Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Finlay 🦊
@danfinlay
People throwing around "proof of personhood" like it's a problem that has already been solved, or is trivially solved. I can't shake the feeling we've done our people wrong by letting this stuff slide. Is it too late to adopt a culture of being specific about the solutions we're referring to?
6 replies
4 recasts
58 reactions
Dan Finlay 🦊
@danfinlay
https://warpcast.com/danfinlay/0x3a0a5b03
1 reply
0 recast
10 reactions
Monteluna
@monteluna
Our industry does have a semantics problem. Another one that is wildly thrown around is around chain abstraction. Solutions that are live generally work on different parts of the stack and are fundamentally solving one aspect of the issues.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
polymutex
@polymutex.eth
I am guilty of this. The reason for imprecision is that I don't know what will work in practice. See Vitalik's take that multiple PoP solutions can complement each other. Gitcoin Passport's approach follows this: Let users decide how to prove their personhood. https://vitalik.eth.limo/general/2023/07/24/biometric.html
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
zombified
@zombified
Ppl be like "Solve world hunger"
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Precious
@boypresh
It's not too late, but we need to urgently adopt a culture of precision and accountability in our conversations. Let's start by asking: What exactly are the solutions being proposed, and do they genuinely address the complexities involved?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Jack
@jackten
Does worldcoin not solve it?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
