Worldcoin Banned in Kenya
techcrunch.comAbout time someone spat into the Use APAC to juice user numbers and extract data then use that to push into US markets game.
What is the alleged harm here? The article seems vague "exploitation", but the actual exchange seems clear - sell a (hash of) your retina scan for cryptocurrency.
It's exploitative because they're deliberately targeting disadvantaged people who have a high enough need for cash that they're more willing to sell sensitive biometric data without questioning things more deeply.
It's a pretty slimy move, at the very least.
I sell my time for need of cash.
I'm not saying that worldcoin isn't bad, but my time is literally my life. If I could make as much money selling my biometric data as I do working, I'd rather do that instead.
So it seems to me that the crux isn't that people sell biometric data, but that they don't make enough off it.
That's absurd - you can't buy and sell from people who are too poor?
"Sorry Kenyan, I know you'd like to make 50 dollars (or whatever it is) by selling your biometric data, but JohnFen/Kenya government/Western Media thinks you're too poor to get any money for voluntary transactions."
> you can't buy and sell from people who are too poor?
That's not my stance at all. My stance is that if you're leveraging an extreme power differential to get people to do things that they would not otherwise be willing to do, you're being coercive.
Worldcoin and these people are not engaging in a free exchange as equals.
Worldcoin is rich and the average Kenyan is poor - relative to one another. By your logic Worldcoin can't fairly engage with Kenyans - as I summarized your position above "You can't buy and sell from people who are too poor."
If you think that Worldcoin needs to pay some much larger amount, such that some richer population would be equally willing to sell their biometrics, then you are again just reiterating the same idea that it's wrong to do business with poor people. If Worldcoin had to pay what would make the average San Franciscan willing - why would Worldcoin travel all the way to Kenya? They would focus on closer and more familiar populations instead. In reality, they go to Kenya because it's better economics - they get more signups per dollar, and Kenyans are willing to sell biometrics at a lower price.
This line of thinking is a perverse insistence that poor people stay poor because you think their wages are too low. It is morally repellent - you insert yourself in the voluntary exchange of consenting adults in order to prevent them from doing what they want, and it is economically irrational.
I would sell a hash of my retinal scan to Worldcoin. I checked if there was an orb near me - alas, not. Please, tell me, why should I be allowed to make this trade but the average Kenyan should not? Or, tell me why you know better than I do what the hash of my retina scan is worth.
> if you're leveraging an extreme power differential to get people to do things that they would not otherwise be willing to do, you're being coercive.
I abhor for-profit retina scanning as much as the next guy, but that's like, most of what employment is.
Seems like a problem with employment then.
African countries should consider any attempt to tag their citizens an attack. The countries that will end up with this data are historically among the most racist on the planet and will find a harmful use for it, if they havent already.
IMO Sam Altman and Worldcoin should be banned from the African continent.
transaction=voluntary=good is an extreme libertarian position, eg bumfights. I’m not saying you support bumfights, but your argument does. Or child labor etc. If there’s more nuance you gotta say it.
Homeless people are often mentally ill or addicted to drugs. Exploiting conditions that render people unable to meaningfully consent is not what we are talking about here. The average Kenyan is not experiencing any such difficulty. Do you think poor people should be allowed to box? To film their fights or post it online?
(To be clear, I do think so)
Whether someone is “unable to meaningfully consent” is unknowable, so I don’t put any stock it in at all in these kind of decisions.
I’d say that deciding that question isn’t that important (as described, fine, don’t ban WorldStarHipHop). Rather, I’d zoom out and ask whether a society where poor people brawl for income is a healthy one, and maybe think of some alternatives to do that would be better.
Also were these Kenyans all screened for mental illness, or is this a crack a few eggs situation?
says it right there: > gray market that surrounds cryptocurrency, especially in emerging economies, and sits far outside the authority of regulators, tax collectors and other government bodies
why does their government need a parallel, competing financial system that it doesn't control? by now even the US has banned most crypto exchanges.
Maybe ID exploitation, like selling Kenyans ID after scanning, which is a legitimate concern.