> Asked about the complaints, Blania said that some operators were unhappy that the company would no longer be paying them, and said that some of them “did ques

> Asked about the complaints, Blania said that some operators were unhappy that the company would no longer be paying them, and said that some of them “did questionable things or didn’t perform well.” He also noted that the operators can have “very misaligned incentives” with the larger startup. Setting aside the initial operational challenges (national regulations, smartphone access, operator conduct), there seems to be a serious misunderstanding or perhaps oversimplification of economics for a “world coin.” Of course there is going to be fraud if the system you set up (where each operator gets paid for each person they recruit (a questionable distribution model already)) incentivizes recruitment only with no quality control. Of course there are going to be people scanning dog eyes, dead people’s eyes, eventually fake eyes because why wouldn’t they? You have not created a system where they should not do this, unless you’re relying on honesty, a strange assumption for a cryptocurrency. Paired with the seeming indignation the leadership has that people don’t like 1) not getting paid for their work and 2) when you close up shop after harvesting their biometric data, this seems to be a very naive system at the outset. Plus, really, you’re answer to “open source our biometric data we gave you” is “we’ll open source our protocol”? Cryptocurrency is about ownership. I own my private key, but now with world coin, I can’t own my own eyes?