Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Edward Snowden Slams Sam Altman's Worldcoin: 'Don't Catalogue Eyeballs'

decrypt.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 318 posts

Re: Edward Snowden Slams Sam Altman's Worldcoin: 'Don't Catalogue Eyeballs'

#21

Post by Julien_r2 »

Wow I feel I just came out of a cave, to discover only now about Worldcoin..

Apart from the arguable concept itself, I'm genuinely wondering why betting on yet another scanning device, instead of using fingerprint scan, which is now available on most smartphones ?

Is it that much more reliable that it's worth going through the pain of engineering a new hardware ?

Finally, how they could expect any other reactions than doubt, fear, and reject, out of this solution, while fingerprint and face detection already go through so much ethical issues ?

Re: Edward Snowden Slams Sam Altman's Worldcoin: 'Don't Catalogue Eyeballs'

#23

Post by bsedlm »

Yetino wrote: post #18
danuker wrote: post #8

Worldcoin issues tokens to people for scanning their retinas. Their magical orb device sends a biometric hash to their network. Here's my take on it: You can possibly replace their biometric device with a random hash generator. * If it works, it means the currency is not fairly distributed, but anyone sending valid hashes to their network is issued tokens, irrespective of whether the eyeballs described by those hashe…

The first half of your argument makes sense. Justifying the use of proof-of-work appears to be a fallacy of relevance though

I consider the energy expense exactly the reason (and the cost) of the decentralized trust afforded by PoW.

How is it irrelevant?

Re: Edward Snowden Slams Sam Altman's Worldcoin: 'Don't Catalogue Eyeballs'

#24

Post by hef19898 »

fsloth wrote: post #13
ozim wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kids or coworkers are not going to make fake fingerprints to mess with me. What they can do is to see password or pin code while I am typing those over my shoulder. Someone on the street also won't be able to see my pin code for unlocking phone if I use fingerprint. Those are scenarios that biometrics are handling really well. Biometrics against sophisticated attackers is not good idea. I don't encounter in my life "…

Yeah, similarly we have crap locks in doors. They are there more to make it somewhat laborious to open to door, hence signal privacy, than make it nigh impossible to break in. That's why we have bank vaults and so on when we really want to deny access. For convenient security you want just enough complexity a bot wont automatically unlock it, for proper security something that can be even a bit unconvenient as long a…

Exactly, every-day security is there to prevent random dudes. And even they can, to stay with homes, just break a window. Serious opponents, especially if they are really motivated, will be able to break into everything. The three letter agencies, and their counterparts in other countries, are obviously on the very professional and very motivated end of the spectrum.

Personally, I don't see any reason to make overly easy for any of those parties. So no biometrical data to be exchanged for some new form dogecoin.

Re: Edward Snowden Slams Sam Altman's Worldcoin: 'Don't Catalogue Eyeballs'

#25

Post by croes »

ozim wrote: post #9
kkjjkgjjgg wrote: post #5

Ever since the movie "Demolition Man", it should be obvious why biometrics are a bad idea. (Yeah I know they also can try to scan for signs of life like blood flow - still, I don't like it). Even without the Demolition Man scenario, an even worse issue is that you can't change your biometrics in case somebody steals them. Fake fingerprints are already easy to do, other things surely can be cloned, too.

Kids or coworkers are not going to make fake fingerprints to mess with me. What they can do is to see password or pin code while I am typing those over my shoulder. Someone on the street also won't be able to see my pin code for unlocking phone if I use fingerprint. Those are scenarios that biometrics are handling really well. Biometrics against sophisticated attackers is not good idea. I don't encounter in my life "…

But you can "forget" your PIN, you can't forget your iris.

Re: Edward Snowden Slams Sam Altman's Worldcoin: 'Don't Catalogue Eyeballs'

#26

Post by exo762 »

danuker wrote: post #8

Worldcoin issues tokens to people for scanning their retinas. Their magical orb device sends a biometric hash to their network. Here's my take on it: You can possibly replace their biometric device with a random hash generator. * If it works, it means the currency is not fairly distributed, but anyone sending valid hashes to their network is issued tokens, irrespective of whether the eyeballs described by those hashe…

While I don't care about Worldcoin (I think it will fail, because they are solving the problem that does not exist), this post is false in multiple ways.

First, retina scanning output hash is deterministic - it is supposed to generate the same result for the same eyeball. So it can't be replaced with random number generation.

Second, network does not interpret hashes, except for making sure that single hash is awarded funds only ones. Network however pays attention to whom is sending the hashes. It must be "legitimate" Orb units, likely considered to be legitimate because their public keys were whitelisted.

Third, process of distribution of initial tokens is obviously NOT OPEN. You need a "legitimate" Orb unit to participate. Which has nothing to do with how the network will behave for users already on-boarded.

Fourth, PoW has nothing to do with it. PoW is antisybil for people who might add new blocks. PoW has nothing to do with people who just want to transfer or hold funds. Or even with people who can create money according to network rules.

Re: Edward Snowden Slams Sam Altman's Worldcoin: 'Don't Catalogue Eyeballs'

#27

Post by dboreham »

Julien_r2 wrote: post #21

Wow I feel I just came out of a cave, to discover only now about Worldcoin.. Apart from the arguable concept itself, I'm genuinely wondering why betting on yet another scanning device, instead of using fingerprint scan, which is now available on most smartphones ? Is it that much more reliable that it's worth going through the pain of engineering a new hardware ? Finally, how they could expect any other reactions tha…

If the problem is "make money from a blockchain" then things may look different.

Re: Edward Snowden Slams Sam Altman's Worldcoin: 'Don't Catalogue Eyeballs'

#28

Post by censormenow »

ahazred8ta wrote: post #3

Admins, please ban sharmin123, shahin841, hackerlist.co, and look at other shahin* user accounts https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=sharmin123

The admins rate limit and flag (ban and censor) anyone talking negatively about Apple products, Google products, or Worldcoin. This is my third account of the week.

Re: Edward Snowden Slams Sam Altman's Worldcoin: 'Don't Catalogue Eyeballs'

#30

Post by idorosen »

bsedlm wrote: post #23
Yetino wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first half of your argument makes sense. Justifying the use of proof-of-work appears to be a fallacy of relevance though

I consider the energy expense exactly the reason (and the cost) of the decentralized trust afforded by PoW. How is it irrelevant?

Proof of work, it’s inefficiency, or it’s security implications on transactions more generally are not relevant to your comments on the vulnerability of their coin faucet or the veracity of their claims.
Post reply on HN