Most of the current blockchains are based on one of the two consensus protocols, the Proof of Work and the Proof of Stake. Despite the ongoing debate over the two, it is not difficult to view them both as conceptually very similar: both are Proof of Investment i.e. requiring participants to invest in some activity or resource to validate their credentials and acquire units of participation.
The investment aspect is very critical in the PoW and PoS because inevitably makes the network of validators the playground of investing corporations, and so the blockchain fails to achieve decentralisation and adoption.
Another limit of proof of investment networks is their quantitative design, this means that the amount of proof required for the validation of the block is proportional to the market cap of the blockchain network. This is intrinsic in the Proof of Stake, and it is also very evident in PoW blockchains such as Bitcoin, that show a strong correlation between the hash-rate of the network and the total capitalisation of the blockchain. As a result, there are no synergies in merging two networks under any Proof of Investment protocol, because the amount of proof required will be always the sum of the single ones.
The concept of PoU on the other hand is non-quantitative. As soon as the PoID network is sufficiently populated, the infiltration of hostile groups becomes impossible and therefore the validation of the blocks is incorruptible.
Furthermore, as it is also impossible for attackers to use forged identities, the network is permanently secure since the very early stages. The incorruptibility of the network allows the PoU to unlimitedly validate blocks within any blockchain, regardless of their market cap.
It’s a far more efficient system than PoS and PoW networks, that instead merely discourage Sybil attacks making them anti-economical for the attacker.
In order to illustrate this difference further, let us consider the following analogy. PoW and PoS networks can be compared to a car driving to an election booth – the vehicle needs fuel to reach the destination, and the amount of fuel consumed is directly proportional to the distance traveled. For every election the driver wants to vote for, they must drive to a different election booth and thus use more fuel.
PoID on the other hand works differently – this network can be compared to the same election day, except that voters do not need to spend on fuel because here all elections are in the same booth, and in order to be admitted they simply need to show up their biometric identity, and then they can vote for any of the elections without having to travel any further or bringing more proof of their rights/status.
Applying this concept to blockchain networks means that the network is freed from the dependence on energy waste and no longer requires staking for participation.
Ultimately, this makes PoU significantly more distributed, secure, and sustainable than the existing PoW and PoS consensus protocols.
In addition to improvements regarding efficiency, the PoU network also makes a huge difference in terms of blockchain censorship resilience. Blockchains and their associated cryptocurrencies are sold as fully decentralized and censorship resilient, but the dependence on hash and stake ownership with PoW and PoS protocols prevent this concept from being realized, because governments can easily limit the electrical supply needed in the PoW and can easily trace down major stake holders in the PoS.
PoID on the other hand uses signatures of single individuals to validate blocks, while their biometric data are heavily encrypted, therefore there is no way to trace down participants or to restrict their capacity to act in the network.
The high level of decentralization and adoption, the full privacy of the participants, the independence from energy, make the PoID network extremely censorship resilient.
In conclusion, the production of hash power in the Pow and the ownership of stakes in the PoS are the criteria used to validate participation to the network and assign rewards; in the PoU instead, participation is validated with the biometric identification, and rewards are the same for all participants.
The PoU ultimate aim is to provide a consensus protocol to all new and existing blockchains. This would allow any blockchain to develop its features freely and efficiently, without being concerned about the non-sustainability of current consensus protocols.
Because the PoU distributes a universal basic income to all individuals of the planet and because it solves the problems of the validation of all blockchains, it is not surprising that the Human Coin (which is created as the reward of the PoU network) aims to achieve in the long run a total market cap higher than any other current currency.