I was surprised to learn that Worldcoin is still running. It's a huge scam; it's a pyramid scheme designed to harvest biometric data, and enrich its creators in the process. I thought it was silently buried after the initial backlash.
I can definitely see it as uncharitable (subjective) but if one wants to claim it's wrong (objective) it would be best to provide reasons. I'd suggest ones which are more thought-provoking than "it's not literally a pyramid scheme" as that can be plainly seen.
I read the "pyramid scheme" (given the rest of the comment) as an accusation that it exists primarily to monetize the biometrics that individuals provide of themselves and any effects like "people can authenticate themselves online with our service" are secondary.
Governments have the same problem with ID cards, and they solved it by requiring your parents or wife to vouch for you. So in order to solve the problem of lost private keys you could have a list of people that you trust, and if two of them
vouch for you - you can generate a new key and keep your old ID. Would probably want another layer or two of security by sending an activation key to a physical address, your home address, or family address. Or require you to show up in person to an office and have your fingerprint or iris scanned.
Fundamentally, cryptography alleviates the need for third-party trust, and opens up for losing your keys.
It’s a tragedy that we don’t have social recovery as part of our online networking. I can lose access that my friends and family can not recover on my behalf. I may not give anyone my SSH keys, but surely my iCloud pictures are worth something to my relatives if I should get hit by a car.
Vitalik Buterin wrote
> One analysis of the Bitcoin ecosystem suggests that 1500 BTC may be lost every day - over ten times more than what Bitcoin users spend on transaction fees, and over the years adding up to as much as 20% of the total supply.
Iris scanning in phones appeared around 2015 but never went mainstream.[1] It requires an IR illuminator near the camera, which usually means on the front of the phone. Doesn't seem to have been a privacy issue; more about needing extra real estate on the front of the phone.
Having a "coin" which represents an iris scan made at some previous time is not very strong authentication.
Many countries [1][2] are designing a CBDC, which is similarly requires a Digital ID system like Worldcoin needs for UBI. However, the implementation is what matters. It is entirely possible to make a private CBDC that works like cash and private Digital ID system. Duly noted that conspiracy theorists could go berserk, however we need to assess as a society what methods we choose to build online money and online identity and prevent faulty implementations from being the ones that our governments and businesses use. We may not want digital ID in the form of mimicking government ID. We may want digital money to work as cash - entirely anonymous.
Like this article, we should point out where implementations go wrong to prevent their deployment. However, we should go further for those who have the time to propose better systems such that the worse ones don't win out.
Bad idea all through. Arrogant tech overlords like Altman should learn that they're not the saviors of the world, but instead, plain profiteering capitalists.
There's nothing inherently wrong with being a profiteering capitalist, but it's paramount to wear their sleeves proudly rather than disguising as wolf in sheep's clothing.
