Comment

Comment by brian_cloutier

It is of course possible to understand it and still be opposed. That's what makes it so frustrating that seemingly all of the negative coverage is ill-informed; I would love to read some informed criticism!

Just some simple examples:

> Imagine that your digital identity has been lost in some way — shut down by authorities for non-compliance, or otherwise blocked. With traditional cash — and other cryptocurrencies — you can always make a new wallet and stash some fresh coins in it. But this isn’t Minority Report, and you can’t get a new iris from your neighborhood surgeon.

You don't need to walk up to an Orb to create a wallet. You can own and transact worldcoin without ever showing your iris to an orb.

> When your immutable digital identity is locked — imagine merchants who won’t take your coins from you without a digital signature announcing your World ID — it’s over for you. No old account. No new account. No soup for you. You just lost your digital personhood.

This is also possible... with every other form of payment? Imagine merchants who refuse to accept cash. Once the government locks your credit card you're out of luck. Imagine a world where you have to sign in with google before you can pay for anything (why is the worldid dystoia apparently so easy to imagine, while the google one seems silly?). Once the government locks your google account you're out of luck. A dystopia has _many_ levers to pull and refusing to deploy worldcoin is not have any impact on the success of that dystopia.

There is really so much that it's not possible to clarify "exactly" what others aren't getting in a single comment, there are a dozen different misconceptions, if you have specific concerns I'm curious to hear them and attempt to reply to them.

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton