Just when everyone was still slacking off, $H exploded again:
A 95.2% surge in 24 hours, the K-line chart directly drew a green rocket launcher. The entire cryptocurrency community exploded in excitement, with some joyfully screaming about their profits while others raised alarms questioning, 'Is this coin reliable?'
Is it yet another chance for overnight wealth, or a capital game cloaked in technological glory? The story of $H is far more complex than just 'how much it has risen'.
"Human Proof Coin"? $H is not trying to solve the wealth code, but rather the trust crisis in the AI era.
$H, full name Humanity Protocol, sounds unconventional right from its name. Its ultimate goal is not to issue tokens and exploit people, but to solve a big problem: how do we prove we are 'human' in the online world?
This issue used to sound like science fiction, but is becoming increasingly real—AI writing copy, Deepfake face-swapping, Bots flooding communities, fake accounts manipulating airdrops... the line between humans and machines is getting blurrier, especially in the Web3 world, where one might easily be submerged by 'witch attacks'.
Thus, $H made its debut: aiming to create a 'Human Layer', becoming the 'trust foundation' of the future Web3 world.
Its approach is quite unique:
Not doing any iris scanning (like Worldcoin), but instead using palm print recognition, which can be verified with just a smartphone camera;
Using zero-knowledge proof technology, it verifies you are human without exposing data, prioritizing privacy;
Built its own Layer2 network based on Polygon, paving the way for future expansion.
This set of operational logic is clear, the narrative enticing, and the technical vision very cutting-edge, quickly attracting a large number of top VCs, including Pantera Capital and Jump Crypto, with a valuation soaring to $1.1 billion.
The myth is shattered: it aimed to counter 'witches' but was played by 'witches'.
However, this 'savior' flipped the script right from the start.
In their so-called 'fair' token airdrop event, the platform was inundated with massive bots—you're not mistaken, a project claiming to be 'anti-witch attack' actually became a paradise for the witch army.
Founder Terrance Kwok admitted in a community AMA that among the 9 million 'human IDs' registered on the platform, there are fewer than 1 million real users, with bots accounting for nearly 90%!
How can this continue? Trust collapsed instantly, the price of $H plummeted, dropping over 60%. What was intended as an 'inclusive airdrop' turned into a feast for script players, with real users becoming the sacrificial victims.
Ironically, while all this was happening, the most core 'palm print verification' system of $H had not yet gone live. It’s like building a castle but starting to distribute gold coins for everyone to enter, only to be raided by bandits first.
It’s not just a 'Worldcoin alternative', but a 'privacy showdown'.
Many say $H is a competitor to Worldcoin—indeed, both have similar ideas but different methods.
Worldcoin is the hardware faction, using the Orb to scan eyes, maximizing regulatory risks; $H takes a lightweight route, achievable with a smartphone. One is more centralized, the other more distributed. $H seems to have seen through its opponent's vulnerabilities, patching them up one by one, trying to win trust.
However, Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin has warned: regardless of who wins, the idea of 'one identity system ruling them all' is itself a problem. A decentralized world should have multiple identity systems coexisting, not dictated by a single protocol. Otherwise, even the best system may become a tool of digital tyranny.
On one side, backed by VCs, on the other stepping into ethical minefields.
$H is also quite confident, backed by over $50 million in funding, along with support from blockchain big shots like the founder of Polygon, exuding a strong presence.
They even partnered with the genetic testing company Prenetics, aiming to use DNA for human verification—yes, you heard right, DNA authentication on-chain!
This sounds incredibly impressive, but immediately sparks controversy: Can biological information on-chain really be safe? Even if encrypted, who will regulate it? One might easily fall into the abyss of privacy, even attracting policy 'concerns'.
Is it a faith experiment or a capital game?
$H's current market surge is essentially the market re-voting: Is this project truly trustworthy?
It has a grand vision, a technical solution, and capital support, but also a serious 'original sin', and its core mechanism has not truly materialized. It is a bold attempt at a future digital identity system, but it could also be just another capital-wrapped bubble.
Its rise and fall is not just a speculative opportunity, but also a reflection of people's attitudes towards 'decentralized trust'.
The last sentence:
$H is a savior or a fraud? Is it a necessary experiment or a dangerous gamble? Perhaps it is still too early to say.
But what is certain is that it has revealed the future conflicts of digital identity: the ideal of technology vs the bottom line of privacy, the freedom of decentralization vs the efficiency of centralization, the desire for trust vs the temptation of interests.
This is not a trivial game of getting rich quickly, but a high-stakes gamble about humanity's digital destiny.
Can you place a bet?
