[throwaway13337]

Interesting idea. The problem with this, though, is the same problem video game economies have with similar systems - people just make extra accounts.

Ensuring a single person has a single account would be a sort of holy grail here for many things. I'd love to hear ideas of a way to make it possible without sharing private information.

[zaguios]

Yea, the extra account issue is something that I have thought a lot about. My initial plan is to slowly increase the requirements for information. In the very near future I will be making email verification a requirement. After that I will be adding required phone verification as an extra step. Eventually once the service grows large enough I will be forced to start requiring private information to ensure that people are unable to game the system by creating multiple accounts.

[6d6b73]

I had similar idea few years ago, and my rudimentary solution to this was web of trust. Create a way for every user to have ability to verify that they know another user. The user gets the whole daily allowance only if they are verified by at least 5 verified users. Until they are verified they only get a small percentage of the allowance. Tie this to crypto and you can help pretty decent web of trust that is so badly needed for crypto to be usable with emails

[zardo]

I think this sort of approach is required, but won't be sufficient. If you are going to give away money on the world stage, you will be dealing with both sophisticated, and barbaric efforts to undermine your system. You will have users being tricked, blackmailed, and violently forced into providing false verification.

[orik]

couldn't you just verify your own alt accounts?

[6d6b73]

first you need to be fully verified, so you would need to have at least 5 fully verified users vouch for you. System could also implement limits on how often and how many tomes one can verify other users. last but not least yoy could have cost of verification set very high, ie daily allowance paid by both veifier and the verified to the system to make fake verification costly

[logfromblammo]

In order to establish a "one account per human" rule, I think using some form of biometric identifier will be inevitable.

My first attempt would probably be a 600 DPI flatbed scan of both hands, palms down, with a nonce written on them with a marker. But since I am a stinker, the nonce would be a procedurally generated phrase similar to "22Feb2017 @randomhandle 03D6A9C1 #RateMyHands", and my trust would wither in the ensuing user data privacy scandal.

I'm sure someone more mature and responsible than I am could do better with that idea.

If you can determine that a new account has the same hands as an existing account, you can stop depositing into the old one, and continue with the new one. You can start with human eyeball inspection, and work your way up to automated hashes of extracted features.