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 evils.
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 of 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 or today in general that I think why
this is so important. And it is, as we've all pointed out, it's the connective
tissue between kind of where this is going and where we are.
And so Hakeem 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 thank you all for being here. Did you want to go around and introduce again,
or do you want to jump right into it?
I'm Derek Brose of The Conscious Resistance.
He's muted. I'm sure they all know us by now. There we go.
Maybe introduce ourselves. I forget that I'm muted sometimes.
Hakeem of T-Bot, Take Back Our Tech and Above Phone.
James Corbett, CorbettReport.com.
Steve Boykin and A.M. Wake Up, Slow News Day. Yeah, I'm skipping that next time.
This is so shambolic. Don't worry, everyone.
What happens to the little name tag? I know, I've got him. That's on me.
I've got them down here. But so anyway, just let's get right into it in general.
So Hakeem had a presentation. I'll throw it to you to get started on where that's
going to go. And we'll let it go where it goes, brother. Go ahead.
Yeah. 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 grid. We don't really get to talk
about a control grid. And that's what digital ID is.
It's this control grid that's being built.
And 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.
So 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.
And so when all these things come together, and it's an identification that
can be turned off at one time.
You really put yourself at risk of being cut out of all the things that all
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 do you guys think a digital ID is actually?
I'll guess 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 ID and technocracy.
And I realized, as all of you guys are saying, this seems to be the most important topic.
And I think it's like, to use for my past guests, we got Pat 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 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 cut 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 and
a form of identification because hakim 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 fingerprints 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, 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 the back of that, Derek, because I agree exactly what Derek said. I completely agree.
But just to overlap a point that I think is relevant, I think it's actually
really glad you said that as well, the point of the difference,
because it can be, you know, all of a sudden people just are hating everything
electronic, you know, or however that works, it becomes kind of an all-encompassing idea.
But I'll point out that I think the definition might be different,
which is kind of where 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
hevor 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 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 and 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 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 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 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 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 this 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.
It's interesting the way you just said that. It's the system that it's building into.
You could argue the digital idea itself exists in some way today,
but it's that connection of those two that make it nefarious.
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 fish like uh what's it you know
the uh 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 israel has this like the no click
the zero the zero click hacks yeah right where suddenly you
don't even have to engage with it point that
makes that insane i just want to include that that's that's a full extension good
yeah well 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 a 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 everyone here nailed it.
It can shift forms, this digital ID, right?
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.
ID Uruguay is the most most of the largest digital ID system where they actually act as a broker.
But that's all through the web browser. So even in countries where not everyone
has a phone yet, that's the way to do it.
So it does shape shift and takes different forms.
And I think everyone here is 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, well, you see the UK Prime Minister just going to Hail Mary,
and he telegraphs a move that's not happening for four years, right?
It's 2029 is the 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 and just today i mean in the u.s this
story i shared 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.
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 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 have no idea getting through to you through your family.
I'm glad you shared that link, brother. I just wanted to add to that just while
we're talking about the U.S.
For those because I know we have a lot of people listening in the U.S.
That that is just kind of picking up on the other recent U.S.
Announcement, which is that now all foreigners who come into the U.S. and leave the U.S.
Are mandatory biometrics screening before. Or, 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 U.S.
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 a sign 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 reemphasize the point that it's happening right now.
This is part of Agenda 2030. We're about to be in 2026. It shouldn't be a surprise
that these agendas are moving forward.
Russia has done the same thing.
Mexico is taking steps to do similar things.
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 same services.
And people have been so conditioned to hate
their neighbor or fear their neighbor or distrust their neighbor that you know
that's a a herculean task her boy 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
um 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 like homeowners meeting in the gated community here in Mexico.
And they, the board is like, they've made the decision. They're going to push this through.
It's not, it's not for sure yet, but they want everyone in our community to
use a residence app, which is effectively sort of like a private,
you know, it's not linked to any official database.
It's just among the community. And I realize this is a thing that's used also
in the US and apartment complexes.
And effectively, you'd give out, 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 vehicle registration for the security.
Visitors would have to, You'd have to give them a QR code. 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 uh against his house
all the time and the parent 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 they're and they're
talking about installing facial recognition um cameras and and all this stuff
and i mean this speaks to latin america i've talked to people who who have said that in Latin culture,
the collectivism is really ingrained.
And you think of Aldo Huxley. I mean, they're going to 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 the tech team earlier today, 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 uh or i might have to eventually move because it's i'd rather take my chances
with the cartels outside of gated community than live in this what's what's
the what's the hashtag saying 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 don't know right said
um fascism will come from america in the name of anti-fascism and
he was wrong fashion was going to come from america in the name of the homos
associate 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 uh 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 see like, how am I actually going to interact with this?
So now you have this, this situation in your home and 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 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,
what your red lines in the sand are when it comes to these things.
I'll just throw out, I mean, we have to embrace becoming uncomfortable, really.
That's that. And 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.
If it costs me more time, I'll deal with that.
And I have an above phone, so that's one option where you have the Graphene
OS and you can check the permission.
So it depends. I have to test out that system to see how it works.
But eventually, I'm happy to just completely change homes to get away from it.
If that's what is necessary, yeah.
Well, I would simply probably, I'm probably going to be similar,
I would think, but I don't know what length I, 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 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 all at that point you know
what i've just realized i think klaus schwab was
right we will owe nothing and we will be happy because we will not be on their
control grid right it'll be great um 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 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 a better part of a century, papers, please, means you are living
in an authoritarian autocratic regime.
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 on 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 I'm just going
to give my papers. Anyway, I'm sorry, Derek, that does not answer your question.
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 there 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 in the sand? I mean,
I've always said, 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.
Um so there is that 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
you're going to give them ideas right,
let's talk about that though that opens up like an interesting philosophical
question about the nature of ethics it doesn't yeah because like 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 and my thumb. But that's it. And they're going
to have to try and prove I committed a murder like this.
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.
What this all comes down to is convenience versus our principles,
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 this 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've got to protect the kids, so you now have to
do a face, you know, 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 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 going to just stop broadcasting or I'm going to 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
it 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.
Well, this is where this becomes such an important point. Go ahead, Hakeem. 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 percent.
60 percent 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 percent. They can't comply.
And they're cut off from the rest of the 60 percent of society.
And you can argue what that number is. But so I do think Internet,
the Internet is maybe one of the last stages of the digital ID wall or the digital fracturing.
And 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? 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 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, OK, 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, OK, sorry,
I guess I'm not going to be able to fly.
Because I don't want to just say, well, OK, here it is. I've been talking all
this crap about it 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'm not 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 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 gotta, 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 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 going to 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 and
to agree with where he was 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,
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, the 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, I was speaking 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 not 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 i just yeah no 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.
We think maybe now we imagine, but it's not like last night when I had this experience.
And my line in the sand, I could still see me because I've already given in
a number of places my fingerprints to Mexican authorities or US or EU.
I feel like 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 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 the thought crime, the digital gulag.
Like the line in the sand is like, OK, 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 not going to adhere to that so i
kind of want to get thrown in the digital gulag you know what i'm saying yeah
but 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 that way i would read it but i but 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 that. 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.
I think they would pull the trigger if they could. And I think they're happy
to let 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 up. I was going to just mention,
James, that you already make certain exceptions, make certain lines in the sand that others hear.
That was actually what I was going to say. 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, what's my phone number?
Screw you. I'm not even going to use you for a joke. So yeah,
I definitely have lines in the sand.
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.
There are like piecemeal lines in the sand. I mean, I'd walked away from rock
then 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's a lot yeah
you're 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 going to do that i'll
leave you know um 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 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 been 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 um 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,
By the way, can I just add, we're talking as if we'll never be heard from again if we're not online.
This is not just something that I'm doing for fun's sake or something.
This is literally if I go offline because I can't get online anymore.
You're going to find me through my books or you're not going to find me.
That's what I was going to mention.
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 or he made a point about the value we saw on 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. If that's individual,
that's not something we should all or ever all going to agree on.
But it isn't, I think it's important back to,
I think 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 tested with every day this goes forward.
I'd like to bring it back to real examples so we can look at other countries
and come up with a name for what we're doing right here, which could be called
a principle test, like a purity test.
And so if you want to talk about… I don't like that term, Mark.
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 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 everywhere.
And then, yes, you really have to make sure you have a home base.
But you 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 was 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 they do bully you at the airport, you know, in the US when you try and opt out.
I can go through some bullying, no problem. but i
but i think that um i think
that what we we should probably talk about was is
the grocery stores i was talking i think i 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 um 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 um
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 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 locker farms get away
from the store in general but go ahead derrick.
Oh, yeah, I was just going to say, I mean, to Hakeem's question there about
that, maybe not purity test, but principle test there, that,
yeah, that's something I wouldn't want to comply with using 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 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,
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 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 small 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.
OK, 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-billed view, that I think a lot of people are watching this happen.
I mean, I think it was your phrase that you coined originally,
James, infotainment, conspiratainment.
That's kind of how 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, OK, 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 habits and just our situation.
And that's OK. 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 you're
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 both
to 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 with yourself, like Derek often points out.
If you don't have it in your area, start it yourself. Go ahead. Sorry.
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 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 OK.
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 they?
So I think it's OK for people to learn the hard way.
Just I hope 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 think also at the same time,
you're going to see 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 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 calling in sick.
So these systems are actually really, really fragile.
They need people to perpetuate them. And hopefully, maybe this is what it's going to be.
You know the rollout digital id there is
going to be a mass negative response and it falls apart in
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 um benefits
i love thoughts like that like they take you know i mean that's they absolutely
will do that um 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 it out to systems, these psychopathic systems have that
same limitation and they can collapse through that.
Remember the European blackouts? Just whatever, 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 i had an article
on my show this week about dumb homes as
a new thing that people
are doing now where it's a wave of people who
are un-teching their their house
and their lives and that's like it's becoming
a popular movement they're talking about
how the gen alpha or their
kids is probably going to be uh 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 yeah i don't know i see it i
recognize it i also have a 13 year old.
Well, to Derek's point, I agree completely, but I think both those things exist at the same time.
Like I think – my opinion is that everybody can see this for the most part.
The question is are they actually taking action in their lives to change anything?
I want to bring this to one more point before we get too far in – towards the
end is the overlap to this of the digital twin point, right,
and the corporate element.
Because as he was pointing out, just the homeowners association is 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 Kakeem 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 SimCity digital twin world where they're
testing out what you may do a week tomorrow and Tuesday at 3 p.m.,
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.
Didn't one part of your report say that one of the governments or one of the
digital ID programs actually said that they own the likeness to you?
Because I thought I remember you saying that. Maybe it was to James.
And that's what it made me think of is this whole digital twin concept,
which has become more popular.
So it's like if they believe they own your literal likeness and they have all
your biometrics 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 talking 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 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 something.
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 kakeem 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 i think that um russia's case
is uh you know where they are
able to integrate biometrics into cctv cameras so they can use facial detection
is is a really uh it's the most scary example of that um 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 countries will converge on a single text specification.
And I think that'll probably be
verified credentials from the WWDOT consortium. So that's in the report.
I really think as a journalist, this is worth just
checking out the text spec 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 or actually this is
worth closing on um kim cameron you
know the who who came up with this idea of digital identity that
him and the um 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 seemed like that word and specifically some of the
things he was saying in his report,
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 is 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 I think that's interesting there.
Like we could we could technically this because this technology is out there,
verify 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 honestly don't know.
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 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 um
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 the reputation in some way.
But it does not have to be the government.
Well, I was going to say that while we'll 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 TLAV 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,
you know, they, them, those to co-op this language and co-op this idea of our sovereign ID.
And personally, for me, I'm okay with just, you know, I get 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 an 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. Cause that's kind of where my mind was going is that what,
what he was saying is really interesting.
And I appreciate James addition to that. Cause it goes in a different direction,
which makes sense. But so what kind of 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 idea 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 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.
And I think that makes sense with the way things have always gone in the past.
I just think that's an interesting thought. So thank you for bringing that up, Akeem.
Bring on the cypherpunk future. I swear they're pushing it, you know.
This is just an interesting little tidbit. So Kim Cameron, I mean,
he's on the board of ID2020.
He was before he died. By the way, this is interesting. His blog is still 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.
Hippie dippy stuff. It 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 could have corrupted it. Right.
But again, on top of that, it's so it's, you could 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.
It'd be like a privacy front end to X or. Yeah.
Oh, like the privacy phone sold by Eric Prince. Thank you. Exactly.
Yeah, that's the guy. He's like, he's legit.
No, I'm just kidding. Don't get his phones. But like 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?
And 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 similar.
You could still have QR codes and all that. So that doesn't leave a good taste
in people's mouths. But if.
We 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 an issuing authority like Apple or Google or the government,
it would be signed by that individual person.
Now, you could build this theoretically. You could start using it.
But the problem 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've already felt the threat of open source
and 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. I know we're going to wrap up in a moment
because of 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 and let us know what you think
– if there was a possibility of what Hakim is describing or reputation system
that James mentioned, some way
to do these things that doesn't involve government, shady corporations,
et cetera, but is done in a private
way that is useful in you and your communities and things like that.
Is that something people 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 think most definitely
is something that I don't want at all.
And I think it was James that said that, like in any way, or maybe it was you, Derek.
I like the personal self-responsibility and trust factor of meeting people.
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 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 those payment apps.
And last is the data exchange piece. So I think we should keep talking about
this. It's 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 abovephone.com slash digital. You can download it. 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 it.
Go ahead, guys. Just final thoughts if you want to jump in. My final thought
is I'm just hoping for a Category 5 solar storm.
That would kind of solve everything. But just keep on trucking,
I think, 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'm trying to get Apple subscription
to put my podcast ad free on the Apple and it's been taking a week to go through
the EU Digital Services Act.
It's absolute madness but I bought a virtual number for five bucks a month.
Ten bucks would have been probably too much for me but five bucks a month,
okay and I was thinking maybe James, that would have that could have been an
option for you and a virtual address.
I found the deal for 76 bucks a year for a virtual address which isn't too shabby
but 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 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 going to 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 uh whatever internet
laws or restrictions there may be or
uh you know how you can share information
and share commodities with people uh 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 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 um i
would say that um well hakim is absolutely right we
we should talk about this more because there's a lot of stuff we've we've
barely grazed over like there's the situation in the uk is just
a fascinating microcosm of this and there's
the um the whole concept of international interoperability which
we just glanced over again um and
i have a final thought i suppose which is more of a question and
i that 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 little agrarian lives or whatever totally separate from the digital
control grid and 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 that I was thinking about.
Well, 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 will do more of these. I think we have one plan
coming up for the general control grid with Catherine, you know,
but it's there are points we 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 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 appreciated
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.
Ryan, I'll just share 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 am sometimes black-filled, 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 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 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 hope you'll
join us for the next one. There'll 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 their 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 speed 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 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, SoftBrick can turn off your 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.
I don't know.