Digital ID - Where Is Your Line in the Sand? (Independent Media Alliance)

We're going to be discussing the idea of the false binary, what an illusion of choice does.

It establishes the baseline assumptions that nobody questions.

This is part of the fifth generation warfare that we've talked about. Voting for the lesser of two evil is definitely an emotional psychological trap that people are in.

You're cheerleading for an insane ideology because.

You think you're winning. The role we have is media. How do we help everybody understand this.

Is theater and you need to get.

Back into the real world.

If you're opposed to the agenda, you should oppose it, regardless who's selling it to you. Welcome to the Independent Media Alliance. We have a great panel set up today to discuss digital id. I was recently discussing this morning that or today in general that I think why this is so important. It is, as we've all pointed out, is the connective tissue between kind of where this is going and where we are. And so Hakeem had the. Had pointed out. He had a great presentation that he'd been working on around digital id. Kind of started the conversation again for us to kind of come together and discuss where it is, where it's going, the issue that it's become. So Hakeem had a presentation. I'll throw it to you to get started on where it's going to go, and we'll let it go where it goes, brother. Go ahead.

Yeah.

So.

So why is this topic so important? Everyone here has done great work on the surveillance grid with companies like Palantir, Big Tech being able to pry into everything that we're doing, knowing a lot about our lives. But on one hand, there's the surveillance gr. We don't really get to talk about a control grid. That's what digital ID is. It's this control grid that's being built. Part of the definition of digital ID is that it's meant to be interoperable. It's meant for one form of identification to be used in many different formats. It could be used in a government setting. It could be used for age verification. It could be used to verify you're old enough to buy that bottle of alcohol. All these things come together and it's a identification that can be turned off at one time. You really put yourself at risk of being cut out of all of the things that all of the things you could do in a society. So I've been studying many different programs around the world and have seen, you know, there's. There's a lesson to be learned from every part of the world, whether it's the EU and their Interoperable digital id, or the Russia and China proprietary model where it's really, really centralized. So, I mean, I think I'd like to start off with, with that question. What, what is. What do you guys think a digital ID is?

Actually, I'll guess I'll. I'll jump in. I just looked at my past half dozen podcast episodes that I put out, and all of them are pretty much on digital idea and technocracy. And I realized, you know, as all of you guys are saying, this seems to be the most important topic. And I. I think it's like, to use, for my past guests, you know, we got that wood technocracy algorithm ghetto. I think it's like the most totalitarian construct we've ever seen in human history. So, effectively, digital ID means all your physical activity permissions will be put on a platform that we don't control. And it's going to be a total checkpoint society from. I mean, from the tiniest thing of buying a cup of coffee to. To the biggest thing, to getting married, to buying a home. And every decision you make is going to be. There's going to be an intermediary there that can shut down that decision. Unlike the analog world that we've generally enjoyed up until now. That's kind of how I see it.

Yeah, I'll jump in real quick. I think I would define digital ID just in a simple way, just a form of identification, because, Hakeem, you've talked about this, that there's a difference between electronic ID and digital id. So I would say a form of identification that uses interconnected databases, obviously the Internet, and typically involves biometrics, whether that's fingerprint scanning, retina scanning, the face print, potentially voice print in the future as well, and how that is then interconnected to all the different systems that we were just hearing about described right there.

That.

That to me is what distinguishes digital ID from just being your paper ID card or your little plastic ID card, or even the fact that you have a Social Security number in the government system or things like that. The difference is what you were talking about, Hakeem, the interoperability between all these different systems. That, to me is what then kind of makes it a digital id.

I'll jump off on back of that, Derek, because I agree exactly what Derek said, completely agree. But just to overlap a point that thinks relevant, I think it's actually really glad you said that as well. Him the point of the difference, because it's. It can be, you know, all of a sudden, people just are hating everything. Electronic, you know, however that works, it becomes kind of an all encompassing idea. But I point, I'll point out that I think the definition is, might be different, which is kind of what we're highlighting it to the average person where so, and I my opinion to what most people think they're fighting or worried about is what, what Hivora was pointing out, where it goes and just really the, the, your digital online electronic representation of who you are that can be shut off, altered, affected, you know, like that you don't have control over all those points kind of together. But I do think that to the average person, it really just is sort of an online representation as opposed to your physical representation of it that's just obviously more manipulated. But the point is that there's the interoperability of all of it is what builds the control structure. So it's, I think it's a really great place to start. So let's keep going. Who's next jump in?

Well, it's going to be marketed as a one click or one download passport, and it's going to be represented as something that is a measure of both security and convenience, which might as well be billed as safe and effective because it's going to have the exact same results. And when you. I agree with Derek 100% there. Your biometrics are your digital ID. Ian Davis was on my show this morning and we were having a very similar conversation. Without the biometrics, you're still just a data footprint. But the biometrics and the hub of what your data ID does as a myriad of functions that allow you access to the vast majority of, you know, society, it's biometrics. Plus that hub is digital id.

I would say that to me, it is that nexus of the digital ID with the digital public infrastructure that really makes it into the, a key component of the control grid that Hakeem was talking about. Because the digital ID by itself, if it was only used for interactions with government services like that was the only thing that it was for, that would be bad enough, because even then, why does, you know, someone in the whatever department need to know about my medical history or whatever, which is gradually starting to happen here in Japan, they've rolled out something called my number, which is one number for all of your government services, including your health visits and your taxes and everything else. So the government will know all of that. That's bad enough. But then when it is connected into a digital public infrastructure, which means that every time you do a financial transaction online, for example, if you're bringing in that digital id suddenly, as has been said, there is a, there is a third party intermediary in every transaction, every interaction that you are having, and that intermediary is the government. And when, and if, let's just imagine if some authoritarian got into a position of power somewhere. I, I know we have to use our imagination for that, but if they did, and if they decided you were a security threat, they could shut off your access to everything digital, which is increasingly everything, because everything is going digital. So that to me is the nightmare part of the scenario. It's not just the digital ID itself, it's the fact that that will be the key that will fit all of these various locks to every asset, every aspect of your life and financial transactions and everything else.

You know, it's interesting, the way you just said that is so the difference is like, so it's the system that's building into. Right, right. But so you could argue the digital idea itself, like we know exists in some way today, but it's that connection of those two that make it nefarious. But I agree that even the idea that you have to go through that with any kind of structure shouldn't be something liberty seeking people want. I thought of something that Steve brought in that was interesting. The clicking. You know, there's the idea of like the no click phish. Like what's it called? You know, the like, what am I talking about? The passwordless. Yeah, like infiltration stuff. Like so I'm trying to think of the word for it. But like, like not phishing stuff but like scams like that real has this like no click.

The zero. The zero click hacks.

Yeah, right. Where suddenly you don't even have to engage with it. That makes that insane. I just want to include that. That's, that's a little extension. Go ahead.

Yeah, well, like, like you take the question what is digital id? And I would say there's actually potentially two, maybe three answers to that because there's the practical answer, which is, is the technological advance that would allow surveillance and surveillance to a point that isn't really been precedented in all of human history. But there's also, what is digital id? It is a psychological propaganda campaign because the two don't exist together necessarily. Like there is the selling of it, which is more about customizing people with, with the idea and not just the idea of, of the digital id because, and this is something that Ian has covered the idea the digital ID can exist conceptually without a name and the infrastructure is there and they will use it whether or not they're telling you they're using it. And there is also the. You know what, guys? You should have a digital id. You should have a card and you should carry it around with you all the time and you show it to anybody that asks to see it. And that's an important aspect of it, not so much the thing itself as a customizing people to the thing itself.

That's a really good point. And I think. I think everyone here nailed it. Those are. It can shift forms, this digital id, right? It could be a. You don't need an app on your phone. You could access it just through the web browser. In fact, that's the main way it's used in South America. They don't have digital ID apps. Idaho, Uruguay is the most, most. The largest digital ID system where they actually act as a broker, but that's all through the web browser. In countries where not everyone has a phone yet, that's the way I do it. So it does shape shift and takes different forms. And I think everyone here is. Been watching the news and it's been interesting to see the different countries and the approaches they take to it. You see countries, while you see the UK Prime Minister just going. Going the Hail Mary and he telegraphs a move that's not happening for four years, right? It's 2029. There's a date, you'll need it by 2029. And so it's this date really far in the future, which gets a lot of people angry. And then you have places like the EU where they have a plan in place, it's written into law that it's voluntary, people will never have to use the digital ID if they don't want to. But we kind of know why that's disingenuous a bit. So I think it'd be interesting to talk about, you know, what are the different responses that you've seen with governments trying to get people to adopt this program? And do you think that's been like, beneficial or not beneficial for their objective?

I'll start with the COVID overlap, since I felt like you touched on that, that I think that's important to consider that this, whether they say it's your choice or not, they coerce you into it societally, circumstantially, you know, so that's important to think about. And I think, to your point, I think, obviously, I mean, the way I see it is that just like with COVID the same thing today, it's very overzealous. I tend to think that's because there's an agenda, there's a timeline, at least they perceive something's making them feel like they need to get it done by a certain time. So I would argue that what they've been doing in their effort to try to push that has actually caused an amazing amount of pushback to it, which I'm very happy to see. That's how I would read it.

Yeah, maybe I just wanted to give some recent examples to maybe for people like listening who don't think this is a big deal for it to really hit home. And just today, I mean, in the U.S. this story, I shared the link about the DHS now wanting to collect biometric data not only from immigrants. We've heard that story, but now it says for even U.S. citizens that are sponsoring immigrants to the U.S. trying to get them Visa, green card. And, you know, I don't have any immediate. My wife is only a Mexican citizen, so I had no plans, but I thought maybe someday if we move to the U.S. i'll have to go to the process to petition her to become a citizen. This means now that I. The DHS is going to say, to make your wife legal, we need your DNA and biometrics. So now I'm put in this position, like I don't have a choice. So you want your wife to live in that. You want to live in America with your family, legally give up your DNA. If not, sorry. You know, it's kind of. It's like a great example, Ryan, of, of I'm coerced. So what am I going to do now? I got no idea.

Getting through to you through your family.

Yeah.

I'm glad you shared that, that link, brother. I just wanted to add to that, just while we're talking about the US for those, because I know we have a lot of people listening in the US that, that is just kind of picking up on the other recent US announcement, which is that now all foreigners who come into the US and leave the US are mandatory. Biometrics screening before. You know, I know people say it's been happening for years. They have been testing it out in different terminals, different airports in the U.S. but that was optional. Even if the vast majority of people didn't know it was optional, it was optional now, as of just, I think last week, and then apparently fully implemented by December 26, 2025, all foreigners coming into the US when they leave will be required to do face scanning and face printing. So, you know, that plus the announcement you just shared there, which clearly it's going to start. You know, including citizens in these different ways should be assigned to everybody. That even if you think these things are just happening in the UK or eu, which have made recent announcements that it's obviously coming to the US which shouldn't be any surprise, because I know, Ryan, you've played that clip a million times of Trump saying, we're going to have biometric entry exit system by air, by land, by sea. But just to kind of re emphasize the point that it's happening right now, this is, you know, part of Agenda 2030. We're about to be into 2026. It shouldn't a surprise that these agendas are moving forward.

Russia has done the same thing. It's, you know, Mexico is taking steps to do similar things. Yeah, yeah. I mean, it's happening absolutely everywhere. And it's something that, you know, people still have the opportunity, for the most part, to opt out of it. It's just you would have to opt into working with your neighbors to provide those own same services. And people have been so conditioned to hate their neighbor or fear their neighbor or distrust their neighbor. The, you know, that's a. A Herculean task.

So, I mean, what you just said. I have a story that happened last night, and I told Hakeem that today when he was on my podcast. And it's crazy, because when 2020 happened, Covid, I imagined this exact scenario five years ago. And this is what all of us do. Like, we're able to see the plans and we can predict the future. And I'm like, I know they're going to pull this one day. I don't know what I'm going to do. I'm going to refuse it or I'm going to move. And yesterday we had our homeowners meeting in the gated community here in Mexico. And the board is like, they've made the decision, they're going to push this through. It's not for sure yet, but they want everyone in our community to use a residence app, which is. It's effectively sort of like a private. You know, it's not linked to any official database. It's just, I mean, among the community. And I realize this is a thing that's used also in the US and the apartment complexes, and effectively, you. You'd give out.

You.

You know, it's a private company in Mexico. I don't know who these people are. And they'd have all of your data. My home, my family's name, my. My vehicle registration for the security visitors would have to you'd have to give them a QR code. You know, the old fashioned way is actually quicker. The security guard calls you and you say, okay, and that's it. Now I got to get on the app, log in, send a code to my visitor who has to present the QR code. And then the neighbors, the residents are like, and then if they stay too long, we can track and we can, you know, this person stayed too long. And then we can see what they're up to. And then they were giddy. They were really trying to outdo one another in creating Soviet, Soviet style rules. They're like, yeah. And I mean, one neighbor, the kid was kicking the soccer ball against his house all the time. And the parent, the, the other neighbor doesn't care. But yeah, let's ban soccer balls. Yeah, let's do this. And I'm like, oh my goodness. And they're talking about installing facial recognition cameras and, and all this stuff. And I mean, this speaks to Latin America. I've talked to people who, who have said that, you know, in Latin culture, the collectivism is really ingrained. And you think about Huxley, I mean, they're gonna love their servitude. And I'm standing listening to everyone and it's just unbelievable. They just, and I'm telling my wife, like I told Takim earlier today, if, if they, if it gets to a point where I can't enter without the app or something, I'm gonna tell them I'm a crazy Croat. I'm gonna ram right through the, the entrance. I don't, I don't care. And, or I might have to eventually move because it's all right. I'd rather take my chances with the cartels outside a gated community than live in this.

What's, what's the same. Like we came up with Crash the gate hashtag crash the gate.

Probably the latter though. Probably not want to go the other direction. But, but I had an interesting right.

Said fascism will come from America in the name of anti fascism. And he was wrong. Fashion is going to come from America in the name of the Homer's associate who owns association.

They have nothing better to do than to get into other people's business.

So I wanted to pose a question just real quick to, to Jorge about that, but also to all of us in a broader sense. Like, so that's a real world example, right? Because I think sometimes people, they're hearing about digital IDs, but not until they can see. And that's not even a full on digital id. Right. But it's just the way the technology is interacting with your life. At least not a government issued, you know, digital id and people don't make that connection. And to, to see like how am I actually going to interact with this. So now you have this, this situation in your home, in your gated community and like you said, if it comes down to it, maybe you'll eventually decide to move. You're willing to make what some people might consider to be a drastic step to make sure you don't comply with these systems. Which personally I think is what we're all going to need to do and you know, since COVID but especially in the coming years. So I'm just curious, first from you brother, but then everybody else just like in, in the ways that you are going to deal with this directly. James, you were talking about the Japanese government making some changes and for paying taxes and doing all kinds of things. What steps, whether abstractly or specifically, are we all willing to take to avoid these systems? Because I think what I'm seeing in my feeds out there is that there's a lot of online chatter and resistance as there has been for years. But at the same time it seems like people aren't willing to make drastic lifestyle changes if it means staying free. Like some people are still holding on to the idea that they're going to be able to keep their, their bank or their, whatever they, you know, their connection to that technocratic system, the systems that's quickly becoming technocratic and that they won't have to really make any major life shifts. And I think that should have been completely erased with everything we saw during COVID People realizing, okay, maybe life isn't going to go back to normal. Maybe I need to start contending with this new reality. So yeah, I'm curious just thoughts on how far you're willing to go. You know, what your red lines in the sand are like when it comes.

To these things, I'll just throw out. I mean we have to embrace becoming uncomfortable really that, that's, that and I, I was going to first, I don't know how I'm going to deal with it because I don't know if they're going to succeed in pushing it through or not. But I'm just not going to comply. At first they said that it'll be more cumbersome for the people who don't onboard into this digital system. And I'm fine with that. You know, if I, if it costs me some more time, I'll, I'll deal, deal with that and you know, I have, I have an above phone. So, you know, that's one option where you have the graphene OS and you can check the permission. So, you know, if it depends, I have to test out that system to see how it works and. But eventually I'm. I'm happy to just completely change homes to get away from. From it, if that's what is necessary. Yeah.

Well, from. I would simply probably. I'd probably be similar. I would, like, I would think, but I don't know what length. I mean, outside of doing something, I was going to say, like, I don't think there's a length. I wouldn't go, you know, like, in a reasonable sense, like, if this continues to push, I will change my life to adapt around it as best I can. The difference is when, like for example, the Internet or anything we're using, when we do this kind of work, it creates an interesting paradox for us, doesn't it, where we kind of have to be involved with certain parts of this that I otherwise might not be if I wasn't doing this work. But I would just argue that, you know, if something builds in that direction, like, I would move. I would, you know, do whatever I could to create, to continue to try to, to keep that out of my life. But I think the point is today they're building it into ways where even if you resist like you're talking about and move, the problem will catch up to you. As long until we deal with the real issue and not just the local part of it, you know, I think that's where I would be. But I mean, pretty much anything outside of something, you know, like murder or, you know, that kind of thing, obviously within reason, but I think I'd imagine we're probably over at that point.

You know what I've just realized? I think Klushwa was right. We will own nothing and we will be happy because we will not be on their control grid. Right. It'll be great. Let me make a little observation that I fear is either going to be too obvious to state, or so obvious that it needs stating, or maybe both. The, the real, the real sticking point of this is digital, Digital id. Because what was the phrase that instantly, in the minds of at least English speakers around the world, instantly signified an authoritarian regime? Papers, please. Right. For first better part of a century, papers, please means you are living in an authoritarian autocratic regiment. And everyone knew that because, you know, I don't have to present my papers. Right, but that's because it was physical. Paper And I still think, I think if they were trying to institute some sort of thing where there's going to be some guy in the border and you have to get out some physical paper card, I think people would still, there would be some remnant of that going through people's heads. But it's not, it's just a QR code, it's an app, it's a website, portal, whatever. And you know, again, this is so trivial that maybe it's stupid, but I think there's something to it. Since the time we all got online and started using software in our childhoods, what is the thing we've done more on computers than anything else? Agree, agree to terms of service. Agree, agree, agree. Don't even read them. Who cares? Whatever. Agree, agree, agree, agree. Just to use the thing. This is exactly that. We have been trained our entire lives digitally to just Agree, agree, agree, agree, whatever. Okay, done. And this is the next implementation of that. I'm just going to give my papers anyway. I'm sorry, Derek, that does not answer your question. But I guess I don't know if you want to use the term black pilled or pessimistic or whatever, but I do not see a way this is going to stop on the societal scale. I think I will be.

I don't either.

I don't either.

But I'm curious though, James, for you. What about like individually? I mean, without, you know, what's the line?

Understand? I mean. Yeah, yeah. I've always said at the point where I'm going to have to like give my retina scan and fingerprint or whatever to get online, I guess I'll just be offline. So there is that.

So would we all choose to not broadcast if, if and when the Internet IDs come, you know, like what are we going to do? Are we going to broadcast?

Let's give them ideas. Right. We can get rid of all with. Just by implementing.

Let's talk about that though.

And that opens up like an interesting philosophical question about the nature of ethics. It doesn't. Yeah. Because at that point are you putting your principles ahead of the good you could do if you give up on your principles?

Right.

Listen, if they put the Internet above my head, I'll give them my ring finger in my thumb, but that's it. And they're going to have to try and prove like I committed a murder like this.

Well, well, what Kit was saying I think is really important because this is something that I do a lot of thinking about personally. James, I know you've done work on this before as well. That what this all comes down to is convenience versus our principals. Right? We all know they're going to sell it via entertainment. They're going to sell it via convenience. They're going to tell everybody it's quicker, it's faster, it's better. You can get into sports ball. You can play with video games, facial recognition, all the stuff we see. States and countries already testing out Internet IDs in terms of people being able to access pornography, for example. Like, that's how it starts. We got to protect the kids. So you now have to do a face selfie or something if you want to look at this porn site. And that's one way that it starts where people start having to do that just to get online. And. And in a very real way. I mean, I'm curious, like you said, Kit, like, are we shooting ourselves in the foot? I tend to stand as strong as principle as possible, but I also can hear the argument of, like, okay, well, if I take myself out of the game and I'm just like, all right, guys, sorry, I got my land. I'm gonna just stop broadcasting or I'm gonna broadcast only on the deep web for anybody who can find me or whatever. Like that of trying to avoid this potential digital ID to get on the Internet. I don't know. I do think at the same time, I think at the same time this. It would send a negative message to our audiences for them all to see, for whatever influence we might have. For them all to see, oh, my God, James is complying. Ryan's complying. Like, they're just doing it because they want to keep broadcasting on YouTube. Like, oh, man, what was all this 20 years worth of work about? Now they're just doing it.

Right?

Well, this is where this becomes such an important point. Go ahead.

I just want to say that the hypotheticals are really, really challenging because we don't know the situations. I think, for me, I've tried to think about it practically, and, you know, the entire world's economy runs on the Internet. So this is something that's a very common question I'm sure you guys have heard, is when are they going to put Internet access behind a digital ID or some sort of global id? And the answer to that is when they have enough digital ID adoption. So when they do do this, the world's economy doesn't crash overnight. So, like, that's in my report. I try to classify different ID programs by 60%. 60% of people have it. Then it's easy enough I call it complete, because at that time you can just coerce the rest of the 40%, they can't comply and they're cut off from the rest of the 60% of society. And you can argue what that number is. But so I do think Internet, at the Internet is maybe one of the last stages of the digital ID wall or the digital fracturing. And so it only will get there if adoption goes really, really well. There's also that other aspect of the Internet is such a useful tool. It maybe doesn't make sense for them to cut off some people from the Internet. Wouldn't they much rather be, you know, knowing what you're doing or knowing what you're doing online? That's.

Well, even if we use a different example, like, let's say, biometrics to get on a plane, which is becoming pretty much standard many, many places, right? Like, I, I have a passport. It's the only ID I have. It expires in 2028. I don't know what I'm going to do, but if things continue in this direction, I'm pretty much willing to give up traveling by flight. A lot of people stopped because of TSA long ago. Others have, you know, they already had a line in the sand. They're like, I'm not going to put up with that. For me, it's kind of been like, okay, I can opt out of facial recognition right now. I can opt out of these things. I'll do that. But when that's not possible, that's a line in the sand for me that I'm going to say, okay, sorry, I guess I'm not going to be able to fly because I don't want to just say, well, okay, here it is. I've been talking all this crap about it these, all these years, but, oh, well, I'll just join like everybody else. So I feel like we, especially as people who are trying to influence others, should know what our lines in the sand are, whether it's about the Internet, flying, what have you.

I'd like to address that. Now. I don't want to put everyone on the spot because I know it's a. It's a difficult conversation, but I want to address it from my perspective because this is something I speak about a lot, you know, and I think it's a really important question for us to individually go through or talk about here if you'd like. And I think, you know what's hard about it, and I love what you guys have already said about it, right? Like, especially what Kit was saying, like, if you're. What I've been arguing to start with, very, very, very aggressively for a while since this last administration, is that we have to err on the side of our principles. Like, I'm saying this every day lately, right? It's important if it comes down to an issue where, you know, they're arguing we should be breaking something to fix it. No, you got to the principles, you know, where you have to err on. So in this conversation, like, even. Let's even start with the airport one, right? So ask Derek. What I recently was saying is I'm not really going to be flying anywhere right now because I'm uncomfortable. Like, a lot of different reasons, which is almost contradictory for the last American vagabond. But the point is that I've decided that that's an issue for me, it's problematic. And so in this case, when it comes to the online part, if they start requiring that or even just go in the larger part of the digital ID at this point, I don't see a world in which I would compromise for that. But, you know, like, that's. That's where I'm standing right now. Like, that's, that's where I'm at. I think that's important. But to consider and to agree with where Kim is pointing out who. We don't know the circumstances of that moment as it is now, there's no way I'm doing that. I've said that many times with Twitter. If they start asking me for facial prints, I'm not doing that. That's. Which is going to be. There's a lot of engagement right there that we're going to lose. But when it comes to, like, what Kit was saying, so what if there's a part where you are losing out on reaching people? Because you do that, you know, and that's, that's where the, the issue becomes a problem, right? Because you can argue today that, like, what they're doing, maybe we can break the Constitution to really bring it back into play, you know, and it's just, it's. The point is you don't know the unknown in the future. But I'm of the mind that I think, and this is my argument, that I think where we are not in every sense in history, but because of the way the world is now, way it's being used, that we have to err on that, that we have to put our, you know, but like, to Derek's point, we would speak it for myself, I would do everything I could to continue to find ways to put work out. And maybe there's. The solution is that we would just have to find another workaround. You know, like we have our entire us individually, maybe some of us, but in, as an industry, people have found ways to work around these things, and I think that's the only way it has to go. But I'd love to hear from what you guys think, you know, whether you have a line.

Yeah.

Oh, go ahead, man.

Just real quick. My line in the sand is a bit different. So, for example, I think there's a bit more wiggle room. And for a lot of these things that we're talking about, I think for many of us, we don't really know how we're going to react until we get to that checkpoint. You know, we think maybe now we imagined, but it's not like last night when I had this experience and my line in the sand, you know, I could still see me because I've already given, you know, in a number of places, my fingerprints to Mexican authorities or US or eu. I feel like that that's already blown past. There are some definite things like vaccination. I will not be injected no matter what. If that means my father is dying and I can't see him, I'm not going to commit suicide. To go see my dying, it'd be like two negatives, you know, so I'm definitely not going to do that. But for me, the real line is in the sand is like, you know, I might go along, I might do the biometric to log on to the id, to log on to the Internet. But for me, the line in the sand is, is the thought crime, the digital gulag. Like, the line in the sand is like, okay, I've used my biometrics, I've logged my digital ID to get on the Internet. But if you say this, you're going to be blocked, you know, or you're going to lose so many social credit points. That's where I'm, I'm, I'm not going to adhere to that. So I kind of want to get thrown in the digital gulag. You get what I'm saying?

Yeah. What's interesting to me, though, is that that seems like the inevitable when you end up in that position, because now they have that control. So you will event. You'll just vanish. Either way, I would read it, but I, but I, I take your point. Anybody else want to comment?

Well, I think, I think Hakeem was right, though, that I don't think they ever would limit access to the Internet.

I happen to agree with you.

It's true. It's too important. They want to keep an eye on everybody, so they'll give you a way in if you don't like to. The Internet access alone.

Yeah. No, I think they would pull the trigger if they could, and I think they're happy to let the bag. The vagabonds be vagabonds who can then be tracked by the fact that they're not. They are not on the system. I had a really important point that just absolutely escaped me.

Well, James, maybe I can help bring it. I was going to just mention, James, that you already make certain exception or make certain lines in the sand. That other.

Actually what I was gonna say.

Yeah.

You're not on Twitter. You're not on all these places.

Well, okay, so for example. Okay, so, yes, again, it is. It's so piecemeal, and there's so many different parts to it. I am a foreign resident in Japan, which means that every time I come into the country, I have to give my digital fingerprints. No exception. If I ever want to leave or come back to Japan ever again, I have to give my fingerprints. And so I have done that many times. However.

Yeah.

For example, Telegram. I went to sign up for Telegram because everyone was on Telegram a few years ago and they wanted my phone number. And I said, screw you. Nope, and I will never sign up with you. I was going to do chat GBT as a kind of a joke thing for one of my editorials once, and I went to use it and it's like, it wants my phone number. Screw you. I'm not even going to use you for a joke. So there. Yeah, I definitely have lines in the sand, but there's so many different pieces of this that I don't. I don't know. I don't think anybody is floating on the cloud here like, oh, I. I'm so above this all. Or if they are, they're not listening to a conversation online like this one brother.

And there. There are like piecemeal lines in the San. I mean, I walked away from Rockfin as consistently like a number one show there because they wanted me to paywall all of my content. And even though the content was up everywhere else for free, you know, I was like, well, no, because that's a.

That.

That's a lot. Yeah, you number one. You can't force me to pay for your people to pay for what is otherwise free content. Like, that's not. That's. We're not gonna do that. I'LL leave. You know, as far as the state goes, I already hate flying. I can give that up, you know, pretty easily. I've already been to Europe. They want biometrics to enter. I'm not in a rush to go back. You know, like, it's, you know, I've been uncomfortable. I've been homeless, I've been poor. I've, you know, been in jail. Like, it's, you know, it's not. Hasn't been a comfortable life to begin with. Like, not taking part in some dystopic digital hellscape doesn't seem that difficult or far afield from the way that, you know, I've lived for most of my adult life anyway, you know, but I recognize that not everybody has that and has that background and they're, you know. But I, I don't know. Yeah, I guess I, my, my line in the sand is definitely you have to give up biometrics in order to get online. Okay, well then I'm not doing that anymore.

I have a number, by the way. Can I just add.

Just.

I mean, we're talking as if we'll never be heard from again if we're not online.

Right.

This is not just. This is not just something that I'm doing for. For fun's sake or something. No, this is literally if I go offline because I can't get online anymore, you're gonna find me through my books or you're not going to find.

That's what I was gonna mention. Yeah. We need to have a physical. We need to have an ima. Physically monthly journal or something. You know, we need to be prepared because we will adapt.

I know Whitney, currently with unlimited hangout, is trying to start something and I definitely think we should, you know, and I'll piggyback on what Steve was saying is kind of an example. And since I have a similar but different experience with rockfin, I'll talk about that too. Is that taking our last conversation about this with Rock, for example, it's kind of, it's the same kind of idea.

Right.

And I'll give you my experience since then. Is that so I. What I said, which I basically still standing in the same point, but I've used it more since then, is that my argument was that there was a use to it in sort of like using it to expose like the partisan work and we could all find our rationales for using whatever, but that ultimately it wasn't something that we should trust and blindly adhere to and blah, you know, the whole thing. Right. But my point was that there was a value that you can see in doing it. And the same thing hvory made a point about the value we saw in it, you know, so it's, it's, it's a rationale you can make about what you think is valuable at that point at least there's no like transactional thing. I think we just know that it's being used right. The information we're helping build the system in a way. But you know, the point is that I've continued to use it in that way, you know, and so it's like it's. We all have our own situational things where we rationalize it on, on Rockfin side of it. Ultimately my logic was that I already have like Steve said, free content all over the place or for the most every other place is free. So when they did that I ultimately just kind of let it be because it's free everywhere else.

Right.

But so it's like we all can find our lines where we think and we should though it's like the line for where we decide is crossed. That's individual. That's not something we should all are ever all going to agree on. But it isn't think I think it's important back to. I forget whose point it was that I think the principles need to be. I think it was Derek that we should know those lines. Right. We should define them for ourselves and we should do our best to stand by them because we're going to get comp tested with every day this goes forward.

I'd like to, I'd like to bring it back to real examples that we could look at other countries and come up with a name for what we're doing right here which is. Could be called a principal test, like a purity test. And so if you want to talk about.

I don't like that anymore.

Boo.

Yeah, if you're talking about an Internet lockdown, right. What they're doing in Australia, they have age verification which is not tied to a digital ID yet. But in their committee meetings they talk about how digital ID would be perfect for it. They just simply haven't pulled that legislative trigger yet. But so the way that works is if you are logged in in to a very large platform, YouTube, TikTok, Gmail, you will need to verify your age or any sort of social network. So I think that's a really easy one to check off our list.

Right.

We're obviously not going to verify ourselves biometrically for that. I think that's a very low at the Totem pole travel is probably somewhere higher than that. We're already seeing that in the eu in the US And I think we can all agree it's not a black or white situation. It's more like, all right, I'm not going to travel to these parts of the world anymore. I still would. I'm going to try and travel, personally. I'm going to try and travel as much as I can before it's. It's everywhere. And then, yes, you really have to make sure you have a home base.

But I do went to Japan recently, right?

I went to Japan and I talked to the gate agent and it was really fun because I looked like a mess. So I didn't have. I didn't have. There was no computers there, right? There is no biometric scanning. They do ask you. And it was really funny because I looked tired and he was like. He was like, super. He was super diligent at his job. So I just did like a kawaii Japanese thing. I was like, oh, look at me. And he laughed really hard. But, yeah, so. So they, they do bully you at the airport, you know, in the US when you try. Try and opt out. I can go through some bullying, no problem. But. But I think that. I think that what we. We should probably talk about was, is the grocery stores. I was taught. I think I shouted with someone about this in another country and, oh, it was in Canada, where they already have this, where if you enter a grocery store, they've got the little doors at the front. And I think that's happening everywhere. And that is a very natural place for digital ID to enter. So you scan it to even enter the store. So that's like a real. That's a tough test, right? Do you. Are you going to be prepared enough for that? And I don't know. I would think I would need to have kids and be in a really tough spot to comply with that.

Well, I'll jump on that real quickly and point out simply that I think that's easier than it may sound. I get your point for the average person, but for those, I mean, there's, you know, that's almost something we should be doing anyway. Go to your farmer's market, go to your local farms, get away from the store in general. But go ahead, Derek.

Oh, yeah, I was just going to say, I mean, to Hakeem's question there about that, maybe not purity test, but principal test there, that, yeah, that's something I wouldn't want to comply with. Using the. Think the Australia example, whether It's Facebook or anything else. But you're right. If it was use Facebook or give biometrics by Facebook, you know, it's not a big, not a hard decision to make. I do think that the way, as we've all understood the way that they pushed it during COVID and the way they've pushed every different agenda throughout the last few decades and maybe throughout history is obviously the kind of subtle coercion, the social engineering, the convenience aspect. I think that maybe, maybe even some here underestimate the amount of people who comply with things. I do think that an Internet ID will eventually roll out, maybe nationwide, you know, not necessarily a worldwide Internet id, but they could find ways to start on the national level, which they're already doing. So, for example, to operate to access certain government websites. They're already starting to make it where you have to have some form of QR code on your phone or things like that. And they claim, well, there will be exceptions for the percentage of the population that's not on smartphones. But so they're already kind of using that subtle coercion to get people, whether it's corporations or you want to renew your driver's license, okay, well, we need to scan your face or we need to do this, you know, this digital, this digital app on the smartphone. So I think a lot of people will comply. And mostly because not just the convenience thing, but because people are not preparing. No matter how many hundreds of thousands of hours people have listened to our podcasts or documentaries or books, people still aren't taking action. At least that's just kind of what I see. And that's maybe on the more pessimistic, like James was saying, a little black pilled view that I think a lot of people are watching this happen. Like, I mean, I think it was your phrase that you coined originally, James, the infotainment, conspira. Attainment. That's kind of how they. I still see people looking at this. Maybe now it's getting a little more real because the announcements are coming more rapidly, but it still feels like people think they're just watching a TV show and not thinking about, okay, how am I actually going to respond to this? If it comes to the grocery store, if it comes to the Internet, if it comes to the airports. And yeah, you mentioned, Hakeem, people with children, we're all going to have different decisions to make based on, again, our lifestyle and our, and our, you know, our habits and just our situation. And that's okay. I wasn't asking that question earlier. About our principles to sort of say we all need to act the same way. Clearly we're all already not acting the same way and dealing with this the same. But if we don't even have that conversation and start thinking about it, then all of a sudden when it happens, maybe you're just going to comply because you haven't given it a second thought because you haven't started visiting the local farmers markets and building those relationships. That's the other point I just want to make real quick, is that I think establishing community relationships, whether it's like in your situation with the HoA, trying to talk to your neighbors and say, like, hey, maybe we need to make an exception for people like me, or trying to build these relationships is going to be increasingly important because I don't think us in our isolated little silos talking about this on the Internet are going to stop it. Like, we have to be able to come together, try to slow it down or to have solutions. Go ahead.

Absolutely. And let me just put a quick plug in for Hakeem's latest T Bot episode. I was just starting to watch that and I saw you were plugging the community gardens websites with the maps and everything, showing people how they can connect to their local area. Because I'm sure we all hear it, I hear it from my audience all the time, but there's nobody in my area. Well, there are lots of ways that you can start finding people in your area and start, or start one yourself.

Like they're. Derek office point, excuse me, often points out, if you don't, you don't have it. Start it yourself. You know, go ahead.

Sorry, I, I. Thanks for mentioning that, James. Yeah, I mean, you know, that was through, really through the Freedom Cell Network where I understood the power of a map for the first time. Because yes, you can find people near you. And, and the interesting things about the government shutdowns right now. Yeah. 40 million Americans about to run out of benefits. There's going to be state level benefits for food stamps and things like that. But, and to back to Derek's point, people don't prepare because sometimes they need the stick. Sometimes you just need a good proper kick in the ass. And that's okay.

Right?

We're at different levels, so I expect that some people are going to be proactive. I mean, even, even us. Right. Just, just generally speaking about content creators, I think a lot of people are talking the talk, but if, you know, if push comes to shove, how, how ready are there? So I think it's okay for people to Learn the hard way. Just. I hope it's. It's not too late for them, and I hope it's not like an overnight thing. Going back to that, though. Yeah, there are a lot of resources out there, and I think that if. If it really happens at a wide scale, like when. If digital ID starts to be used in every asset of life, I. I think also at the same time, societal breakdown, and it's not going to be that attractive of a system going back to the government shutdown. TSA is right now working in America without pay. Dude, they are so grumpy, bro. It's. It's kind of hilarious, honestly. They're very, very grumpy. I've talked to them a little bit, and they're just telling me, yeah, no one's showing up for work. Everyone is. Everyone is calling in sick. So these systems are actually really, really fragile. They need people to perpetuate them. And hopefully this, maybe. Maybe this is what it's going to be. You know, they'll roll out digital id, there is going to be a mass negative response, and it falls apart on its own. That is, that is the best case scenario for. For this thing, in my opinion.

Now it's almost like somebody wants to crash these systems purposefully in order to rebuild them. Maybe a digital ID might even be the best way to distribute SNAP benefits.

I love thoughts like that.

Like, they take.

Yeah, I mean, that's absolutely. I'll do that. But there is an element of that, of, like, deliberate sabotage to bring things down. But I think you can also take a bit of comfort from, like, if you take. Take like, true crime programs where you see some guy kills his wife and they find out on his computer 10 days before he did it, he was googling how to kill your wife and get away with it. And that literally does happen. Because there is a limitation to the psychopathic mind. There is a lack of imagination and a lack of foresight. And if you extrapolate out to systems, these psychopathic systems have that same limitation, and they can collapse.

Remember, remember the European blackouts? Just whatever last last spring or whatever. And there was. There was mass blackouts. And people are like, oh, my God, suddenly we can't buy or sell anything.

Wow.

Maybe we need some physical way of doing this instead of all digital. And it's gonna happen when and if they roll out the digital ID in a big way, there will be like a blackout for a day or two, and suddenly people will be like, oh, we can't do anything.

Wow.

I wonder if we should have some.

Other way on my show this week about dumb thing that people are doing now where it's a wave of people who are unteching their, their house and their lives and that's like it's becoming a popular movement. They're talking about how the Gin Alpha or their kids is probably going to be the least tech savvy generation in a couple because they're all kind of moving in reverse away from. There's a natural rejection of this that's taking place, I don't know, on a subconscious or spiritual level for, I mean tens of millions of people. And I, I think, I don't know, I see it, I recognize it. I also have a 13 year old.

Well, to Derek's point, I, I agree completely but I think both those things exist at the same time. Like I think.

Yeah.

My opinion is that everybody can see this for the most part. The question is, are they actually taking action their lives to change anything? I want to bring this to one more point before we get too far in, you know, towards the end is the overlap to this of the digital twin point, right. And the corporate element because you know, as you've always pointing out, you know, just the homeowners association just scooping up all this data. I don't know what scares me more, a corporation or a government or whether they're both the same thing owning all this information. And we don't even truly, maybe, maybe Cookie more than anybody here, but I don't truly even know what that means in the future. You know, like what does it mean when they own every piece of biometric data of you and just on a computer? What does it mean when they create like a sim city digital twin world where they're testing out what you may do a week Tomorrow and Tuesday, 3pm which is exactly what's actually happening. Like the sim kind of, you know. So my point is all of this not just in the accessing life part, but the use of that block to gain those things and for what that may mean in the future. You know, it's just one more part to you know, recognize that this is much more alarming than just being blocked out from your life, which is far alarming enough. You know, so I just want to throw that in there before we finish.

I didn't, didn't want a part of your report say that one of the governments or one of the digital ID programs actually said that they, they own the likeness to you because I thought I remember you saying that maybe it was to James and it. That's what it made me think of is this whole digital twin concept with which is becoming more popular. So it's like if they believe they own your literal likeness and they have all your biometrics and, and who knows whatever else, what does that mean for them? Recreating you in the digital space and that whole digital twin conversation Ryan's talked about. But that's what first came to mind when I heard you say that.

And they own. And possibly with the overlap of your genetic, you know, like your, your patent on your body because of the COVID 19 injection. Like just ideas like the idea that if they alter you genetically like a Monsanto seed, that they can argue they own that change. You know, this, this is not that crazy of an idea when you look at the way it's gone. Combine those together and that becomes even more alarming. Kakim, go ahead. I know your thought on this.

Yeah, so, so yes, once you give away, once you give them your biometrics, it's like they have like ownership of, of, of your likeness because they could take that biometric data, they could share it. Right? Like it five eyes is still a thing. Those data sharing agreements still apply whether it's online surveillance or whether it's biometric, whether it's your biometrics. And so you could, they can do, they can still continue to do stuff with them. And Russia's case is, you know, where they are able to integrate biometrics into the CCTV cameras so they can use facial detection. Is, is a really, it's, it's the most scary example of that. Also going back full circle, we talked about how interoperability is one of the most important features of these systems. I do think we will reach a time where most, most countries will converge on a single tech specification and I think that'll probably be verified credentials from the, you know, the www. Consortium. So that's in the report. I really think as a journalist this is worth just checking out the tech spec to see, to see what it looks like. It's not, it's not black magic. Like you guys can also play around with this. We can make her. Actually this is worth closing on Kim Cameron, you know, who, who came up with this idea of digital identity that him and the, and the people who are working on this idea, they had this idea of sovereign self identity and it was about someone issuing their own identity and it kind of made him. It seem like that word and specifically some of the things he was saying in his report, it kind of, it kind of made it sound Good. As in you're the one who could issue your identity and you had complete control of it. Where was I going with this? I was going with this as is, is there a alternate or competing form of identity we could provide or we should provide? Because as we, if we're moving into the counter economy, we're letting go of, you know, grocery stores, banks and all of that, we're going to need a trust and reputation system for ourselves. So I think that's interesting there. Like, we could, we could technically this. Because this technology is out there, verified credentials. You could issue your own IDs, you could build software around it. I mean, I've had the thought in my mind, but I, I honestly don't know. What do, what do you guys think? Is it useful or is it not?

Let me just say right off the bat, Hakeem, you're exactly right, because. And here's, here's the example that we can cite. And this may not be the best one, but it is a one. We do not need governments in order to steward over some identification system for us. We can do it ourselves. And here's an example how on, remember ebay. And I don't even mean whatever it is today, but you know, 20, 25 years ago, when people were using it to buy and sell things online, you had no idea who's on the other end of that transaction or whether they're going to be able to, you know, fulfill that, or whether it's a total scam or what have you. But lots of people bought on ebay and lots of people trusted it because they had the reputation system. People would rate and review the sellers, right? And if somebody's got a thousand five star reviews, they're probably going to deliver. And if somebody's got like three one star reviews, they're probably not going to deliver. And that's a completely voluntary. Totally. And it's pseudonymous, Right? It doesn't have to be your particular individual, like, here's my name, face profile, DNA, whatever. It's just here's the handle that I'm using. And people can, you know, use a trust and reputation system. But yeah, we do. When we are interacting with people, we do need some way of understanding who that person is in terms of their reputation, if nothing else. And that is the thing we lose when we go from the real world of actual people that we are interacting with that we know on a face to face basis into the big digital billions of people that you have no idea who they are. And so, yes, I think there does need to be a way for us if we are going to interact with people digitally, we need to be able to verify their reputation in some way, but it does not have to be the government.

Well, I was going to say that while, just real quick, while I understand what James you're saying there and what Hakeem is saying, I also want to just point out I wrote an article back in 2021 for TLAB about this discussion around sovereign digital ID. And one of the people who was promoting is Charles Hoskinson, who's one of the co founders of Ethereum. He actually spoke at the World economic forum in January 2020 and he was talking about this and he's talking about how do you track people, how do you trace that, how do you make sure the money is actually going into the right hands? And he talks about global citizenship, self sovereign identity. So again, I think there's potential to what's happening there. But then I also pointed out that as far back as 2018, IBM partnered with something called the Sovereign foundation, which is also a partner with the World Economic Forum and they are aligned with the United Nations Development Goals. So I guess my concern is that there is also going to be an effort by though, you know, they them those to co op this language and co op this idea of their sovereign id. And personally for me I'm okay with just, you know, I get the, in the digital space you were describing James, in terms of reputation and how that could be, you know, valuable. But I feel like, I don't know, I guess just like, because for example, I've seen some communities I'm building intentional community. I've seen some intentional communities say we're going to put our entire community on the blockchain, we're going to have our own internal digital ID for whatever use cases. And I guess just, and I don't see the value in that now maybe in the broader picture like you were saying on the Internet or something. But to me I'm just like, I, I why if I need an id can I still just use a piece of plastic or a piece of paper? Like I don't, I'm very wary I guess of that co opting of that language.

Oh, I'll add to that because that's kind of where my mind was going is that what Akeem was saying is really interesting and I appreciate James addition to that because it goes in a different direction, which makes sense. But so what kind of what, what Derek was hinting at I think is that, you know, clearly people are going to push back. So there's going to be, at least I would argue whether they manipulate or not, somebody out there is going to go, here's something like this is what I thought is the possibility in this. Here's something you can use to pirate the system, right? Here's your fake digital ID that you can use to get inside and be able to broadcast. Isn't that kind of what we're doing with Corbett with our YouTube pirate streams? You know, it's like we're finding a way to circumvent it. So we're not complying, but we're still working through the system. So that's kind of where mine was going earlier, the idea that you could find a way to make your own and then work inside of it. But at the same time, you know, somebody I get would see that and then try to, you know, you get the mainstream alternative media version of your thing that gets you and you're trapped in the same way. So we have to be skeptical. But I think the idea is, you know, this is if this inevitably continues to go in this direction, if we box ourselves out and sit in a corner, we're not, you know, other than. I don't mean that. Obviously we're going to keep working, like you said, books and other sides, other ways, but we're missing out on that major reach. There will inevitably become an effort, if it's possible, to sort of hack your way through. I think that makes sense with the way things have always gone in the past. I just think that's interesting. Thought so. Thank you for bringing that up, Akeem.

Bring on the cypherpunk future.

That's where they're pushing it, you know.

But this is just an interesting little tidbit. So Kim Cameron, I mean, he's on the board of ID 2020. He was before he died, by the way. This is interesting. His blog is still up up. The last post he made was criticizing the COVID lockdowns before he died. Not that that has anything to do with each other, but it's just interesting. On his blog, identityblog.org but it was really funny because he used this term sovereign self identity. And then I think he presented it to the UN and they all hated it because of the word sovereign. They're like, oh, this sounds like some. This sounds like some hippie dippy. They really didn't like that idea.

But Derek is right. They will try to co opt that language exactly as they have with everything else. Sustainability, for example. I mean, there's. The concept is Fine. It's the way, what they mean by it and the way they have corrupted it.

Right.

But again, on top of that, it's it. So it's. You could I argue there's going to be somebody who doesn't just use the language, but literally make something that appears to be the way you hack into it, but that's the trap in it of itself. Like there's. What's a good example of that today? I can't think of anything. I know there's some kind of an overlap.

Like that be like a privacy front end to X or.

Yeah, like, like the privacy phone sold by Erik Prince.

Thank you.

Yeah, that's the guy. He's like, he's legit. No, just kidding. Don't, don't, don't get his phones. But like one, one note to add on to that. So it is possible. Ryan and I've tossed some ideas back and forth from people who've read the spec and we'd be like, should we do this? On one hand, it feels really weird. I don't want to just mimic them. On the other hand, you do need trust and reputation systems. But it would still work the same way. It'd be very, very simple. Similar, you could still have QR codes and all that. That doesn't leave a good taste in people's mouths. But if we did want to build something like that, where was I going with this? I was just saying that, I was saying that it's possible, it's possible to do it just. It may. Before, before we had these trust and reputation systems, all you had was each other's words. So it was through the people you know. The people you know. And so you could have, you could have digital identities that are signed by other people as well. But instead of having. And that's where I was going with this. Instead of having an issuing authority like, like Apple or Google or the government, it would be signed about that individual person. Now, you could build this, theoretically, you could start using it. But the problem is, is that Google and Apple will not. They don't want to let this happen. Apple is a lockdown ecosystem. By 2027, Google phones, Samsung phones, anything that's Android based will not let you install apps unless the developer hands over their id, their government id to Google and also gives them the master key to their app. So Google can make changes anytime they want. They see this coming, you know, they're, they've, they've already felt the threat of open source and they're, they're doing things so it is seriously a digital fracturing where the, you know, the mainstream side of the populace won't be able to interact with our tech and our tech will probably, you know, vice versa, we won't be able to interact with theirs.

I just want to say one more thing for. I know we're going to wrap up in a moment because what you said, Hakeem, so that's actually what Charles Hoskinson talks about. He says that this is going to be a sovereign ID stored on a blockchain, not accessible to any third party with all these protections built in if people trust him. But I have a feeling, and this is where I'm curious to everybody listening to this across all the different platforms, are you guys. I think the audience is just genuinely against digital IDs of any kind of concept like that, whether that's silly or not. I think for the most part. And please do comment, let us know what you think. If there was a possibility of what Hakeem's describing or reputation system that James mentioned, some way to do these things that doesn't involve government, shady corporations, etc, but is done in a private way that is useful in you and your communities and things like that. Is that something people are out there are still interested in or is it just like digital id? Whether it's government or private or corporate, I don't want anything to do with it.

I'll start with that and we can kind of wrap on it. I, I think most definitely is something that I, you know, I don't want at all. And I think that, I think was James that said that like in any way. Or maybe it was you, Derek. Just that's, I think I like the, the personal self responsibility and trust factor of meeting people, you know, but my point was simply that we may end up in a world where that is the reality and that may be the only way to sort of, you know, pirate, stream your way past it. But I'm of the mind that I would like to go in any direction other than that. But it's a good question to ask. So why don't we finish up going around with final thoughts. Go ahead. Kim, you want to kick it off?

No. I thought this was an awesome conversation. I think we should, I think we should have this conversation more because, you know, as we know, this is just one component of digital public infrastructure. Digital ID is the first. Next comes unified payments through this payment apps and last is the data exchange piece. So I think we should keep talking about this as time moves on. Seems like there's Something new every week. But I'm just grateful to have this conversation with y'.

All.

And check out the Digital ID report. It's on above phone.com digital. You can download it.

Just.

You'll just need to give your email on it. And I'm going to try and keep it updated as things move on in time. So, yeah, I hope we can just get more visibility onto the subject. And also I'm interested in the conversations people are having with their community. Right. What's the most effective ways we can get through to others? Because we will need a network to actively resist this and thrive in the face of.

Of it.

Good.

Guys, just final thoughts if you want to jump in.

My final thought is I'm just hoping for a Category 5 solar storm, you know, that would kind of solve everything. But just keep on trucking. I think it's. It's. And get used to being uncomfortable. Just yesterday I was thinking what James said about not having the number for Telegram, but I had been planning this for a while and I was trying. I'm trying to get Apple subscription to put my podcast ad free on the Apple. And it's been taking a week like to go through the EU Digital Services Act. It's absolute madness. But I bought a virtual number for five bucks a month. You know, ten bucks would have been probably too much for me, but five bucks a month. Okay. And I was thinking maybe James, you know, that would have. That could have been an option for you. And I have virtual address. You know, I found. I found the deal for 76 bucks a year for a virtual address, which isn't too shabby, but privacy is going to increasingly come financially at a premium. So economically. But also in terms of the time and energy that we're going to spend. But I think we just need to keep. Just like all of our forefathers in the past. Right. Just keep on trucking.

So my answer to the question is that I think it's naive to think that we'll be able to ever have communities larger than the Dunbar number without some form of. Of identification, reputation, whatever it is. And I think we should be actively thinking about that and constructing ones that work for us. And I realize now I should not have said ebay because everyone will go ebay. Well, okay, I, I never bought anything on the OG Russell, Brick, Silk Road, but I'm betting they had a reputation system, too. So there you go. If you want to be in the counter economy, you're gonna need a reputation system. Think about how to do it.

No, that's Absolutely correct. And I think about how you want to and can network either through, you know, skating around whatever Internet laws or restrictions there may be, or, you know, how you can share information and share commodities with people. It. In a world that you're no longer participating in the online part of, if it comes to it, like, all of this stuff has to be sort of planned out. You can't be just, you know, little isolated pockets of semi resistance.

You.

You do have to maintain connections into the broader world. So, you know, think about how you might want to do that while you're at it.

I would say, well, Hakeem is absolutely right. We should talk about this more because there's a lot of stuff we've barely grazed over. Like, there's. The situation in the UK is just a fascinating microcosm of this. And there's the whole concept of international interoperability, which we just glanced over again. And I have a final thought, I suppose, which is more of a question and I genuinely don't know the answer to, and maybe a big concept to introduce when we're supposed to be stopping, but what is more important, complicity or awareness? Like, just say we get to 2030 and the system is in place internationally, there's digital ID for everybody everywhere. And you have two options. You can either have 90% complicity and the 10% aren't on the Internet. They're not anywhere. They're living the agrarian lives or whatever, totally separate from the digital control grid. And the 90%, 45% of the 90% are aware that the system is wrong. Or you can have 80% complicity and the 20% have scraped off and doing their own thing, but all 80 of those 80% are totally fine with it. Which of those situations is worse?

Yeah, interesting.

I think it's an interesting thing to think about. I genuinely don't know the answer. It's just something I was thinking about.

Well, that's, that's the best kind of, you know, it's thought provoking, you know, and just kind of wrap up. I think it's. That's what. That's why I think I've really enjoyed this discussion today. And I do agree, kid. I mean, we, we will do more of these. I think we have one plan coming up for the general control grade with Catherine, you know, but it's. There are points we like interoperability, like, I recommend, and I'll include in the show notes, you know, Hakeem's outline, because this is, I think, one of the central parts in it, but you know, it's, it's. What I enjoyed today was the thought provoking ideas that we don't all have the same opinion. You know, we definitely see things a different way and that's what is going to happen for each one of us as we, as this all continues. So I really appreciate it more than anything today. Derek and Corbett, you know, this conversation of where your line is, I think we need to reflect on that and think about where that is for each of us and what choices we're going to make. We can't wait until this is in front of you, right where they're demanding your papers, until you make these choices. It has to happen now. And you have to plan for where that life is. Deliberately plan for where you want your life to go.

Right. I'll just share one, one last thought real quick. Just reiterate what everybody said. This has been a great conversation. I hope everybody listening is taking something from it in terms of getting these thoughts in your mind, talking about this with your family, with your loved ones, with your churches, your communities, what have you, your neighborhoods. Because these are conversations we need to be having. And I, I am sometimes black pilled. Like James was saying earlier, with, like this is going forward, there's nothing we can do to stop it. You know, that's why I tend to focus on exit and build, try to build outside the system. I still think that for me is, is the path, but I recognize there's many paths and I'll just end with. One of the things my grandmother used to tell me was that as long as there's life, there's hope. And I try to remember that with everything going on, it's like even if the cage gets tighter and tighter, you know, if we're still breathing and we're still, as you were saying, Kit, keeping these, this in the consciousness and having people being aware of this, however, we have to navigate that even if it's not perfectly in line with our principles, which is going to be difficult. And I think we should still strive to stick to them. Even if we end up in that place, if we're alive, if we're breathing, the resistance is still going on and that means there's still a chance. And yet we shouldn't let it get to the point where it feels impossible to go back and to resist it, you know, because we've all seen what past totalitarian regimes have done without any of this infrastructure. So we know what they think they can do once they have it in place.

Great point, Derek. Well, it's a good place to wrap guys, and I'm hoping you'll join us for the next one. Be plenty more coming. As always, question everything, come to your own conclusions. Stay vigilant.

In the long term, the plan is to pretty much lock up humanity in smart cities, which is kind of a superset of a 15 minute city. They've sold all the state and local governments and countries that smart cities are about sustainability and the good of the city. But in reality the language from the UN and WEF and their white papers is all inverted. So air monitoring is really about limiting mobility and no car ownership, right? Surveillance control via LED grid is why the smart lighting is death. Water management is about water rationing. Noise pollution is about speech surveillance. Traffic monitoring is about limiting mobility. And then of course, energy conservation is all about rationing heat, electricity and gasoline. Another concept one should be familiar with is called geofencing, and that's think of it as an invisible fence around you where you cannot go beyond a certain point and that will be related to your face recognition, digital identity and access control. Your smart contracts soft brick can turn off your digital digital currency beyond a certain point. From your house, our world has been turned into a digital panopticon. That means you can be monitored, analyzed, managed and monetized.

It.