So you're against encryption then. Simple as that.
> Outsourcing some, or all of that to some VC backed companies, facilitating access for the various intelligence agencies, is what I have a problem with.
I also have a problem with that. We should aim to build systems that are resistant to all attackers, even intelligence agencies. And like Signal, it should be impossible for companies to facilitate access for anyone, including intelligence/law enforcement.
> And a crypto start-up setting out to build a global database of peoples retinas
Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with real criticisms of WorldCoin (Vitalik has a nice critique here: https://vitalik.ca/general/2023/07/24/biometric.html), because they don't store biometric data, they only store hashes.
What's the worry here? If WorldCoin surpasses their wildly ambitious long term goals, governments won't be able to revoke someones passport for being a dissident anymore? What specific issues do you see with a successful decentralized proof of personhood system?
EDIT: Specifically, what issues does _decentralization_ bring to proof-of-personhood over government run proof of personhood, other than removing the government's ability to un-person someone.
You wont solve social issues with technical solutions. But just like the DAO hack you can solve technical issues using social solutions quite easily.
Outsourcing some, or all of that to some VC backed companies, facilitating access for the various intelligence agencies, is what I have a problem with. And a crypto start-up setting out to build a global database of peoples retinas is exactly that.