attention if they are interested to know about casino implementing this feature. Although as always we should be aware that there are casino which the reputation is questionable so we should take proper precaution and always ask people's opinion regarding on casino reputation if its really safe to proceed to use their services.

Yeah, I also remember the discussion about the need to integrate LN into payments for casinos here in the Gambling section.  There, indeed, some of our colleagues on the forum mentioned in their posts some casinos that had already integrated such payments. 
But I also think that you are right that such integration is quite inconvenient for players, and for the casino it is additional labor costs and it is also necessary to hire specialists in LN, which the casino probably does not need.  Apparently that's why large casinos don't do this. 
In addition, of course, some widespread Altcoins, such as Tron, can completely replace Bitcoin in casino gambling.  In addition, they are much more convenient than messing around with LN. 
So, probably the devs of many casinos are doing the right thing in not yet integrating LN payments.

Casinos actually have developers to build up their platforms and infrastructures for their casino operations and interactions with different cryptocurrencies. I believe they have no technical problems to build up extra infrastructures for Lightning Network integration.

Legal issues and their concern on demands from users and how users will use LN in a clean or 'dirty' ways are probably their main concerns.

Casinos can not operate beyond all existing laws and regulations and they will not want their platforms be exploited by users with money laundering through Lightning Network.

For sure there are many things to consider why some casinos don't consider using LN. One is it might be challenging to set up the LN and not all casinos have the skill or resources for it. Some casinos might worry about rules and laws that might affect using LN in different places. Also most users don't know or trust the LN, casinos might hold off until it's more widely understood. So, it's a mix of tech skills, rules, money, user comfort and network stability to consider using Lightning network.

As far as im aware that there are some gambling sites or new platforms that offers that LN payments which i have seen on this gambling board, cant just remember the name but they had integrated LN.

If those sites or platforms did able to make out such integration then why these old ones or known ones cant be able to do so?
Usually people would really be finding that LN solution on the time that Bitcoins network condition is congested but we do know that its not happening all the time
and this is why it isnt really just that much of a focus on regarding on this one and also we do have tons of altcoins options as well.

Yeah!  Indeed, the network has stabilized, although sometimes there are some periods of too busy mempool. 

I probably agree with you that LN is still developing too slowly for players to actually use this technology to save on commissions.  Now it even began to seem to me that LN still seems to become a dead-end technology, the demand for which with the mass adoption of Bitcoin will be too low.  But it is also worth considering that the technology itself, with the opening of separate channels and at the same time the custodial meaning of payments, is too complex for ordinary users. 
So yes, perhaps there is no need to rush into integrating LN into crypto casinos.

That's awesome, I try to do that in any place that allows me to do it as well, that's why I know and a lot of my friends does the same thing, so I assumed that there were more of us out there, and you confirming it just makes it more sure for me that there are other people who do the same thing. Obviously it's clear that we are talking about a situation that would benefit everyone, because as a gambler you end up with less fee, and you know exactly how much you make or lose.

If you lost 2 bitcoins in 2014, that would be something you regret a ton right now, but if you lost 200 dollars, then you know it's okay. I agree that altcoins would not be bad idea, but sometimes those do go up a lot as well, so that's always a bit of a trouble in the end.

That's me, my favorite coin when gambling is stable coin, like USDT with TRON network as the fee are cheap and I can see my money being stable. With that, it will be easier for me to keep track of my record if I'm profitable or not as the value is stable so I just have to win more to be on the profitable side. Using altcoins maybe a good option as well due to less transaction fee but you also have to consider its volatility, so not only you are gambling with the casino, you are also gambling with its volatility which is fine only if the market is bullish.