Digital ID's for everyone

4068ac1elhodqr · 02-04-2020 10:01pm

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

I make it that you are trying to bait other users into winding them up for your enjoyment.

I would disagree with this allegation.

Simply agreeing with another poster's obervations, and presenting a theory (based on perception of unusual and persistant, even abnormal patterns).
You could say a theory itself, within the CT thread (where else better).

Perhaps it's just a hobby for some folks to comment on what seems like every single CT thread, in such an omnipresent and similar styled manner, with a very similar dismissive tone and single-minded, agenda-like approach.

Guess we could settle on calling them serial CT denier 'hobbyists'.
Good evening to the dedicated 'hobbyists', tally ho.

Overheal · 02-04-2020 10:01pm

Lonesomerhodes wrote: »

Poster has been diverting and changing topic all thread. Like a full time job for him (or her)

He (or she) well knows Varadkar Harris etc dont have kids!.

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Exactly, think they've been at it for years, and years, fingers in every single CT, even the random pure funny top banter ones that are really best ignored.

They go into full deniability offensive at any, and all, theories, and often within minuites.
Then when proved wrong, diversion tactics are used.

A full-time job, 24/7 very most likely.
And there is another remarkable similar chap also, who is king of these very similar traits.

I suggested this before as a simple curiousity, but got told not to.
Make of that what you will.

eleventh wrote: »

Are we talking about the same thing. Probably not, again.
Something badly wrong that you want to go off topic all the time and now in this direction.
I didn't use that term anywhere nor imply any such thing.
Troll away anyway.

@Lonesomerhodes
@Kehlani Massive Magnum
@Eleventh
@Whoever else aligns in this behavior:

In lieu of cards I will remind you all to stay away from personal attacks.

If you have a problem with a post, report it, don't sit in here and accuse people of being trolls.

And these people aren't paid, I don't have enough money for that.

Cards will follow unless morale improves.

/mod

Lonesomerhodes · 02-04-2020 10:16pm

EyesClosed wrote: »

People are in their houses cause there is a virus, you know this, no other reason.

Sweden has had 308 deaths, 69 of which where today alone. They need to start doing something fast to stop it.

Physical money can easily spread a virus... Do you understand how viruses are spread??

Once this pandemic ends, people will go back spending their money as they like, either physically or digitally.

But since the physical money is all backed up by the digital numbers on a screen.... It really doesn't matter anyway.

So you are in favour of lockdown til ........ when?

This coronavirus could be around for years should people be in lockdown for years?.

Leave the elderly to rot at home eh. Sure they be grand dont they have tae and non stop RTE propagana to keep em going!. Who cares their last few months is ruined due to anxiety and isolation right?.

For Many the fear will kill them off quicker. Suits the big boys less pensions to pay out.

And What about those in lockdown with someone who unsuspectingly has it?.

In relation to Sweden

Its better to die on your feet
Than live on your knees.

eleventh · 02-04-2020 11:31pm

Overheal wrote: »

@Lonesomerhodes
@Accumulator
@Eleventh
@Whoever else aligns in this behavior:

In lieu of cards I will remind you all to stay away from personal attacks.

If you have a problem with a post, report it, don't sit in here and accuse people of being trolls.

And these people aren't paid, I don't have enough money for that.

Cards will follow unless morale improves.

/mod

Can you not tell a troll from someone who's actually interested in a discussion?
The poster thinks he's in current affairs. He can't seem to tell the difference, though it's been pointed out. If he is right to continue posting as if it's current affairs, why don't you merge threads into current affairs, if there is no difference in your view between current affairs and CT.
Have a look at the corona thread for more of the same.

Lonesomerhodes · 02-04-2020 11:42pm

eleventh wrote: »

Can you not tell a troll from someone who's actually interested in a discussion?
The poster thinks he's in current affairs. He can't seem to tell the difference, though it's been pointed out. If he is right to continue posting as if it's current affairs, why don't you merge threads into current affairs, if there is no difference in your view between current affairs and CT.
Have a look at the corona thread for more of the same.

Ive not accussed anyone of being a troll. I have said if people dismiss any alternative idea or theory immediately and pooh pooh it and ebellish and drag up unrelated things why are they even bothering being here if its all nonsense to them?.
They dont have an interest just belittle or undermine anything that goes against the spoonfed status quo drivel we get from the media.

If for example you went on say a basketball forum and called it nonsense and stupid and absurd all thread how long you last?

Fair game here however!.

Timberrrrrrrr · 03-04-2020 6:35am

Lonesomerhodes wrote: »

Ive not accussed anyone of being a troll. I have said if people dismiss any alternative idea or theory immediately and pooh pooh it and ebellish and drag up unrelated things why are they even bothering being here if its all nonsense to them?.
They dont have an interest just belittle or undermine anything that goes against the spoonfed status quo drivel we get from the media.

If for example you went on say a basketball forum and called it nonsense and stupid and absurd all thread how long you last?

Fair game here however!.

Do they tell blatant lies in the basketball thread? Has anyone claimed (as an instance) that Michael Jordan is really a Lizard, or Charles Barkley was in on 9-11? When people post untruths or make wild accusations then they should be called out on them, or would you prefer this to be an echo chamber where everyone agrees with every wild assertion posted?

Lonesomerhodes · 03-04-2020 10:31am

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Do they tell blatant lies in the basketball thread? Has anyone claimed (as an instance) that Michael Jordan is really a Lizard, or Charles Barkley was in on 9-11? When people post untruths or make wild accusations then they should be called out on them, or would you prefer this to be an echo chamber where everyone agrees with every wild assertion posted?

I dont think you could have proved my point any better. Kudos.

Another "you're all mad" dismissive childish post that doesnt address anything just more mindless "your a lizard" braindead rambling trying to undermine any alternative viewpoint. Its so immature.

Michael Jordan is a lizard you believe?

No one else brought it up and whats it got to do with the thread?

So deflection dismissive and derailing all in one.
Which was my point.

Good work done for you today eh!

Timberrrrrrrr · 03-04-2020 10:36am

Lonesomerhodes wrote: »

I dont think you could have proved my point any better. Kudos.

Another "you're all mad" dismissive childish post that doesnt address anything just more mindless "your a lizard" braindead rambling trying to undermine any alternative viewpoint. Its so immature.

Ah suck it up buttercup.

Nowhere did I accuse anyone of being "mad".

Nowhere have I called anyone a lizard.

On this forum there are people who have accused others of being Lizard people, they have also accused people of being in on 9-11. Should those claims not be questioned?

Michael Jordan is a lizard you believe?

No one else brought it up and whats it got to do with the thread?

So deflection dismissive and derailing all in one.
Which was my point.

Good work done for you today eh!

SIGH

Again, I have not claimed that, is Wnglish your 1st language? I only ask because you seem to have trouble reading/understanding other peoples posts.

Dohnjoe · 03-04-2020 10:51am

Lonesomerhodes wrote: »

They dont have an interest just belittle or undermine anything that goes against the spoonfed status quo drivel we get from the media.

You've constantly labelled posters here as naive, stupid, brainless, unemployed, no life, so don't you think comment here might be a little rich?

Anyway moving on, I still don't get the big concerns over digital ID, as mentioned certain countries in Europe have them, there's actually a little chip on the ID card, which means they can be slotted into card readers and so on, can be used to pay taxes online, or for administration - not sure what the big issue is

Lonesomerhodes · 03-04-2020 11:12am

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Ah suck it up buttercup.

Nowhere did I accuse anyone of being "mad".

Nowhere have I called anyone a lizard.

On this forum there are people who have accused others of being Lizard people, they have also accused people of being in on 9-11. Should those claims not be questioned?

SIGH

Again, I have not claimed that, is Wnglish your 1st language? I only ask because you seem to have trouble reading/understanding other peoples posts.

Is Wnglish your 1st language?

Think you meant is English your FIRST language
(your suppose to use actual words in sentences otherwise its God awful grammar)

9-11 etc has nothing to do with this thread. More rambling and derailing.

I know its lockdown but isnt it little early to be hitting the bottle?

Timberrrrrrrr · 03-04-2020 12:15pm

Lonesomerhodes wrote: »

Is Wnglish your 1st language?

Think you meant is English your FIRST language
(your suppose to use actual words in sentences otherwise its God awful grammar)

9-11 etc has nothing to do with this thread. More rambling and derailing.

I know its lockdown but isnt it little early to be hitting the bottle?

Oh the irony:pac:

As for your last sentence, as usual when you know you are wrong you revert to form with insults :rolleyes:

Overheal · 03-04-2020 2:06pm

eleventh wrote: »

Can you not tell a troll from someone who's actually interested in a discussion?
The poster thinks he's in current affairs. He can't seem to tell the difference, though it's been pointed out. If he is right to continue posting as if it's current affairs, why don't you merge threads into current affairs, if there is no difference in your view between current affairs and CT.
Have a look at the corona thread for more of the same.

Do not discuss moderation on thread. If you have a response to make about moderation it will be entertained by PM.

If you have complaints about someone's post use the report function.

This is the only warning I will make about this.

@Everyone drop it and get back on topic, if I see another purse out I'm stealing it.

Lonesomerhodes · 03-04-2020 5:11pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Oh the irony:pac:

As for your last sentence, as usual when you know you are wrong you revert to form with insults :rolleyes:

Insult LOL. Observation more like.

And as if you dont insult been at it all thread.

Anyway wasn't an insult if you want to Grammar police people on the English language but can't spell the word English or even first well I figured maybe this lad maybe is on the sauce. Apologies if you are sober but I don't know if thats better!.

4068ac1elhodqr · 22-04-2020 1:36pm

One promising pathway to digital stamping (ID) has been found, using what is essentially micro-needles.
Funded of course by BillGates & Co (id2020.org).

https://stm.sciencemag.org/content/11/523/eaay7162
An approach to encode medical history on a patient using the spatial distribution of biocompatible, near-infrared quantum dots (NIR QDs) in the dermis. QDs are invisible to the naked eye yet detectable when exposed to NIR light. QDs with a copper indium selenide core and aluminum-doped zinc sulfide shell were tuned to emit in the NIR spectrum by controlling stoichiometry and shelling time. The formulation showing the greatest resistance to photobleaching after simulated sunlight exposure (5-year equivalence) through pigmented human skin was encapsulated in microparticles for use in vivo. In parallel, microneedle geometry was optimized in silico and validated ex vivo using porcine and synthetic human skin. QD-containing microparticles were then embedded in dissolvable microneedles and administered to rats with or without a vaccine

Using metals avails of more persistance, and of course in future adoptions of these (copper indium selenide core and aluminum-doped zinc sulfide shell), it may be possible to configure a passive antenna within these 3,000 (per inch2) micro dots, to act as a RFID area.

22-04-2020 6:24pm

A research paper is proof of a conspiracy now?

4068ac1elhodqr · 22-04-2020 7:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

A research paper is proof of a conspiracy now?

It's a proof of concept model, the team was approached by BillyGates, emphasising his need for 'vaccine tracking' and ideally digital infromation recall.

“The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation came to us and said, ‘Hey, we have a real problem — knowing who’s vaccinated,’”

They offered a good potential soloution. Although the vaccine needles disintegrate in the skin, they're still good for 5yrs. Ideally this would need to become birth-to-death persistant, in order to meet Bills needs.

https://news.rice.edu/2019/12/18/quantum-dot-tattoos-hold-vaccination-record/

It's an interesting early concept. It means a vaccine team can know exactly who has or hasn't been given a vax, even in some rural shantytown in sub-saharan Africa where paper records don't exist.

Cheerful Spring2 · 23-04-2020 12:28pm

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

It was him on Reddit

lol. You have doubters to everything on this forum.

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 12:32pm

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

It was him on Reddit

the reference to digital id microchipping wasnt made by gates

Cheerful Spring2 · 23-04-2020 12:35pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the reference to digital id microchipping wasnt made by gates

Unclear in Bill Gates Reddit post what he meant by a digital certificate? He talking about a digital card issued to people who got tested? (like a bankcard) or something you can store on your phone and show people when asked? Where the micro-chipping info coming from?

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 12:39pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Unclear in Bill Gates Reddit post what he meant by a digital certificate? He talking about a digital card issued to people who got tested? (like a bankcard) or something you can store on your phone and show people when asked? Where the micro-chipping info coming from?

not from bill, which is the point.

Cheerful Spring2 · 23-04-2020 12:51pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum 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.

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.

Still not clear what ID2020 is? Read the website and i still unsure. Is it an ID for everyone there trying to bring out?

Quote a passage.
In January 2019, the Alliance launched the ID2020 Certification Mark at the World Economic Forum in Davos. ID2020’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), made up of leading experts on digital ID and its underlying technologies, established a set of functional, outcomes-based technical requirements for user-managed, privacy-protecting and portable digital ID.

Cheerful Spring2 · 23-04-2020 1:24pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

not from bill, which is the point.

All I could find is Microsoft is a founding member.
I still unsure why some believe the digital certificate is a microchip?
Has anyone got convincing evidence to show this?
Read this
https://medium.com/id2020/id2020-launches-technical-certification-mark-e6743d3f70fd
Why are they not telling people in plain English what it is?

Technical paper here
Biometrics and Biometric data is discussed as just one way to identify people.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X8wKvPr-xEnF43BK0Bg-qK-woVspQirP27bChEW8Y8Y/edit

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 2:09pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Still not clear what ID2020 is? Read the website and i still unsure. Is it an ID for everyone there trying to bring out?

It's mission statement is in a simple nutshell: "a (huge) push towards DigitalID".

In particular the purpose of this is for the moment is for simple vaccine tracking in the developing world to begin with (1.5bn), then rollout for everyone.

Future of this persistant birth-to-death ID will likely include the ability to buy or sell, indeed access anything that requires this unique blockchain-encrypted ID (voting, education, healthcare, employment etc).

To be fair they can't say outright in the copy they aim to 'chip people'.
Indeed this common 'misconception' may not even be neccessary.

As new subtle technologies develop (including the latest they funded) i.e. quantum dot tattoos, which is less invasive and delivers their need to combine digital tracking with a combined vaccine in one single delivery.
https://bioengineering.rice.edu/news/quantum-dot-tattoos-hold-vaccination-record
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/invisible-ink-could-reveal-whether-kids-have-been-vaccinated/

RFID (a bit like bluetooth) would be suitable also (potentialy possible with QDT), and is also not a 'microchip', but simply a passive (zero power) antenna with minimal storage ability.

It's founder and partners are all either vaccine companies or technologists, and directly backed by the most wealthy people of this century (and the previous).
It's kind of a big deal.

id2020 also fully back the Gates promoted digital immunity certificates:
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/immunity-certificates-if-we-must-have-them-we-must-do-it-right--id2020-alliance-releases-white-paper-301044459.html

"Immunity certificates would enable workplaces, schools, medical facilities, airlines, and other public or private venues to identify those who have tested positive for the antibody (or who have recently tested negative for the virus) through a verified credential issued by a medical provider (or certified testing center) 'and carried on a mobile phone"

Naturally you can see the immediate limitations of this i.e. a mobile phone - which isn't persistant, isn't secure or truly portable.
There is only one alternative to this which solves all this.

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 2:24pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

All I could find is Microsoft is a founding member.
I still unsure why some believe the digital certificate is a microchip?
Has anyone got convincing evidence to show this?
Read this
https://medium.com/id2020/id2020-launches-technical-certification-mark-e6743d3f70fd
Why are they not telling people in plain English what it is?

Technical paper here
Biometrics and Biometric data is discussed as just one way to identify people.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X8wKvPr-xEnF43BK0Bg-qK-woVspQirP27bChEW8Y8Y/edit

ask your mate clarence. you even thanked their post

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 2:25pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

It's mission statement is in a simple nutshell: "a (huge) push towards DigitalID".

In particular the purpose of this is for the moment is for simple vaccine tracking in the developing world to begin with (1.5bn), then rollout for everyone.

Future of this persistant birth-to-death ID will likely include the ability to buy or sell, indeed access anything that requires this unique blockchain-encrypted ID (voting, education, healthcare, employment etc).

To be fair they can't say outright in the copy they aim to 'chip people'.
Indeed this common 'misconception' may not even be neccessary.

As new subtle technologies develop (including the latest they funded) i.e. quantum dot tattoos, which is less invasive and delivers their need to combine digital tracking with a combined vaccine in one single delivery.
https://bioengineering.rice.edu/news/quantum-dot-tattoos-hold-vaccination-record
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/invisible-ink-could-reveal-whether-kids-have-been-vaccinated/

RFID (a bit like bluetooth) would be suitable also (potentialy possible with QDT), and is also not a 'microchip', but simply a passive (zero power) antenna with minimal storage ability.

It's founder and partners are all either vaccine companies or technologists, and directly backed by the most wealthy people of this century (and the previous).
It's kind of a big deal.

id2020 also fully back the Gates promoted digital immunity certificates:
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/immunity-certificates-if-we-must-have-them-we-must-do-it-right--id2020-alliance-releases-white-paper-301044459.html

"Immunity certificates would enable workplaces, schools, medical facilities, airlines, and other public or private venues to identify those who have tested positive for the antibody (or who have recently tested negative for the virus) through a verified credential issued by a medical provider (or certified testing center) 'and carried on a mobile phone"

Naturally you can see the immediate limitations of this i.e. a mobile phone - which isn't persistant, isn't secure or truly portable.
There is only one alternative to this which solves all this.

a mobile phone isn't portable? eh, ok.

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 2:34pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

a mobile phone isn't portable? eh, ok.

The singluar reliance on a smart phone fails on so many levels:

i). The latest smart models turn into useless bricks after a couple of days without a reliable power source.
ii). Always on bluetooth is power draining.
iii). The developing world has limited access to both smart phones (using bluetooth, NFC, Apps), or reliable power (even major cities in India have regluar blackouts)
iv). A mobile phone isn't truly portable, in the way a smart tracking tattoo would be. Thus it isn't persistant.
v). A mobile phone isn't secure, leave it on a bus, and wave goodbye to your medical records, personal data and digital cert. Download a virus or the wrong App and there goes your details also.

Thus a blockhain-encryped permanent (persistant: ideally from birth-to-death) QDtattoo, or other physical mark embedment of data (DigitalID) at time of vaccine (or birth) is the only practical solution.

Cheerful Spring2 · 23-04-2020 2:36pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

ask your mate clarence. you even thanked their post

I thanked his post today. He provided proof Gates did an AMA on Reddit. I have not read the entire thread. I just had a look over it today to see what the discussion was about.

My issue with gates was explained in another thread.

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 2:37pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I thanked his post today. He provided proof Gates did an AMA on Reddit. I have not read the entire thread. I just had a look over today to see what the discussion was about.

My issue with gates was explained in another thread.

they are the ones making the claim abut microchipping.

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 2:40pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

they are the ones making the claim abut microchipping.

People with very little technical knowledge are (again) simply confusing the term 'microchip' with what is passive embedded biometric digital IDs.

For the Xxxxth time, NFC/RFID and even the latest model of quantum dot tattoos (funded by BillGates) are not microchips.
It's a simple misunderstanding, but these technologies can behave in a somewhat similar, but more limited fashion.

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 2:41pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

The singluar reliance on a smart phone fails on so many levels:

i). The latest smart models turn into useless bricks after a couple of days without a reliable power source.
ii). Always on bluetooth is power draining.
iii). The developing world has limited access to both smart phones (using bluetooth, NFC, Apps), or reliable power (even major cities in India have regluar blackouts)
iv). A mobile phone isn't truly portable, in the way a smart tracking tattoo would be. Thus it isn't persistant.
v). A mobile phone isn't secure, leave it on a bus, and wave goodbye to your medical records, personal data and digital cert. Download a virus or the wrong App and there goes your details also.

Thus a blockhain-encryped permanent (persistant: ideally from birth-to-death) QDtattoo, or other physical mark embedment of data (DigitalID) at time of vaccine (or birth) is the only practical solution.

none of that relatedes to portability. most people have their phones welded to them.

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 2:45pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

none of that relatedes to portability. most people have their phones welded to them.

Mobile phones are wholly unreliable for digital certificates as was explained to you already, they simple fill a temporary gap until better technologies (often funded by BillGates) become available.
A mobile becomes very quickly useless without power, and has a host of issues.

Portable is only one (secondary) requirement of id2020.org, for DigitalIDs.
More important, is the concept of birth-to-death 'Persistant'.

23-04-2020 2:45pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

People with very little technical knowledge are (again) simply confusing the term 'microchip' with what is passive embedded biometric digital IDs.

For the Xxxxth time, NFC/RFID and even the latest model of quantum dot tattoos (funded by BillGates) are not microchips.
It's a simple misunderstanding, but these technologies can behave in a somewhat similar, but more limited fashion.

You still haven't provided any proof that the intent is nfc tattoos or whatever. Eg nfc technology can simply be on a card or a sticker. So getting nfc tattoos or whatever is more likely to put people off getting it tbh.

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 2:46pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Mobile phones are wholly unreliable for digital certificates as was explained to you already, they simple fill a temporary gap until better technologies (often funded by BillGates) become available.

Portable is only one (secondary) requirement of id2020.org, for DigitalIDs.
More important, is the concept of birth-to-death 'Persistant'.

i was specfically pointing out that your claim that mobile phones are not truly portable was nonsense. and portability is a main requirement for any digital id. if a digital id is not portable then it is useless.

Cheerful Spring2 · 23-04-2020 2:49pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

they are the ones making the claim abut microchipping.

Tech paper for ID2000 says biometrics.

The problem right how is trying to identify what form this would take in the real world. It sounds to me it be biometric ID card, and not a chip in the body?

Before you receive the card, you may have to give fingerprints, eye scan, facial and body movements, stuff like that can't be cheated.

My guess it is a global ID card to identify a person is who they say they are!

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 2:50pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Tech paper for ID2000 says biometrics.

The problem right how is trying to identify what form this would take in the real world. It sounds to me it be biometric ID card, and not a chip in the body?

Before you receive the card, you may have to give fingerprints, eye scan, facial and body movements, stuff like that can't be cheated.

My guess it is a global ID card to identify a person is who they say they are!

your mate clarence specifically said microchipping so you need to take that up with them.

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 2:54pm

Deleted User wrote: »

You still haven't provided any proof that the intent is nfc tattoos or whatever. Eg nfc technology can simply be on a card or a sticker. So getting nfc tattoos or whatever is more likely to put people off getting it tbh.

Maybe you're behind with the news, but didn't Bill Gates not request (and fund) better tracking (excluding simple mobile phones) of vaccines i.e.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded the (quantum dot tattoo) team's research, which was published in the journal Science Translational Medicine on Wednesday.

https://bioengineering.rice.edu/news/quantum-dot-tattoos-hold-vaccination-record
It's a digital mark on the person, with future data storage capabilities i.e. Digital ID.

"It's possible someday that this 'invisible' approach could create new possibilities for data storage, biosensing, and vaccine applications... particularly in the developing world," MIT professor and senior author Robert Langer said in the statement.

Dohnjoe · 23-04-2020 3:01pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Maybe you're behind with the news, but didn't Bill Gates not request (and fund) better tracking (excluding simple mobile phones) of vaccines i.e.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded the (quantum dot tattoo) team's research, which was published in the journal Science Translational Medicine on Wednesday.

https://bioengineering.rice.edu/news/quantum-dot-tattoos-hold-vaccination-record
It's a digital mark on the person, with future data storage capabilities i.e. Digital ID.

"It's possible someday that this 'invisible' approach could create new possibilities for data storage, biosensing, and vaccine applications... particularly in the developing world," MIT professor and senior author Robert Langer said in the statement.

Don't your concerns about this technology boil down to the fact that you think all of this is somehow mentioned in the bible and is "the mark of the beast"?

King Mob · 23-04-2020 3:05pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Mobile phones are wholly unreliable for digital certificates as was explained to you already, they simple fill a temporary gap until better technologies (often funded by BillGates) become available.
A mobile becomes very quickly useless without power, and has a host of issues.

Portable is only one (secondary) requirement of id2020.org, for DigitalIDs.
More important, is the concept of birth-to-death 'Persistant'.

But none of the technologies you keep pointing to are persistent.

Nor are they Biometric, which is a major point you keep quoting...

And again none of those technologies are mentioned on the site you keep linking...

Cheerful Spring2 · 23-04-2020 3:09pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Maybe you're behind with the news, but didn't Bill Gates not request (and fund) better tracking (excluding simple mobile phones) of vaccines i.e.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded the (quantum dot tattoo) team's research, which was published in the journal Science Translational Medicine on Wednesday.

https://bioengineering.rice.edu/news/quantum-dot-tattoos-hold-vaccination-record
It's a digital mark on the person, with future data storage capabilities i.e. Digital ID.

"It's possible someday that this 'invisible' approach could create new possibilities for data storage, biosensing, and vaccine applications... particularly in the developing world," MIT professor and senior author Robert Langer said in the statement.

I read your links and understand now why you think this. Tattoo wrong word to describe this, it not visible to the naked eye.

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 3:15pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Don't your concerns about this technology boil down to the fact that you think all of this is somehow mentioned in the bible and is "the mark of the beast"?

That's an interesting angle that you bring up and highlight.

King Mob wrote: »

But none of the technologies you keep pointing to are persistent. Nor are they Biometric, which is a major point you keep quoting...

If you receive an implant or mark at birth (or at time of vaccine), then yes that becomes a (new) additional point of biometric data. {statistical analysis to biological data}.

Also if this mark or RFID type quantum-dot tattoo can store data, it can also be programmed pre-entry with other cumulative biometric data including prints, iris or medical data.

Indeed it's sole purpose is to store data which was BillGate's request, e.g. to carry the date, time and details of a vaccine as a digital record. And the MIT lads who made the QDT have similar programs that use RFID vaccine records as 'wearables', if they can combine the two: ...bingo.

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 3:18pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I read your links and understand now why you think this. Tattoo wrong word to describe this, it not visible to the naked eye.

Irrelevant point.
It used microneedles, it functions as a tattoo.

You can already get UV tattoos which glow under certain light condtions.
This one simply used iRed light (most cameras can see infrared anyway), many smartphones can broadcast this light to operate as tv controls.

Cheerful Spring2 · 23-04-2020 3:23pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Irrelevant point.
It used microneedles, it functions as a tattoo.

You can already get UV tattoos which glow under certain light condtions.
This one simply used iRed light (most cameras can see infrared anyway), many smartphones can broadcast this light to operate as tv controls.

Under the skin that nobody can see.
What you wrote is true.
I looked at the evidence unlike some on here.
I still not getting is the digital marker harmful or is it useful for medical purposes? Expand your thoughts on this.

23-04-2020 3:27pm

Kehlani Massive Magnum wrote: »

Maybe you're behind with the news, but didn't Bill Gates not request (and fund) better tracking (excluding simple mobile phones) of vaccines i.e.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded the (quantum dot tattoo) team's research, which was published in the journal Science Translational Medicine on Wednesday.

https://bioengineering.rice.edu/news/quantum-dot-tattoos-hold-vaccination-record
It's a digital mark on the person, with future data storage capabilities i.e. Digital ID.

"It's possible someday that this 'invisible' approach could create new possibilities for data storage, biosensing, and vaccine applications... particularly in the developing world," MIT professor and senior author Robert Langer said in the statement.

Well firstly, the quantum for tattoo is only supposed to act as a marker to indicate a vaccination has occurred. The technology realistically cannot carry a lot of information so it's not some elaborate mine of data.

Id2020 doesn't appear to have chosen any technology. They've funded some pilot projects that tend to use qr codes at the moment. Iris recognition or fingerprints may be used but ultimately the information about individuals will be stored on the cloud. Not in physical implants or tattoos.

So yep entirely up to date with the news but you're reading far too much into your mark of the beast.

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 3:29pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Under the skin that nobody can see.
What you wrote is true.
I looked at the evidence unlike some on here.
I still not getting is the digital marker harmful or is it useful for medical purposes? Expand your thoughts on this.

Again having to over simplify things... the objective push of global and persistant unique DigitalIDs is becoming inevitable (for a range of purposes), by many groups such as BillGates (using vaccine tracking as his need) and indeed id2020.org

We can all agree on this, yes?

The next question, is one of 'whether or not this is a good thing or not'.

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 3:30pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Under the skin that nobody can see.
What you wrote is true.
I looked at the evidence unlike some on here.
I still not getting is the digital marker harmful or is it useful for medical purposes? Expand your thoughts and explain your concerns.

his concerns relate to the "mark of the beast" mentioned in the bible.

Cheerful Spring2 · 23-04-2020 3:34pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

his concerns relate to the "mark of the beast" mentioned in the bible.

666 is the mark of the beast in the bible.

ohnonotgmail · 23-04-2020 3:38pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

666 is the mark of the beast in the bible.

that is only part of it.

Revelation 13:16

Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead,

Revelation 13:16-18

Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 3:40pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Well firstly, the quantum for tattoo is only supposed to act as a marker to indicate a vaccination has occurred. The technology realistically cannot carry a lot of information so it's not some elaborate mine of data.

But (agreed) it can carry (some) data, it's a readable data point, that become biometric when marked on the person.
Also the team that made it want to expand upon the amount data storage, in future improvements of it, an expected natural aspiration.
The team also avail of RFID vaccine programs (wearables) but know the limitations of such

Deleted User wrote: »

Id2020 doesn't appear to have chosen any technology. They've funded some pilot projects that tend to use qr codes at the moment. Iris recognition or fingerprints may be used but ultimately the information about individuals will be stored on the cloud. Not in physical implants or tattoos

It uses/looks at what's currently available, but more importantly...
It also states that 'all current biometric measurements' are unsuitable. It also rejects paper and card (including national ID/Passport cards). It's main funding and push is towards 'new', 'novel', and 'unique' technologies.

Either those in infancy (blockchain, as is mentioned and supported for encryption). Or funding towards newly sourced and discovered e.g. QDT types that can be combined with vaccines.

Deleted User wrote: »

So yep entirely up to date with the news but you're reading far too much into your mark of the beast.

The other chap, and now you are the only ones to recently mention the mark of the beast.

I can however see your association to this, in regards of the ability to buy or sell goods with a body mark of some sort.

Certainly this new DigitalID would support such a function in the future, there is no question about that, given the nature of it (secure, truely portable, unique biometric, blockchain supported, always-on, persistant from birth to death) etc.

4068ac1elhodqr · 23-04-2020 3:44pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

his concerns relate to the "mark of the beast" mentioned in the bible.

Not a concern, its a concern of yours clearly.
Simple an acknowledgement of the similarities.

So...

The question reverts to the uses of DigitalIDs.
Can/Will it be used for buying/selling: Perhaps, don't see why not?

Other used could include access to education, voting, employment, welfare and so on....

23-04-2020 3:49pm

But it makes zero sense for any significant amount of data to be stored on one's skin. Data in general is prone to corruption, skin gets damaged on a constant basis. Everything from sun damage to scratches, that makes it pretty useless for biometric tattoos to act as storage containers of any notable amount of info.

Digital ID's for everyone

Comments