Sam Altman’s Worldcoin, now simply known as World, has reignited debates about privacy and decentralization in the crypto industry. Promising a revolutionary approach to financial inclusion, World uses iris scans to verify human uniqueness, distributing its WLD token across the globe. However, this audacious venture has sparked intense scrutiny, with detractors arguing that its biometric methods clash with the core principles of decentralization and digital privacy. For more on the project’s launch and its unique approach, see Sam Altman’s World Crypto Project Launches in US With Eye-Scanning Orbs in 6 Cities.
Biometric Identity vs. Decentralization
The crux of the controversy lies in the claim that biometric systems, reliant on proprietary technologies and centralized control, can’t align with the decentralized ethos. Shady El Damaty, co-founder of Holonym Foundation, remarked, “Decentralization isn’t just a technical architecture. It’s a philosophy that prioritizes user control, privacy, and self-sovereignty. World’s biometric model is inherently at odds with this ethos.” Despite employing advanced cryptographic techniques like multiparty computation (MPC) and zero-knowledge (ZK) proofs, World’s dependency on custom hardware—specifically, the Orb—raises alarms about potential central points of failure and control.
In response, a World spokesperson emphasized that their infrastructure is not centralized, highlighting the non-custodial nature of the World App. “Once the Orb generates an iris code, the iris photo is end-to-end encrypted, sent to your phone, and immediately deleted from the Orb,” they asserted. Yet, critics remain unconvinced, questioning the true decentralization of such a system.
Echoes of Tech Overreach
El Damaty draws parallels between World’s data practices and those of OpenAI, suggesting a recurring pattern of tech overreach. “OpenAI built its foundation by scraping vast amounts of unconsented user data to train its models, and now Worldcoin is taking that same aggressive data acquisition approach into the realm of biometric identity,” he warned. This comparison comes amid ongoing legal battles against OpenAI for alleged unauthorized data scraping.
World distances itself from these allegations, underscoring its commitment to privacy-preserving technologies and asserting that it neither sells nor stores personal data. Still, the project faces regulatory pushback globally. Germany, Kenya, Brazil, and most recently Indonesia, have raised concerns about the security of users’ biometric data, reflecting a growing regulatory skepticism. For further insights into the project’s expansion and challenges, refer to Sam Altman’s eye-scanning crypto project World launches in US.
The Risk of Digital Exclusion
As World’s biometric systems gain momentum, they provoke concerns about exacerbating global inequalities. Critics argue that requiring biometric data for service access could deepen societal divides. “When biometric data becomes a prerequisite for accessing basic services, it effectively creates a two-tiered society,” El Damaty cautioned. World counters this by stating that its protocol does not mandate biometric enrollment for basic participation, allowing users to engage without visiting an Orb.
The potential for misuse in authoritarian regimes adds another layer of complexity. Although World asserts that its ID protocol is “open source, permissionless,” and designed to prevent governmental misuse, the specter of centralized biometric data invites skepticism.
The Future of Secure Identity
The push for secure identity systems is not without justification. As AI technology evolves, distinguishing between humans and AI agents online becomes increasingly challenging. Evin McMullen of Privado ID highlighted the stakes: “Risks at the nexus of AI and identity are not limited to any one kind of government system or region. Without reliable verification for humans and AI agents, digital ecosystems face growing threats.”
This ongoing debate underscores the need for systems that prove humanity without centralized data repositories. “We need to build systems that empower individuals, not corporations,” El Damaty urged, advocating for zero-knowledge proofs and decentralized governance.
As World navigates these turbulent waters, the larger question looms: can biometric identity systems truly align with the decentralized ideals of the crypto world? The answer, it seems, remains entangled in a web of technological, ethical, and philosophical complexities.
Source
This article is based on: Is World’s biometric ID model a threat to self-sovereignty?
Further Reading
Deepen your understanding with these related articles:
- Coinbase Leaps Into Supreme Court Case in Defense of User Data Going to IRS
- AI-Powered Court System Is Coming to Crypto With GenLayer
- AI Crypto Agents Are Ushering in a New Era of ‘DeFAI’
Steve Gregory is a lawyer in the United States who specializes in licensing for cryptocurrency companies and products. Steve began his career as an attorney in 2015 but made the switch to working in cryptocurrency full time shortly after joining the original team at Gemini Trust Company, an early cryptocurrency exchange based in New York City. Steve then joined CEX.io and was able to launch their regulated US-based cryptocurrency. Steve then went on to become the CEO at currency.com when he ran for four years and was able to lead currency.com to being fully acquired in 2025.
