121–130 of 379 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Write once media on a server is what you want How does that solve this problem: >[company will] go out of business and take down the servers with it
distributed public key, and a private-signed hash of the dataset.
Maybe some sort of globally distributed time-stamping mechanism? Oh hey look, it's a blockchain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To the best of my knowledge, the IRS has never scanned my eyeball, and yet I'm still able to send and receive money with them. I'm not getting the UBI angle at all. What part of UBI requires new technology?
The problem it's solving or attempting to solve is "how do I create demand for a token that isn't redeemable for anything (generated by a private organization which intends to profit from exchanging tokens it generates for money)", and the only people that want those are cryptobros. Throw in the eyeball trackers as a "Proof of Personhood" twist on the "restricted supply" story, to go with the usual "future world curr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He was always sketchy, and the whole way he handles OpenAI is also extremely sketchy with pushing for regulation that in effect protects OpenAI's products against competition and forms a soft-to-hard government monopoly on AI (the exact opposite of OpenAI's initial mission). And yet, they did bring us GPT, and inspired the world to go in this direction, including the open-source models by Meta. History is always mess…
> including the open-source models by Meta "open-source"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does this mean? You already have a unique identity as far as the government are concerned, and who would pay UBI if not the government.
To the best of my knowledge, the IRS has never scanned my eyeball, and yet I'm still able to send and receive money with them. I'm not getting the UBI angle at all. What part of UBI requires new technology?
None of it, of course. The things that makes implementing UBI difficult to implement are socioeconomic, not technological, in nature.
But I think WorldCoin is cynically hoping that invoking "UBI" will trick people into thinking that WC's efforts will be of benefit to everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does this mean? You already have a unique identity as far as the government are concerned, and who would pay UBI if not the government.
Here is one answer: > How Altman plans to pay for Worldcoin’s UBI, however, remains murky. “The hope is that as people want to buy this token, because they believe this is the future, there will be inflows into this economy. New token-buyers is how it gets paid for, effectively,” Altman told Coindesk recently.
I'm actually surprised how rapidly this went downhill exactly how people were warning it would.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He was always sketchy, and the whole way he handles OpenAI is also extremely sketchy with pushing for regulation that in effect protects OpenAI's products against competition and forms a soft-to-hard government monopoly on AI (the exact opposite of OpenAI's initial mission). And yet, they did bring us GPT, and inspired the world to go in this direction, including the open-source models by Meta. History is always mess…
> including the open-source models by Meta "open-source"
I really don't want to have anything to do with crypto, and the fact that Sam Altman is pushing it in 2023 makes both him and OpenAI look sketchy. Especially crypto with a weird biometric eye scanner.
It is wild to me that Altman seems to really believe his company will have a God-On-Earth within the next decade and he still wants to put his name and time into some side hustle? I don't get it. (I think he or his supporters would say Worldcoin is something necessary for the future-AI world, but I don't buy it).