Why is Worldcoin distributed for free? An explanation of its mechanism, risks, and future potential

Introduction

Why is Worldcoin distributed for free? Its mechanism and risks are frequently searched topics. It is not a system that pays rewards to those who perform calculations like Bitcoin, nor is it a system that distributes tokens to those who stake and secure the network like Ethereum.

Yet, you can receive WLD by proving you are a "human" through World ID. This seems a bit unnatural.

Moreover, WLD has a total supply of 10 billion tokens at issuance, with 75% allocated to the World Community and 25% to early investors, the development team, and small reserves for TFH. In other words, it is not a completely free distribution, but a pre-designed distribution model.

I will organize the mechanism, dangers, and reasons why Worldcoin can be distributed for free in order.

*This article is a personal analysis based on public information and official documents. It does not recommend any specific investment decisions.

How Worldcoin works | Why it can be distributed for free

Worldcoin's mechanism differs from Bitcoin and Ethereum. Worldcoin does not operate its own consensus network like PoW or PoS.

World ID confirms that you are a "unique human" via an Orb, and that proof is stored in the World App on your smartphone. Officially, the design is such that the data is encrypted and deleted from the Orb.

World ID itself is described as a "digital human proof" that can be used for logging into online services and verifying identity.

So, who handles transactions and state updates? This is on the Ethereum side. Ethereum uses Proof of Stake, where validators confirm the validity of transactions and propose blocks.

In other words, Worldcoin is not designed to independently aggregate large-scale computing power. Its foundational security and processing are built while utilizing existing blockchain infrastructure, centered on Ethereum.

Therefore, it is more natural to view the core of Worldcoin not as a computing network, but as an ID layer and a distribution layer. Furthermore, it is closer to reality to view this as a design that attempts to create network effects by combining ID and token distribution.

Why is Worldcoin free? | The mechanism of the distribution model

The initial design of World aims to "have as many people as possible hold the same currency." According to official explanations, Worldcoin is launched by distributing a portion of the new currency to as many people as possible, and behind this lies the coordination problem that "a currency is difficult to spread unless it is widely held."

In fact, the total supply of WLD is 10 billion, and 75% is allocated to the World Community. That is 7.5 billion, not 750 million for the community. If you treat these numbers carelessly, you will misunderstand the overall picture.

And what is important is that the majority for the community will not enter the market all at once. In the white paper, team and investor tokens are subject to lock-ups, and while tokens received by users are not locked, the supply for the community is designed to be released gradually over a schedule of up to about 15 years.

Furthermore, the method of releasing supply is determined by governance, and after 15 years, there is room to introduce inflation of up to 1.5% per year, subject to governance approval. In other words, it is more accurate to say that it is being distributed based on a long-term supply design rather than just "giving it away for free."

Hidden costs

The cost of issuing the coin itself is not electricity costs like PoW. Since it is just allocated via smart contracts, the issuance itself is light. However, the cost of operating the mechanism is a different matter.

The World whitepaper explains that TFH developed the Orb, the initial protocol, and the World App during the pre-launch phase, and continues to operate them today. Furthermore, the ecosystem fund is intended for protocol R&D, Orb R&D, standardization, audits, certifications, grants, and incentive programs. In other words, behind the free distribution lies significant development, operational, and verification costs.

This is one area where it becomes clear that World is not simply 'giving it away on a whim.' The whitepaper mentions a policy to deploy 50,000 Orbs in the future for long-term financial sustainability, and notes that they have been competitively testing the design of operator rewards to achieve this. In short, before any distribution, World is already shouldering the maintenance costs for the people and machines that support field operations.

Who is bearing the cost?

The source of the funding varies depending on the stage. In the initial phase, TFH supported the pre-launch, and investor capital was also involved. The whitepaper explains that 25% of WLD is allocated to early investors, the development team, and a small reserve, with the World Foundation managing the whole. Furthermore, World Assets, Ltd. is identified as the entity that issues the 7.5 billion WLD allocated to the World Community. It is at least not a situation where 'no one is bearing the cost.' It is a structure where the entities that provided the initial capital are covering the costs upfront.

In terms of operational reality, there are also rewards for operators. According to official documents, World Operators who run the Orbs are independent participants who can receive WLD rewards by assisting with user identity verification.

It is also officially explained that rewards, which were paid in USDC during the transition period, have since shifted to WLD. In other words, even though it is called a distribution, the actual work in the field is a reward-based operation.

The source of funds for the free distribution is a combination of investment capital, future supply, and the costs borne by the operators. As a result, the structure is such that these costs are dispersed to the market in the form of increased token supply.

Rewarding 'being human'

This is the core of the project. World ID is designed as a mechanism to prove online that 'you are a real, unique human being.'

According to World's explanation, World ID is like a digital passport that can prove one is human while maintaining privacy, and the whitepaper mentions the possibility of applying it to human-centric governance, such as 'one-person-one-vote.' The idea of assigning value to being human makes a lot of sense when considering the AI era.

However, what is important here is that 'having value' and 'having money circulate' are two different things. While World is trying to create incentives for network participation by distributing currency to new participants, World ID itself is open, and designed so that developers can integrate it into web, mobile, and on-chain applications using an SDK. The mechanism is in place. But how far the entities that actually pay money will expand is another matter.

Worldcoin Risks | Dangers and Issues

Looking at the mechanism so far, several risks also become apparent.

First is regulatory risk. Since it handles biometric information, it is strongly influenced by personal information protection laws in each country. There have actually been cases of temporary suspensions and investigations, and future developments will depend on the decisions of each country.

Next is the uncertainty of demand. While it is said that there is demand for proof of personhood itself, it is not yet clear how far the entities that will continuously pay for it will expand.

And then there is the issue of the supply structure. Since WLD is designed to increase in supply over the long term, it is a structure where downward pressure on the price is likely if demand does not keep up.

These three are points that should be kept in mind separately from the mechanism. For this reason, Worldcoin is sometimes called 'suspicious.' In particular, the handling of biometric information and the mechanism of free distribution, which are counterintuitive, reinforce that impression.

Given this background, it is natural that there are many searches asking, 'Is Worldcoin dangerous?' or 'Is it suspicious?'

Summary so far

To summarize this without overcomplicating it, Worldcoin is not a 'currency paid to those who calculate,' but a 'currency distributed to those who prove they are human.' The network's processing and security do not rely on its own infrastructure but on Ethereum's PoS, with World focusing on the ID and distribution layers.

While the distribution appears free, it is actually supported by initial investment, development, Orb operations, reward design, and long-term token unlocking. In other words, the costs have not disappeared; they have simply shifted to less visible areas.

The point of contention for Worldcoin is not whether it can be distributed for free, but whether an entity that will continuously pay for proof of personhood will truly emerge.

If that is weak, no matter how well-structured the mechanism is, the economy will remain thin. Conversely, if that becomes strong, it will be quite interesting. For now, the most reasonable view is that we are just before that fork in the road.

If necessary, I will next connect this first half as a premise to the second half—'Is there really demand for proof of personhood?' and 'Will it support the token price?'—with the same level of intensity.

Is proof of personhood really necessary? | The value of Worldcoin

I believe there is a necessity for it. Even in World's official explanation, Proof of Personhood is considered a fundamental concept important in the AI era, serving to prevent Sybil attacks and suppress the spread of AI-generated misinformation.

World ID is designed as a mechanism to prove 'being human' and 'being unique' online while remaining anonymous. World's official page also envisions scenarios where one would want to open access only to humans, such as ticket purchases, gaming, exclusive drops, and dating. This is a very sound concept.

However, having a need and being widely used are two different things. If you confuse the two, you will almost always misjudge the situation.

Reasons why it still doesn't spread

The reason it is difficult to spread is probably simple. World ID requires identity verification via an Orb, necessitating physical authentication. According to World's explanation, the data after authentication is encrypted and sent to the device, and is designed to be deleted from the Orb, but the burden of 'using an iris' and 'verifying on-site' remains.

In addition, there has been a strong reaction from regulatory authorities in various countries. There have been cases where temporary suspension measures or investigations were conducted in some regions from the perspective of personal information protection. In other words, regardless of the quality of the technology, the operational friction is quite high.

There are situations where proof of personhood is desired. But from the perspective of the implementer, the reason to go out of their way to introduce a new authentication flow is still weak. Moreover, when biometric information is involved, convenience alone is not enough to push it through.

The weight of biometric authentication

World explains that World ID verification is performed at an Orb. While it states that information after authentication is saved on the device and deleted from the Orb side, what is being handled here is biometric authentication.

Therefore, even with privacy considerations in the design, the psychological burden on the recipient does not disappear. It is precisely this part that regulatory authorities have repeatedly raised as an issue. There have been cases where regulatory authorities have intervened or imposed restrictions in some regions from the perspective of personal information protection.

In short, high accuracy and being accepted are different things. This is quite troublesome.

Is there demand to pay for it?

I am looking at this quite cautiously. World's white paper states that until the protocol becomes self-sustaining, the World Foundation will manage the World Community's tokens, and it outlines a vision to establish World ID usage fees through two layers: 'credential fees' and 'protocol fees' in the future.

In other words, World itself assumes that it is not yet in a sufficiently self-sustaining state, and aims for a design where it will charge fees to apps and issuing entities in the future. Moreover, the World Foundation explains that it plans to conduct a pilot in the third quarter of 2025. This is closer to a model where the service side bears the cost because they see the value, rather than a model where users pay out of pocket.

This is an important point. Although there is demand for proof of personhood, it has not yet reached a level where it is continuously charged for. The fact that World is considering a fee structure for self-sustainability can be read as an acknowledgment of that weakness.

Relationship with token price

WLD has a total supply of 10 billion tokens at launch, with 75% allocated to the World Community and 25% to early investors, the development team, and small reserves.

Furthermore, no new tokens can be issued for 15 years, and even after that, the design allows for inflation of up to 1.5% per year if approved by governance. In other words, the distribution is large from the start, and the structure allows for supply to increase over the long term.

Therefore, simply distributing tokens is not enough to support the price; a reason to buy is necessary. The reason World is designing World ID fees is to create those buyers and payers.

If I may add some speculation here, as long as distribution precedes adoption and real demand remains thin, the design of gradually increasing supply creates a structure where downward pressure on the price is likely, unless demand expands simultaneously. This is not a definitive conclusion, but a natural reading when looking at the supply design and usage fee structure.

Scenarios where it could succeed

Even so, there are scenarios where it could succeed. The World white paper states that World ID can be used to avoid bot accounts, prevent AI impersonation and fraud, and control age access.

Furthermore, it touches on the possibility that technology like World ID will be needed in the future when delegating authority to AI agents. The official World page also points to "human-only priority lanes" for things like tickets, games, exclusive drops, and dating apps.

Personally, I see this mechanism becoming stronger in areas where fraud that cannot be prevented by standard logins is significant. This includes countermeasures against airdrop farming, scalping, reputation economies, age verification, and situations where distinguishing from AI causes actual harm. Here, "Proof of Personhood" becomes a tool for cost reduction and maintaining trust, rather than just a feature.

Thinking this through

Looking at it this way, the essence of World becomes quite clear. It is not a currency for aggregating computing power, but an infrastructure for proving that one is human. Moreover, the maintenance of this infrastructure is already being borne by the World Foundation, covering a wide range of activities including Orb operations, manufacturing, deployment, education, auditing, and grants. The supply of WLD is also premised on large-scale distribution to the community from the start.

So, my view, to put it bluntly, is this: There is demand. However, at this point, it has not yet reached the level of "broadly monetized demand." World is in the middle of trying to create that through institutional design.

Conclusion

If you look at Worldcoin casually, it looks like a "suspicious mechanism that takes your iris scan and gives you free coins." However, if you look at it a bit more carefully, a more accurate picture emerges. There is actual demand for Proof of Personhood.

This is even more true in the AI era. However, that demand does not automatically generate money. Moreover, biometric authentication is heavy precisely because it is strong. This "trade-off between high accuracy and adoption burden" is the bottleneck for this project.

I believe World has not yet moved past the "interesting concept" stage. But it is not just a pipe dream either. There are seeds of demand. The question is who will continue to pay for it and in what form. As long as that remains unseen, this project may work as a concept, but it remains unstable as a sustainable economy.

👉 Click here for a summary of past articles and organization

Magazine summarizing financial results

Bonus

By the way, here is a magazine that compiles my paid articles.

Please take a look if you are interested.