I used to defend crypto a lot (now just a little). Especially the UBI attempts. But no.
World coin has always looked like a thinly veiled attempt to generate a biometric dataset which would later be used against its users.
I just don't know who its audience was supposed to be. If you're suspicious enough of fiat to want this kind of escape hatch, how can you simultaneously be trusting enough to embrace a system that relies on biometrics and allegedly trustworthy hardware?
Because 90% of the people who got into crypto did not give a fuck about "trust" or any of the nonsense blockchains claim they do and only wanted to hit the lottery on the next coin going to the moon.
Oh it's totally in the 95% grift part of crypto. I'm just saying that it stands out from the rest because it targets a virtually non-existent demographic. Most scams try to cast a wide net.
It's pie in the sky. UBI could be worked towards today in many different ways without involving crypto. The idea of US tech people offering UBI to people in one of the most heavily exploited parts of the world as a way to get them to turn over biometric data is gross.
World coin has always looked like a thinly veiled attempt to generate a biometric dataset which would later be used against its users.
I just don't know who its audience was supposed to be. If you're suspicious enough of fiat to want this kind of escape hatch, how can you simultaneously be trusting enough to embrace a system that relies on biometrics and allegedly trustworthy hardware?