U.S. companies back Sam Altman's World ID even as much of the world pushes back

rdevilla

As if I needed another reason to despise this continent. Who actually wants to uphold, work for, and build these systems in our society? This is seriously the kind of nation you want to inhabit?

frogperson

This is fascism. It erodes our right to privacy and should be shouted down at every opportunity.

2ndorderthought

World id, meta verifier, how many other military funded establishments are pushing to require mass surveillance of everyone doing anything. Meanwhile their bots run rampant all over the Internet without any concern for anyone else's infrastructure, copyright, or ip. The irony...

ArcHound

You mean to tell me that companies that got rich by hoarding data are excited to hoard more data? Never would have guessed. Also, why wouldn't anyone want to have data about everyone? Seems like a valuable asset.

josefritzishere

Nobody wants to live in an open air prison.

jmclnx

Of course they do, when the age verification morphs into real personal identification (PI) all people's habits will be known to everyone. Time to put a stop to this PI tracking trend. But we all know PI will be tracked by all entities in the future in about 10 - 20 years.

theplatman

so we're trusting the guy who created tech to make it easier for bots to exist on the internet to then sell us the solution to fix the problem he made worse?

AlexandrB

I can't believe this idiotic project is running so long after the "blockchain for everything" mania ended. Seems like they can't believe it either since they changed their name from "Worldcoin" to just "World.

jonathanstrange

The US is trying hard to become world's most despised country.

goolz

The blind leading the blind. These companies and Sam are both devoid of any sort of ethical code aside from C.R.E.A.M.

giancarlostoro

Sam Altman doing his hardest to become more hated than Larry Ellison I see.

booleandilemma

I think we need less technology. Can we have a de-tech movement? Life-saving tech is fine but enough is enough with software, AI, surveillance, etc. It's too much. It's been too much for the past twenty years or so.

greenchair

his mark of the beast attempt # ?

Terr_

I'm not even remotely-interested unless there is legislation that creates civil-liability and criminal penalties for abuse or mishandling of the data. Also, companies shouldn't be able to refuse service just because the prospective customer's biometric data was leaked/stolen/duplicated in the past. I mean, when you think about it that's some Twilight Zone or Black Mirror territory.

drob518

Oh, hell no!

gentleman11

I suspect that if we don't want to live in this future, we need some major open source tech leadership around making something like an anonymous version of this I know, not exactly an easy problem to solve, but big tech or government is going to do it if we can't find better solutions first

john_strinlai

> On April 16, it published a blueprint for how companies can grow their revenue with its digital ID. that "blueprint", hilariously enough, starts with the title "How AI is eroding the foundations of the internet" . from a sam altman company. im afraid if i rolled my eyes any harder that they would spin out of their sockets.

taeric

This is an odd topic. On the one hand, we do seem to have a problem where attention is hijacked by engagement farming. On the other, we also know of problems from draconian management. I would actually like it if we had something that could say, only promote things on my feeds that are "liked" by people within a geographic radius of me. At the least, mute things that are getting pumped from hostile regions. I just don't know that I see how this can get us there, though? Seems far more likely that it would lead to more abuse.

int32_64

Is there any technical solution to these centralized ID authorities doing sybil attacks and minting identities out of nothing to manufacture consensus on supposedly "human verified" sites?

zingababba

Sama can ID my balls.