nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Digital ID's for everyone

Clarence Boddiker

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

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

This will be a per-govermental decision. e.g. Only last week the uk's health chap said he would certainly not rule out manditory vaccines, upon their population, that they have the capability and reserved such rights to impliment.

You understand of course manditory isn't in any way compulsary, it's a 'push' (yes, that word again) factor. You can certainly refuse, and suffer the results.

Bill Gates won't determine vaccine policy. He can express views and they may be taken on board. But ultimately national health authorities will have the greatest influence.

4068ac1elhodqr

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

can you explain how a vaccine can be manditory(sic) but not compulsary(sic).

Try a dictionary if you have issues with wordage.
There is a subtle (but effective) difference.

You won't have to have it by law, but to access nearly every perceivable service, to have a vaccine will be a manditory requirement by those providers, before service can be availed of.

E.g. You will not be allowed within kerosene sniffing range of an airport (never mind the local library/school/hospital/workplace...).

ohnonotgmail

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

This will be a per-govermental decision. e.g. Only last week the uk's health chap said he would certainly not rule out manditory vaccines, upon their population, that they have the capability and reserved such rights to impliment.

You understand of course manditory isn't in any way compulsary, it's a 'push' (yes, that word again) factor. You can certainly refuse, and suffer the results.

can you explain how a vaccine can be manditory(sic) but not compulsary(sic).

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

Please quote Bill Gates stating that entire of these things will be mandatory.

This will be a per-govermental decision. e.g. Only last week the uk's health chap said he would certainly not rule out manditory vaccines, upon their population, that they have the capability and reserved such rights to impliment.

You understand of course manditory isn't in any way compulsary, it's a 'push' (yes, that word again) factor. You can certainly refuse, and suffer the results.

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

BillGates want's 7bn vaccines (likely manditory) into the entire planet's arms ASAP (<12/18mths).

BillGates is also the main partner of id2020, who wants the entire planet to have (likely also manditory)

Paranoid speculation.

Please quote Bill Gates stating that entire of these things will be mandatory.

4068ac1elhodqr

Dohnjoe wrote: »

No one is claiming it doesn't exist [program to push DigitalIDs to everyone on the planet]

What is the conspiracy here?

In fact, many others (not you) are still in denial of any such 'push towards DigitalIDs'.

Again....

....The only CT relates to the exact features, method(s) of realisation, and indeed ultimate intentional primary/secondary use of such a mass DigitalID program, and thus it's effects: intentional or otherwise.

We can start with current/past tech developments and look for the likely foundation candidate for the start of the program, that of mass 'deployment'.

e.g.
BillGates want's 7bn vaccines (likely manditory) into the entire planet's arms ASAP (<12/18mths).

BillGates is also the main partner of id2020, who wants the entire planet to have (likely also manditory) DigitalID pre-2030. This target date was pre-pandemic btw.

BillGates spent millions on a brief to MIT for a digital immunity certification soloution, the current best offering the proposed in return was the very interesting QDT(v1).
The lodged patent even specifies one of it's uses is as data storage mark/mechanism i.e. both vaccine record and immunity passport.
This data mark embodiment is perfectly viable as unique digital identifer in itself: an ideal fulfilment.

Dohnjoe

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Yes indeed, agree a significant program does exist (via id2020) for DigitalIDs.

No one is claiming it doesn't exist

What is the conspiracy here?

You clearly believe in biblical prophecies, but seem smart enough to keep attempting to hide it. Perhaps drop all this pretense and give us your conspiracy..

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Finally, someone with more sense than KingBob, and not in a state of 'ultimate denial'.

And again. It's an M. Not a B.
You still seem to have issues with basic spelling. It makes all your accusations of ignorance earlier very funny.

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Problemo is, you are constantly pushing this angle, not me ('beasts' are mentioned in nearly every single post of yours). Interesting stuff all the same, insightful if nothing else.

But again, if this is the case, all you have to do is state that you don't believe that quantum dot tattoos are the mark of the beast and you don't believe in the biblical prophesy.
It's very simple.

However, you keep avoiding doing that and whine about "distraction".
We have also seen that your previous posting history shows that you believe in the idea of the mark of the beast and that quantum dot tattoos are this mark.
You have also used as sources several websites that express this belief.
And again, many conspiracy theorists who do openly state their belief make the exact same claims as you.

Again, this angle is central to your conspiracy theory.
Be honest about it at least. You aren't actually fooling anyone. It's very funny that you think you are.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

But sure, also keep an open mind for the (small,much less likely chance) it could well be something else.

And what is that something else exactly?

Timberrrrrrrr

EyesClosed wrote: »

And the conspiracy is what exactly?

He has been asked this many times, he never seems to be able to say exactly what the conspiracy is though.

EyesClosed

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Finally, someone with more sense than KingBob, and not in a state of 'ultimate denial'.

Yes indeed, agree a significant program does exist (via id2020) for DigitalIDs.

Their (own) terminology is actually: an opportunity for an 'unpredented push', to offer (aka push), this new unique platform (likely manditory), with all it's prescribed features, and processes 'to everyone on the planet'. It's also very well backed under the UN's 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, so not any work of fiction, as some other may perceive.

Thus the only CT relates to the exact features, method(s) of realisation, and indeed ultimate intentional primary/secondary use of such.

Further more, am not claiming it's a bad thing, nor a lol 'beast'. Although the pushed 'greater good' use of this, depends largely upon the previous paragraph.

It's a natural technological development as such, the other real big question, is whether or not the planet would be ready (right now), for such a program. Another few decades, sure very little issues after more gradual natural evoloution, but rollout perhaps within the next couple of years: can forsee major 'issues'.

And the conspiracy is what exactly?

4068ac1elhodqr

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Disagree with what?
There is a project for global digital ID - that's not a conspiracy
What is the conspiracy?

Finally, someone with more sense than KingBob, and not in a state of 'ultimate denial'.

Yes indeed, agree a significant program does exist (via id2020) for DigitalIDs.

Their (own) terminology is actually: an opportunity for an 'unpredented push', to offer (aka push), this new unique platform (likely manditory), with all it's prescribed features, and processes 'to everyone on the planet'. It's also very well backed under the UN's 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, so not any work of fiction, as some other may perceive.

Thus the only CT relates to the exact features, method(s) of realisation, and indeed ultimate intentional primary/secondary use of such.

Further more, am not claiming it's a bad thing, nor a lol 'beast'. Although the pushed 'greater good' use of this, depends largely upon the previous paragraph.

It's a natural technological development as such, the other real big question, is whether or not the planet would be ready (right now), for such a program. Another few decades, sure very little issues after more gradual natural evoloution, but rollout perhaps within the next couple of years: can forsee major 'issues'.

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

And because you subscribe to such a silly notion

Problemo is, you are constantly pushing this angle, not me ('beasts' are mentioned in nearly every single post of yours). Interesting stuff all the same, insightful if nothing else.

I've even suggested elsewhere, that the other relative MSoft patent suffix (606060), and the use of a Luciferase {lucifer} (oxidative enzymes that produce bioluminescence), as used in the QDT...are both most likely 'flukes' and/or 'humour' from both the Patent office, and the other coincidential via Latin scientific termonology, in describing flouresents. But sure, also keep an open mind for the (small,much less likely chance) it could well be something else.

Dohnjoe

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

I know it probably makes you head explode with anger, as your used to the 'Elvis is alive on Mars, silly type bantz'.

Sit down, however, as this one is really very simple, doesn't even require skygods (unless you wish it to, as a secondary contextual item).

Q. Is there a program to push (new) Digital IDs to everyone (on the planet)?
A. Yes indeed, very most likely.

Other (including yourself) disagree, fair enough. Sounds like a conspiracy does it not??? Some say yes, and wait for it.... some say no. Shocker!

Disagree with what?

There is a project for global digital ID - that's not a conspiracy

What is the conspiracy?

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Can't help but thinking you're close to pensionable age

You shoudda stayed/went to school, your constant references to beasts is remarkable btw, truely fascinating for a keen athiest.

Please, keep going with your accusations. You're getting very close.

I am indeed a Satanic pensioner who is also an atheist because of my tragic past.

You're very good at guessing.

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

May I call you the beastman?

If you like.
It doesn't really address the issue though.

You believe that Quantum Dot Tattoos are the mark of the beast as predicted by the bible.
That's a very silly notion.

And because you subscribe to such a silly notion, the rest of your claims, technobabble and all, are also highly likely to be coloured by your strange fringe religious belief, and thus aren't accurate.

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

ory. You believe these quantum dots are the mark of the beast ....

May I call you the beastman? The QDT is what MIT on behalf of Gates, believe. As the best solution (immunity certifications) for the inbound 7bn vaccines. As per the brief, as per the patent.

They may well use something else, that will function as an assigned (writable) + readable (scanable) unique data point. via embodiment seems to be a constant factor however.

The good news is that Europe may well be the last to experience such markings, Gates attention has been redirected to S.America of late, with areas of the Far East, and naturally Africa already of primary concern. He's likely also aware Africa (FWIW )will have 2.5bn by 2050, half of which under 25yo. Just sayin' as that's a lot of mouths to feed is it not?

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

Lol. Wrong..

Lol (actually much more lols directed for you)

You are very wrong, and ignorance of basic facts.
Have you even ever yourself complied (output) a simple QRCode?

Very elementary simple stuff really, takes all of 5secs.

King Mob wrote: »

Also, an Iris scan can also act as a "juiced up QRCode".

This funny, very funny indeed. But also gibberish.
Can't help but thinking you're close to pensionable age (based on ignorance of technology). You cannot assign (write) data (muti string queries) and output it as an Iris image (not without nano lasers, and sudden onset blindness. Ugh, don't do this, btw).

King Mob wrote: »

Yes, I know that copper is conductive.

And... you know it has potential like the unique tailored QDT pattern, to be written with a equally unique identifier (pattern), thus potential as a unique 'conductive' passive antenna repsonse upon both visual and RF conductive scans. This again is a enhancement option, and not even within the MIT proposal.

King Mob wrote: »

You've previously rejected other methods of identification based on the ability to hide it.

Nonsense talk, lols. All/any raw (even paper digitised) data can be used, the more the merrier, mutliple strings are fine and workable, the more the better, all 16 biometrics and all paperwork, load it up.

King Mob wrote: »

You don't apply the same standard to your preferred method because you have another motive for wanting Quantum Dot Tattoos to be the best option.

MIT presented the QDT to BillGates as the best option (immunity passports, and as per the patent's schedule: for vaccine use). Nada (zilch) to do with me (what a very funny assumption you have presented here).

King Mob wrote: »

Or you use another kind of transmitter (Copper!) to overwrite the transmission from your mark of the beast. It wouldn't be hard at all.

You sure love these beasts, whatever they are, lols.

Again your displaying some ignorance here once again... there is no 'transmission' invoked, with a 'passive' antenna (unpowered).

Now this copper polymer isn't even the active solution (its only a potential enhancement, yes). The actual QDT application's function MIT proposed, is via a very simple UV (or iRed), scan, which delivers a read return, from an earlier unique written input. You're maybe a decade ahead of onself here, grand so, no worries.

King Mob wrote: »

Lol, and again when it's pointed out to you that quantum dot tattoos can't actually do the things you claim, you say that research is ongoing.

v1 is circa a decade old, having already spent 5yrs under 24/7 UV exposure already. The MIT team promised enhancements, when (they, not me) presented that early proof of concept to BillGates, in return for this million$. Good value all the same.

King Mob wrote: »

If "research ongoing smells of fakery, then quantum dot tattoos can only last 5 years. They can't be used as transmitters. They can't glow under UV light. They can't be detected at any kind of long range.

Proven concept by MIT. No one ever claimed any tranmission (you're confused, again old boy). Yes they glow under any standard optics (same as a TV remote fired at any camera), and under 'both' UV/iRed (as MIT stated).

Yes scanable at range, depending on optics on simple cameras.

Yes MIT promised enhancements. I often scan very small QRCs at distance using 10yr old technology, with near instant server-side processing returns, handy dandy.

King Mob wrote: »

Right now, there isn't any phone app that can do what you claim.

One of my decade old phones, can photograph iRed easily, can read QRCs (data patterns) and fulfil such requests with ease. A QDT is very similar indeed, Chances are even an iphone3 with x5 zoom could pull the pattern at ease.

King Mob wrote: »

The quantum dot tattoo that does all you claim doesn't yet exist either. You believe that these things are under development.

Proof of (existing) concept delivered to Gates, Press Release issued as to success (vaccine immunity certificates).

King Mob wrote: »

But Billy Gates also has thrown money at Iris scans.

Which are (again) non data writable simple single measurments, comprende!

King Mob wrote: »

The links you have provided also say that iris scans are the best option.

As a (single) passive raw data reading they unique. However, unprocessed, and UNiD unpaired, they are meaningless, without such pairing, assignment, platforming and blockchain Azure processing, and with a final output delivery mechanism they do not fulfil id2020 needs on their own.

The other link in Texas prefers to use both face and hand scans, instead of the iris, before using id2020's platforms. It also uses the digitisation of all paper/card data, almost like a biometric measure. The source point does not matter. id2020 in Kenya even uses a voice-metrics as primary choice, along with paper digitised. The mutli-stage cloud processing and encryption (pairing) platform, with standardised output (often also a QRC) is the real key.

King Mob wrote: »

But again, you are bending over backwards and being pretty dishonest so you can claim that quantum dot tattoos are the only option.

But again you are confusing me with MIT (thanks!), their brief, and thus their solution. Would like to take the credit for the world's #1 school, buy hey won't actually.

King Mob wrote: »

... technobabble

You shoudda stayed/went to school, your constant references to beasts is remarkable btw, truely fascinating for a keen athiest.

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

lol, You have mentioned beasts here (repeatedly), no one else.

Paranoid, much, eh?

But again, it's the central belief to your theory. You believe these quantum dots are the mark of the beast predicted in the bible.
You just aren't honest enough to admit this is the case because you know it will turn the vast majority of people off your theory.
Because your theory is silly.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

This thread is based on factual evidence and current technologies, it does not require any supplimentary speculation.

But what you are doing is entirely supplementary speculation.

For example, you just claimed that quantum dot tattoos will be required to access a large amount of services and removal of your tattoo will result in you being denied these services.
That's all in your imagination.

And your imagination is coloured by your fringe religious beliefs.

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

And all of that is pure, paranoid speculation.
None of it is actually claimed by any of your links and is the result of your strange, cultlike belief in the mark of the beast.

lol, You have mentioned beasts here (repeatedly), no one else.

Paranoid, much, eh?

This thread is based on factual evidence and current technologies, it does not require any supplimentary speculation.

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Then...

...all travel, welfare, access to all public services such as libraries, internet cafes, education, driving, insurance, internet shopping and banking, access to +18 venues, telephonics or cable, mail redirection and collection, enterprise, rent, home ownership (and on and on, and on) all up in smoke and nullified.

You may get a final (second chance) using the other arm, (maybe) at a cost.

And all of that is pure, paranoid speculation.
None of it is actually claimed by any of your links and is the result of your strange, cultlike belief in the mark of the beast.

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Wrong.

The pattern in itself can act as a complex, unique, multi-query data string. Cryptographic, but in more simple terms a juiced up QRCode.

Lol.
Wrong, and gibberish.

Also, an Iris scan can also act as a "juiced up QRCode".

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

16kb (at the older ver.1) is a whole lot of charachters. can you memorise a random complie, of sequenced 4,296 alphanumeric characters? Sure you can, this will far exceed that old QRC based standard figure anyhow.

And an iris is far far more unique.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

For the xth time, An iris scan is a read-only source (one of 16 biometrics), it cannot be assigned a new value. A unique standardised identifer can be assigned using QDT, ideal for a central db. The QDT can certainly use an Iris (or any of the 15 other measurements) as biometric static value, or old even paper/card IDs: as 2nd stage verification, then paired with another assigned UNiD pre-crypto, again to suit the platform and processing.

It 'becomes' a synthetic embodiment, thus becomes an effective bio-measurement itself. It also stores x16 other biometric values (along with various other personal data) within it's own single value chain, clever eh?

Wrong, and gibberish.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So you're ignorant to the fact that copper is conductive, and that it also uses modern polymers during it's manufacture stage. Ah well, you know as of now. May as well update you to the fluorescent aspect too, while here.

Yes, I know that copper is conductive.
But it's a bit weird and nonsensical to just blurt it out randomly in brackets.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

You can also hide your card based driving licence, and this serves what purpose exactly other than self-denial of right to drive?

You've previously rejected other methods of identification based on the ability to hide it. You don't apply the same standard to your preferred method because you have another motive for wanting Quantum Dot Tattoos to be the best option.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

How can it be faked... do you have nano particle manipulation capabilities, with the ability to alter nano structures to new precise assignable values? Far out dude, well done, think NASA are hiring, call now 555....

Or you use another kind of transmitter (Copper!) to overwrite the transmission from your mark of the beast.
It wouldn't be hard at all.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Lols, when people use the word 'research ongoing' its smells of fakery
When exactly is the last time you got an iris scan, was this in a james bond dream where you saved the world?

Lol, and again when it's pointed out to you that quantum dot tattoos can't actually do the things you claim, you say that research is ongoing.

If "research ongoing smells of fakery, then quantum dot tattoos can only last 5 years. They can't be used as transmitters. They can't glow under UV light. They can't be detected at any kind of long range.

However, again you don't apply the same standard to the idea of Quantum Dot tattoos.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Most of us have used fingers to access offices for over 10yrs now or even just to exit JFK, where backlogs are already common. Besides FRS can scan 200 heads (per second), China grabbed a lad out of a stadium of 30,000 using 'find the face'. Try playing the same game searching for the interior patterns of eyeballs from hundreds of feet away, on fairly standard camera optics on a sunny day (sunglasses galore).

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Granted the US and Sweden are starting to move to RFID, but this a more of an invasive, timely and expensive operation, tham the 1sec, just below skin QDT marking.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So e.g. you're in the Med, and happen to pick up a dingy that holds the Ace of Spades, do you...

Lol, More gibberish.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

pull out some magical bulky iris scanner with full battery on choppy seas, and upload such raw data, assuming co-operation...

Or use any standard mobile, with standard camera, standard app, and quickly photo his arm (even with 1bar) to verify in under 1sec via Azure the (secure) ID. Then at port, you can choose one of 16 other biometrics to further validate the initial QDT ID response (16 stage verification, each on blockchain encryption).

Again, you are being a massive hypocrite here.
Why do you believe that it requires a bulky iris scanner?
Why do you believe a slim, convenient and efficient scanner can't be developed?
Why do you believe an app or similar can't be develop to allow a phone to also do this?

Again, you are apply different standards unfairly and artificially to reach a prefered conclusion.
It's very obvious and very silly.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

...Because BillyGates after throwing millions at his MIT team, was told this is the (current) best soloution, and shown an early (now superseeded) proof of concept for both data storage and as a mechanism of vaccine delivery certification (aka his COVID-esq immunity passport).

But Billy Gates also has thrown money at Iris scans.
You've been shown the working prototypes.
The links you have provided also say that iris scans are the best option.

But again, you are bending over backwards and being pretty dishonest so you can claim that quantum dot tattoos are the only option.

This is because you have a very strange belief that the bible predicted quantum dot tattoos.
You can keep throwing out as much technobabble gibberish as you like, but the fact that this is the central point of your conspiracy theory robs you of any credibility.
It's why you keep dodging the point and refuse to be honest about it.
You know that most people will rightly dismiss you claims out of hand if they know it's because it's a silly fringe religious belief about the mark of the beast.

4068ac1elhodqr

King Mob wrote: »

But the QDT is only linking to information in the cloud.

Wrong.

The pattern in itself can act as a complex, unique, multi-query data string. Cryptographic, but in more simple terms a juiced up QRCode.

King Mob wrote: »

They don't contain any more information than a memorised code would.

Wrong, and jibberish.

16kb (at the older ver.1) is a whole lot of charachters. can you memorise a random complie, of sequenced 4,296 alphanumeric characters? Sure you can, this will far exceed that old QRC based standard figure anyhow.

King Mob wrote: »

Iris scans can also do that.

For the xth time, An iris scan is a read-only source (one of 16 biometrics), it cannot be assigned a new value. A unique standardised identifer can be assigned using QDT, ideal for a central db. The QDT can certainly use an Iris (or any of the 15 other measurements) as biometric static value, or old even paper/card IDs: as 2nd stage verification, then paired with another assigned UNiD pre-crypto, again to suit the platform and processing.

King Mob wrote: »

But they have the benefit of actually being persistent, birth to death and biometric.

It 'becomes' a synthetic embodiment, thus becomes an effective bio-measurement itself. It also stores x16 other biometric values (along with various other personal data) within it's own single value chain, clever eh?

King Mob wrote: »

We also know that while quantum dot tattoos have not actually been shown to work as a passive antenna at any distance. (Not sure why you say copper and polymer... seems a bit like technobabble.)

So you're ignorant to the fact that copper is conductive, and that it also uses modern polymers during it's manufacture stage. Ah well, you know as of now. May as well update you to the fluorescent aspect too, while here.

King Mob wrote: »

And even if it could, it could easily be blocked or faked.

You can also hide your card based driving licence, and this serves what purpose exactly other than self-denial of right to drive?

How can it be faked... do you have nano particle manipulation capabilities, with the ability to alter nano structures to new precise assignable values? Far out dude, well done, think NASA are hiring, call now 555....

King Mob wrote: »

On the other hand, iris scans can be performed at a great distance. There is research on going where they can be read at up to 60 feet.

Lols, when people use the word 'research ongoing' its smells of fakery
When exactly is the last time you got an iris scan, was this in a james bond dream where you saved the world?

Most of us have used fingers to access offices for over 10yrs now or even just to exit JFK, where backlogs are already common. Besides FRS can scan 200 heads (per second), China grabbed a lad out of a stadium of 30,000 using 'find the face'. Try playing the same game searching for the interior patterns of eyeballs from hundreds of feet away, on fairly standard camera optics on a sunny day (sunglasses galore).
Granted the US and Sweden are starting to move to RFID, but this a more of an invasive, timely and expensive operation, tham the 1sec, just below skin QDT marking.

King Mob wrote: »

And again, iris scans can also be paired to UN identification just as easily as quantum dots.nd iris scans can also be used in tandem with any number of other biometrics.

So e.g. you're in the Med, and happen to pick up a dingy that holds the Ace of Spades, do you... pull out some magical bulky iris scanner with full battery on choppy seas, and upload such raw data, assuming co-operation...

Or use any standard mobile, with standard camera, standard app, and quickly photo his arm (even with 1bar) to verify in under 1sec via Azure the (secure) ID. Then at port, you can choose one of 16 other biometrics to further validate the initial QDT ID response (16 stage verification, each on blockchain encryption).

King Mob wrote: »

You only believe that quantum dot tattoos are the best option because... ...

...Because BillyGates after throwing millions at his MIT team, was told this is the (current) best soloution, and shown an early (now superseeded) proof of concept for both data storage and as a mechanism of vaccine delivery certification (aka his COVID-esq immunity passport).

4068ac1elhodqr

Deleted User wrote: »

And if you got a flesh wound that removes your quantum dot?(doubt it would survive a tattoo either) Persistence gone... .

Then...

...all travel, welfare, access to all public services such as libraries, internet cafes, education, driving, insurance, internet shopping and banking, access to +18 venues, telephonics or cable, mail redirection and collection, enterprise, rent, home ownership (and on and on, and on) all up in smoke and nullified.

You may get a final (second chance) using the other arm, (maybe) at a cost.

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Lols, sorry old chap but 'ignorance' would be putting it mildly.

An Iris scan is 'readable' only.

QDT is 'writable' (6kb min) then also (more easily, and from greater distance) readable (not to mention also conductive, with potential to act as a passive antenna {copper & polymer}). This is even before we get on to UnID Pairing.

Welcome to komputers 101 (more lols!)

Topic for Day 1's introductory class was the tricky topic of 'read vs write' data.
Tommorow guide, is how to turn de komputers off... then on again.

And if you got a flesh wound that removes your quantum dot?(doubt it would survive a tattoo either) Persistence gone... Meanwhile ultimately all you need is an identifier that can be cross referenced online and retrieve all information on an individual.

"Komputers 101", your proposed system is terribly designed and only to fulfill a particular conspiracy you're into.

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Lols, sorry old chap but 'ignorance' would be putting it mildly.

An Iris scan is 'readable' only.

QDT is 'writable' (6kb min) then also (more easily, and from greater distance) readable (not to mention also conductive, with potential to act as a passive antenna {copper & polymer}). This is even before we get on to UnID Pairing.

But the QDT is only linking to information in the cloud. They don't contain any more information than a memorised code would. Iris scans can also do that.
But they have the benefit of actually being persistent, birth to death and biometric.

We also know that while quantum dot tattoos have not actually been shown to work as a passive antenna at any distance. (Not sure why you say copper and polymer... seems a bit like technobabble.)
And even if it could, it could easily be blocked or faked.
On the other hand, iris scans can be performed at a great distance. There is research on going where they can be read at up to 60 feet.

And again, iris scans can also be paired to UN identification just as easily as quantum dots.
And iris scans can also be used in tandem with any number of other biometrics.

You only believe that quantum dot tattoos are the best option because you want this to fit to your biblical prophesy.
It's what many of the sources you've linked to also do.
It's also what conspiracy theorists like yourself did with barcodes....

4068ac1elhodqr

Deleted User wrote: »

Also as a person who works in tech, embedding a load of data on a tattoo is a pretty bad design choice. It's not remotely guaranteed to last until death and that applies to the vast majority of storage. So once again, retina would be the most reliable way to identify an individual with all data being on the cloud.
Now Accumulator will likely shout some buzz words and laugh at my ignorance.

Lols, sorry old chap but 'ignorance' would be putting it mildly.

An Iris scan is 'readable' only.

QDT is 'writable' (6kb min) then also (more easily, and from greater distance) readable (not to mention also conductive, with potential to act as a passive antenna {copper & polymer}). This is even before we get on to UnID Pairing.

Welcome to komputers 101 (more lols!)

Topic for Day 1's introductory class was the tricky topic of 'read vs write' data.
Tommorow guide, is how to turn de komputers off... then on again.

EyesClosed

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Also as a person who works in tech, embedding a load of data on a tattoo is a pretty bad design choice. It's not remotely guaranteed to last until death and that applies to the vast majority of storage. So once again, retina would be the most reliable way to identify an individual with all data being on the cloud.

Now Accumulator will likely shout some buzz words and laugh at my ignorance.

He's also avoided my question around the bible being anti tattoo, so how would any Christian get this tattoo is beyond me.
I don't even agree with the tattoo nonsense anyway, but the bible verse is just another massive plot hole.

[Deleted User]

Also as a person who works in tech, embedding a load of data on a tattoo is a pretty bad design choice. It's not remotely guaranteed to last until death and that applies to the vast majority of storage. So once again, retina would be the most reliable way to identify an individual with all data being on the cloud.

Now Accumulator will likely shout some buzz words and laugh at my ignorance.

[Deleted User]

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Largely undecided, certainly may be something to it, but on the other hand, also sure there may not. Really depends on specifics. An open mind is a healthy mind. Certainly it's interesting is it not? (...will await you token lols and slander)

Again, no denial, which proves my point.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Lol (more) you haven't 'not' done this, at 'every' point and opportunity: thus more lols!

You've become incoherent here.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

So Y/N?

Yes or no what exactly?
Am I a Satanist?

Lol

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Lol Jesting aside, and more likely, and practically is like many an (overkeen) athiest they have suffered from both personal severe tragedy and loss, hence the denoucement now, of anything within a sniffle of spiruality (a very typical reactionary blame event scenario). Ah well, sure what can you do, this is it etc.

Lol

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Meanwhile, however the CT saga continues...

Q. Digital IDs for everyone?
A. Yes, would seem so.

A: No, not in the way you believe as your belief is based on a silly supernatural prophesy which is making you twist and misinterpret things to fit that prophecy.
We keep answering this question, yet you keep asking it...