I don't think calling a web3 casinos as a decentralized casinos is true to its core. They're more like a semi-anonymous casino, where player does not need to provide ID and can conveniently connect through wallets.
However, much like you said, some elements are still centralized. They still pool funds [and I assume they have full control of this pool] to take from loses and pay the winnings, and they still collect sensitive data like device fingerprints and IPs to identify abusers, of which the data [I am somewhat sure] are stored centralizedly.
I thought decentralized and web3 are the same thing. I must had a confusion in differentiating these two [if they are two]. What's the difference?
Ahh, my apology for the confusion. I was not trying to say that they're different things [at least far as I know]. My post was intended to convey a message that there are several elements of these decentralized casinos that's still centralized [as explained further in paragraph 2]. If I may revise my first sentence, it would look like this,
"
I don't think calling a web3 [decentralized]
casinos as a decentralized casino is true to its core as in in a verbatim or extremely literal way, and can not be taken literally as a decentralized system, like dex exchange [forkdelta].
They're more like a semi-anonymous casino, where player does not need to provide ID and can conveniently connect through wallets.
[...]"
Hi guys. The OP has clarified everything by himself. Nothing to add... We can't disclose how our fraud detection algorithm works.
Do you mind to provide them to an arbitrator, though? They can keep those evidence related to your algorithm private, just for the arbitrator's eyes, which they'll use to verify and validate your counter-accusation.
OP, suppose the casino are willing to get it escalated to an arbitrator, please choose one and stick to that one only. If you both agreed to a mediator, their findings and ruling will be considered final and bindings to both parties and you two should honor their decision.