![](\"https:\/\/images.cointelegraph.com\/images\/840_aHR0cHM6Ly9zMy5jb2ludGVsZWdyYXBoLmNvbS91cGxvYWRzLzIwMjUtMDUvMDE5NzA3NjUtZDQ4MC03ZDA4LTg5YmYtNDhiY2U3Njk0OWVi.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n<\/p>\n\n
<\/p>\n
The crypto industry is no stranger to controversy, yet few projects have drawn more scrutiny than Sam Altman\u2019s World, formerly known as Worldcoin.<\/p>\n
Promising to verify human uniqueness through iris scans and distribute its WLD token globally, World positions itself as a tool for financial inclusion<\/a>. However, critics argue the project\u2019s biometric methods are invasive, overly centralized, and at odds with the ethos of decentralization and digital privacy.<\/p>\n At the heart of the critique is the claim that biometric identity systems cannot be truly decentralized when they rely on proprietary hardware, closed authentication methods, and centralized control over data pipelines.<\/p>\n \u201cDecentralization isn\u2019t just a technical architecture,\u201d Shady El Damaty, co-founder of Holonym Foundation, told Cointelegraph. \u201cIt\u2019s a philosophy that prioritizes user control, privacy, and self-sovereignty. World\u2019s biometric model is inherently at odds with this ethos.\u201d<\/p>\n El Damaty argued that despite using tools like multiparty computation (MPC)<\/a> and zero-knowledge (ZK) proofs<\/a>, World\u2019s reliance on custom hardware \u2014 the Orb \u2014 and centralized code deployment undermines the decentralization it claims to champion.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is by design to achieve their goals of uniquely identifying individual humans. This concentration of power risks creating a single point of failure and control, undermining the very promise of decentralization,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n When reached out for comment, a spokesperson for World pushed back against these claims. \u201cWorld does not use centralized biometric infrastructure,\u201d they said, adding that the World App is non-custodial, meaning users remain in control of their digital assets and World IDs.<\/p>\n The project said once the Orb generates an iris code, the \u201ciris photo will be sent as an end-to-end encrypted data bundle to your phone and will be immediately deleted from the Orb.\u201d The iris code, they claimed, is processed with anonymizing multiparty computation so \u201cno personal data is stored.\u201d<\/p>\n Evin McMullen, co\u2013founder of Privado ID and Billions.Network, said that World\u2019s biometric model is not \u201cinherently incompatible\u201d with decentralization but faces some challenges in implementation around data centralization, trust assumptions, and governance.<\/p>\n Related: <\/strong><\/em>Sam Altman\u2019s World raises $135M from Andreessen, Bain, to expand network<\/strong><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n El Damaty also drew a parallel between OpenAI\u2019s large-scale scraping of \u201cunconsented user data\u201d and World\u2019s collection of biometric information.<\/p>\n He argued that both reflect a pattern of aggressive data acquisition framed as innovation, warning that such practices risk eroding privacy and normalizing surveillance under the banner of progress.<\/p>\n \u201cThe irony here is hard to miss,\u201d El Damaty claimed. \u201cOpenAI 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.\u201d<\/p>\n In 2023, a class-action lawsuit filed<\/a> in California accused OpenAI and Microsoft of scraping 300 billion words from the internet without consent, including personal data from millions of users, such as children.<\/p>\n In 2024, a coalition of Canadian media outlets, including The Canadian Press and CBC, sued<\/a> OpenAI for allegedly using their content without authorization to train ChatGPT, claiming copyright infringement.<\/p>\n World, however, rejects this comparison, emphasizing that it is a separate entity from OpenAI. The company said that it neither sells nor stores personal data, citing its use of privacy-preserving technologies such as multiparty computation and zero-knowledge proofs.<\/p>\n The scrutiny also extends to World\u2019s user onboarding. The project says it ensures informed consent through translated guides, an in-app Learn module, brochures, and a Help Center.<\/p>\n However, critics remain skeptical. \u201cPeople in developing nations, who World\u2026 has mainly been targeting up until this point, are easier to bribe and often don\u2019t understand the risks involved with \u2018selling\u2019 this personal data,\u201d El Damaty warned.<\/p>\n Several global regulators have pushed back on\u00a0World\u2019s operations<\/a> since its\u00a0launch in July 2023<\/a>, with governments like\u00a0Germany<\/a>, Kenya and\u00a0Brazil expressing concerns over potential risks<\/a> to the security of users\u2019 biometric data.<\/p>\n In the most recent setback, the company\u00a0faced challenges in Indonesia<\/a> after local regulators temporarily suspended its registration certificates on May 5.<\/p>\n Related: <\/strong><\/em>\u2018Humans can tell when it\u2019s a human\u2019 \u2014 Community mocks Worldcoin\u2019s Orb Mini<\/strong><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n As biometric systems like World\u2019s gain traction, questions are emerging about its long-term implications. While the company promotes its model as inclusive, critics say the reliance on iris scans to unlock services could deepen global inequality.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen biometric data becomes a prerequisite for accessing basic services, it effectively creates a two-tiered society,\u201d said El Damaty. \u201cThose willing (or coerced) into giving up their most sensitive information gain access\u2026 while those who refuse\u2026 are excluded.\u201d<\/p>\n World maintained that its protocol does not require biometric enrollment for basic participation. \u201cYou can still use an unverified World ID for some purposes even if you do not visit an Orb,\u201d it said, adding that the system uses ZKPs to prevent linking actions back to any specific ID or biometric data.<\/p>\n There are also concerns that World could become a surveillance tool \u2014 especially in authoritarian regimes \u2014 by centralizing biometric data in a way that may attract misuse by powerful actors.<\/p>\n World dismisses these claims, asserting that its ID protocol is \u201copen source, permissionless,\u201d and designed so even government applications cannot tie back a user\u2019s activity to their biometric data.<\/p>\n The debate also extends to governance. While World says its protocol is moving toward greater decentralization \u2014 highlighting open-source contributions and the governance section of its white paper \u2014 critics argues that meaningful user ownership is still lacking.<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to build systems that allow individuals to prove their humanity without creating centralized repositories of biometric or personal data,\u201d said El Damaty. \u201cThis means embracing zero-knowledge proofs, decentralized governance, and open standards that empower individuals, not corporations.\u201d<\/p>\nA pattern of tech overreach?<\/h2>\n
The risk of digital exclusion<\/h2>\n