Features
Defining antisemitism – a history of the “IHRA” definition
By SIMONE COHEN SCOTT Late last year I was asked by The Jerusalem Report to interview the Hon. Irwin Cotler, upon his appointment by Prime Minister Trudeau as Special Envoy for Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combating Antisemitism. His responsibilities will cover domestic and international antisemitism, and Holocaust education at every level.
His first assignment was to head the Canadian Delegation to the plenary of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, or IHRA, (pronounced eera). The meeting, hosted in Leipzig, Germany, was already in progress, but being virtual it was easy to jump in, except for the time difference. Until that assignment, the plethora of acronyms signifying organizations studying antisemitism and Holocaust had formed a sort of alphabet soup in my head. Ever since, like with a word you’ve just looked up, I notice references to IHRA all over the place, especially in connection with its definition of antisemitism. This is causing a lot of consternation among even more groups, with and without acronyms.
More about that later; first I’d like to focus on the two Winnipeg delegates at the plenary. When I spoke to Prof. Cotler, the meeting had just wound up, and when he learned I was from Winnipeg he mentioned how impressed he had been with Belle Jarniewski and David Matas. I made up my mind right then to pitch this article idea to Bernie; I believed it would be interesting to learn through these members of our community, what IHRA, the plenary, the definition, and the work, is all about.
David Matas, senior legal counsel at Bnai B’brith Canada, was one of the Canadian delegates at the original meeting in Stockholm in 2000, which drafted the founding document (Stockholm Declaration) that became IHRA. He attended again in 2007, 2008, 2018 and every year since. This recent plenary ran from November 24th to December 3rd, which meant attending a couple of weeks of meetings at 5:30 am Winnipeg time, 12:30 pm Leipzig time. Cotler joined the second week, from Montreal. Meeting electronically with the Canadian delegates was his first task as special envoy.
Belle Jarniewski, Executive Director of the Jewish Heritage Centre of Western Canada, was part of the national group bringing Canada into the International Task Force for Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research, (which evolved to become IHRA). When Canada became the 27th member of IHRA, (on June 24th, 2009, according to the Canada and the IHRA websites), she became a member of that delegation.
When a country joins IHRA, among other criteria, it must establish a Holocaust Memorial Day, and commit to Holocaust education at a senior political level. Its archives for the years 1933-1950 must be open for research, allowing academic, educational, and public access to the examination of those years of the country’s history. IHRA currently has 34 Members, one Liaison country, seven Observer Countries and eight Permanent International Partners, studying the latest developments in the field of Holocaust education, remembrance and research. According to IHRA’s own report on the plenary, there were 250 delegates at the meeting.
I asked Jarniewski how she saw IHRA differing from all those other organizations (the alphabet soup). She explained “…IHRA is the only intergovernmental organization mandated to focus solely on Holocaust-related issues, bringing together government representatives as well as experts. In addition to the definitions on antisemitism, Holocaust denial and distortion, and anti-Roma discrimination, the IHRA’s academic research publications have contributed greatly to the field of Holocaust Studies. IHRA’s pedagogical experts continue to develop detailed resources in order to help educators keep abreast of the latest best practices in education on the Holocaust and antisemitism. IHRA also supports and helps fund projects and conferences in the fields of Holocaust remembrance, research, and education. This in turn provides guidance to policy-makers, educators, civil society, and researchers.”
Part of Cotler’s mandate in his new position will be to address Holocaust denial and distortion, together with enhancing the adoption and implementation of the IHRA definition. Anyone who has experienced antisemitism, even in a mild form, recognizes it and doesn’t need a definition, but so that scholarly folk can study and deal with it empirically, and so it can be applied in a practical sense, a working definition is necessary. The definition was first developed in 2005 by the European Union Monitoring Centre. After careful study and adaptation it was adopted by IHRA in 2016.
It consists of two parts. The first part reads as follows: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
The second part, accompanying the statement and forming an integral part of it, are 11 indicators of antisemitism. In total, the definition is meant to be a working tool, not legally binding, and it is gradually being adopted by governments, parliaments and communities at all levels, in efforts to combat this oldest hatred which irrationally metastasizes wherever it infects.
Recently in the JP&N, Jarniewski wrote an effective rebuttal to a complaint someone had sent the newspaper regarding some of the definition’s examples, which he said made it inconvenient for him to express certain of his ideas. In her rebuttal she stated… “The definition must be adopted holus bolus along with the examples”…a stipulation that she says has been “….repeated over and over again by the IHRA.” Here are the 11 examples, as stated on IHRA’s website:
—Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
—Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
—Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
—Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality, of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
—Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
—Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
—Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
—Applying double standards by requiring of Israel a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
—Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
—Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
-Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
There they are! Taken together with the earlier section, they define antisemitism. It must have been an emotionally wrenching exercise, putting this list together.
In November 2019, Matas presented a paper entitled “The IHRA definition of antisemitism: criticisms and responses” for a seminar at the Kantor Centre on Contemporary Antisemitism, wherein he methodically set out the extent of official acceptance of the definition, criticism of that acceptance, and proposed responses to the critics. In it he urges member states of the European Union to encourages its members that have not done so yet to “…endorse the non legally binding working definition of antisemitism employed by the IHRA, as a useful guidance tool in education and training, including for law enforcement authorities in their efforts to identify and investigate antisemitic attacks efficiently and effectively.”
Several EU members have indeed done so, and in fact the EU has recently put out a handbook for practical use of the IHRA working definition. I further asked Matas if the United Nations had endorsed the definition. He referred me to the remarks in November 2020 of Miguel Moratinos, High Representative for the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations: “I plan to work on having an agreement on a definition of anti-Semitism within the UN, based on the IHRA definition which constitutes a basis to start from.” (I suppose it would be too much to ask that he incorporate the part about Israel?)
According to Matas, any organization can accept the definition of antisemitism. He told me that Bnai B’rith is proactive in getting organizations to endorse the effort, but any association can introduce discussion and begin the procedure…. sports organizations, service clubs like Kiwanis and Rotary, Police Departments, Community Clubs, synagogues, community newspapers. Jarniewski pointed out municipalities in Quebec and Ontario that have endorsed the IHRA definition include: Westmount; Cote Saint-Luc; Aurora; Newmarket; Markham; and Richmond Hill.
Notably, one of the accomplishments of the plenary this year has been the definition of “anti-Roma”. Between 250,000 and 500,000 Roma perished in the Holocaust, out of a pre-war population of between 1 and 1.5 million. As special delegate Cotler never tires of pointing out “…while it begins with the Jews it doesn’t end with Jews, and antisemitism is the bloodied canary in the mineshaft of global evil today.” I asked if there were Roma delegates to IHRA and Jarniewski told me there were, including in the Canadian delegation.
Features
Sheldon Adelson’s Campaign Against Online Gambling Regulation
Sheldon Adelson, the late billionaire casino magnate and founder of Las Vegas Sands Corporation, was a towering figure in the gambling industry and a polarizing force in the debate over online gambling regulation in the United States.
While many casino operators saw the internet as a new frontier for profit, Adelson waged a relentless campaign to block its legalization, citing moral, social, and business concerns.
His efforts, primarily channeled through the Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling, left a lasting impact on the regulatory landscape.
Let’s explore Adelson’s motivations, strategies, and the role of initiatives like Jackpot Sounds, a platform aggregating big online casino wins, in the broader context of the online gambling debate.
Jackpot Sounds: Celebrating Big Wins Amid the Debate
A 2023 report estimated that online gambling generated $5.7 billion in revenue in the U.S., a figure amplified by spotlighting success stories. It caused the rise of gamblers’ desire to address the big win replays. Platforms like Jackpot Sounds emerged, highlighting and aggregating big win replays as the enticement of online gambling.
The platform showcases real-time highlights of significant payouts, from slot machine jackpots to poker tournament victories, fostering community among online gamblers.
Jackpot Sounds captures the excitement of virtual jackpots, offering players a way to relive thrilling moments.
By curating content that celebrates high-stakes wins, Jackpot Sounds underscores the appeal that Adelson sought to suppress.
But what preceded this success of online gambling in the USA? How is Sheldon Adelson’s name related? While Adelson argued that such accessibility endangered society, Jackpot Sounds reflects the industry’s resilience and the public’s enthusiasm for digital gaming.
The Rise of Sheldon Adelson and His Casino Empire
Born on August 4, 1933, in Boston, Massachusetts, Sheldon Adelson grew up in modest circumstances.
By 12, he sold newspapers, showcasing an entrepreneurial spirit that defined his career. By 1995, Adelson had amassed wealth through ventures like the Comdex trade show, which he sold for $860 million.
He then focused on the casino industry, founding Las Vegas Sands Corporation. By 2019, his net worth was estimated at $35 billion, making him one of the world’s wealthiest individuals. His flagship properties, including The Venetian Las Vegas and Marina Bay Sands in Singapore, solidified his status as a global casino titan.
Adelson’s influence extended beyond business. A major Republican Party donor, he contributed over $90 million to political campaigns in 2012 alone, earning the moniker “kingmaker.”
His financial clout gave him significant leverage in Washington, D.C., which he later wielded in his fight against online gambling.
Adelson’s Stance on Online Gambling
Adelson’s opposition to online gambling emerged publicly in 2013, when he declared his intent to block its legalization in the U.S. Unlike competitors like Caesars Entertainment and MGM Resorts, who embraced online platforms, Adelson argued that internet gambling posed unique risks. In a June 2013 Forbes article, he claimed it could lead to financial ruin for vulnerable individuals, including those with student debt.
He also expressed concerns about underage access and the potential for money laundering, calling online gambling “a danger to society.”
Critics, however, pointed to a potential conflict of interest. Adelson’s brick-and-mortar casinos thrived on in-person gambling, and online platforms threatened to divert revenue.
A 2001 Las Vegas Sun article revealed that Adelson had once supported online poker, suggesting his later opposition might have been strategic. By 2014, he was unequivocal, stating, “I am willing to spend whatever it takes” to stop online gambling.
The Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling
In January 2014, Adelson launched the Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling (CSIG), a lobbying group designed to rally support for a federal ban on online gambling.
Headed by prominent figures like former New York Governor George Pataki, former Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln, and former Denver Mayor Wellington Webb, CSIG aimed to influence lawmakers and the public.
The coalition’s website warned that online gambling “crosses the line of responsible gaming” by bringing casinos into “living rooms and smartphones.”
CSIG employed aggressive tactics, including:
- Media Campaigns: In February 2014, CSIG released an ad titled “Don’t Let the Games Begin,” claiming online gambling could fund terrorism and harm families.
- Lobbying Efforts: By 2015, CSIG had enlisted dozens of lobbyists, including former Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, to push for legislation.
- Political Alliances: Adelson secured support from governors like Rick Scott of Florida, who received $750,000 in campaign contributions from Adelson between 2010 and 2014.
The coalition’s efforts gained traction. In March 2014, 16 state attorneys general co-signed a letter to Congress urging a ban on online gaming. CSIG also influenced the American Gaming Association, which dropped its support for online gambling in 2014 after pressure from Adelson.
Legislative Push: The Restoration of America’s Wire Act
Adelson’s campaign focused on reinstating a broad interpretation of the 1961 Wire Act, which prohibited interstate wagering.
In 2011, the Department of Justice (DOJ) had issued an opinion stating the Wire Act applied only to sports betting, opening the door for states like New Jersey, Delaware, and Nevada to legalize online gambling. Adelson sought to reverse this.
On March 26, 2014, Senator Lindsey Graham and Representative Jason Chaffetz introduced the Restoration of America’s Wire Act (RAWA), a bill backed by Adelson to ban most forms of online gambling.
The legislation gained co-sponsors, including Senators Dianne Feinstein and Marco Rubio, and was reintroduced in February 2015. Adelson met House Speaker John Boehner in January 2015 to push RAWA, leveraging his $13.2 million in donations to Republican causes in 2014.
Despite these efforts, RAWA faced opposition from a coalition of casino operators, poker players, and states’ rights advocates.
By 2016, the bill had stalled in Congress, unable to overcome resistance from figures like New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who legalized online gambling in his state in 2013.
Adelson’s Influence on the Department of Justice
Adelson’s campaign reached a high point in 2018, when the DOJ revisited its 2011 Wire Act opinion.
On November 2, 2018, the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a new memo, released publicly on January 14, 2019, declaring that the Wire Act applied to all forms of online gambling, not just sports betting.
This reversal threatened the legal frameworks in states like New Jersey and Pennsylvania, which had generated $200 million in tax revenue from online gambling by 2017.
The timing raised suspicions. Adelson and his wife, Miriam, donated $113 million to Republican causes in 2016, including $20 million to Donald Trump’s campaign. In January 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who received campaign support from Adelson, expressed shock at the 2011 opinion and vowed to review it.
A February 2017 memo from former CSIG lobbyist Charles Cooper mirrored the DOJ’s 2018 arguments, prompting speculation of Adelson’s influence. In 2019, New Jersey and Pennsylvania attorneys general filed Freedom of Information Act requests seeking evidence of lobbying by CSIG and Adelson.
Resistance and Industry Pushback
Adelson’s efforts faced significant opposition. Caesars, MGM, and the American Gaming Association formed the Coalition for Consumer and Online Protection (C4COP) in February 2014 to counter CSIG’s narrative.
Led by former Representative Mary Bono and former Financial Services Committee Chairman Mike Oxley, C4COP argued that regulation, not prohibition, ensured consumer safety. A January 2014 poll by North Star Opinion Research, commissioned by C4COP, found that 74% of voters favored state-by-state legalization over a federal ban.
The Poker Players Alliance also mobilized, urging members to flood lawmakers’ social media with pro-gambling messages.
By 2015, states like Nevada, New Jersey, and Delaware had generated $2 billion in online gambling revenue, bolstering arguments for regulation. Critics like Jan Jones Blackhurst of Caesars called Adelson’s approach “counterproductive,” accusing him of fostering an unregulated black market.
Adelson’s Legacy and Ongoing Impact
Sheldon Adelson passed away on January 11, 2021, at the age of 87, but his campaign against online gambling left a complex legacy. While RAWA never passed, the 2018 DOJ memo slowed the expansion of online gambling, creating uncertainty for operators.
By 2023, only seven states had fully legalized online casino gaming, compared to 38 for sports betting, partly due to Adelson’s influence.
However, the industry continued to grow. A 2024 report projected U.S. online gambling revenue to reach $7.6 billion by 2026.
Adelson’s moral arguments resonated with some lawmakers, but critics viewed his campaign as defending his land-based empire. As Mary Bono noted in 2014, “It’s impossible to stand in the way of the internet.”
Conclusion
Sheldon Adelson’s battle against online gambling, spearheaded by the Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling, was a high-stakes effort to shape the industry’s future. From launching CSIG in 2014 to influencing the DOJ in 2018, Adelson used his wealth and political connections to advocate for a federal ban.
Yet, platforms like Jackpot Sounds highlight the enduring appeal of online gambling, celebrating wins that Adelson sought to curtail. While he delayed regulation in some areas, the momentum for legalization persisted, reflecting the challenges of containing a digital revolution.
Adelson’s story is a testament to the power—and limits—of influence in a rapidly changing world.
Features
How To Earn Money with Cryptocurrency From Home
If you’re looking for new ways to make money from home, there’s a modern way to do it. Cryptocurrency has opened up new opportunities for making money online. With the right approach, you can generate income without leaving your house. Whether you want to invest, trade, or earn through other methods, there are various ways to profit from digital currencies. For instance, Canadian poker players take advantage of crypto-friendly platforms to play from home and cash out in Bitcoin or other digital currencies. These platforms provide customers various benefits and attractions that make online gambling a great way to earn money from home, while also having fun.
Understanding Cryptocurrency
Before diving into ways to make money, it is important to understand what cryptocurrency is. It is a digital form of money that operates on blockchain technology.
Unlike traditional currencies, it is decentralized and not controlled by any government or central bank. The most well-known cryptocurrency is Bitcoin, but there are thousands of others, including Ethereum, Litecoin, and Solana, and even plenty of meme coins to choose from.
Trading Cryptocurrency
One of the most popular ways to earn money with cryptocurrency is through trading. This involves buying and selling digital coins to take advantage of price changes.
Day Trading
Day trading is for those who want to make quick profits by buying and selling cryptocurrencies within the same day. It requires monitoring price charts and market trends. Since prices can be volatile, traders must act quickly to capitalize on short-term price movements.
Swing Trading
Unlike day trading, swing trading focuses on medium-term price trends. Traders hold onto their assets for days or even weeks, waiting for a better price before selling. This method requires patience and a good understanding of market trends.
Holding
HODLing is a long-term investment strategy. Investors buy cryptocurrencies and keep them for an extended period, expecting the value to rise over time. This method is ideal for those who believe in the long-term potential of digital currencies and prefer a hands-off approach.
Earning Through Staking
Staking allows cryptocurrency holders to earn passive income by participating in the network of a blockchain. By holding certain cryptocurrencies in digital wallets, users help validate transactions and secure the network. In return, they receive rewards in the form of additional coins. Some popular staking coins include Ethereum, Cardano, and Polkadot.
Mining Cryptocurrency
Mining is another way to generate income from home. It involves using computer power to validate transactions and add new blocks to the blockchain. Miners are rewarded with cryptocurrency for their efforts.
While Bitcoin mining requires expensive equipment and high electricity costs, other cryptocurrencies like Litecoin and Monero can still be mined using regular computers. Some mining pools allow individuals to combine their computing power with others to increase their chances of earning rewards.
Earning Through Airdrops and Forks
Airdrops occur when cryptocurrency projects distribute free tokens to wallet holders as part of a promotion. These giveaways help new projects attract attention. To receive airdrops, users often need to hold a specific cryptocurrency or complete simple tasks like signing up for a newsletter or following a project on social media.
Forks happen when a blockchain splits into two. If you hold a cryptocurrency that undergoes a fork, you may receive new coins based on the amount you already own. This provides an opportunity to make money without additional investment.
Participating in Play-to-Earn Games
The rise of blockchain gaming has created new opportunities for earning cryptocurrency from home, while also having a little fun. Some online games reward players with digital assets for completing tasks, winning battles, or progressing through levels. These assets can be sold or traded for real money.
Many play-to-earn games operate using NFTs, which allow players to own and trade in-game items. Popular games in this space include Axie Infinity, The Sandbox, and Gods Unchained.
Creating and Selling NFTs
Non-fungible tokens have created new earning possibilities for digital artists, musicians, and content creators. NFTs are unique digital assets stored on the blockchain, representing ownership of artwork, music, videos, and virtual collectibles.
Artists can create NFTs and sell them on marketplaces making them a great way to raise your income from home. Some NFTs have sold for thousands or even millions of dollars, making this a profitable option for those with creative skills.
Earning Crypto Through Affiliate Programs
Affiliate programs allow individuals to earn cryptocurrency by promoting products and services. Many crypto exchanges, wallets, and investment platforms offer referral programs where users receive rewards for bringing in new customers.
By sharing referral links on social media, blogs, or YouTube channels, users can generate a steady income stream. The more people who sign up using their link, the more they earn.
Crypto Lending and Yield Farming
Crypto lending allows investors to earn interest by lending their digital assets to others, of course, you will need to have a crypto to lend in the first place to make money through this method.
Yield farming is another way to earn passive income. It involves providing liquidity to decentralized finance platforms and earning rewards in return. This method can be profitable but carries risks, including market fluctuations and smart contract vulnerabilities.
Freelancing for Crypto Payments
Many online platforms and businesses pay freelancers in cryptocurrency for their work. Writers, developers, graphic designers, and marketers can find gigs that offer digital currency as payment.
There are plenty of websites out there that can help connect freelancers with clients who prefer paying in Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies.
By offering services in exchange for cryptocurrency, freelancers can avoid traditional banking fees and receive payments faster.
Features
Understanding different payment methods in online casinos
Payment methods have been a hot topic of conversation in the casino gaming world since the inception of online casinos. Before the internet changed the entire fabric of this industry, there were a relatively small number of ways to deposit money in a casino. Many land-based casinos have ATMs, others accept cheque payments as withdrawals and deposits, and others pay out larger amounts in cash or bank transfers.
Of course, Visa and Mastercard have been widely accepted in land-based and digital casinos for decades. But compared to the way the market is now, with a whole range of e-wallets and digital payment options, the number of possibilities has soared.
Today, we’ll review the popular payment methods, some of which experts believe could disrupt the industry, and other options that have started to connect with casino gaming audiences in Canada and further afield.
Prepayment vouchers
In the modern casino market, digital wallets and internet-based payment services have become dominant forces in casino gaming. Prepayment services have exploded in popularity over the last 25 years, and services and platforms such as Neosurf have been able to carve out a slice of this market for themselves.
As the Canadian market expands, prepayment options such as Skrill and Paysafecard have emerged as deposit options for gamers looking to deposit first and pay later. Neosurf is widely used in casino gaming, offering e-wallet and account functionality. Knowing where you can find the best Neosurf casinos is a good move, as dozens of highly reputable providers provide a facility for Neosurf customers to play casino games.
However, in a vast and competitive casino gaming market, casinos that simply focus on one type of payment method face an uphill challenge in an industry where scope of choice is becoming more of a selling point.
E-wallet payment options
While PayPal and Neteller might have been the first companies to highlight the potential for e-wallets to exist as payment methods in the online casino business, they have morphed into an entirely different market to that of 20 years ago.
Options such as Apple Pay and Google Pay have surged in popularity. While they work similarly to PayPal and Neteller, for the tens of millions of people who have added their debit card to their phone wallet, it’s a simple case of selecting either Apple Pay, Android or Google Pay, depending on the type of mobile device you use. Your card information syncs immediately to the site, and you can deposit within seconds.
It’s faster than entering your card details. It integrates the biometric face ID or your passcode, depending on which one you use on your mobile device. If you experience any issues, you can immediately freeze your Apple Pay card, meaning nobody can withdraw any funds.
Traditional methods
Millions of online casino gamers opt for traditional payment options. We’ve touched on some of these, including PayPal and Visa. However, despite the rise of e-wallet payment options and more contemporary types of payments such as cryptocurrency, there’s still a vast, dominant market for Visa and Mastercard – which are two of the oldest and most traditional payment methods still available in the casino gaming industry, both online and land-based.
Of all the key tips to use the internet safely, several high-profile anti-fraud campaigns focus on traditional payment options. While entering your card details, CVV number and expiry date into the wrong site can be disastrous, many stopgaps are in place, including suspicious transaction flagging from both Visa and your bank, which can stop criminals dead in their tracks.
That said, handing out such information is still not a good idea. This is why you should always research a casino before you use it. Once you ensure they have a watertight security system and have not been subjected to a data breach, you can deposit your funds with greater confidence. It also pays to keep updated with the latest cybersecurity news, including sophisticated phish-free phishing attacks, one of the latest emerging threats.
The future of payment methods in online casino gaming
Cryptocurrency and blockchain systems are the latest methods that have become popular in the online casino world, although they might not have the visibility or the same level of mass adoption that we have seen with other payment options over the last few years.
It does feel like there’s room for Bitcoin and altcoins to become players in the future. Not only do they have the appeal to branch into a broader market, but by utilizing and leveraging the power of the blockchain, users can deposit and withdraw their funds directly to their crypto wallet without having to enter their card details.
In the event of a cyberattack, a cryptocurrency casino’s main wallet is often targeted for funds, but criminals rarely try to extract databases of information.
The added convenience and potential security could be the two main pillars that bring cryptocurrency alongside some payment systems that have been present in the casino gaming world for decades. There are still other variables to consider here – most crucially, regulation. However, if these obstacles can be overcome, crypto could spearhead the growth of online casinos into the 2030s.
Final thoughts
You could find platforms with two dozen payment options, depending on the casino site you use. Many of the large providers offer as many payment options as possible. Other sites, such as niche casinos that don’t have the same market share, will only focus on cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, Ethereum and XRP.
However, regardless of the payment options you encounter in an online casino, they will often fall into three categories: e-wallets, traditional payment systems or niche digital-specific payment options, such as cryptocurrency. We wouldn’t recommend seeking the niche options if you do not understand how they work.
Understand the mechanics of these payment systems and what drives the market. Once you know the payment option, whether cryptocurrency or Apple Pay, you can test the waters and experience how it works in the broader online casino gaming industry.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login