Live data from Hacker News

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

decrypt.co

41–50 of 318 posts

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

#41
This is one of the most disturbing things I’ve read in quite some time. The implications of all of it and all the bad avenues it could go down chill me. A person’s right to anonymity gone forever. I think all people should deserve the right to disappear and be unknown if they don’t have IDs on them.

I understand what Sam is going for here (equitable distribution of wealth) but this is absolutely the wrong way to go about it.

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

#42
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…

No you can't. The whole point is to every everybody have only 1 entry / key.

The concept is simple: give everybody an equal amount of coins. You need a unique identifier / derivative of it

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

#43
post #7

I registered the domain thiseyeballdoesnotexist.com - anyone interested in training a GAN for that page?

How will that help you? You need the orb, too and those operating the orb can presumably tell the difference between a real person and a jpg of an eyeball.

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

#44
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. His argument is valid, what stops you from replacing the retina scan with a random hash replicating a different person scanning each time and collecting new tokens? What ties the hash to the actual retina other than the device that you can mess…

Presumably the orbs produce a verifiable type of hash. E.g. whatever output it has is also encrypted with their private key + some salt and you can always check if what a user provides has that.

You don't understand what a hash is.

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

#45
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…

No you can't. The whole point is to every everybody have only 1 entry / key. The concept is simple: give everybody an equal amount of coins. You need a unique identifier / derivative of it

> You need a unique identifier / derivative of it

What prevents anyone from mass-generating unique identifiers?

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

#46
This is just so wrong in so many different ways, it actually fills me with despair to think that there are people somewhere who actually think this is in some ways a good idea. To the point of wondering if there is some way of organising more direct action to stop this kind of disaster from befalling the human race.

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

#47
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 awarde…

> 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. His argument is valid, what stops you from replacing the retina scan with a random hash replicating a different person scanning each time and collecting new tokens? What ties the hash to the actual retina other than the device that you can mess…

DRM magic inside the Orb.

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

#48

RIP Sam Altman's reputation

Genuine question: what is Sam Altman's reputation based on? I'm aware that Paul Graham had a serious mancrush on him, and that he somehow managed to turn a failed startup into a $40M acquihire, which is nothing to scoff at -- but is his success mostly based on his genius of selling himself and whatever he's involved in, or has he actually said or done anything that shows some deeper form of insight or ability?

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

#49
post #26
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 awarde…

>I think it will fail, because they are solving the problem that does not exist

Admittedly I never bothered to read about it but the problem they are solving is purely the distribution. Currently there's just no way to do a fair distribution where everyone gets equivalent amounts of it except perhaps with KYC but then they have to store way more personal data.

I'm much more comfortable with someone having a hash based on my biometric data than having my passport and other details.

Post reply on HN