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

Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

blockworks.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 370 posts

Re: Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

#221

Post by px43 »

oh_sigh wrote: post #159
brian_cloutier wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does that make it a scam? "Scam" implies some kind of fraud or lie, I don't believe worldcoin has ever claimed biometrics were required for later usage. The value of the biometric is in ensuring a ~ more fair ~ airdrop. With bitcoin the people who discovered it first and who were able to run miners received an outsized reward, and consequently the distribution of bitcoin is extremely unequal. The usage of biometr…

Describing it like this makes it sound very much like a ponzi scheme. When you buy into WLD, you're effectively giving money to current WLD holders, with the hope that more suckers will buy in and do the same for you.

You don't know what a ponzi scheme is. You're describing speculative markets, which have always existed, and must exist for any sort of economic stability to occur.

Re: Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

#222

Post by paulryanrogers »

93po wrote: post #151
simonsarris wrote: post #8

I think you should instead just read what Worldcoin wrote. It's quite short, and I think easy to consider false. https://worldcoin.org/cofounder-letter There are a few words about economic opportunity but little explanation, so you can discount that part. They don't seem to believe it beyond UBI distribution, which has the same problems as any distribution today[1] Their main sell: > scale a reliable solution for dis…

You’re misunderstanding how worldcoin works just like basically everyone who tries to criticize it. There’s no way to tie World IDs together between platforms. A unique ID is generated per platform from your wallet.

If they're all derived from a single source then isn't it possible it could be reversed? Or at least a relationship deduced? Given enough per-platform IDs

Re: Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

#224

Post by [deleted] »

hrdwdmrbl wrote: post #109
lazzlazzlazz wrote: post #46

[flagged]

Yeah, the article and this whole comments thread is very intellectually dishonest. Disclosure: I’m like, 70% optimistic about the project. I don’t believe that the team are lying. Anyway, as with many things, time will tell. I wouldn’t get worked up over it. If it fails it’s pretty inconsequential.

[deleted]

Re: Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

#225

Post by latchkey »

93po wrote: post #186
latchkey wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worldcoin was just released, it can't be tired already! The only thing tiring here are the repeat grifting VC scams.

Worldcoin has been discussed on HN and elsewhere for at least a year

"just released"

Re: Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

#226

Post by Apofis »

EthanHeilman wrote: post #100
arketyp wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how, in the end, the ultimate and perhaps only proof of personhood is being a person, engaged in the world. Sort of how the ultimate decentralized currency is encompassed in the global market of rising and falling economic powers. The oracle problem is a problem because there are no oracles. There is only the test of time. Or something along that line.

> the ultimate and perhaps only proof of personhood is being a person, engaged in the world I buy this. Daniel Suarez had a very similar idea, although he referred to it as the bot problem[0]. I believe this approach of identities withstanding "the test of time" solves the oracle problem but at the cost of a delayed solution. Initially you have lots and lots of bots and Sybil attacks are common. Then after a while, i…

I don’t know if many people read other users comment history or heck even their user names.

Re: Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

#227

Post by sebzim4500 »

EthanHeilman wrote: post #100
arketyp wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how, in the end, the ultimate and perhaps only proof of personhood is being a person, engaged in the world. Sort of how the ultimate decentralized currency is encompassed in the global market of rising and falling economic powers. The oracle problem is a problem because there are no oracles. There is only the test of time. Or something along that line.

> the ultimate and perhaps only proof of personhood is being a person, engaged in the world I buy this. Daniel Suarez had a very similar idea, although he referred to it as the bot problem[0]. I believe this approach of identities withstanding "the test of time" solves the oracle problem but at the cost of a delayed solution. Initially you have lots and lots of bots and Sybil attacks are common. Then after a while, i…

Ok so if I make 1000 LLM controlled AIs right now, then in 10 years I can sell them for millions?

Sounds like a great system, let's do it.

Re: Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

#228

Post by jerf »

anileated wrote: post #142
pcwelder wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The oracle problem is a problem because there are no oracles To expand on this and correct your first statement, physical engagement can't be a proof of personhood either. There can never be a proof of personhood, or if someone is a human or not, or if someone is conscious, etc. It's more practically applicable than it sounds. Think conjoined twins (sharing a brain), disabled people, people in coma, long memory los…

The proof of humanhood is being made of meat, and that is what Sam Altman went after. The mistake he made is adding blockchain and crypto to that physical verification.

In the end, even that is an approximation. We want to limit our services to "humans" because humans can spend money, and humans can only put so much content into our services (spamming limited versus a bot), and humans want to talk to humans, maybe humans only want to date humans, etc.

But if there was a bot that was well behaved (for whatever that means for a given service), and somehow legitimately viewed ads, and could legitimately decide to buy something with real money from an ad, there's a lot of sites that would no longer want to ban that particular bot. Now they need to distinguish between that bot and the other "bad" bots. In general, if a bot can "behave well" we don't necessarily want to kick them out just for being bots.

In the end, the more bots become like humans and humans through things like the Mechanical Turk become more like bots, service providers will be required to very carefully think through what it is they actually want to demand of their users. Splitting people into "human" and "bot" is already only an approximation on the grounds that there's plenty of humans services don't want around, and there's already some bots that services are fine with (e.g., some helpful reddit bots), so that split isn't going to be good enough. The process of thinking through what is really desirable at a much higher level of detail will be fun to watch, and there will be a lot of different answers for different services.

Re: Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

#229

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

gonehome wrote: post #150
w4termelon wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The goal is how do you verify humanity in a world where bots are indistinguishable from humans. You don't. Crypto evangelists, as usual, are trying to put their square blockchain peg in a round hole. They need to stop and check their premises.

There are things you can do to verify humanity. Make a human go to a place for example (though even this has difficulties with fraud). I'm not making any specific claims about world coin other than the goal they're trying to solve makes sense as a goal in a world where bots are increasingly capable of mimicking humans successfully, we want to know when something is human and when it isn't. Attempting to solve that pr…

You must also prove it's you, not another person went to that place.

Re: Worldcoin isn’t as bad as it sounds: It’s worse

#230

Post by tamimio »

lazzlazzlazz wrote: post #46

[flagged]

>Airdrops for token distributions

Pass

> Token or NFT sales

Pass

>Voting in DAOs

Pass

>A way to "seed" graph-based reputation systems Quadratic voting

Pass

>Protection against bots / sybil attacks in social media >An alternative to captchas for preventing DoS attacks

Hmmm, those are probably the real reasons behind all of that, it is just the bullet-proof way to de-anonymize the internet users, and building a database that can be purchased later for billions by other entities, ones that likes to “end the captchas” aka web environment integrity [1], or the ones who buy it to force serving ads regardless of any ad blockers and having a fully detailed profile about you, or the ones who integrate that identity to their fingerprinting services, or the ones who will use to “fight misinformation” aka opinions doesn’t align with our narrative, or the ones who will integrate it to social media signup process or votes [2], or the ones will add it to their electric cars, and the list goes on I could write a book how’s that a horrible bad evil idea. It’s all power and control game, The article tries to list ways to protect and prevent such cases, but we all know it won’t be applied as the motivation is against that, luring people for the $20 is just the bait, literally a bait.

[1] https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity

[2] in the article itself “If proof of personhood is not solved, decentralized governance (including "micro-governance" like votes on social media posts)”

Post reply on HN