5 ms·

I'm convinced Worldcoin is just a massive biometric data gathering operation with a "we have a coin to save the world" being the cover story. Altman (for some

I'm convinced Worldcoin is just a massive biometric data gathering operation with a "we have a coin to save the world" being the cover story. Altman (for some reason) needs a ton of biometric data, so go around the world and especially to poorer places, offer folks funny money in exchange for their biometrics and run off. Set aside the moral and ethical questions and it's quite frankly a very good way to get your hands on this type of data.

chihuahua 3y ago
Step 1: Record biometrics from millions of poor people. Step 2: ??? Step 3: Profit. It's a bit like the outlandish COVID vaccine conspiracy theories: Step 1: Vaccinate people and deploy 5G wireless networks. Step 2: ??? Step 3: Total power over people; world domination.
- _fat_santa 3y ago
  Total speculation but it could be used as training data for GPT5 or whatever they are doing at OpenAI. I could totally see a scenario where they would want to train an AI on biometrics data and then sell that to the govt.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- rurp 3y ago
  Well for one thing a database of biometric records gives you an immutable way to impersonate those people on any other platform that relies on the same biometrics. But that's kind of beside the point. I wouldn't be at all confident that you or I thinking about this problem for a few minutes are going to uncover every possible abuse vector that a motivated nefarious actor will in the future. Collecting this kind of private data for no clear benefit looks sketchy as hell.
reducesuffering 3y ago
HN has become quite kneejerk-cynic, but let me explain what Worldcoin is supposed to solve in Sam Altman's eyes. #1: AGI is coming soon. #1.a: Because of #1, there will be a flood of unverifiable bot activity on the internet, easily outnumbering real human interaction by 100x+. The only way to identify other humans is some sort of biometric verification process. #1.b: Because of #1, the vast majority of people will become an economic net-negative. They can't outproduce an easily replicable AGI more than they consume. Thus we need a Universal Basic Income (without the messy fraud) and a way to evenly distribute it, so that people can still enjoy a decent quality of life. Sama has written about these concerns on his blog about a decade ago. Or just believe it's "because money $"
- JohnFen 3y ago
  What I don't understand from Altman's point of view is that if AGI will bring such a disaster that we need to subject ourselves to yet another Bad Thing along the lines of WC, then why in the world is he trying so hard to make sure his dystopian worldview actually happens?
  - Keyframe 3y ago
    If it's inevitable, better to be first than late. Personally, I don't think there will be AGI anytime soon or at all, and if there will be - OpenAI is not the one that will achieve it.. and if they do, they will not be the one controlling it.
  - gs17 3y ago
    > then why in the world is he trying so hard to make sure his dystopian worldview actually happens? If he's also working under the assumption that AGI is inevitable, it would make sense to want to be first at it so it aligns with his values more, while also preparing for a post-AGI world.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      I don't follow that logic. If he thinks that the development of an AGI is inevitable, why would it make sense to be the first one to do it, when he also clearly thinks that its existence if a grave danger? What does it matter who does it first? The results are the same regardless. If I thought that AGI was anywhere close to imminent (which I don't), then this perspective seems to me like it has a great risk of being a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why risk being the one to bring the bad thing into existence? Wouldn't it make more sense to let someone else be the bad guy and instead focus on defense?
      - reducesuffering 3y ago
        Because they believe the results are not the same regardless. AGI's impact on humanity will hinge upon if we are able to correctly impart human-loving values onto what is essentially an unhuman system, so called "alignment." If we align AGI, it will make us obsolete but atleast give us a good life. If we don't, and it has goals it wants and the superpower to subvert our attempts to thwart its goals, we will end up as ants are to Google. Not hated, but a tiny nuisance to be disregarded when a new data center needs to be built. The only defense is slowing down AI capabilities until alignment has been rigorously verified.

chihuahua 3y ago

Step 1: Record biometrics from millions of poor people. Step 2: ??? Step 3: Profit. It's a bit like the outlandish COVID vaccine conspiracy theories: Step 1: Vaccinate people and deploy 5G wireless networks. Step 2: ??? Step 3: Total power over people; world domination.

_fat_santa 3y ago
Total speculation but it could be used as training data for GPT5 or whatever they are doing at OpenAI. I could totally see a scenario where they would want to train an AI on biometrics data and then sell that to the govt.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
rurp 3y ago
Well for one thing a database of biometric records gives you an immutable way to impersonate those people on any other platform that relies on the same biometrics. But that's kind of beside the point. I wouldn't be at all confident that you or I thinking about this problem for a few minutes are going to uncover every possible abuse vector that a motivated nefarious actor will in the future. Collecting this kind of private data for no clear benefit looks sketchy as hell.

reducesuffering 3y ago

HN has become quite kneejerk-cynic, but let me explain what Worldcoin is supposed to solve in Sam Altman's eyes. #1: AGI is coming soon. #1.a: Because of #1, there will be a flood of unverifiable bot activity on the internet, easily outnumbering real human interaction by 100x+. The only way to identify other humans is some sort of biometric verification process. #1.b: Because of #1, the vast majority of people will become an economic net-negative. They can't outproduce an easily replicable AGI more than they consume. Thus we need a Universal Basic Income (without the messy fraud) and a way to evenly distribute it, so that people can still enjoy a decent quality of life. Sama has written about these concerns on his blog about a decade ago. Or just believe it's "because money $"

JohnFen 3y ago
What I don't understand from Altman's point of view is that if AGI will bring such a disaster that we need to subject ourselves to yet another Bad Thing along the lines of WC, then why in the world is he trying so hard to make sure his dystopian worldview actually happens?
- Keyframe 3y ago
  If it's inevitable, better to be first than late. Personally, I don't think there will be AGI anytime soon or at all, and if there will be - OpenAI is not the one that will achieve it.. and if they do, they will not be the one controlling it.
- gs17 3y ago
  > then why in the world is he trying so hard to make sure his dystopian worldview actually happens? If he's also working under the assumption that AGI is inevitable, it would make sense to want to be first at it so it aligns with his values more, while also preparing for a post-AGI world.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    I don't follow that logic. If he thinks that the development of an AGI is inevitable, why would it make sense to be the first one to do it, when he also clearly thinks that its existence if a grave danger? What does it matter who does it first? The results are the same regardless. If I thought that AGI was anywhere close to imminent (which I don't), then this perspective seems to me like it has a great risk of being a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why risk being the one to bring the bad thing into existence? Wouldn't it make more sense to let someone else be the bad guy and instead focus on defense?
    - reducesuffering 3y ago
      Because they believe the results are not the same regardless. AGI's impact on humanity will hinge upon if we are able to correctly impart human-loving values onto what is essentially an unhuman system, so called "alignment." If we align AGI, it will make us obsolete but atleast give us a good life. If we don't, and it has goals it wants and the superpower to subvert our attempts to thwart its goals, we will end up as ants are to Google. Not hated, but a tiny nuisance to be disregarded when a new data center needs to be built. The only defense is slowing down AI capabilities until alignment has been rigorously verified.