Topic: The most liquid companies in the gambling industry (Read 2261 times)

That's one of the biggest fear on why some cannot pass on the KYC policy, but eventually all casinos will require KYC and we have no choice.
They are regulated, therefore we have to trust them, yes, the trust is very important, otherwise we'll just choose a decentralized gambling which I don't know if there are games that are popular in their.

When they are regulated and they scam, the government will go after them. There's nothing we can do about that anymore as even those gambling sites that have the best reputation now can become a scam something, so like what I've mentioned, that's the risk of KYC.

It is obvious that control by government financial regulators is tightening everywhere and in all countries of the world. 

If we talk about Monero, I only read two days ago that trading of this confidential coin on the exchanges of Belgium and Ireland is actually prohibited.  Here is another example of such an attack on human rights to privacy and confidentiality of information about personal life. 
It’s a shame, of course, that such an invention as Bitcoin and cryptocurrency is increasingly losing confidentiality.  But I still hope that over time, for these payment options in the world, the issue of the existence of a separate sector of anonymous payments will still be formed and the issue of the existence of a separate sector of anonymous payments will be resolved by law.  It seems to me that this is a necessary part of the lives of many people and regulation in this area should still be done. 
Now, of course, the process is going in the wrong direction, but it will slow down and win back its rights to confidentiality.  It's just a long process.  It is unclear when this will be.

Well, the problem of all the casinos with the clients has been the KYC, the cryptocurrencies now do not give privacy, the only coin that I see that gives privacy and anonymity is Monero and you can't even find it on Binanace, so this type of coins They are the ones that can give us that privacy, but everyone has already aligned themselves so that they do not give privacy or anonymity, that is already ending, there are only the decentralized casinos that do not require this requirement, but the governments are already there and have the Look at these casinos, they don't want to leave us alone, they want to control absolutely everything, I believe there will come a time where crypto methods will be managed from wallet to site and from site to wallet so that these things no longer get out of control with the KYC and only with casinos that are decentralized.

Cryptos are a tool, and when tools are good enough, they can be used for good and evil. But i wouldn't pretend that no one would use it for money laundering etc. Just because i am not doing anything shady with it, i definitely see how it's possible. Especially nft markets opened my eyes on that and trying to hide origins of the crypto and mixers were quite a giveaway. Also i am certain that some people try to use some non-kyc casinos for money trail obfuscation.

Some propaganda against cryptos is based on pure ignorance and can be easily shot down as fud, and no matter who is spreading that i wouldn't be that worried about it. Cryptos probably will stay misunderstood until i die, but i don't see mandatory KYCs for example as hatred towards crypto. I see it as governments acknowledging it as a wealth transferring tool, and this is their way to validate it, by regulating it. And even though people think it's an attact towards privacy, until ZK solution for IDs is out there, transparency and auditability for all is best way to tackle corruption. While pure anonymity would feed it.

we knew the government and also know how they are working to take money from every
businesses so what more in gambling business that they knew how money is flowing each minute.
but that is hard for the gamblers to trust a casino that has small capital or starting small
because we are talking about winning or potential wins of each players most specially when they
hit jackpot it is the obligation that they need to face.

This is my only concern about KYC, but we do not have a choice if we want to abide by the terms and conditions of the companies we deal with, and they also will have to obey the law of the land they domicile and follow the directive of their regulators. I believe that the government also would have weighed the risk of sharing our data with other parties in the name of KYC and the benefits of the KYC itself for them to have concluded that we should continue to do so. The benefits would have outweighed the risk to have warranted that. I am certain that sharing our details with companies exposes us because I remember that strange numbers would just be calling me and trying to persuade me to be their customer, especially when I just signed up with a certain company. I also received emails from the companies I never signed up for through my official email address which I only take seriously formal.

These can only be possible through data leakage and the completion of KYC is responsible for that. But this can't end as you thought, it can only be done better. Perhaps, in the future, the government can restructure the way companies cheaply have assets to our details, what if they are bad? Each government might create their national data bank for this purpose where details and documents can be dumped in favour of a certain company and get verified instead of the companies themselves. By that, the companies would have satisfied the government's demand but not necessarily have to possess the documents of their customers directly, except for the communicating details like the email and phone number for security reasons.

Once you provide your  kyc forget about you identity,  it might  not be revealed  to large number of people but what I do know is they know about you already .

Apart from leakage, if a company later becomes  a scam I guess that sucks even more , although we have nothing to do about it maybe someday inches future the system of Kyc will be completely  scrapped but for now we have no choice  than to continue  paying  our kyc debts....  and for the companies they will also continue  obeying the government  once they need some details about a kyc  in as much they are under the government  unless they don't  want to lose their licence and go off business.

Yes, you are getting the point, but I would rather call KYC a necessary evil that we must obey. Just like the debt we must pay or sacrifice just for the sake of the sanity of the world. If you agree with me, many years after the internet had started and companies were being patronised newly online, there was no immediate request for the KYC. However it started over time due to what the world has turned to, and it is so important so that the company you are dealing with and you who are dealing with the company can be accountable for it. Should the case something happen, it would be easy to know what to do when it comes to tracing and all that.

However, it is a means that can reveal our identities as well, which is the only valid issue people always point to. Because such identities revealed to the company through the KYC could be leaked, thereby compromising our privacy in one way or another. Nonetheless, once you are a centralised company, you must obey some regulations and rules, unless you are not answerable to any country or authority. This kind of arrangement will even make customers wary of such companies and might reduce patronage which can bring about liquidity to the companies that aspire growth.

It has always been like this with the problem of governments, there are many things that they always want to make profits from, they are very smart and want to see the profits for themselves, but I think this is something very common that all governments in the world are like this They want to take away something over which they have no control, that is the biggest problem of a government, apart from that they say that cryptocurrencies can decapitalize their economy but if this happens, is it that the fiat economy is so weak? I would believe so, that is why they make those decisions, apart from the fact that it is something in which we are always going to focus on doing things that do not make much sense, for example if we look at the most valuable industries such as the casino, in my country it is already They know the situation, they demand a good part of their profits to be able to operate, so in some way they are earning something, and we also do not know if the Kyc requirements are like that. That in the future they require more taxes, so sometimes industries have more liquidity, can bring these complications on the part of governments.

Over the years, cryptocurrency has been zealously classified as a tool of scammers and criminals. 
I think that in fact, of course, cryptocurrency is used in fraudulent schemes no more often than ordinary fiat money, cash first of all.  But the image of money for criminals has been thoroughly created for cryptocurrencies and it is clearly supported by all governments, which in turn are practically proxies of the global banking system.  And of course, bankers treat cryptocurrency like a bone in the throat, and it must be dealt with once and for all, so that it does not interfere in the field where the bankers play.  This is what results in constantly creating the image of cryptocurrency as criminal money for criminals, although in essence it is simply an alternative financial system.  But in any case, she exists thanks to the genital invention of Satoshi and she is a clear competitor to the bankers with their dollars and she interferes with them, this is obvious.  So everyone will continue to see such attacks with accusations. 
Sometimes they also drag in a generally delusional argument about the dangers of Bitcoin mining for the environment.  I won’t even comment on this frivolous nonsense invented by “green dreamers”.

I also think that, everything brings its dangers, so the decentralization of industries can sometimes produce certain things that can be very difficult and counterproductive because I have always preferred things to be done centrally, but if there is no anonymity, you have to take the risk. Furthermore, other types of things have to be done, so the decentralized thing scares me, because if I have a problem, will they take care of it all at once?

When there is a centralized casino, the tension is immediate, the only bad thing is that they require KYC and that it be done all at once, that is what I cannot conceive, for that reason it is because centralized ones as a player trust more, which is the more liquid between centralized and decentralized cases? I don't know, it may be that the decentralized one is too honest, but the topic that encompasses everything is the blessed KYC.

You can't certainly blame the government in this regard, cryptocurrency caught them unawares, so getting used to it will take time. You can't also blame them as some speak against it while others either ban, restrict or advocate/enforce strict regulation, it wasn't the same reaction by all which indicates Hope. What they've always known was fiat which is a centralised system and is what they somewhat trusted because they still have control over it despite some illicit flows. As for the illicit flows, criminals and money launderers continue to find means to outsmart the government even as the government continues to block some and unveil some perpetrator's schemes and even jail many of them. This has been the tough task the government was fighting and still fighting before and after the introduction of cryptocurrency.

Now that cryptocurrency was introduced, it became an added headache for them for obvious reasons, and if you were the top leader in the government, would you feel differently if you were genuine? As we know, it takes harder tasks to solve the puzzles of cryptocurrencies than fiats, and the common claims that criminals are using fiats are not even a contention here because the government will never deny that. But it seems people continue to reference it which is supposed not to be so because the primary concern of any responsible government is to build and maintain a sane system where illicit flows will not happen talkless of causing the financing of terrorism, trafficking and others. The only way they can do this is to get better control of cryptocurrency which is what they're trying to do these days through various regulations, and this is for the good of all as decentralisation will always come with its danger whether we like it or not.

We may not see that all gamblers are on the same page page with the approach they have on it, just as the government also cant be predicted on what they have as take on gambling as well, if we look at the gambling platforms also, we may have many things to pointed our from them from the way of their operations down to how financial capability they all have rom each other.

Some benefit and that is one of the things that Everyone must Understand , there is no Greater pleasure in a government than doing things well for them , so when the Gaming industry is so private, they have high profits and have little Participation from some entities The Government does not care About giving them bad propaganda, the case of my country where Gambling was prohibited for almost 20 years and the only way they would reopen is Because they are going to Receive money from the casinos , even so , the casinos are Still the company that makes the most money.

In this Order of things, things can be Applicable to Everything, the regulations of other countries for crypto, casinos, exchanges, all of these are industries that are very Profitable , that is why they are all the things that are done for the Liquidity of companies It has a lot to do with the things that Happen because Everyone Wants to have their share of Money.

There have always been alot of misconceptions and propaganda again cryptocurrency and bitcoin most especially which is why we see alot of attacks from various government a and some of it agencies around the world, even though all the criminal who use the fiat monetary process have been left unchecked and uncaught until now, but their are quick to sponsor hate statements against the industry today.

The government have failed in to act right to regulate the financial institutions,  and also making a misplaced priority by chasing the wrong fight.

There is no doubt about that, I personally could say that things can be very usable in terms of those who can put them to use, I know that in many cases corrupt rulers and people who have always done evil to the world have done so with fiat money, we cannot blame the fiat money for the crimes of some people, so sometimes seeing that they say that they have been robbed and that they have done things to be able to establish themselves better in terms of crypto, well it doesn't make much sense to me that they think Thanks to crypto, more thefts can be made these days, all of these are simply tools.

The things that are referred to crypto, the people who hate them invent all kinds of excuses to make them look bad, then based on anonymity and all this that they want to remove, well they simply want to remove it so that everything is exposed, and Those who use crypto, casinos and all this may be exposed.

Nice points you have there and the good part is that good and reputable KYC casinos are all over the place for anyone to choose from, which includes Stake.com, and this further validates your point because, for example, liquidity is unwavering with Stake, to say the least. The majority can never be wrong in this regard as they troop into the centralised casinos rather than the decentralised arrangement because, despite the protection the decentralised casinos offer, almost all people still prefer the centralised exchanges, and that could only be majorly for liquidity.
And when they could get what they need there, why not stick to it? Which includes the lower general fees for betting and other transactions.

It will be a long difference if we start mentioning them as many reasons are attributed to the reason for the centralised choice which disfavours the decentralised casinos and favours the centralised casinos even aside from the liquidity. Regardless, the present-day reality is the proof and also key in this discussion, and the very good reason why we should consider the centralised arrangement even as people's reason(s) keeps pumping liquidity into it.

The reason why regulators and authorities don't allow decentralized platforms and platforms without licenses to operate is because they know such platforms won't report or pay taxes, but platforms that are registered with them and have licenses are compelled to report their revenue and hence pay taxes to the authorities.

A few months back, I read somewhere in the news that authorities are looking to crack down on decentralized platforms, and if they do that, they will either get them shut or ask them to acquire a license and operate under them so that they can tax the revenue they generate from their services. So basically, there is no way for a casino or any other platform to stay safe from this and they will have to pay taxes no matter what.

True, many of these gambling companies really are liquid but because of some hot eyes on them. What they're doing is they try to be low profile as much as they can. But even they do that, they can't stop the regulators that will always find them relevant into paying taxes.

Yeah, there are a lot of them that have started small and then the business boomed and clicked and everything is a history.

Many of those that have also got their announcement threads in the forum and as we can see, there are still a lot coming in. While the existing ones, we've known them on how they are already popular in here.

Absolutely right. 
Of course, blockchain technology in general always allows you to accurately trace the entire sequence of data on where and where cryptocurrencies are moving, where and how they are exchanged, and in general the entire financial history of their use by a specific person or organization. 
For this reason, in terms of maintaining anonymity, of course, cryptocurrency is inferior to cash and paper money.  But cryptocurrency is significantly superior in anonymity to ordinary bank transfers and the use of plastic cards, even non-personal plastic cards.  And as we found out, anonymity is sometimes needed by any person, and I’m not talking about some kind of money and transfers from scammers and criminal transactions.  These also exist in large numbers, of course, but it seems to me that 99% of criminal payments use paper cash or complicated regular bank transfers. 
But of course, I don’t know the real statistics on the use of cryptocurrencies by criminals. 
I also think that its importance in the criminal world is clearly exaggerated by the representatives of the security forces themselves.  This is logical and it kind of comes to mind when justifying the complexity of law enforcement work for their own marketing purposes.  And therefore this is an excuse for receiving a lot of money from the country’s budget to combat such crimes.