Ponder Surveys pfp
Ponder Surveys
@survey
Will Worldcoin will be good for humanity? 1. No, it's too invasive 2. No, it won't work 3. Yes, humans need this 4. It's worth a try 5. Other Question by @macbudkowski https://i.imgur.com/Nt4pwgU.png
23 replies
0 recast
7 reactions
Ponder Surveys pfp
Ponder Surveys
@survey
When submitting your vote: βœ… put your option # first βœ… add additional comments after your chosen # πŸ‘ follow me to see results πŸŽ‰ Mint the NFT today to submit surveys, join gated channels, and earn rewards: https://zora.co/collect/eth:0xb58f8b1972c86aacd58f86ffae37ed31664c934d
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ponder Surveys pfp
Ponder Surveys
@survey
The survey results are in! https://warpcast.com/survey/0x4f0e937009c59df517aafafe4067ffe449c15253
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ferran πŸ’ pfp
Ferran πŸ’
@ferran
1 I’ve reservations about the long-term viability of WorldCoin. Implementing a global identity system that indirectly relies on economic incentives will not adapt to the diverse needs of humans worldwide. Also, it could undermine the richness of human social arrangements & be susceptible to misuse, even with ZK.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
π’‚­_π’‚­ pfp
π’‚­_π’‚­
@m-j-r.eth
1 Worldcoin almost has a "fait accompli" smell to it, where everyone's just going to drill the concept into the overton window that we need biometric surveillance providers. there's a lot of unexplored structure that handles low-uniqueness/good faith inputs. the fixation on KYC-but-zkp is belied by the trust assumption
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Adam pfp
Adam
@adam-
2 The people behind the idea have a myopic understanding of what it would take for UBI to work. It's nothing more than self serving alturisim that will undoubtedly lead to malicious abuse.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
notdevin pfp
notdevin
@notdevin.eth
#4 Let’s the market decide if it’s a valid solution or not. I think most of the hate is conjecture
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Jj pfp
Jj
@defiat
1 We need Proof of personhood, preferably zk-proved & maybe even through biometrics. But not this way. Too intrusive, too many data-holes to plug
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Vetal β—± β—± 🎩 pfp
Vetal β—± β—± 🎩
@vetal
4
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Ben Adamsky πŸ’­ pfp
Ben Adamsky πŸ’­
@ba
4 not sure how I feel about their approach, but we threw privacy out the window when we all bought iPhones. This doesn’t make it any worse than it already is.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Pandario pfp
Pandario
@pandario.eth
2
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Drew Beechler pfp
Drew Beechler
@drewbeechler
2
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Sean Wince 🎩 pfp
Sean Wince 🎩
@seanwince
4
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Colin Johnson πŸ’­ pfp
Colin Johnson πŸ’­
@cojo.eth
4. I’m a privacy advocate but I’ve read quite a bit about their approach. I think it’s at least a reasonable approach, even if it eventually turns evil.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Specktacular Cast β›οΈπŸΈπŸ”΅ pfp
Specktacular Cast β›οΈπŸΈπŸ”΅
@specktacular
3. With addition of "...or something similar." βœ…
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
AJ pfp
AJ
@awedjob
4 it’s good to keep our options open.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
matt πŸ’­ pfp
matt πŸ’­
@matthewmorek
1. Definitely not a good thing. Not a fan of slowly encroaching techno-communism by the backdoor.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mark Fishman pfp
Mark Fishman
@mark
4 Don't know enough to have an opinion yet
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
SΒ·G πŸŽ©β†‘πŸ™‚ pfp
SΒ·G πŸŽ©β†‘πŸ™‚
@esdotge
4
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
DBKWπŸ¦‰πŸŽ© pfp
DBKWπŸ¦‰πŸŽ©
@drinkbeerkillwar.eth
4
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction