►
Description
Visit the https://archive.devcon.org/ to gain access to the entire library of Devcon talks with the ease of filtering, playlists, personalized suggestions, decentralized access on Swarm, IPFS and more.
https://archive.devcon.org/archive/watch/6/universal-basic-income-for-humanity/
On 2021 the Proof of Humanity protocol was released alongside the UBI token reaching almost 20k humans receiving Universal Basic Income. This talk will offer direct testimonials from users on how UBI has impacted their lives. We will demo how Proof of Humanity v2 will support the use of Soul Bound Tokens and reduce costs using Layer 2. Also we will explain how UBI v2 extends its streaming features allowing real time money and how we can create regenerative economics for it as a community.
Speaker(s): Santiago Siri
Skill level: Beginner
Track: Opportunity & Global Impact
Keywords: UBI,Identity,DeSoc
Follow us: https://twitter.com/efdevcon, https://twitter.com/ethereum
Learn more about devcon: https://www.devcon.org/
Learn more about ethereum: https://ethereum.org/
Devcon is the Ethereum conference for developers, researchers, thinkers, and makers.
Devcon 6 was held in Bogotá, Colombia on Oct 11 - 14, 2022.
Devcon is organized and presented by the Ethereum Foundation, with the support of our sponsors. To find out more, please visit https://ethereum.foundation/
A
A
Do
you
can
see
a
picture
of
me
there
with
Fede
the
CEO
of
cleros,
amazing
guy,
good
person
we
were
talking
about
back
then,
is
proof
of
human
possible.
You
can
see
the
slide
there
back
in
2019
is
a
proof
of
human
possible.
We
were
wondering
if
we
were
able
to
do
a
protocol
that
would
be
able
to
formalize
human
identity
on
the
blockchain,
and
that
would
bring
us,
as
you
can
see,
on
the
list.
There,
democracy,
Universal,
basic
income,
portable
credit,
a
lot
of
very
cool
social
applications.
A
So
what
happened
since
2019
everything
happened
because
a
lot
of
the
things
that
were
theoretical
that
were
just
a
speculation
about
how
we
could
do
a
social
identity
on
the
blockchain
or
how
we
could
do
Universal
basic
income
became
a
reality.
We
have
the
proof
of
humanity
protocol
and
the
universal
basic
income
token,
which
is
the
very
first
application
built
on
top
of
proof
of
humanity.
A
So
a
brief
recap
of
what
proof
of
humanity
is
it's
a
protocol?
You
can
generate
a
brief
video
of
yourself.
You
get
vouchered
by
another
human
stake,
a
deposit
for
three
and
a
half
days.
If
you
get
challenged,
you
go
to
a
Clarence
arbitrator,
if
you,
if
not,
you
become
a
verified
human
on
the
blockchain
and
we
are
starting
to
see
social
applications
like
Ubi.
The
very
first
one
lens
protocol
has
integrated
with
proof
of
humanity.
A
A
Why
is
this
important?
If
you
look
at
this
at
the
world
bank
statistics,
they
claim
that
out
of
the
8
billion
people
that
were
on
this
planet,
almost
1.5
billion
lack
an
identity,
and
this
is
a
very
common
problem,
especially
here
in
Latin
America.
If
you
go
to
some
of
the
poorest
neighborhoods,
you
will
realize
that
a
lot
of
teenagers
a
lot
of
kids-
they
don't
have
any
kind
of
identity,
which
means
they
don't
have
any
kind
of
access
to
services
to
Goods
to
to
the
state
protecting
them.
A
A
Capitalism
where
our
privacy
has
been
jeopardized
and
is
now
in
the
hands
of
a
handful
of
Corporations,
so
making
sure
that
we're
able
to
think
about
identity
in
a
decentralized
way
and
no
big
brother,
whether
whether
that
big
brother
is
myself
Clement
or
Cletus
or
any
private
organization
station
or
the
state
or
any
entity
that
can
geopolize
a
right
to
identity
is
a
very
important
fight.
So
this
is
core
to
to,
at
least
in
my
view,
to
many
of
the
decisions
and
to
many
of
the
political
choices
that
we
have
made
as
a
doll.
A
So
the
main
question
I've
been
hearing
since
I
arrived
to
Defcon
that
everyone
asked
me
is
what's
going
on
with
with
the
poh
drama.
Well,
we
had
a
democratic
summer
kind
of
analog
to
the
D5
summer
that
we
saw
a
couple
of
years
ago
with
a
with
with
the
rise
of
D5
protocols,
but
with
proof
of
humanity.
We
have
the
virtue
that
it
is
the
most
democratic
Dao
in
existence.
I
would
even
go
as
far
as
to
say.
A
Is
this
the
most
precious
democracy
we
have
in
the
entire
internet,
because
the
proof
of
humanity
protocol
allows
for
formal
verification
of
human
identity.
We
can
do
one
person,
one
boat,
and
this
has
led
to
a
very
active,
a
very
engaging
now
where
all
of
our
decisions
are
done
democratically,
which
is
a
big
difference
with
all
of
the
other
Downs,
where
you
do
token
boating,
and
they
are
essentially
plutocracies
where
the
largest
whales,
the
largest
holders,
are
the
ones
who
are
ultimately
the
decision
makers.
A
Democracy
helps
to
put
users
to
help
to
give
users
power,
not
just
as
developers
not
just
the
investors,
but
the
users
have
a
voice
in
a
democracy
and
that's
The
Virtuous
thing
about
it.
A
brief
recap
of
the
Dao
one
person.
One
boat
allows
to
delegate
the
vote.
You
can
do
vote
delegation.
We
have
quadratic
delegations
that
help
Empower
minorities
over
delegate
whales,
and
we
have
three
phases
of
deliberation
for
proposals.
These
are
the
basic
rules.
A
Quadratic
delegations
has
been
a
recent
Improvement
due
to
a
farmer
of
delegations
that
we
identified
in
it
now
and
it's
a
very
interesting
experiment
on
how
to
make
a
resilient
democracy
on
the
blockchain.
So
that's
democracy,
work,
which
is
a
big
question.
You
know
making
Democratic
systems
something
that
I
once
heard
from
a
an
old
activist,
a
former
president
of
Uruguay
Pepe
Mujica.
He
once
said
to
me
that
democracies
always
a
work
in
progress.
Democracy
is
not
an
absolute
totalitarian
idea,
like
all
the
other
ideologies
out
there.
It
is
the
one
exception.
A
It
is
the
one
idea
about
how
we
think
about
the
ideas
and
it's
in
constant
Evolution
and
democracy
is
constantly
evolving
and
adapting
why
it's
important
that
we
make
Democratic
decisions.
Ultimately,
high
risk
decisions
require
a
high
level
of
legitimacy,
the
higher
the
risk,
the
higher
the
need
for
legitimacy
decisions,
sometimes
are
not
easy
choices.
Obviously,
we
don't
go
to
a
vote
to
make
technical
choices
that
are
no-brainers.
Those
decisions
are
not
high
risk
are.
Basically,
you
know,
you
don't
go
to
a
you,
don't
do
a
democracy
in
order
to
build
an
airplane.
A
You
just
trust
the
airplane
Engineers
to
make
the
decisions
for
that
you
go
to
democratic
votes
for
the
decisions
that
are
facing
conflicts
of
interest
for
decisions
that
have
multiple
parties
with
different
points
of
view,
and
this
this
represents
very
high
risks
for
the
outcome
of
the
governance
of
Adele
or
for
the
governance
of
a
protocol
or
for
the
parameters
of
a
given
system.
So
high
risk
decisions
require
High
legitimacy.
A
There's
a
recent
article,
I
highly
recommend
it
there's
a
QR
code.
If,
for
those
of
you
who
want
to
to
actually
read
this
Dows
are
not
corporations
and
it's
vitalik,
basically
explaining
the
nature
of
how
Democratic
decision-making
can
be
very
helpful
for
specific
types
of
decisions
in
organizations,
and
he
gives
this
very
good
analysis
of
decision
types
where
he
claims
there
are
concave
World,
Views
and
convex
World
Views.
A
Basically,
this
chart
is
option
A
and
option
b
on
the
x-axis
on
both
charts,
and
there
are
concave
decisions
are
decisions
that
usually
are
much
better.
When
there
you
can
negotiate
between
option,
A
and
option
b,
and
the
best
point
is:
is
this
point
in
the
Middle,
where
you
reach
common
ground
and
these
decisions?
Concave
decisions
are
much
more
compatible
for
Democratic
decision
making,
because
in
democracy
you
have
to
negotiate
convex
decisions.
On
the
other
hand,
convex
decisions
are
decisions
where
it's
obviously
A
or
B.
A
Should
we
vaccinate
everybody,
or
should
we
shouldn't
vaccinate
everybody
there's
no
middle
ground
in
the
middle
in
this
type
of
decisions,
so
it's
obviously
one
or
the
other,
and
these
are
convex
a
convex
worldview.
In
the
argument
of
italic,
he
argues
that
technical
choices
are
most
more
often
than
not
convex
decisions,
but
a
governance
decisions.
What
he
calls
Sovereign
decisions
are
usually
concave,
World
Views,
and
these
are
much
more
compatible
for
Democratic
decision
making.
A
So
in
order
in
this
20
months
of
existence,
almost
two
years
we
had
a
total
of
88
voted
decisions
which
consists
of
72
what
we
call
hips
Humanity
Improvement
proposals,
and
this
has
three
phases.
The
hips
go
through
a
process
of
three
phases
where
there
is
a
forum
post,
a
signaling
boat
which
is
kind
of
reaching
Quorum.
If
it
makes
sense
to
vote
this
or
not,
and
a
binding
boat,
which
is
makes
the
decision
final
and
binding.
A
Usually
it's
around
five
to
six
percent
of
the
registered
humans
that
participate
in
the
Dao.
It's
it
might
not
sound
like
a
big
number,
but
when
you
compare
it
to
the
usual
participation
rates
in
other
dolls,
it's
actually
a
very
decent
number.
The
good
thing
is
that
engagement
is
growing,
so
we
analyze
a
little
bit
of
the
decisions
that
we
took
in
the
Dao
throughout
the
these
20
months.
Half
of
the
decisions
we
made
almost
50
percent
are
governance
decision.
A
Mostly
related
to
the
governance
of
the
Dow
itself,
20
of
the
decisions
are
technical
decisions,
parameters,
operating
parameters
of
the
smart
contract
or
a
specific
decisions
related
to
the
technical
aspects.
A
six
percent
were
economic
decisions
related
to
allocating
grants,
allocating
funds
that
the
Dow
has
in
the
treasury
and
22
percent
were
policy
decisions,
which
means
improvements
in
the
policy
that
is
used
to
evaluate
the
human
applications
on
proof
of
humanity,
so
only
the
technical
ones
are
mostly
convex.
A
So
another
interesting
thing
is
that
half
of
the
decisions
had
at
least
85
percent
of
voter
support.
This
means
that
half
of
the
decisions
that
we
took
in
the
Dow
they
had
one
of
the
options
reaching
85
percent
of
consensus,
which
is
a
very
high
number.
A
lot
of
half
of
the
decisions
had
85
percent
of
Common
Ground
people
agreeing
on
that
decision,
whether
it's
a
yes
or
no,
and
even
more
interestingly
I,
don't
know
where
I
have
to
point
with
this
25
of
the
decisions.
A
One
every
four
out
of
every
four
decisions
actually
had
a
hundred
percent
of
support,
unanimous
voter
support.
This
most
of
these
decisions
are
are
really
interesting
because
it
you
know
people
when
they
think
about
democracy.
They
think
oh
people
are
going
to
be
disagreeing
or
people
are
going
to
be.
A
Fighting
over
things
turns
out
that
one
out
of
every
four
decisions
have
100
percent
of
unanimous
voter
support
on
the
path
to
take
forward,
and
the
fact
that
we
make
this
that
decision
with
the
community
rather
than
from
an
elite
of
developers
showing
their
back
to
the
community.
It's
actually
putting
trust
in
our
users
is
putting
trust
in
the
people
that
are
helping
build
this
together
and
not
in
an
ivory
Tower.
A
Where
you
make
decisions-
and
you
really
just
don't
know
what
users
actually
want
so
I-
have
a
deeper
look
about
unanimous
decisions,
I
thought
initially
that
they
were
going
to
be
mostly
technical
choices.
To
my
surprise,
actually,
the
technical
choices
that
had
that
kind
of
unanimous
support
is
only
33
percent
and
most
of
the
decisions
around
66
percent
were
actually
concave
decisions
reaching
unanimous
support.
So
that's
another
interesting.
Take
that
it's
not
only
the
technical
choices
that
might
get
this
the
convex
choices
that
might
get
this
kind
of
unanimous
support.
A
So
those
are
just
some
numbers
about
the
drama
about
sorry
about
the
the
decisions
we
made
in
abstract
form,
but
what
led
to
the
Dao
drama?
What
led
to
the
the
fighting
and
the
debating
and
the
arguing
that
we
had
improve
of
humanity?
Well,
this
is
an
old
motto
from
politics:
let's
just
follow
the
money.
Let's
just
follow,
what's
happening
with
the
money
routes
that
are
within
proof
of
humanity
and
bottom
line
is
that
the
role
of
clarus
in
the
protocol
became
a
decisive
Factor
on
how
we
think
about
things.
A
This
is
an
image
from
Dali.
I
live
to
your
imagination.
What
keywords
are
used
to
knowledge
to
generate
that
image.
So
to
show
some
stats,
we
had
652
challenge
profiles.
These
are
the
profiles
that
are
dubious
profiles
that
might
not
follow
correctly
the
process
to
do
the
proof
of
humanity.
Video
of
these
profiles,
we
had
a
total
of
153
addresses
that
acted
as
Challengers
of
this
profiles.
A
The
record
month
was
146,
so
the
profile
challenging
has
led
to
to
to
the
whole
game
around
proof
of
humanity
becoming
a
little
bit
first
thing
from
being
a
fair
game
and
I'm
gonna
dive
deep
into
this.
By
the
way
on
Dune
analytics,
there
are
some
numbers
that
are
wrong.
We
actually
checked
the
data,
so
Salva,
who
did
the
Dune
analytics
statute,
should
correct
some
things
because
of
the
652
challenge
profiles
we
found
out
that
you
get.
A
If
you
get
challenged
9
out
of
10
times,
you
will
get
rejected
from
the
registry.
It
means
that
if
you
are
challenged,
90
chances
that
you're
gonna
get
kicked
out,
you
will
not
be
able
to
defend
yourself
and
that's
a
not
a
very
good
thing
for
the
onboarding
process
for
a
lot
of
the
users.
It's
a
very
risky
thing.
We
looked
into
the
90
of
the
profiles
that
got
challenged
and
it
turns
out
that
ninety
percent
of
the
profiles,
the
main
reason
why
profiles
are
challenged.
A
We
have
the
protocol,
has
formalized
a
couple
of
States
whether
the
person
is
deceased,
the
person
died,
the
person
does
not
exist,
maybe
a
deep
fake.
The
person
might
be
a
duplicate,
it's
a
civil,
attacker
or
incorrect
submission.
The
person
just
didn't
follow
the
steps
properly.
Well.
Incorrect
submission
is
90
of
the
profits
that
get
challenged,
get
challenged
for
making
an
incorrect
submission
for
making
a
mistake,
a
simple
mistake
and
the
problem.
We
have
a
deeper
look,
even
a
deeper
look
into
this.
A
On
into
this
into
these
submissions
and
the
the
number
one
reason
is
incorrect,
address
someone
submitted
the
address
and
is
showing
the
incorrect
address
in
the
video
or
it's
the
address
in
the
video
is
not
matching
the
address
from
the
submission
a
lot
of
challenges
because
of
the
video
size.
The
resolution
in
pixels
of
the
video
you
get
rejected
from
upgrading
uploading
a
video
eight
pixels
smaller
than
what
is
the
requirement.
Video
artifact,
no
sign,
address
and
readable
address
mismatch.
A
Facial
feature
is
not
visible,
like
Kevin
owaki,
looking
three
quarters,
so
a
closer
inspection
shows
that
90
percent
of
the
people
lost
their
deposit,
which
until
very
recently
was
0.1.
If
which
is
600
500,
which
is
a
lot
of
money,
especially
Latin
America,
where
we
have
a
lot
of
users,
they
got
kicked
out
of
the
protocol.
Ninety
percent
of
the
people
got
kicked
out
of
the
protocol
for
making
honest
mistakes,
honest
mistakes,
so
vitalik
said
it
in
our
chats
this
you
lose
your
deposit.
If
you
do
it
wrong
mechanism
is
Harsh.
A
It
is
very
harsh
and
it's
not
a
good
look
on
web3.
It's
not
a
good
look
on
how
we
are
trying
to
onboard
people
and
give
them
the
right
to
Identity
malicious
Challengers
exist
and
they
are
constantly
attacking
and
taking
advantage
of
the
unsuspecting
users
all
the
time,
and
we
even
have
a
category
the
a
category
of
users.
We
call
both
Challengers,
who
are
addresses
that
vouch
for
someone
and
then
immediately
challenge
the
very
person
that
they
have
voted
for
in
order
to
take
their
stake.
A
So
we
have
a
lot
of
malicious
users
and
rejecting
tokens
if
you're
doing,
if
you're
doing
this
kind
of
Mecca
mechanism
to
build
a
list
of
tokens
or
to
build
a
list
of
objects,
you
know
that's
fine,
but
rejecting
humans.
For
making
honest
mistakes
is
discrimination,
you
are
discriminating
users
because
they
don't
have
the
skills
and
knowledge
or
the
know-how
on
how
to
interact
with
web
3
protocols.
A
So
here's
a
simple,
very
rule,
very
important
rule
of
thumb
that
I
would
like
to
to
enforce
into
our
community.
Justice
is
not
the
same
as
logic
more
often
than
not.
We
have
in
our
debates
a
sort
of
positivist
view
on
how
things
should
be
done.
Oh
the
person
didn't
show
the
the
label
probably
didn't
follow
the
steps
properly
and
it
takes
a.
A
It
takes
a
look
around
the
around
the
behavior
of
people,
which
puts
logic
over
justice,
but
Justice
is
very
different
from
logic
Justice
Means,
trying
to
make
a
system
that
is
fair,
that
is
empathic
that
is
able
to
attempt
and
not
to
punish
people
for
making
human
mistakes
we're
dealing
with
humans.
We
are
not
dealing
with
robots
and
the
universe
of
humans
is
very
different
from
the
universe
of
robots,
so
some
of
the
most
controversial
changes
that
we
had
to
the
protocol
and
the
Dao.
A
Just
to
give
you
an
example,
the
very
first
one
was
the
video
resolution
thing.
People
were
getting
rejected
because
videos
had
352
pixels
of
resolution
instead
of
the
recommended
three
of
the
required
360.,
because
WhatsApp
apparently
crops,
videos
and
people
were
sharing
and
testing
videos
on
WhatsApp
before
uploading
them
to
proof
of
humanity.
A
People
getting
rejected
for
8
pixels
is
not
very,
very
fair.
We
got
a
people,
we
have
very
strong
debate
about
allowing
people
to
speak
in
their
own
language,
believe
it
or
not.
We
have
a
lot
of
people
opposing
to
making
the
proof
in
your
very
own
language.
You
know
a
lot
of
people
don't
know
English,
so
we
had
to
actually
fight
to
get
people
to
be
able
to
do
the
video
proof
in
Spanish
we
had
to
we.
We
had
the
telegram
groups
which
were
built
by
the
community.
A
The
community
did
everything
to
create
not
only
the
official
groups,
but
also
the
groups
that
helped
people
to
get
vouches
the
groups
that
help
people
to
learn
how
to
make
the
video
groups
that
pay
for
the
deposit
for
users,
a
lot
of
groups
were
built
by
the
community
only
to
one
day
suddenly
find
them
being
captured
by
the
clearest
organization
which
led
to
voting
official
groups
on
Telegram
and
Twitter.
And
last
but
not
least,
we
found
a
user
Farming
delegations
Farming
almost
180
delegations
of
profiles
that
were
delegating
to
this
person.
The
very
second.
A
These
profiles
were
created,
which
led
to
a
debate
around
the
nature
of
how
we
tally
delegations.
We
came
up
with
a
model
of
quadratic
delegations
which
incentivizes
people
to
actually
delegate
to
users
with
fewer
delegations
and
makes
delegate
whales
like
myself,
don't
have
as
much
power
over
the
more
delegations
they
get.
This
is
a
very
new
idea
and
we
actually
won
that
one
with
70
percent
of
the
votes,
so
if
we
actually
grab
the
top
top
five,
these
are
the
top
six
I
think
we
have
here.
A
But
if
you
grab
the
top
10
between
the
cladous
side
and
the
GLaDOS
native
users
and
the
proof
of
humanity
users,
the
interesting
thing
is
that
the
proof
of
humanity
Community.
It
has
begun
to
win
most
of
the
proposals,
in
contrast
to
the
clearest
native
community-
and
this
is
interesting
because
clearos,
of
course
they
created
the
protocol,
they
started
the
whole
proof
of
humanity
project,
in
collaboration
with
many
researchers,
which
I
was
very
lucky
to
be
among
the
very
first
ones
to
be
contributing
and
collaborating
on
this
project.
A
A
If
we
look
today
at
as
of
today
as
of
today,
you
know
if
we
look
at
the
proposals.
Proposals
started
by
the
community
have
79
chances
to
get
approved.
Then
proposals
started
by
the
creators
of
the
protocol,
which
is
the
the
declaredos
community.
So
the
community
has
been
able
to
gather
power.
The
users
of
proof
of
humanity
have
been
able
to
gather
power
and
put
the
the
let
their
voice.
Be
heard
thanks
to
democracy,
democracy,
decentralizes
daos.
This
is
what
we're
seeing
in
proof
of
humanity.
A
A
A
So,
let's
talk
about
the
bright
side
of
life,
what
has
led
to
the
growth
of
proof
of
humanity?
You
know
we
were
roughly
17
000
users
right
now,
it's
good
to
analyze
what
led
to
the
growth.
If
we
look
over
time
since
the
launch
of
the
protocol,
this
is
somewhat
how
the
curve
looks
of
user
adoption,
and
the
story
behind
this
chart
is
that
we
can
also
look
at
the
history
of
the
price
of
the
Ubi
token.
The
Ubi
token
had
two
big
Moments
One
is
during
launch
during
launch.
A
There
was
a
lot
of
enthusiasm
around
the
idea
of
Ubi,
so
we
had
a
lot
of
curious
users
that
were
interested
in
learning
about
this
token
learning
about
proof
of
humanity,
and
then
we
had
the
miraculous
day
on
October.
Last
year,
a
year
ago,
when
vitalik
started,
buying
and
burning
huge
amounts
of
Ubi
and
those
those
the
vitalik
burn,
the
vitalic
burn
has
led
to
a
lot
of
users
interested
in
proof
of
humanity
and
Ubi.
A
If
we
put
the
two
charts
together,
the
proof
of
humanity
being
the
yellow
line
and
the
Ubi
price
being
the
green
line,
you
know
this
is
not
a
novelty
in
this
industry.
Price
always
drives.
Adoption
price
is
always
an
important
thing
for
capturing
and
and
getting
users
enthusiastic
about
that
technology.
A
Ubi
is
is
a
token
that
is
streamed
streamed
in
real
time
to
verify
humans
on
proof
of
humanity.
It's
one
Ubi
per
hour
per
human
or
0.002h
Ubi
per
per
second
for
every
human.
It
streams
in
real
time
to
your
wallet.
There
are
Ubi,
burning,
daps
and
gains
that
help
burn
Ubi
and
build
scarcity
into
the
Ubi
model.
It
is
composable
with
D5
protocols.
It's
an
erc20
token.
A
These
are
some
of
the
real
faces
of
the
people
that
were
impacted
by
the
the
power
of
Ubi
when
vitalik
burned
his
tokens
and
bought
like
all
of
the
tokens
that
were
available
on
uni
swap
Araceli.
Here,
who
is
an
oncology,
patient
and
a
single
mother
was
able
to
use
the
money
for
Ubi
to
get
help
for
their
kind
for
her
cancer
treatment.
We
had
a
lot
of
grandparents
a
lot
of
grandparents
using
web
3
for
the
first
time.
A
Of
course,
it
might
be
their
their
grandson
or
it
might
be
a
relative
that
is
helping
them
to
use
the
computer
to
be
on
board
into
proof
of
humanity,
but
I
I,
really
for
the
first
time
in
my
life,
I'm,
seeing
early
adopters
who
belong
to
the
third
age
could
be
our
grandparents
because
they
are
in
on
countries
like
Argentina,
an
alternative
like
Ubi
for
the
first
year.
It
was
actually
a
very
real
alternative
to
the
pensions
that
people
get
from
the
state.
A
We
had
also
users
that
were
able
to
buy
the
materials
to
start
building
their
first
house.
We
had
users
from
all
over
the
world
that
suddenly
found
in
this
idea
of
universal
basic
income
on
the
blockchain
in
a
censorship
resistant
Network.
There's
a
user
from
Myanmar
Myanmar
is
going
through
a
dictatorship
through
a
terrible
dictatorship
and
because
ethereum
is
censorship
resistant
because
proof
of
humanity
runs
on
ethereum.
A
We
are
able
to
reach
vulnerable
populations
that
could
definitely
benefit
significantly
from
having
50
a
month
or
ten
dollars
a
month
or
even
in
you
know,
if
vitalik
shows
up
500
a
month
or
a
thousand
dollars
a
month
like
we
had
during
2021,
so
we
recently
launched
ubi.eth.
You
can
scan
the
QR
code.
There
has
all
the
resources
about
Universal
basic
income,
about
everything
that
we're
trying
to
do
with
the
Ubi
token.
I'm
very
excited
we're
actually
now
working
on
the
version
2
of
uvi.
A
That
allows
to
use
your
stream
of
Ubi
tokens
and
break
it
apart
into
multiple
streams,
and
you
can
delegate
your
stream
to
someone
who
needs
needs
it
the
most.
You
can
use
10
of
your
stream
for
a
charity.
You
can
start
using
that
streaming
capacity,
novel
ways
and
we're
very
close
to
launching
this.
On
mainnet,
we
have
applications
like
the
Ubi
burner.
Actually
any,
if
that
you
send
to
Ubi
dot
is,
will
go
straight
to
the
Ubi
burner.
A
Challenge
period
is
pointless
in
proof
of
humanity.
Proof
of
humanity
needs
to
be
more
accessible.
A
high
deposit
is
still
a
high
barrier
of
adoption.
People
complain
about
the
high
deposit.
It's
not
very
inclusive,
just
make
proof
of
humanity
work
like
a
token
curated
registry
reward
Challengers
that
detect
human
Farms.
Those
are
the
real
enemies,
not
users,
making
honest
mistakes.
That's
a
stupid
thing
to
punish
and
Universal
basic
income
income.