To be honest, I have never even heard of anybody who sued a service provider for failing to mitigate DDoS, or for letting an attack through a WAF, etc. I am quite positive that the contracts/T&C you sign when you subscribe to the services are rock solid, otherwise cloudflare would be under extreme liability. Also, usually you have the ability to customize the DDoS settings, choose thresholds etc. I really can’t imagine a company having any real chance of getting the provider to reimburse you. The only service that usually has SLA is the uptime of the CDN, which if breached should be compensated. I am quite sure that in the cheap plans the SLA is probably not very high.

Also, what you say about a customer that someone might want to take down is true for all customers that require DDoS protection. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t pay for the service on the first place. Cloudflare serves a bazillion customers who are much bigger targets than a casino, I don’t think they were afraid of the exposure. Also, when cloudflare receives a high DDoS attack, for them is awesome marketing. Imperva, Akamai, Cloudflare are basically identical and the selling point is exactly “how big can they tolerate?”.

Honestly rather than speculating on what we don’t know, I propose a simpler option: cloudflare plans are designed to get customers one foot in the door with a super cheap plan, to them each individual customer has basically no marginal cost. However, once the customers are in they can identify the ones they can squueze and find reasons to push more expensive plans. If they bump 1/30 of them, even if they other 29 will leave, they are in plus (250x29 < 10000 x 1).

To me this seems simply a business strategy. They specifically say “Unlimited & unmetered DDoS attack mitigation” in the cheapest plan, afterall.

I am in no way using this definition right now, I am using the definition you provided (established businesses) and I generally use it interchangeably with “licensed”, because to operate you need at least a license.

So it’s not a tautology.

There are enough illegitimate online casinos to create a problem for the whole industry.

Incorrect. Also creating a problem for is not defining the industry itself. There are phishing bank sites to create a problem for the banking industry, but only an idiot would answer “they steal your identity/card details” to the question “why are online banks bad”.

They don’t have enough users so they need to squeeze their regular punters harder.

Incorrect. You forgot to address “how”. I will also add another item to the “you have no idea what you are talking about”. Players losing is a sure way to lose even more customers. In fact if you knew something about the industry you would know that new companies operate on much lower margins that established ones. Bet365 might operate on a 7-9% margin, a new company operates on 1,2,3%. The idea that squeezing more existing customers, besides being technically impossible, is absurd. It’s a huge business risk (you lose your license and then you will have 0 customers).

Even your beloved “legitimate” casinos do “rig” games by offering different odds at different times to different people.

First, I don’t like casinos, despite having worked for one, I have played on less sites than you did. I like even less bullshit though, hence my pleasure in clearing the world from yours. Second, that is not rigging at all. You know it, I know it, it is absolutely not what you meant, and I am embarrassed for you for trying to use this terrible rethorical trick to now bend the word rigging. Rigging means that you expect the odds to win are X but instead behind the scene are Y (<X). Offering odds first of all is not a casino thing, it’s a sportsbook thing, and second of all is transparent to the user. Finally, odds obviously change over time, as estimated probability does…

Listen, you are just a guy on the internet with a big mouth and a family supply of bad faith. I showed you multiple times that your claim are bullshit and that much smarter people than you took care of the problems you claim affect casinos (rigged games and money laundering).

You failed to provide any argument from any of your claims and now you proved to argue in bad faith. As promised, I will make you a favour and block you, so you don’t have to keep embarrassing yourself. Take this as a chance to reflect on maybe not arguing on something you don’t understand fully, and maybe to learn from someone who knows more than you, as I try to do in the many occasions where I make mistakes or know little about something. Your claim at the moment is false. It’s a conspiracy theory that you repeat and might believe, but it’s false. Deal with it. You can use the very real and many reasons to consider casinos bad, do that.

Indeed I want to make a distinction. Because thinking legitimate casinos rig games is completely different from thinking scammy ones do.

In fact, you had no argument whatsoever to prove those do, including your external sources that recommended basically in all cases to stick to licensed sites, proving that there is a difference (duh). On the other hand, having worked in the industry and understanding both how casinos integrate games and how compliance works, I have explained to you why there are generally not technical means AND no economic incentive for legitimate casinos to rig games.

I will repeat the points for you:

• legitimate casinos undergo certification and audits. Every piece of code change is analyzed periodically and so does the functionality of basically everything on the sites.
• most importantly, casinos don’t develop games, they purchase them from providers. They don’t have access to the code, as games are served directly by the maker, so they can’t change the code to tweak odds.
• the game makers don’t have any incentive of jeopardizing their whole business to let a customer earn more money illegally.

The above applies to essentially every licensed casino, every legitimate casino.

You failed to acknowledge any of these points, and you argued for 15 comments about scammy websites, bringing now the conversation back to where we started.

The reason why I want an agreement that legitimate (not some!) casinos don’t rig games is specifically because I provided arguments (technical and economical) for why that’s the case. So your refusal to make any distinction while also refusing to provide any proof to support your claim just results in a vague and messy discussion, exactly like your insane definition of “online casinos” that includes scam websites. You refuse to be accurate :)

But a problem very much related to “what’s wrong with online casinos”.

It’s not. It’s something casinos (real ones) can’t do anything about, the same way banks or shops can’t do anything about. This is an extremely tiny problem because official means exist to recognize legitimate ones since there are trusted authorities that certify them. In fact, given the existence of central national authorities it is much easy to be sure that a casino is legitimate than a shop, for example. I will tell you more: rigged games (and therefore fake casinos) are a MINOR problem in the industry in general. It is absolutely a terrible argument to say what’s wrong with casinos, because it’s something the vast majority of the people will never even encounter in a life of gambling. However, there are plenty of reasons why casinos can be considered bad based on the regular operations of legitimate casinos, not based on your fairytales.

So yes, I am stuck on wanting an acknowledgement that legitimate casinos don’t rig games because I know how that works, unlike you. Here is how I conclude this conversation, since we are at a moot point:

If you fail to acknowledge tha rigging games is very very unlikely (I will keep the theoretical possibility in case there are suicidal CEOs) in legitimate casinos, then I will call your argument bullshit until you have any proof. Specifically, you should explain what economic incentive do legitimate casinos (licensed) to rig games, and how do you think they can do that. If you fail to provide any argument in support of this while also refusing to make a distinction in your original claim, then I know you are arguing in bad faith, so I will simply block you and move on.

I give up. You refuse to engage in good faith.

What user can tell is irrelevant, we are talking about your “taxonomy” and the properties that carries being in one or other category.

You might not be able to distinguish a legitimate casinos by a fake one, but if in your opinion legitimate ones also rig games, this is irrelevant. If they don’t, then what users can tell is a completely separate problem.

Yes, but I am asking to answer according to your own definition! I specified it, I quotes it, I wrote YOUR in caps, I can’t add flashing lights or I would.

You provided a definition, I am asking a simple question with that definition in mind.

According to YOUR definition, do legitimate casinos rig games?

Come on, how many more comments do you need to answer this simple query?

Your quote:

Here’s the definition I’m happy with. Legitimate casinos = established businesses in the casino industry Fake casinos = scammers Online casinos = legitimate casinos + fake casinos

You forgot already? A link to your own comment.

You have defined legitimate casinos as ones that don’t rig games.

I didn’t define shit, you defined legitimate casino as a partition of online casino.

Look what triple jump you are making to avoid saying a very simple thing: legitimate casinos, defined as YOU did (established businesses in the casino industry) don’t rig games. All because you can’t admit to be wrong :)

So, I will ask once again:

• do legitimate casinos, as in YOUR definition, rig games, according to you?

Yes or no question.

Yes. Not necessarily knowingly. Income from internet gambling is tainted.

I would argue with this point, but I won’t. It doesn’t matter, I accept the theoretical possibility of money laundering. For some reason I was mistakenly taking the top comment of this thread as your comment. I even quoted it several times and you didn’t note that that’s not your comment… my bad.

It’s YOUR definition ahahah I literally took what you said and I am asking a question.

YOU said, legitimate + fake = online. I asked to which you applied the answer and you said online. Now you are saying it doesn’t?

So, do we agree that legitimate casinos don’t rig games?

Also, you mentioned taking a cut to help laundering money, now you are retracting saying “are exposed”. No dude, taking a cut has intentionality behind, being exposed is a natural risk for any business which moves money. You claimed the first.

So, one last time:

• do legitimate casinos rig games?
• do legitimate casinos help laundering money?

So both legitimate and fake? In other words you believe that both legitimate and fake casinos rig games, both help laundering money and both fight against regulations?

It’s a simple question, show a tiny bit of good faith :)

P.s., have you read your own link?

The blacklisting reasons have to do with scammy customer support, lack of license, stealing money. They don’t even mention rigging games or laundering money, which is what you claimed :)

Answer the question, your definition doesn’t add much.

To which ones does your initial answer apply? Both legitimate and fake casinos?

It’s not a hard question.

P.s. I bet you wouldn’t be able to show me a fake casino if I asked. That’s because they are not a common problem. You are overinflating it to make your absurd definition more reasonable. But let’s not get into this…

Not part of the discussion. You are straining pretty hard in your efforts to “win”.

I am making an example to prove a point. The point is simple “industry” doesn’t contain the scammers who try to abuse it.

Yes, they do. The clue is in the name.

Genius take!

Answer the question, though. I repost it for your own convenience. We clear out all the bullshit semantic you brought up, and go straight to the point:

Let’s pretend you actually believe your bs, and let’s make a distinction:

Online casinos = established businesses in the casino industry, operating with at least a license.
Fake casinos = scam websites that operate without a license and which spoof an online casino with the purpose of scamming users (in whatever way).

To which ones do you think your initial answer applies:

They run rigged games in predatory ways. They happily let organised crime launder money for a cut. They fight regulations designed to reduce problem gambling.

?

• Do you think that online casinos as defined above run rigged games?
• Do you think they help laundering money?

Incorrect. Learn to recognize ‘spoofing’ and ‘phishing’

Jesus… Let me spell it out even more clearly: if someone is creating a new standard for banking sites, they don’t expect those goddamn measures to apply to phishing websites, because they are not considered part of the industry. Nobody discussing the banking industry would consider phishing sites PART OF it. it’s relevant to discussing phishin FOR the industry, but it’s not a problem OF banking sites. Because “banking site” means inherently a legitimate banking site.

Incorrect. OP clearly wrote “online casinos”.

And online casinos don’t include fake online casinos.

But ok, let’s clarify once and for all.

Let’s pretend you actually believe your bs, and let’s make a distinction:

• Online casinos = established businesses in the casino industry, operating with at least a license.
• Fake casinos = scam websites that operate without a license and which spoof an online casino with the purpose of scamming users (in whatever way).

To which ones do you think your initial answer applies:

They run rigged games in predatory ways. They happily let organised crime launder money for a cut. They fight regulations designed to reduce problem gambling.

?

Do you think that online casinos as defined above run rigged games? Do you think they help laundering money?

At least I will give you an out and you don’t need to keep climbing mirrors.

You clearly have a guilty conscious about the money you earned from gamblers. Or you are being paid for this shilling.

No, I simply don’t like bullshit, and your arguments are full of it. I strongly dislike the gambling industry, but for reasons based on facts, not on what I heard in the beauty salon :) In fact, my whole point is that there are good, solid reasons to dislike gambling and online casinos. The bullshit you quoted is not part of it because it’s false.

Ok, I see you are now fully entrenched on your position, with absolutely no ability to defend it. You are hanging onto that random site that says that yes - fake casinos exist, for your dear life.

You are not approaching this from a user perspective

ahahaha, yes, a scammer creating a fake banking site from a scammed person perspective is doing a banking site. But here we are discussing about banks (or casinos) so you realize this argument is completely irrelevant, right?

If it looks like a banking site, then it is banking site.

Finally we reached the core flaw in your argument! If we are talking about banking sites, and - say - we discuss the security measures needed on them, nobody would think to include phishing sites into the discussion, because it’s meaningless. The question you answered to was about online casinos, and was obviously referring to the businesses which run online casinos, not “any site which looks as an online casinos from an aesthetic point of view”, because this is a completely dumb way to characterize stuff. There is a scam in which someone “sells” a box for something (say, a camera), and then you open it and there is a rock. Your argument is basically like saying “cameras suck, some don’t even do pictures”, because you consider those rocks cameras, since they were in camera boxes and sold as such.

I am 99% sure you actually don’t believe your own argument, and you are just doubling and tripling down on it because admitting to be wrong on the internet is basically impossible.

Incorrect

Oh yeah?

Why are online casinos bad? I don’t understand this pervasive need some people have to force their way of life on others and take away their agency over their own lives. It comes off to me as some kind of superiority complex. “They’re too stupid to make their own decisions, I know better what’s best for them, I must protect them from themselves”.

OP was clearly talking about actual gambling businesses. They were trying to ask an opinion about why people consider gambling bad, in relation to the agency of people to play (or not play) on them.

Now you are trying to bullshit your way through, pretending that your answer was related to scam websites, and not actual casinos. Let’s remember your first answer:

**Sounds more like you just don’t know anything about the gambling industry. **They run rigged games in predatory ways. They happily let organised crime launder money for a cut. They fight regulations designed to reduce problem gambling.

You specifically talk about the gambling industry. Once again, if you really want to base your whole argument on the fact that scam websites belong to the industry they spoof, then feel free to embarrass yourself. It’s clear to anybody what you meant in your first comment, but you couldn’t defend it (because it’s bullshit), and now you are trying to get away with a rhetorical argument that is even worse. Really dude, we all said shit on the internet, admit you just said some stereotypical bullcrap and move on with your life :)

And this opinion is incorrect. I would accept that some online casinos don’t need to scam by rigging games.

No, it’s not. I discussed and explained already to you that there are several reasons:

• Game makers don’t usually have casinos. Their revenues come from other casinos, who in turn don’t have access to the code.
• Games are already designed to have a margin for the host.
• Rigging games is illegal and would make a casino lose their license. This is a much bigger financial risk than skimming 2-3% more of margin on games.

You instead provided 0 explanation about what you are claiming.

Incorrect. I’ve posted multiple examples of online casino scams, including rigging the games.

You didn’t post any example. You posted statements that mentioned that some website can spoof casinos with rigged games. Those are not casino websites, they hold no licenses and they are not established businesses. They are not part of an industry, exactly like scam banking website are not part of the financial industry.

Some are.

False, again. They are not banking sites lol. No bank would phish their users. There are scammers who impersonate banks, exactly like they impersonate casinos. Your whole argument relies on calling scammers that do X part of the X industry. They are not.

Look at the top of this thread. The question was “Why are online casinos bad”.

And your answer in fact is completely incorrect. Rather than admitting that you have 0 proof or arguments that casinos rig games and enable laundering money, you are now relying purely on a definition of casinos that include the casino scam sites.

I will repeat, your argument is exactly as absurd as the following:

Why are online casinos banks bad?

Sounds more like you just don’t know anything about the gambling financial industry. They run rigged games steal your credit card details in predatory ways. They happily let organised crime launder money for a cut steal people identities.

Then, when confronted about this, you would provide https://getcomputeractive.co.uk/protect-your-tech/fake-bank-website-URLs which says:

Hackers have set up fake URLs for UK banks, using website names that sound genuine in order to trick people into handing over their personal information and log-in details.

thinking it is proof. It’s not.

As I said, you clearly have no idea about the industry, you said so many things that show it and then glanced over them to avoid embarrassment, and you ended up moving the goalpost so far, that now your entire stance relies on the fact that scam casino websites are online casinos. The initial question “why are online casinos bad” clearly referred to businesses which…run online casinos. And 100% your initial answer referred to that too, but once you couldn’t support your argument in any way, you retreated purely onto the scam websites that impersonate casinos.

Is it so hard for you to admit that you made a big statement about something you are not fully knowledgeable?

Your source didn’t confirm in any way what you said. Making lookalikes have nothing to do with “hacking small parts of the codebase”.

Also the source itself is a random website lol

My argument is that casinos don’t need to scam by rigging games. A scam site is no more a casino than a phishing site is a banking site. Do you think banking sites are scams?

Your initial statement was a blanket statement about casinos “rigging games” and “helping laundering money for a cut”. Now you are defending the hill that some scammers use casinos as their vector for scams, which is a completely different thing, that nobody questioned also. It simply has nothing to do with " casinos".

But I see you are one of those people who are clinically incapable of admitting you said something incorrect, even after you said tons of incorrect stuff and you showed to have a very superficial understanding of the gambling industry (my favorite was when you called games "dressed up RNGs, when they are required to be RNG by law, and you really want them to be…).

Dude, you are changing the argument again, as usual.

I got it. Yes, scam website exist. Yes, scan shop websites exist, as exist phishing banking sites, and a universe of things.

You said:

That’s why scammers usually just pirate and hack small parts of the codebase.

This is complete bullshit.

Pirating a game only means copying the look of a legitimate game served on “real” casinos. There is nothing to hack, because you don’t have the codebase. Netent, playtech, evolution, microgaming, they all serve their games via iframes or similar, they integrate with you via API, they whitelist your IPs or authenticate yourself with a token. Scam casinos might simply look at real games and imitate them, exactly like you might do a fake shop and copy - say - Amazon’s look.

And for the 100th times, this is a negligible problem if you are playing on licensed websites, which in turn used licensed gaming providers.

You are conflating arguments that apply to scam website as if these apply to the wider industry, they don’t! If you are talking about banking, you wouldn’t say “banks steal your data”, because there are scammers that use bank websites to phish people. They are a completely different thing. So, as clear as it can be:

• Some scammers might use casinos to scam people. They might spin up fake casino sites (UNLICENSED, of faking a license at most) where games are rigged. These casinos generally can’t advertise anywhere and they are luring people the same way phishing sites lure them in: Spam emails etc.
• Rigged games are generally not a problem within the casino industry, as it’s not money laundering. Regulations apply to the vast majority of established businesses which prevent both quite effectively. This is why before putting money in a website you should spend 10 seconds and check that the website has a valid license (from your national authority). Once you have done this, you can stay with that website and be 99.9% sure that games are not rigged (i.e., they use RNG). You will still lose in the long run, but not because they are rigged.

I can’t be clearer than this.

That’s why scammers usually just pirate and hack small parts of the codebase.

Sure.

EDIT: I don’t even dignify with an answer “hack small parts of the codebase”. I can clearly see you have absolutely no clue of what you are talking about.

You don’t get as much money that way. Better to encourage larger deposits and “crash” when large withdrawals are requested.

Then this is not a rigged game. Again, you said that games are rigged to scam people…

Not necessarily. Popups and emails exist. Especially interesting if they offer free spins.

True, and that’s if the site find you, rather than viceversa. No different than phishing…

The original question was “what is wrong with online casinos”. One answer I gave was scammers, then you pressed me for more.

Your original answer was specific: rigged games and money laundering. None of which is generally true.

DUDE. This is the point. You can’t argue that online casinos are fine so long as you ignore all the bad casinos and scammers.

I already clarified what I consider an “online casino”. it’s irrelevant what a scam website is, it doesn’t say anything about the industry it tries to imitate…

Fuck me. You admit online casinos are unfair then immediately dismiss this as unimportant. Now I suspect I’m arguing against a paid troll.

Don’t move the goalpost. Some casinos use complicate T&C, this has nothing to do with rigging games.

Again, the fact that your arguments are hairdresser gossip doesn’t make me a paid troll. I know the industry and I can use facts to criticize it, which I do (I left it for a reason). You make stuff up and keep changing your argument…

From the user perspective they are the same. A scam casino is much easier to create than a scam Nike shop.

it’s not. Creating a game is much more complex than putting a bunch of images and text on a web page. Also in order to play casino games you need to deposit money, so you need to also develop that part, a scan shop can simply spoof the payment window and steal the card directly…

Not if the licence is fake.

If you got to know about the casino, chances are it’s a legitimate business. It doesn’t take a PhD also to just double check the website. If you are looking for casinos online digging in the internet, rather than surfing the most prominent businesses, then yes. If you just pick the mainstream ones, you are covered. The chance you lose because the game is rigged is negligible. Also, you are putting money somewhere, you should make some basic checks (it’s enough a 10 second search for the license ID and check your regulator website).

“Might be mandatory” means that it might not be, and for certain casino operators don’t want it.

No, it means that it depends on licenses. Different licenses require different things. If you hold the Maltese license, you need to have it, period. Maybe there are licenses that don’t prescribe that particular thing, hence “might be”.

Yes. There is the objective “designed to steal” scamming and my subjective dislike of betting against a dressed up random number generator.

Games have to be random number generators lol. There is nothing to dress up, that’s exactly what playing casino games is like. It’s a RNG where you have the 50%-the margin chance to win. This has nothing to do with scamming, or rigging games, which was your initial argument.

Lots of anecdotes along the lines of

Ok… lol

“What I mean by this is my friend is a new bettor, we sit side by side watching the same games at the same time, and the odds are much worse for me. It will show -100000 on my screen and shows -8000 on my friends screen”

Absolutely the bookie will know the customers and might apply different limits and different odds. If you are suspected being a part of a syndicate, for example, you will get worse odds. This is not a scam, you see exactly what the odds are, it is not hidden from you. This applies to sportsbook, not casino.

All betting sites have blacklists of customers taking advantage of arbitrage between sites.

This has nothing to do with casino or scamming. Also, sure betters are generally not blacklisted, they simply get limits applied as anyway to make any kind of money you need high volumes. Again, what does this have to do with rigging games? You can’t “rig” sportsbook, when you bet you see clearly what the odds are and you can compare and choose another provider with better odds.

Here are some common online betting scams copied from quora.

Wow, very useful dump. Have you read the “rigged games” part?

Rigged Games: In some cases, illegitimate gambling sites may manipulate game outcomes to ensure players lose. Stick to reputable sites that use random number generators and undergo regular audits.

Note that 7/10 items in that list are simply scams by individuals targeting other individuals and have nothing to do with casinos. The only relevant ones are:

• Unregulated Casinos
• Rigged Games
• Unfair Terms and Conditions

The solution for the first 2 is to use licensed providers. The last one is absolutely true, usually in bigger or established businesses, but has nothing to do with rigging games.

Basically nothing of this info dump from Quora (for what is worth) corroborates your argument…

To be honest, is it so hard to admit that you simply don’t like gambling because it’s taking money from people who don’t know better? I agree with that myself, and it’s a sufficient criticism to dislike casinos. There is no need to make up totally false information to add arguments.

No, mainstream, reputable and licensed casinos will not rig games and steal money from you. Yes, they will take money from you in the majority of cases because games - all of them - are designed to benefit the house. No, they don’t help laundering money because in most cases they will get caught and lose the whole business, it’s very, very, very hard to hide activity when you have multiple regulators plus the usual government agencies look at your reports constantly, and all your transactions are tracked.

Exactly. Scam websites can be casinos or shops or anything.

Ok, you understand that this is a completely different set of businesses compared to established casino business, right?

Talking about scam website to infer things about the “real” counterparts doesn’t make much sense. Yes, there is scam-everything. Doesn’t mean “shops are scam”, because there are shops which scam people. So when I talk about online casinos, I refer to the legitimate businesses that are gambling businesses, not scam organizations that happen to use gambling as their cover.

In any case, licenses are a very effective way to protect yourself from scammers.

Casinos, on and offline, are excellent ways to launder. The amount of regulations trying to mitigate this risk proves my point.

As all systems that allow to move money, they are excellent vectors, but doesn’t mean they are excellent ways to launder money. Regulations prevent money laundering (or strongly mitigating), which makes them less and less viable for laundering. I specifically talk about online casinos, since cash is not an option.

Not for casinos. Gambling addiction is a casino’s main business. Why are there no windows in Vegas?

Online and physical casinos are different and they comply with different regulations. In online casinos for example it might be mandatory to limit session duration, show popups every X minutes to inform about losses and duration of the session etc., depending on licenses. These are just responsible gaming measures enforced by licenses (in this case the Maltese, which is a very common one), which do not apply to physical casinos.

Yes. Online you can scam many more people with fake roulette tables.

So, this is the crux of the problem: your definition of scamming seems to be variable. There are only two options:

• The casino game works according to specifics
• The casino game is rigged, meaning it provides better odds to the host compared to its specifics

Both of them provide revenue for the host, with the second being marginally higher (you can’t have 80% margin, people won’t play). The second though has the problem that it won’t pass certification, so the only way to serve it is on unlicensed sites. Being unlicensed makes it impossible to access whole markets. So, why companies should go for the second and not the first, when even the first is providing money and a bigger pool of players?

To support your claim, maybe you can list a bunch of articles about casinos getting caught with rigged games that were licensed? I did a quick search and nothing popped up immediately (although they might exist, and it’s a good thing they got caught, which shows controls work).

Betfair, betfred, bet356, Ladbrokes etc.

As a user? Because that doesn’t tell much. Anyway, bet365 has a casino, do you trust it?

OK, sorry. Digital services businesses.

Also, once factories have machines etc., they might prioritize one customer over another, but I doubt they decide a customer is not profitable. In fact, digital businesses don’t have by design the problems posed by the physical world, and this is especially true in b2c businesses…

That’s not what OC mentioned, which is what I was answering to. They mentioned the logic that getting DDoS made them unprofitable customers, I questioned it.

I perfectly understand the issue. If cloudflare was getting their IP blocked in countries where the casino was dodging regulations, they should have simply written that, and forced the customer to block traffic from those countries. The BYOIP is not the only way to solve it. Imperva forced the website i worked for to block Russia (which was not a market we were operating in) to prevent their IPs being blocked in Russia, for example. They didn’t bring it up as an option somehow, and that gives to this an extortion vibe.