Digital ID's for everyone

Dohnjoe wrote: »

So what's the conspiracy..

Maybe you're slow/forgetful?

But see #1300 (above), tip: use the scroll thingy on the mouse.

Anyway will let you old cynical unhealthy chaps get back to stocking up on toilet rolls, then asking pointless questions, and babblings about ufos/gold/lizards/whatever in this echo-chamer, as the peak pandemic closes in.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Absolutely, it's always wait and see.
Just to be clear, this could involve people like Gates using a vaccination program in order to inject people with some sort of microchip or RFID, correct?

Without a time-machine, many things are wait and see. Sorry to break the bad news about time-space.

The push to digitalID everyone, with persisant technology, can mean whatever you want it to mean.
Gates of couse does have great interest in this, clearly.

But best not to speculate. Instead, indications (directly from the program) suggest such a new form of ID would be used for accessing services: ranging from voting rights, to access healthcare and education. And also to connect people to financial tools.

Slightly persuasive for some sheep farmer in Timbuktu if told he can't access any public services, or buy goods for his flock without it post-2030.

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

For that we will have to wait and see

Absolutely, it's always wait and see.

Just to be clear, this could involve people like Gates using a vaccination program in order to inject people with some sort of microchip or RFID, correct?

Dohnjoe wrote: »

In this conspiracy what exactly happens "during vaccination"?

For that we will have to wait and see (for the developing world), where already many pilot programmes are steering towards 'useful' RFID tags (external or on-person), ideal for both vaccine records, and digtialID of other services, including future monetary transactions.

There are some other private pilot prgrammes that use internal implants for smaller specific situations.

In Sweden (where else!) thousands of consumers actually opt-in for hand implants, as it saves a couple of minuites when ordering a fatty double soy milk frappuccino at le cafe.

They call it bio-hacking or something, as that sounds better, a bit like an 'upgrade'.

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

The 'push' to 'digitalID' circa 1.5bn people (the developing world). With unique, portable, novel blockchain, persistant birth-to-death (ideally during vaccination) digital methodologies. To be completed by 2030.

This particular Cornavirus, isn't the cause of this, but is the 'perfect' opportunity for exponential program advancement.

In this conspiracy what exactly happens "during vaccination"?

Dohnjoe wrote: »

What is your conspiracy..

The 'push' to 'digitalID' circa 1.5bn people (the developing world). With unique, portable, novel blockchain, persistant birth-to-death (ideally during vaccination) digital methodologies. To be completed by 2030.

This particular Cornavirus, isn't the cause of this, but is the 'perfect' opportunity for exponential program advancement.

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

Are you suggesting they are not the founding sponsors of id2020.org (along with the good ole rockerfellas')?

www.id2020.org, the new unique (unique as in, new technology not currently deployed), persitant birth-to-death biometric digital ID folks, with added vaccine interest?

What is your conspiracy..

King Mob wrote: »

Biometric means things like fingerprinting and iris recognition.

What do you understand by the term 'unique'?

Rather than referencing already flawed old techniques.
Or many 'old hat' biometrics that can't even be used persitantly from birth-to-death.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Are you suggesting there is something more sinister going on here linked to Covid 19? if so, what is it?

Are you suggesting they are not the founding sponsors of id2020.org (along with the good ole rockerfellas')?

www.id2020.org, the new unique (unique as in, new technology not currently deployed), persitant birth-to-death biometric digital ID folks, with added vaccine interest?

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

The link? You mean you aren't yet aware that it's (https://id2020.org/digital-identity) a joint vaccine distribution & next generation technology (for persistant birth-to-death ID) program?

Are you referring to Gavi?

according to the site:

Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance brings together public and private sectors with the shared goal of creating equal access to new and underused vaccines for children living in the world’s poorest countries. Dr. Seth Berkley, CEO of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, sits on our Executive Board.

Are you suggesting there is something more sinister going on here linked to Covid 19? if so, what is it?

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

Not sure what that babble is meant to mean.

It's a very direct simple question.
In all the things you quote, they always mention the word "biometric".
Biometric means things like fingerprinting and iris recognition.

Why do they use this term if they aren't intending to use those things?

By "in your world" I mean, "how do you explain this to yourself".

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

As far as can see you've only quoted something about old technology that has a margin of error.

If Iris scans are the best you can come up with..

Well no, I make several points and ask some pointed questions, all of which you ignored.

Ipso

Dohnjoe wrote: »

All the sovereign citizens and freemen of the land must be going nuts at all this global flagrant abuse of their right to do whatever the hell they want

I hope the health system of Freemania has adequate resources in case they get the sniffles. If they don’t recognise the law/jurisdiction then they shouldn’t come crawling and waste resources that could go toward people with normal brain activity.

King Mob wrote: »

Now, in your world, why do they say biometrics in all their material if it's impossible to use for their purposes?

Not sure what that babble is meant to mean. As far as can see you've only quoted something about old technology that has a margin of error.

If Iris scans are the best you can come up with..

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Sounds like a good project: giving some form of digital ID to people who have no access to ID

What's the link to this virus again?

Perhaps, can also result in the 'entire denial of all and any services' with ease.

The link? You mean you aren't yet aware that it's (https://id2020.org/digital-identity) a joint vaccine distribution & next generation technology (for persistant birth-to-death ID) program?

https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/fingerprints-change-over-the-course-of-a-persons-life

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

Provide an example of type of digital ID that meets their specific needs.

Provide a single scrap of evidence for your claims about mircochips.
Provide a single instance of the people you are accusing ever directly stating they plan to use microchips.
Provide an example of a microchip that can meet their specific needs.

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

Those two methods are invalid forms from their base requirement of 'birth to death' biometrics. Fingerprinting a newborn? Catch yourself on, that hardly a 'persistant' reliable form, when accounting for changes from growth.

However, at 12 years (the longest this study investigated), the error rate was still within the normal margins of error for such machines in real-life, unless one of the prints was of poor quality. And regardless of age or elapsed time, the machines didn’t confuse one person’s prints with another person’s — kind of a big deal if you’re standing trial. The study was published Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
This study seems to indicate that, yes, our fingerprints do morph over time. But those slight changes aren’t enough to befuddle the machines in use today, for the most part. More research will need to be done to answer the question of how many years must elapse between prints for the machines to miss the match.

As was pointed out above, iris recognition is also a possibility. Or it could be other methods or a combination of several with more advanced technology and infrastructure to allow for more persistence and accuracy than we have today.

Now, in your world, why do they say biometrics in all their material if it's impossible to use for their purposes?

ohnonotgmail

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

Provide an example of type of digital ID that meets their specific needs.

Those two methods are invalid forms from their base requirement of 'birth to death' biometrics. Fingerprinting a newborn? Catch yourself on, that hardly a 'persistant' reliable form, when accounting for changes from growth.

Next you'll be suggesting a facial scan, that can be recalled and used 30yrs later.

and the issue with iris recognitions is? It seems to be something that they are working on. http://www.id4africa.com/2019_event/presentations/InF15/2-Yaseen-Moolla-CSIR.pdf

and if it is not any of the above what are you suggesting they intend to use?

King Mob wrote: »

Clear as day, yet doesn't actually say any of the stuff you claim.

Provide an example of type of digital ID that meets their specific needs.

King Mob wrote: »

Why? That's what biometrics is...

Those two methods are invalid forms from their base requirement of 'birth to death' biometrics. Fingerprinting a newborn? Catch yourself on, that hardly a 'persistant' reliable form, when accounting for changes from growth.

Next you'll be suggesting a facial scan, that can be recalled and used 30yrs later.

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

Actually you forgot Gavi and Microsoft along with the Rockerfellers and Billy Gates, and a few more second level technology-meets-vaccine wetdream folks.

Who are also one of the main sponsors of the www.id2020.org program.
The Gavi CEO was only on the Euronews a few hours ago, banging on about potential 'future platforms' for the Coronavirus vaccine delivery.
https://id2020.org/alliance

Is as clear as day to their mission objectives, thus there is no conspiracy. Only a conspiracy to deflect (see last 3 pages).

Birth-to-death, persistant, portable, digital, blockchain next gen biometric ID.
This can't be done with a photoID card (they reject this form of national id).

Any other ideas how this, will be rolled out.
e.g. (at)birth-to-death persistant, digital persistant and portable?
You can exclude iris and fingerprinting btw.

Sounds like a good project: giving some form of digital ID to people who have no access to ID

What's the link to this virus again?

I bet I can create a more embellished tenuous link than you can

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

Is as clear as day to their mission objectives, thus there is no conspiracy. Only a conspiracy to deflect (see last 3 pages).
]

Clear as day, yet doesn't actually say any of the stuff you claim.

You can exclude iris and fingerprinting btw.

Why? That's what biometrics is...

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You also forgot ID2020, Gates and the Rockefellers

Actually you forgot Gavi and Microsoft along with the Rockerfellers and Billy Gates, and a few more second level technology-meets-vaccine wetdream folks.

Who are also one of the main sponsors of the www.id2020.org program.
The Gavi CEO was only on the Euronews a few hours ago, banging on about potential 'future platforms' for the Coronavirus vaccine delivery.
https://id2020.org/alliance

Is as clear as day to their mission objectives, thus there is no conspiracy. Only a conspiracy to deflect (see last 3 pages).

Birth-to-death, persistant, portable, digital, blockchain next gen biometric ID.
This can't be done with a photoID card (they reject this form of national id).

Any other ideas how this, will be rolled out.
e.g. (at)birth-to-death persistant, digital persistant and portable?
You can exclude iris and fingerprinting btw.

Alena Tangy Someone wrote: »

Agenda 21 and www.id2020.org are focused on a program of *persistant, unique, new, portable, birth-to-death biometric, digital ID*
This is laid out as clear as day on their website.

If you asked a copywriter to write web-copy for a future microchip implant program (via vaccine, or similar/additional insertion at birth),
but importantly not to actually mention the exact words of' chip implant' (clearly this would spook people),
- then you'd the website and exact contents of what is known as id2020.org.

But Agenda 21 doesn't have anything to do with digital ID at all.
And neither mention or talk about any kind of mircochip at all.

"Persistant, unique, new, portable, birth-to-death biometric, digital ID" does not equal mircochips.
That is something that is being misconstrued by conspiracy theorists who then leap to silly conclusions about it being implanted by vaccine.
Often this has a root in the notion of the "mark of the beast" which is also very silly.

Agenda 21 and www.id2020.org are focused on a program of *persistant, unique, new, portable, birth-to-death biometric, digital ID*
This is laid out as clear as day on their website.

If you asked a copywriter to write web-copy for a future microchip implant program (via vaccine, or similar/additional insertion at birth),
but importantly not to actually mention the exact words of' chip implant' (clearly this would spook people),
- then you'd the website and exact contents of what is known as id2020.org.

The founders/sponsors/partners are: https://id2020.org/alliance
MSoft (ex-BillyGates, where hardware, software and microchip dreams are made)
Rockerfellas (perhaps the most powerful and wealthiest family of the last century)
Gabi (vaccine delivery to the wee childers in the developing world).
Ideo (Service design consultants mass ID registrations of national DigitalIDs)

Other partners are experts in Blockchain and biometric technologies.
Not for the West though (yet), only the 1.5bn poorest of the world, and not until 2030.
Longer term 2035 might the timeline for the other billions, after proof of concept.

Joshua J

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

What kind of CT forum is this?

Is this not the place to discuss conspiracy related material?

Yet as soon as someone tries to have a discussion several posters jump on top of posters, with some aggression I might add.

I mean all you have to do is look at the ID2020 website and its spelled out as clear as day that there is a desire, to create a digital ID for everyone.

It's a weird one alright. It's one of the only forums on this site where people who despise the subject matter and the people who discuss it, have free reign. The adversarial nature of this forum would not be tolerated anywhere else. I would just ignore them tbh.

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

I mean all you have to do is look at the ID2020 website and its spelled out as clear as day that there is a desire, to create a digital ID for everyone.

Yeah.

Except that certain individuals decide that this project plans to microchip people against their will for nefarious reasons.

Context is important.

Clarence Boddiker

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I like how he suggests digital certificates and some anti-vax poster suggests that he is directly referring to mandatory microchips and as such the conspiracy community blows up (as always) with the usual hysteria that the nefarious powers that be are trying to microchip people for fiendish reasons

Anti Vax? Thats a big assumption from you there. An incorrect assumption.

Clarence Boddiker

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Lol, wheres the proof that's Gates talking? Also where does he use the words "digital ID microchipping"?

It was him on Reddit

TheRepentent

King Mob wrote: »

That's simply not true.
......is the result of conspiracy theorists jumping to conclusions.

Colour me surprised

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

Bill Gates referring to digital ID microchipping on an AMA in Reddit

That's simply not true.
It's clear from your picture that the only one referring to microchips is some rando on reddit who jumps to that conclusion,

The ID2020 thing that keeps getting referenced has nothing to do with microchips and the connection is likewise is the result of conspiracy theorists jumping to conclusions.