The Last American Vagabond - IMA: Digital ID - The Linchpin Of The Technocratic Control Grid

Episode Date: November 7, 2025

Today the Independent Media Alliance (IMA) brings you a panel discussing digital ID, its differing definitions, and how it’s one of the most important elements of the control grid agenda. We discuss why digital ID is so important to this agenda, the global nature of the digital ID roll out, and what we can do to stop it from coming to pass. We also discuss the role that mainstream alternative media is playing in this execution, the varying lines in the sand we are drawing, and why it’s important that we each find and define what that line is for ourselves, before the choice is looming over us.Source Links:The Future of the Internet: A Global Digital ID ReportDHS proposes biometrics expansion for immigrants, dropping age restrictions and requiring biometrics from some US citizens - Nextgov/FCWDHS wants more biometric data - even from citizens • The RegisterJames Corbett Interview - COVID-19 Censorship, Technocracy & The Amazing Country Of Digital GulagEpisode 415 - The Global Digital ID Prison | The Corbett ReportThe Only REAL Solution to Digital ID - #SolutionsWatch | The Corbett ReportThe BritCard Psyop: What Is True Digital ID in the UK? – OffGuardianQuick Take…Are Digital IDs coming piecemeal? – OffGuardianYou searched for Digital ID - The Conscious Resistance NetworkDerrick Broze Interview - The Slow Change Into Digital ID, Budding Technocracy & A Fluoride Win - The Last American VagabondWho is Driving the Digital ID Trend in the United States?Derrick Broze Interview - Impending Future Of Social Credit, Social Impact Investing & Digital IDsThe Fast-Approaching Digital Control Grid (Independent Media Alliance) - The Conscious Resistance NetworkAM Wake Up | SubstackHakeem Anwar: Preparing for Life Under Digital IDBitcoin Donations Are Appreciated:www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/bitcoin-donation(3FSozj9gQ1UniHvEiRmkPnXzHSVMc68U9f)The Last American Vagabond Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to The Last American Vagabond Substack at tlavagabond.substack.com/subscribe

We're going to be discussing the idea of the false binary. What an illusion of choice does, establishes the baseline assumptions and nobody questions. This is part of the fifth generation warfare that we've talked about, voting for the lesser of two evils. Definitely an emotional, psychological trap that people are in. You're cheerleading for an insane ideology because you think you're winning. The role we have is media. How do we help everybody understand? This is theater, and you need to get back into the real world.

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

where it's going, the issue that it's become. So thank you all for being here. did you want to go around and introduce again or do you want to jump right into it? I'm Derek Bros. of the conscious resistance. He's muted. I'm sure they all know us by now. There we go.

Maybe introduce ourselves. I forget that I'm muted sometimes. Hakeem of T-Bot, take back our tech and above phone. James Corby Corby Corbyn.com. Steve. Boykin and a week up, slow newsday. Yeah, I'm skipping that next time. This is so shambolic.

Sorry, everyone. What happens to the little name text? I know I've got them. That's on me. I've got them down here. So anyway, just let's get right into it in general. So Hakeem had a presentation. I'll throw it to you to get started on where that's going to go,

and we'll let it go where it goes, brother. Go ahead. Yeah, so why is this topic so important? Everyone here has done great work on the surveillance grid with companies like Palantir, big tech, being able to pry into everything that we're doing, knowing a lot about our lives. But on one hand,

there's a surveillance grid, we don't really get to talk about a control grid. And that's what digital ID is. It's this control grid that's being built. And part of the definition of digital ID is that it's meant to be interoperable. It's meant for one form of identification to be used in many different formats. So it could be used in a government setting. It could be used for age verification. It could be used to verify you're old enough to buy that bottle of alcohol. And so when all these, well, and all these things come together, and it's a identification that can be turned off at one time. You really put yourself at risk of being cut out of all the things that, all the things you could do in a society. So I've been studying many different programs around the world and have seen, you know, there's a lesson to be learned from every part of the world, whether it's the EU and their interoperable digital ID or the Russia and China proprietary model where it's, you know,

really, really centralized. So, I mean, I think I'd like to start off with with that question. What is what do you guys think a digital ID is actually? I'll guess I'll jump in. I just looked at my past half dozen podcast episodes that I put out and all of them are pretty much on digital ID and technocracy. And I realize, you know, as all of you guys are saying, this seems to be the most important topic. And I think it's like to use for my past guests, you know, we got Pat Wood technology algorithm ghetto. I think it's like the most totalitarian construct we've ever seen in human history. So effectively digital ID means all your physical activity permissions will be put on a platform

that we don't control. And it's going to be a total checkpoint society from, I mean, from the tiniest thing of buying a cup of coffee to the biggest thing, to getting married, to buying a home. and every decision you make is going to be there's going to be an intermediate there that can cut down that decision unlike the analog world that we've generally enjoyed up until now that's kind of how I see it yeah I'll jump in real quick I think I would define digital ID just in a simple way just a and a form of identification because Hakeem you've talked about this that there's a difference between electronic ID and digital ID

So I would say a form of identification that uses interconnected databases, obviously the internet, and typically involves biometrics, whether that's fingerprint, scanning, retina scanning, the face print, potentially voice print in the future as well, and how that is then interconnected to all the different systems that we were just hearing about described right there, that that to me is what distinguishes digital ID from just being your paper ID card or your little plastic ID card, or even the fact that you have a social security number in the government system or things like that.

The difference is what you were talking about, Hakeem, the interoperability between all these different systems. That to me is what then kind of makes it a digital ID. I'll jump off from back of that, Derek, because exactly what Derek said, completely agree, but just to overlap a point that thinks relevant, I think it's actually really glad you said that as well, he made the point of the difference,

because it can be, you know, all of a sudden people, just are hating everything electronic, you know, however that works, it becomes kind of an all-encompassing idea. But I'll point out that I think the definition might be different, which is kind of what we're highlighting it to the average person where, so, and I, my opinion to what most people think they're fighting or worried about is what, what Havoro was pointing out where it goes and just really the, your digital online electronic representation of who you are that can be shut off, altered, affected, you know, like that you don't have control over, all those points kind of together. But I

think that to the average person, it really just is sort of an online representation as opposed to your physical representation of it. That's just obviously more manipulated. But the point is that there's the interoperability of all of it is what builds the control structure. So I think it's a really great place to start. So let's keep going. Who's next? Jump in. Well, it's going to be marketed as a one-click or one-download passport. And it's going to be represented as something that is a measure of both security and convenience, which might as well be billed as safe and effective, because it's going to have the exact same results.

And when you, I agree with Derek 100% there, your biometrics are your digital ID. Ian Davis was on my show this morning, and we were having a very similar conversation. Without the biometrics, you're still just a data footprint, but the biometrics and the hub of what your data ID does as a myriad of functions that allow you access to the vast majority of society, it's biometrics plus that hub is digital ID.

I would say that to me, it is that nexus of the digital ID with the digital public infrastructure that really makes it into a key component of the control grid that Hakeem was talking about. Because the digital ID by itself, if it was only used for interactions with government services, like that was the only thing that it was for, that would be bad enough because even then, why does, you know, someone in the whatever department need to know about my medical history or whatever which is gradually starting to happen here in Japan. They've rolled out something called My Number, which is one number for all of your government services,

including your health visits and your taxes and everything else. So the government will know all of that. That's bad enough. But then when it is connected into a digital public infrastructure, which means that every time you do a financial transaction online, for example, if you're bringing in that digital ID, suddenly, as has been said, there is a third-party intermediary in every transaction.

every interaction that you are having, and that intermediary is the government. And when and if, let's just imagine if some authoritarian got into a position of power somewhere, I know we have to use our imagination for that. But if they did, and if they decided you were a security threat, they could shut off your access to everything digital, which is increasingly everything, because everything is going digital. So that, to me, is the nightmare part of the scenario. It's not just the digital idea itself.

it's the fact that that will be the key that will fit all of these various locks to every aspect of your life and financial transactions and everything else. You know, it's interesting the way you just said that is so the difference is like so it's the system that's building into, right? But so you could argue the digital idea itself like we know exists in some way today, but it's that connection of those two that make it nefarious. But I agree that even the idea that you have to go through that with any kind of structure shouldn't be something liberty seeking people want.

I thought of something that Steve brought in that was interesting. The clicking, you know, there's the idea of like the no-click fish, like, what's it, you know, the, like, what am I talking about? Passwordless. Yeah, like infiltration stuff. Like, so I'm trying to think of the word for it, but like, like, not fishing stuff, but like scams like that. Israel has this like stuff. The no-click, the zero-click hacks. Yeah, right.

Where suddenly you don't even have to engage with it. So that's point. That makes that insane. I just want to include that. That's a little extension. Go ahead. Yeah. Well, I'm like, so you take the question, what is digital ID?

And I would say there's actually potentially two, maybe three answers to that, because there's the practical answer, which is the technological advance that would allow surveillance. And surveillance to a point that isn't really been precedented in all of human history. But there's also, what is digital ID? It is a psychological propaganda campaign because the two don't exist together necessarily. Like there is the selling of it, which is more about customizing people with the idea, and not just the idea of the digital ID, because, and this is something that Ian has covered, the idea, the digital ID can exist conceptually without a name,

and the infrastructure is there, and they will use it, whether or not they're telling you they're using it. And there is also the, you know what, guys, you should have a digital idea, you should have a card, and you should carry it around with you all the time, You show it to anybody that asks to see it. And that's an important aspect of it. Not so much the thing itself as a customizing people to the thing itself. That's a really good point. And I think everyone here nailed it.

Those are, it can shift forms this digital ID, right? It could be a, you don't need an app on your phone. You could access it just through the web browser. In fact, that's the main way it's used in South America. They don't have digital ID apps. ID Uruguay is the most of the largest digital ID system where they actually act as a broker. But that's all through the web browser. So even in countries where not everyone has a phone yet, that's the way to do it.

So it does shape, shift and takes different forms. And I think everyone here has been watching the news. And it's been interesting to see the different countries and the approaches they take to it. You see countries, well, you see the UK Prime Minister just going, his going to Hail of Mary and he telegraphs a move that's not happening for four years, right? It's 2029. There's a date. You'll need it by 2029.

And so it's this date really far in the future, which gets a lot of people angry. And then you have places like the EU where they have a plan in place. It's written into law that it's voluntary. people will never have to use the digital ID if they don't want to, but we kind of know why that's disingenuous a bit. So I think it would be interesting to talk about, you know, what are the different responses that you've seen with governments trying to get people to adopt this program?

And do you think that's been beneficial or not beneficial for their objective? I'll start with the COVID overlap, since I felt like you touched on that, that I think that's important to consider whether they say it's your choice or not, they coerce you into it societally, circumstantially. So that's important to think about. And I think to your point, I think obviously, I mean, the way I see it is that just like with COVID, the same thing today, it's very overzealous. I tend to think that's because there's an agenda, there's a timeline, at least they perceive, something's making them feel like they need to get it done by a certain time. So I would argue that what they've been doing in their effort to try to push

that has actually caused an amazing amount of pushback to it, which I'm very happy to see. That's how I would read it. Yeah, maybe I just wanted to give some recent examples to maybe for people like listening who don't think this is a big deal for it to really hit home. And just today, I mean, in the U.S., this story I shared, I shared the link about the DHS now wanting to collect biometric data, not only from immigrants. We've heard that story. But now it says for even U.S. citizens that are sponsoring immigrants to the U.S. trying to get them visa, green, card. And, you know, I don't have any immediate, my, my, my wife is only a Mexican citizen. I have, I had no plans, but I thought maybe someday if we move to the U.S., I'll have to go to the

process to petition her to become a citizen. This means now that I, the DHS is going to say her way to make your wife legal, we need your DNA and biometrics. So now I'm put in this position, like, I don't have a choice. So you want your wife to live in that? You want to live in America with your family legally give up your DNA if not sorry you know it's kind of it's like a great example Ryan of of I'm coerced so what am I going to do now I got no idea getting through to you through your family yeah I'm glad you shared that that link brother I just wanted to add to that just while we're talking about the US for those because I know we have a lot of people listening in the US that that is just kind of picking up on the other recent US announcement which is that now all

foreigners who come into the U.S. and leave the U.S. are mandatory biometrics screening. Before, you know, I know people say it's been happening for years. They have been testing it out in different terminals, different airports in the U.S., but that was optional. Even if the vast majority of people did know it was optional, it was optional. Now, as of just, I think, last week, and then apparently fully implemented by December 26, 2025, all foreigners coming into the U.S. when they leave will be required to do face scanning and face printing. So, you know, that plus the announcement you just shared there, which clearly it's going to start, you know, including citizens in these different ways, should be assigned to everybody that even if you think these things are

just happening in the UK or EU, which have made recent announcements that it's obviously coming to the US, which shouldn't be any surprise because I know, Ryan, you've played that clip a million times of Trump saying, we're going to have biometric entry exit system by air, by land, by sea. But just to kind of reemphasize the point that it's happening right now this is you know part of agenda 2030 we're about to be into 2026 it shouldn't be a surprise that these agendas are moving forward russia has done the same thing it's you know mexico is taking steps to do similar things uh yeah yeah i mean it's happening absolutely everywhere and it's something that um you know people still have the opportunity for the most part to opt down

out of it it's just you would have to opt into working with your neighbors to provide those own you know same services and people have been so conditioned to hate their neighbor or fear their neighbor or distrust their neighbor that you know that's a heraculian task for boy so i mean what you just said i so have a story that happened last night and i told hakeem that today when he was on my podcast. And it's crazy because when 2020 happened COVID, I imagined this exact scenario five years ago. And this is what all of us do. Like, we're able to see the plans and we can predict the future. And I'm like, I know they're going to pull this one day. I don't know what I'm going to do. I'm going to refuse it or I'm going to move. And yesterday we had our like homeowners meeting in the

gated community here in Mexico. And they, the board is like, they've made the decision. They're going to push this through. It's not, it's not for sure yet. But they want everyone in our community to use a residence app, which is, it's effectively sort of like a private, you know, it's not linked to any official database. It's just among the community. And I realize this is a thing that's used also in the U.S. And, you know, apartment complexes.

And effectively, you'd give out, you, you know, it's a private company in Mexico. I don't know who these people are. And they'd have all of your data. My home, my family's name, my vehicle registration for the security. visitors would have to, you'd have to give them a QR code. You know, the old-fashioned way is actually quicker. The security guard calls you and you say, okay, and that's it.

Now I got to get on the app, log in, send the code to my visitor who has to present the QR code. And then the neighbors, the residents are like, and then if they stay too long, we can track and we can, you know, this person stayed too long and then we can see what they're up to. And then I get, and they were giddy. they were really trying to outdo one another in creating Soviet-style rules. They're like, yeah, and I mean,

one neighbor, the kid was kicking the soccer ball against his house all the time and the other neighbor doesn't care. But let's ban soccer balls. Yeah, let's do this. And I'm like, oh, my goodness. And they're talking about installing facial recognition and cameras and all this stuff.

And I mean, this speaks to Latin America. I've talked to people who have said that, you know, in Latin culture, the collectivism is really, really ingrained. And you think of Aldo Huxley. I mean, they're going to love their servitude. And I'm standing, listening to everyone. And it's just unbelievable.

They just, and I'm telling my wife, like, I told Takeem earlier today, if they, if it gets to a point where I can't enter without the app or something, I'm going to tell them I'm a crazy Croat. I'm going to ram right through the entrance. I don't, I don't care. And, or I might have to eventually move because it's, I'd rather take my chances. with the cartels outside of gated community than live in this.

What's the hashtag? We came up with, crash the gate, hashtag crash the gate. Probably the latter, though. Probably not want to go the other direction. But I had an interesting thought. He said, Fascism would come from America

in the name of anti-fashism when he was wrong. Fashion was going to come from America in the name of the homo-association. They have nothing better to do than to get into other people's business. I wanted to pose a question just real quick to Horv about that, but also to all of us in a broader sense. So that's a real world example, right?

Because I think sometimes people, they're hearing about digital IDs, but not until they can see. And that's not even a full on digital ID, right? But it's just the way the technology is interacting with your life, at least not a government issue to get digital ID. And people don't make that connection and to see like how am I actually going to interact with this. So now you have this situation in your home and your gated community. like you said, if it comes down to it, maybe you'll eventually decide to move. You're willing to make what some people might consider to be a drastic step to make sure you don't comply with these systems, which personally I think is what we're all going to need to do

and, you know, since COVID, but especially in the coming years. So I'm just curious first from you, brother, but then everybody else, just like in the ways that you are going to deal with this directly, James, you were talking about the Japanese government making some changes and for paying taxes and doing all kinds of things. what steps, whether abstractly or specifically, are we all willing to take to avoid these systems? Because I think what I'm seeing in my feeds out there is that there's a lot of online chatter and resistance as there has been for years. But at the same time, it seems like people aren't willing to make drastic lifestyle changes if it means staying free. Like some people are still holding on to the idea that they're going to be able to keep their bank or their whatever.

their connection to that technocratic system, the systems that's quickly becoming technocratic and that they won't have to really make any major life shifts. And I think that should have been completely erased with everything we saw during COVID, people realizing, okay, maybe life isn't going to go back to normal. Maybe I need to start contending with this new reality. So yeah, I'm curious, just thoughts on how far you're willing to go, you know, what your red lines in the sand are, like when it comes to these things. I'll just throw out. I mean, we have to embrace becoming uncomfortable, really, that's that. And I was going to first, I don't know how I'm going to deal with it, because I don't know if they're going to succeed in pushing it through or not, but I'm just not

going to comply at first. They said that it'll be more cumbersome for the people who don't onboard into this digital system. And I'm fine with that. You know, if it costs me in it, so my more time, I'll deal with that. And, you know, I have an above phone. So, you know, that's one option where you have the Graphene OS and you can check the permission. So it depends. I have to test out that system to see how it works. But eventually, I'm happy to just completely change homes to get away from it. If that's what is necessary.

Yeah. Well, I would simply probably, I'd probably be similar, I would think. But I don't know what length I, I mean, outside of doing something, I was going to say, I don't think there's a length they wouldn't go, you know, like in a reasonable sense. Like if this continues to push, I will change my life to adapt around it as best I can. The difference is when, like, for example, the internet or anything we're using when we do this kind of work, it creates an interesting paradox for us, doesn't it? Where we kind of have to be involved with certain parts of this that I otherwise might not be

if I wasn't doing this work. But I would just argue that, you know, if something builds in that direction, like I would move, I would, you know, do whatever I could to create, to continue to try to keep that out of my life. But I think the point is today they're building it into ways where even if you resist like you're talking about and move, the problem will catch up to you as long until we deal with the real issue and not just the local part of it. You know, I think that's where I would be. But I mean, pretty much anything outside of something, you know, like murder or, you know, that kind of that obviously within reason. But I think I'd imagine we're probably all at that point. You know what I've just realized?

I think Klaus Schwab was right. We will own nothing and we will be happy. because we will not be on their control grid, right? It'll be great. Let me make a little observation that I fear is, it's either going to be too obvious to state or so obvious that it needs stating, or maybe both. The real sticking point of this is digital, digital ID.

Because what was the phrase that instantly in the minds of at least English speakers, around the world instantly signified an authoritarian regime. Papers, please, right? For a better part of a century, papers please means you are living in an authoritarian autocratic regime. And everyone knew that because, you know, I don't have to present my papers, right? But that's because it was physical paper. And I still think, I think if they were trying to institute some sort of thing where there's going to be some guy in the border and you have to get out some physical paper card, I think people would still, there would be some remnant of that going through people's heads, but it's not. It's just a QR code.

It's an app. It's a website portal, whatever. And, you know, again, this is so trivial that maybe it's stupid, but I think there's something to it. Since the time we all got online and started using software in our childhoods, what is the thing we've done more on computers than anything else? Agree. Agree to terms of service. agree, agree, agree. Don't even read them. Who cares? Whatever. Agree. Agree. Agree. Just to use the thing. This is exactly that. We have been trained our entire lives digitally to just agree, agree, agree, agree, whatever.

Okay, done. And this is the next implementation of that. I'm just going to give my papers. Anyway, I'm sorry, Derek, that does not answer your question. But I guess, I don't know if you want to use the term blackpilled or pessimistic or whatever, but I do not see a way this is going to stop on the societal scale. I think there will be. I don't either. I don't either. But I'm curious though, James, for you, what about, like, individually? I mean, without.

What's the line in the sand? I mean, I've always said, yeah, I've always said at the point where I'm going to have to, like, give my retina scan and fingerprint or whatever to get online. I guess I'll just be offline. So there is that point. So would we all choose to not broadcast if and when the Internet IDs come, you know, like, what are we going to do? We're going to broadcast on the dark web. Let's give them ideas, right? We can get rid of all the rules just by implementing.

Let's talk about that, though. That opens up like an interesting philosophical question about the nature of ethics. It doesn't. Because at that point, are you putting your principles ahead of the good you could do if you give up on your principles? Right. Listen, if they put the internet above my head, I'll give them my ring finger in my thumb. But that's it. And they're going to have to try and prove, like, I committed a murder like this.

Well, what Kit was saying, I think is really important because this is something that I, I, I, I do a lot of thinking about personally, James, I know you've done work on this before as well, that what this all comes down to is convenience versus our principles, right? We all know they're going to sell it via entertainment. They're going to sell it via convenience. They're going to tell everybody it's quicker, it's faster, it's better. You can get into sports ball. You can play with video games, facial recognition, all the stuff.

We see states and countries already testing out internet IDs in terms of people being able to access pornography, for example. That's how it starts. We've got to protect the kids. So you now have to do a face. you know, selfie or something if you want to look at this porn site. And that's one way that it starts where people start having to do that just to get online. And in a very real way.

I mean, I'm curious, like you said, Kit, like are we shooting ourselves in the foot? I tend to stand as strong as principle as possible, but I also can hear the argument of like, okay, well, if I take myself out of the game and I'm just like, all right, guys, sorry, I got my land. I'm going to just stop broadcasting or I'm going to broadcast only on the deep web for anybody who can find me or whatever like that of trying to avoid this potential digital ID to get on the internet. I don't know. I do think at the same time, I think at the same time, it would send a negative message to our audiences for them all to see it, for whatever influence

we might have, for them all to see, oh my God, James is complying, Ryan's complying. They're just doing it because they want to keep broadcasting on YouTube. Like, oh man, what was all this 20 years worth the work about? Now they're just doing it. Right. Well, this is where this becomes such an important point. Go ahead, Higke, go ahead. I just want to say that the hypotheticals are really, really challenging because we don't know the situations. I think, for me, I've tried to think about it practically. And, you know, the entire world's economy runs on the internet. So this is something that's a very common question. I'm sure you guys have heard is when are they going to put internet access behind

a digital ID or some sort of global ID? And the answer to that is when they have enough digital ID adoption. So when they do do this, the world's economy doesn't crash overnight. So like that's in my report. I try to classify different ID programs by 60% of people have it. Then it's easy enough. I call it complete because at that time you can just coerce the rest of the 40%. They can't comply and they're cut off from the rest of the 60% of society. And you can argue what that number is. So I do think internet is maybe one of the last stages of the digital ID wall or the digital fracturing. And so it only will get there if adoption goes really, really well. There's also that other aspect of the internet is such a useful tool. It maybe doesn't make sense for them to cut off some

people from the internet. Wouldn't they much rather be knowing what you're doing or knowing what you're doing online? Even if we use a different example, like let's say biometrics to get on a plane, which is becoming pretty much standard many, many places, right? Like I have a passport. It's the only idea I have. It expires in 2028. I don't know what I'm going to do, but if things continue in this direction, I'm pretty much willing to give up traveling by flight. A lot of people stopped because of TSA long ago. Others have, you know, they already had a line in the sand. They're like, I'm not going to put up with that. For me, it's kind of been like, okay, I can opt out of facial recognition right now. I can opt out of these things. I'll do that. But when that's not possible, that's a line in the

sand for me that I'm going to say, okay, sorry, I guess I'm not going to be able to fly because I don't want to just say, well, okay, here it is. I've been talking all this crap about it all these years, but oh, well, I'll just join like everybody else. So I feel like we, especially as people who are trying to influence others, should know what our lines in the sand are, whether it's about the internet flying, what have you. I'd like to address that. Now, I don't want to put everyone on the spot, because I know it's a difficult conversation, but I want to address it from my perspective, because this is something I speak about a lot, you know, and I think it's a really important question for us to individually go through or talk about here if you'd like. And I think, you know,

what's hard about it, and I love what you guys have already said about it, right? Like, especially what Kit was saying, like, if you're, what I've been arguing to start with, very, very, very aggressively for a while, in the sense of this last administration is that we have to err on the side of our principles. Like I'm saying this every day lately, right? It's important. If it comes down to an issue where, you know, they're arguing we should be breaking something to fix it.

No, you got to the principles, you know, where you have to air on. So in this conversation, like even, let's even start with the airport one, right? So asked Eric, what I recently was saying is I'm not really going to be flying anywhere for right now because I'm uncomfortable, like a lot of different reasons, which is almost contradictory for the last American vagabond. But the point is that I've decided that that's an issue for me. It's problematic. And so in this case, when it comes to the online part, if they start requiring that or even just going to the larger part of the digital ID, at this point, I don't see a world in which I would compromise for that. But, you know, like, that's where I'm standing right now. Like, that's,

that's where I'm at. I think that's important. But to consider, and to agree with where Kakeem is pointing out, we don't know the circumstances of that moment. As it is now, there's no way I'm doing that. I've said that many times with Twitter. If they start asking me for facial prints, I'm not doing that. Which is going to be, there's a lot of engagement right there that we're going to lose. But when it comes to, like what Kit was saying. So what if there's a part where you are losing out on reaching people because you do that, you know? And that's where the issue becomes a problem, right? Because you can argue today that like what they're doing it, maybe we can break the constitution to really bring it back into play. You know, and it's just, it's the point is you don't

know, the unknown in the future. But, I'm of the mind that I think, and this is my argument, that I think where we are, not in every sense in history, but because of the way the world is now, and way it's being used, that we have to err in that, that we have to put our, you know, but like to Derek's point, we would, let's speak it for myself, I would do everything I could to continue to find ways to put work out. And maybe there's the solution is that we would just have to find another workaround. You know, like we have our entire, us individually, maybe some of us,

but as an industry, people have found ways to work around these things. And I think that's the only way it has to go. I'd love to hear from what you guys think, you know, whether you have a line. Yeah, no. Oh, go ahead, man. Just real quick, my line in the sand is a bit different. So, for example, I think there's a bit more wiggle room. And for a lot of these things that we're talking about, I think for many of us, we don't really know how we're going to react until we get to that checkpoint.

You know, we think maybe now we imagine, but it's not like last night when I had this experience. And my line in the sand, you know, I could still see me because I've always, already given, you know, in a number of places, my fingerprints to Mexican authorities or U.S. or EU. I feel like that that's already blown past. There are some definite things like vaccination. I will not be injected no matter what. If that means my father is dying and I can't see him, I'm not going to commit suicide to go see my dying.

It'd be like two negatives, you know, so I'm definitely not going to do that. But for me, the real line is in the sand is like, you know, I might go along. I might do the biometric to log on to the ID to log on to the internet. But for me, the line in the sand is the fault crime, the digital gulag. Like the line in the sand is like, okay, I've used my biometrics. I've logged my digital you to get on the internet. But if you say this, you're going to be blocked, you know, or you're going to lose so many social credit points.

That's where I'm not going to adhere to that. So I kind of want to get thrown in the digital gulag. You get what I'm saying? Yeah. Yeah. What's interesting to me, though, is that that seems like the inevitable when you end up in that position, because now they have that control, so you will eventually, you'll just vanish either way. I would read it, but I take your point. Anybody else want to come in?

Well, I think, I think Hakeem was right, though, that I don't think they ever would limit access to the internet. I have to agree with that. It's too, it's too important. They want to keep an eye on everybody. So they'll give you a way in if you don't like to the internet access alone. Yeah. No, I would, I think they would, I think they would. I think they would.

I think they would. You know, let the vagabonds be vagabonds who can then be tracked by the fact that they're not, they are not on the system. That's a good one. I had a really important point that just absolutely escaped me. Well, James, maybe I can help bring it out. I was going to just mention James that you already make certain exceptions or make certain lines in the sand that others. That was actually what I was going to say. You're not on Twitter.

You're not on all these places. Well, okay. So, for example, okay. So, yes, again, it is, it's so piecemeal and there are so many different parts to it. I am a foreign resident in Japan, which means that every time I come into the country, I have to give my digital fingerprints. No exception. If I ever want to leave or come back to Japan ever again, I have to give my fingerprints. And so I have done that many times.

However, yeah, for example, Telegram, I went to sign up for Telegram because everyone was on Telegram a few years ago. And they wanted my phone number. And I said, screw you. Nope. And I will never sign up with you. I was going to do chat GBT as a kind of a joke thing for one of my editorials once. And I went to use it and it's like, it wants my phone number? Screw you.

I'm not even going to use you for a joke. So yeah, I definitely have lines in the sand, but there are so many different pieces of this that I don't know. I don't think anybody is floating on the cloud here. Like, oh, I'm so above this all. Or if they are, they're not listening to a conversation online like this one. There are like piecemeal lines in the sand. I mean, I'd walked away from Rockfin as consistently like a number one show there because they wanted me to paywall all of my content. And even though the content was up everywhere else for free, you know, I was like, well, no, because that's a, that's a lot.

Yeah, number one, you can't force me to pay for people to pay for what is otherwise free content. Like that's not that's we're not going to do that. I'll leave, you know. As far as the state goes, I already hate flying. I can give that up, you know, pretty easily. I've already been to Europe. They want biometrics to enter. I'm not in a rush to go back.

It's, you know, I've been uncomfortable. I've been homeless. I've been poor. I've, you know, been in jail. Like it's been, you know, it hasn't been. been a comfortable life to begin with like not taking part in some dystopic digital hellscape doesn't seem that difficult or far afield from the way that you know i've lived for most of my adult life anyway um you know but i recognize it not everybody has that and has

that background and they're you know but i i don't know yeah i guess i my my My line in the sand is definitely you have to give up biometrics in order to get online. Okay, well, then I'm not doing that anymore. I have a number of. Sorry, by the way, can I just add just, I mean, we're talking as if we'll never be heard from again, if we're not online. Right. This is not just something that I'm doing for fun's sake or something. No, this is literally, if I go offline because I can't get online anymore, you're going to find me through my books or you're not going to find me.

I'm going to mention, we need to have a physical, we need to have an IMA physically monthly journal or something, you know, we need to be prepared because we will adapt. I know Whitney currently with Unlimited Hangout is trying to start something and I definitely think we should, you know, and I'll piggyback on what Steve was saying is kind of an example. And since I have a similar but different experience with Rock, and I'll talk about that too, is that taking our last conversation about this with Rock, for example, it's kind of, it's the same kind of idea, right? And I'll give you my experience since then. is that so what I said, which I basically still standing in the same point, but I've used it more since then, is that my argument was that there was a use to it in sort of like using it to expose like the partisan work and we could all find our rationales for using whatever, but that ultimately it wasn't something that we should trust and blindly adhere to and, you know, the whole thing, right?

But my point was that there was a value that you can see in doing it. And the same thing, or I've already made a point about the value we saw on it. You know, so it's a rationale you can make about what you think is valuable. at that point at least there's no like transactional thing i think we just know that it's being used right the information we're helping build the system in a way but you know the point is that i've continued to use it in that way you know and so it's like it's we all have our own situational things where we rationalize it on rockfin's side of it ultimately my logic was that i already have like steve said free content all over the place or for the most every other place is free so when they

did that i ultimately just kind of let it be because it's free everywhere else right but so it's like we all can find our lines where we think, and we should, though. It's like the line for where we decide is crossed that this individual. That's not something we should all or ever all going to agree on, but it isn't, I think it's important back to, I figure whose point it was, that I think the principles need to be, I think it was Derek, that we should know those lines, right? We should define them for ourselves and we should do our best to stand by them because we're going to get tested with every day this goes forward. I'd like to, I'd like to bring it back to real examples so we could look at other countries and come up with a name for

what we're doing right here, which could be called a principal test, like a purity test. And so if you want to talk about... I don't like that to report. Boo! Yeah. If you're talking about an internet lockdown, right? What they're doing in Australia, they have age verification, which is not tied to a digital ID yet, but in their committee meetings, they talk about how digital ID would be perfect

for it. They just simply haven't made it pulled that legislative trigger yet. But so the way that works is if you are logged in to a very large platform, YouTube, TikTok, Gmail, you will need to verify your age or any sort of social network. So I think that's a really easy one to check off our list, right? We're obviously not going to verify ourselves biometrically for that. I think that's a very low at the totem pole. Travel is probably somewhere higher than that.

We're already seeing that in the EU, in the U.S. I think we can all agree. It's not a black or white situation. It's more like, all right, I'm not going to travel to these parts of the world anymore. I still would, I'm going to try and travel personally. I'm going to try and travel as much as I can before it's, it's everywhere. And then, yes, you really have to make sure you have a home base. But I do. You went to Japan recently, right? I went to Japan and I talked to the gate agent and it was really fun because I looked like a mess. So I didn't have, um, I didn't have, there was no computers there, right? There was no biometric scanning. They do ask you. And it was really funny because I looked tired. And he was like, he was like super, he was super diligent at his job.

So I just did like a Kauai Japanese thing. I was like, oh, look at me. And he laughed really hard. But, yeah. So they, they do bully you at the airport, you know, in the U.S. when you try and opt out. I can go through some bullying, no problem. But I think that what we should probably talk about is the grocery stores.

I think I shodded with someone about this in another country. Oh, it was in Canada, where they already have this, where if you enter a grocery store, they've got the little doors at the front. And I think that's happening everywhere. And that is a very natural place for digital ID to enter. So you scan it to even enter the store. So that's a tough test. right? Do you, are you going to be prepared enough for that? And I don't know. I would think I would

need to have kids and be in a really tough spot to comply with that. Well, I'll jump on there quickly and point out simply that I think that's easier than it may sound. I get your point for the average person, but for those, I mean, there's, you know, that's almost something we should be doing anyway. Go to your farmer's market. Go to your liquor farms. Get away from the store in general. But go ahead, Derek. Oh, yeah, I was just going to say, I mean, to Hakeem's question there about that maybe not purity test, but principal tests there. That, yeah, that's something I wouldn't want to comply with using the, like, the Australia example, whether it's Facebook or anything else, but you're right.

If it was used Facebook or give biometrics by Facebook, you know, it's not a big, not a hard decision to make. I do think that the way, as we've all understood, the way that they pushed it during COVID and the way they pushed every different agenda throughout the last few decades and maybe throughout history is obviously the kind of subtle coercion. the social engineering, the convenience aspect. I think that maybe even some here underestimate the amount of people who comply with things. I do think that an internet ID will eventually roll out, maybe nationwide, not necessarily

a worldwide internet ID, but they could find ways to start on the national level, which they're already doing. So for example, to access certain government websites, they're already starting to make it where you have to have some form of QR code on your phone or things like that. And they claim, well, there will be exceptions for the small percentage of the public, population that's not on smartphones. But so they're already kind of using that subtle coercion to get people, whether it's corporations or you want to renew your driver's license, okay, well, we need to scan your face or we need to do this, you know, this digital, this digital app on the

smartphone. So I think a lot of people will comply and mostly because not just the convenience thing, but because people are not preparing. No matter how many hundreds of thousands of hours, people have listened to our podcasts or documentaries or books, people still aren't taking action. At least that's just kind of what I see. And that's maybe on the more pessimistic, like James was saying, a little black-pilled view, that I think a lot of people are watching this happen. Like, I mean, I think it was your phrase that you coined originally, James, infotainment, conspiratainment.

That's kind of how I still see people looking at this. And maybe now it's getting a little more real because the announcements are coming more rapidly. But it still feels like people think they're just watching a TV show and not thinking about, okay, how am I actually going to respond to this if it comes to the grocery store, if it comes to the internet, if it comes to the airports. And yeah, you mentioned Hakeem, people with children, we're all going to have different decisions to make based on, again, our lifestyle and our habits and just our situation. And that's okay. I wasn't asking that question earlier about our principles to sort of say we all need to act the same way. Clearly, we're all already not acting the same way in dealing with this the same.

But if we don't even have that conversation and start thinking about it, then all of a sudden when it happens, maybe you're just going to comply because you haven't given it a second thought, because you haven't started visiting. the local farmers markets and building those relationships. That's the other point I just want to make real quick is that I think establishing community relationships, whether it's like in your situation with the HOA trying to talk to your neighbors and say like, hey, maybe we need to make an exception for people like me or trying to build these relationships is going to be increasingly important because I don't think us in our isolated little silos talking about this on the internet are going to stop it. We have to be able to come together both to try to slow it down or to have solutions.

Go ahead. Absolutely. And let me just put a quick. plug in for Hakeem's latest T-Bot episode. I was just starting to watch that. And I saw you were plugging the community gardens websites with the maps and everything, showing people how they can connect to their local area. Because I'm sure we all hear it.

I hear it from my audience all the time. But there's nobody in my area. Well, there are lots of ways that you can start finding people in your area and starting to connect with. Like Derek, office point, excuse me, often points out. If you don't have in your, you know, start it yourself. You know, go ahead. Sorry.

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

We'll have different levels. So I expect that some people are going to be proactive. I mean, even us, right? Just generally speaking about content creators. I think a lot of people are talking to talk. But if push comes to shove, how ready are there? So I think it's okay for people to learn the hard way. Just I hope it's not too late for them.

And I hope it's not like an overnight thing. Going back to that, though, yeah, there are a lot of resources out there. And I think that if it really happens at a wide scale, like when, if digital ID starts to be used in every asset of life, I think also at the same time, we're going to see societal breakdown. And it's not going to be that attractive of a system. Going back to the government shutdown, TSA is right now working in America without pay. Dude, they are so grumpy, bro. It's kind of hilarious, honestly. They're very, very grumpy.

I've talked to them a little bit. and they're just telling me, yeah, no one's showing up for work. Everyone is calling and sick. So these systems are actually really, really fragile. They need people to perpetuate them. And hopefully, maybe this is what it's going to be. You know, the rollout digital ID, there is going to be a mass negative response, and it falls apart in its own.

That is the best case scenario for this thing, in my opinion. Now, it's almost like somebody wants to crash these systems purposefully in order to rebuild them. Maybe a digital ID might even be the best way to distribute SNAP benefits. I love thoughts like that. I mean, absolutely, we'll do that. But there is an element of that of, like, deliberate sabotage to bring things down.

But I think you can also take a bit of comfort from, like, if you take, take, like, true crime programs where you see some guy kills his wife and they find out on his computer 10 days before he did it, he was Googling how to kill your wife and get away with it. And that literally does happen. because there is a limitation to the psychopathic mind. There is a lack of imagination and a lack of foresight.

And if you extrapolate their outer systems, these psychopathic systems have that same limitation, and they can collapse through that. I mean, remember the European blackouts? Just whatever, last spring or whatever? And there was mass blackouts, and people are like, oh, my God, suddenly we can't buy or sell anything.

Wow, maybe we need some physical way of doing this instead of all digital. And it's going to happen when and if they roll out, the digital ID in a big way. There will be like a blackout for a day or two and suddenly people will be like, oh, we can't do anything. Wow. I wonder if we should have some other way. I had an article on my show this week about dumb homes as a new thing that people are doing where it's a wave of people who are unteching their house and their lives. And that's like it's becoming a popular movement. They're talking about how the

Gen Alpha or their kids is probably going to be the least tech savvy generation in a couple because they're all kind of moving in reverse away from it. There's a natural rejection of this that's taking place, I don't know, on a subconscious or spiritual level for, I mean, tens of millions of people. And I think, I don't know, I see it. I recognize it. I also have a 13 year old. Well, to Derek's point, I agree completely, but I think both those things exist at the same time. Like, I think, my opinion is that everybody can see this for the most part. The question is, are they actually taking action their lives to change anything?

I want to bring this to one more point before we get too far, you know, towards the end, is the overlap to this of the digital twin point, right? And the corporate element, because, you know, as I've always pointing out, you know, just the homeowners association, just scooping up all this data. I don't know what scares me more, a corporation or a government or whether they're both the same thing, owning all this information. And we don't even truly, maybe maybe Kaki more than anybody here, but I don't truly even know what that means in the future, you know, like what does it mean when they own every piece

of biometric data of you and just on a computer? What does it mean when they create like a Sim City digital twin world where they're testing out what you may do a week tomorrow and Tuesday at 3 p.m. Which is exactly what's actually happening. Like the Sim kind of, you know, so my point is all of this. not just in the accessing life part, but the use of that block to gain those things and for what that may mean in the future.

You know, it's just one more part to, you know, recognize that this is much more alarming than just being blocked out from your life, which is far alarming enough, you know? So I just want to throw that in there before we finish. I didn't want to part of your report say that one of the governments or one of the digital ID programs actually said that they own the likeness to you. Because I thought I remember you saying that maybe it was to James.

And that's what it made me think of as this whole. digital twin concept with which is becoming more popular. So it's like if they believe they own your literal likeness and they have all your biometrics and who knows whatever else, what does that mean for them recreating you in the digital space and that whole digital twin conversation Ryan's talked about. But that's what first came to mind when I heard you say that. And they own and possibly with the overlap of your genetic, you know, like your patent on your body because of the COVID-19 injection, like just ideas, like the idea that if they alter you genetically, like a Monsanto seed that they can argue they own that change.

You know, this is not that crazy of an idea when you look at the way it's gone. Combine those together and that becomes even more alarming. Keene, go ahead. I know your thought on this. Yeah. So, yes, once you give away, once you give them your biometrics, it's like they have like ownership of your likeness because they could take the biometric data. They could share it, right?

Like five eyes is still a thing. Those data sharing agreements still apply, whether it's online surveillance, or whether it's biometrics, whether it's your biometrics. And so they can still continue to do stuff with them. And I think that Russia's case is, you know, where they are able to integrate biometrics into CCTV cameras so they can use facial detection is a really, it's the most scary example of that.

Also, going back full circle, we talked about how interoperability is one of the most, important features of these systems. I do think we will reach a time where most, most countries will converge on a single tech specification. And I think that'll probably be verified credentials from the, you know, the WW dot consortium. So that's in the report.

I really think as a journalist, this is worth just checking out the tech spec to see, to see what it looks like. It's not black magic. Like you guys can also play around with this. We can make it. Actually, this is worth closing on. Kim Cameron, you know, who came up with this idea of digital identity,

him and the people who are working on this idea, they had this idea of sovereign self-identity. And it was about someone issuing their own identity. And it kind of made him seem like that word and specifically some of the things he was saying in his report, it kind of made it sound good, as in you're the one who could issue. your identity and you had complete control of it. Where was I going with this? I was going with

this is, is there a alternate or competing form of identity we could provide or we should provide? Because as we, if we're moving into the counter economy, we're letting go of, you know, grocery stores, banks and all of that, we're going to need a trust and reputation system for ourselves. So I think that's, I think that's interesting there. Like we could, we could technically, because this technology is out there, verified people. You could issue your own IDs. You could build software around it. I mean, I've had the thought in my mind, but I honestly don't know. What do you guys think? Is it useful or is it not? Let me just say right off the bat. You're exactly right. Because and here's here's the example that we can cite. And this may not be the best one, but it is a one. We do not need governments in order to steward over some identification system for us. We can do it ourselves. And here's an example. How on, remember eBay, and I don't even mean whatever it is today, but, you know, 20, 25 years ago when people were using it to buy and sell things online, you had no idea who's on the other end of that transaction or whether they're going to be able to, you know, fulfill that or whether it's a total scam or what have you. But lots of people bought on eBay and lots of people trusted it because they had the reputation system.

People would rate and review the sellers, right? And if somebody's got a thousand five-star reviews, they're probably going to deliver. And if somebody's got like three one-star reviews, they're probably not going to load. And that's a completely voluntary, totally, and it's pseudonymous, right? It doesn't have to be your particular individual, like, here's my name, face, profile, DNA, whatever. It's just here's the handle that I'm using. And people can, you know, use a trust and reputation system.

But yeah, we do, when we are interacting with people, we do need some way of understanding who that person is in terms of their reputation, if nothing else. And that is the thing we lose when we go from the real world of actual people that we are interacting with that we know on a face-to-face basis into the big digital billions of people that you have no idea who they are. And so, yes, I think there does need to be a way for us. If we are going to interact with people digitally, we need to be able to verify the reputation in some way. But it does not have to be the government. Well, I was going to say that while, just real quick, while I understand what James you're saying there and what Hakeem is saying, I also want to just point out, I wrote an article back in 2021 for TLAB about this discussion around sovereign digital ID. And one of the people who was promoting is Charles Hoskinson, who's one of the co-founders of Ethereum. He actually spoke at the World Economic Forum in January 2020.

And he was talking about this and he's talking about how do you track people? How do you trace that? How do you make sure the money is actually going into the right hands? and he talks about global citizenship, self-sovereign identity. So again, I think there's potential to what's happening there. But then I also pointed out that as far back as 2018, IBM partnered with something called the Sovereign Foundation, which is also a partner with the World Economic Forum, and they are aligned with the United Nations Development Goals. So I guess my concern is that there is also going to be an effort by, you know, they, them, those,

to co-op this language and co-op this idea of her sovereign idea. And personally, for me, I'm okay with just, you know, I get in the digital space, describing James in terms of reputation and how that could be, you know, valuable. But I feel like, I don't know, I guess just like, because for example, I've seen some communities, I'm building an intentional community. I've seen some intentional communities say, we're going to put our entire community on the blockchain. We're going to have our own internal digital ID for whatever use cases. And I guess just, and I don't see the value in that. Now, maybe in the broader picture, like you were saying on the internet or something. But to me, I'm just like, if I need an ID,

can I still just use a piece of plastic or a piece of paper? Like, I don't, I'm very wary. I guess of that co-opting of that language. Oh, I'll add to that because that's kind of where my mind was going, is that what he was saying is really interesting. And I appreciate James' addition to that because it goes in a different direction, which makes sense. But so what kind of what Derek was hinting at, I think, is that, you know, clearly people are going to push back. So there's going to be at least, I would argue whether they manipulate or not, somebody out there is going to go, here's something like, this is what I thought is the possibility in this. Here's something you can use to pirate the system, right?

here's your fake digital idea that you can use to get inside and be able to broadcast. Isn't that kind of what we're doing with Corbett, with our YouTube pirate streams? You know, it's like we're finding a way to circumvent it. So we're not complying, but we're still working through the system. So that's kind of where my mind was going earlier. The idea that you could find a way to make your own and then work inside of it. But at the same time, you know, somebody I would see that and then try to, you know, you get the mainstream alternative media version of your thing that gets you and you're

trapped in the same way. So we have to be skeptical. But I think the idea is, you know, this is, if this inevitably, continues to go in this direction. If we box ourselves out and sit in a corner, we're not, you know, other than, I don't mean that. Obviously, we're going to keep working, like you said, books and other ways, but we're missing out on that major reach. There will inevitably become an effort if it's possible to sort of hack your way through. I think that makes sense with the way things have always gone in the past. I just think that's interesting thought. So thank you for

bringing that up, Akeem. Bring on the cypher punk future. I'm for they're pushing it, you know. This is just an interesting little tidbit. So Kim Cameron, I mean, he's on the board of ID 2020. He was before he died. By the way, this is interesting. His blog is still up. The last post he made was criticizing the COVID lockdowns before he died. Not that that has anything to do with each other, but it's just interesting on his blog,

IdentityBlog.org. But it was really funny because he used this term sovereign self-identity. And then I think he presented it to the UN and they all hated it because of the word sovereign. They're like, oh, this sounds like some. this sounds like some hippie-dippy. For sure. It really didn't like that idea. But Derek is right.

They will try to co-opt that language exactly as they have with everything else. Sustainability, for example. I mean, the concept is fine. It's the way, what they mean by it and the way they have corrupted it, right? But again, on top of that, it's, so you could argue there's going to be somebody who doesn't just use the language, but literally make something that appears to be the way you hack into it, but that's the trap in it of itself. Like, what's a good example of that today?

I can't think of anything. I know there's some kind of an overlap like that. It'd be like a privacy front end to X or. Yeah. Oh, like the privacy phone sold by Eric Prince. Thank you. Exactly. Yeah, that's the guy.

He's like he's legit. No, just kidding. Don't don't get his phones. Like one note to add on to that. So it is possible, Ryan. And I've tossed some ideas back and forth from people who've read the spec and we'd be like, should we do this? And on one hand, it feels really weird.

I don't want to just mimic them. On the other hand, you do need trust and reputation systems, but it would still work the same way. It would be very, very similar. You could still have QR codes and all that. So that doesn't leave a good taste in people's mouths. But if we did want to build something like that, where was it going with this?

I was just saying that, I was saying that it's possible. It's possible to do it. Just it may, before we had these trust and reputation systems, all you had was each other's words. So it was through the people, you know, the people you know. And so you could have digital identities that are signed by other people as well. But instead of having, that's where I was going with this, instead of having an issuing authority

like Apple or Google or the government, it would be signed about that individual person. Now, you could build this theoretically. You could start using it. But the problem is that Google and Apple will not, they don't want to let this happen. Apple is a lockdown ecosystem. By 2027, Google phones, Samsung phones, anything that's Android-based, will not let you install apps unless the developer hands over their ID, the government ID to Google, and also gives them the master key to their app so Google can make changes anytime they want.

They see this coming. You know, they've already felt the threat of open source and they're doing things. So it is seriously a digital fracturing where the, you know, the mainstream side of the populace won't be able to interact with our tech. And our tech will probably, you know, vice versa. We won't be able to interact with theirs. I just want to say one more thing before. I know we're going to wrap up in a moment because what you said, Hakeem, so that's actually

what Charles Hoskinson talks about. He says that this is going to be a sovereign ID stored on a blockchain, not accessible to any third party with all these protections built in if people trust him. But I have a feeling, and this is where I'm curious to everybody listening to this across all the different platforms, are you guys, I think the audience is just genuinely against digital IDs of any kind of concept like that, whether that's silly or not, I think for the most part, and please do comment and let us know what you think, if there was a possibility

of what Hakeem's describing or reputation system that James mentioned, some way to do these things that doesn't involve government, shady corporations, et cetera, but is done in a private, way that is useful in you and your communities and things like that. Is that something people are out there still interested in? Or is it just like digital ID, whether it's government or private or corporate, I don't want anything to do with it. I'll start with that and we can kind of wrap on it. I think most definitely is something that I don't want it all. And I think that's like it was James that said that like in anyway, or maybe it was you, Derek. Just that's, I think I like the personal

self-responsibility and trust factor of meeting people. You know, but my point was simply that we may end up in a world where that is the reality, and that may be the only way to sort of pirate stream your way past it, but I'm of the mind that I would like to go in any direction other than that, but it's a good question to ask. So why don't we finish up going around with final thoughts? Go ahead of Keem. You want to kick it off? No, I thought this was an awesome conversation.

I think we should have this conversation more, because, you know, as we know, this is just one component of digital public infrastructure. Digital ID is the first. Next comes unified payments through those payment apps, And last is the data exchange piece. So I think we should keep talking about this. It's time moves on.

Seems like there's something new every week. But I'm just grateful to have this conversation with you all. And check out the digital ID report. It's on abovephone.com slash digital. You can download it. You'll just need to give your email on it. And I'm going to try and keep it updated as things move on in time. So, yeah, I hope we can just get more visibility onto the subject.

And also I'm interested in. the conversations people are having with their community, right? What's the most effective ways we can get through to others? Because we will need a network to actively resist this and thrive in the face of it. Go ahead, guys. Just final thoughts if you want to jump in? My final thought is I'm just hoping for a category 5 solar storm. You know, that would kind of solve everything.

But just keep on trucking, I think. And get used to being uncomfortable. Just yesterday, I was thinking what James said about not having the number for telegram, but I had been planning this for a while. And I was trying to get Apple subscription to put my podcast ads on the Apple. And it's been taking a week, like to go through the EU Digital Services Act. It's absolute madness. But I bought a virtual number for five bucks a month.

You know, 10 bucks would have been probably too much for me. But five bucks a month, okay. And I was thinking maybe James, you know, that would have, that could have been an option for you and I have virtual address. You know, I found I found the deal for 76 bucks a year for a virtual address, which isn't too shabby, but privacy is going to increasingly come financially at a premium so economically, but also in terms of the time and energy that we're going to spend. But I think we just need to keep, just like all of our forefathers in the past, right?

Just keep on trucking. So my answer to the question is that I think it's naive to think that we'll be able to ever have communities larger than the Dunbar number without some form of identification, reputation, whatever it is. And I think we should be actively thinking about that and constructing ones that work for us. And I realize now I should not have said eBay because everyone will go, eBay, well, okay, I never bought anything on the OG Russell, Brits Silk Road, but I'm betting they had a reputation system too. So there you go. If you want to be in the counter economy, you're going to need a reputation system. Think about how to do it. No, that's absolutely correct. And,

And think about how you want to and can network either through, you know, skating around whatever internet laws or restrictions there may be or, you know, how you can share information and share commodities with people in a world that you're no longer. participating in the online part of if it comes to it like all of this stuff has to be sort of planned out you can't be just you know little isolated pockets of semi-resistance you do have to maintain connections into the broader world so I think about how you might want to do that while you're at it I would say that well Hakeem is absolutely right we should talk about this more because there's a lot of stuff we've barely grazed over. Like there's the situation in the UK is just a fascinating microcosm of this.

And there's the whole concept of international interoperability, which we just glanced over again. And I have a final thought, I suppose, which is more of a question and that I genuinely don't know the answer to and maybe a big concept introduced when we're supposed to be stopping. But what is more important, complicity, or? awareness. Like just say we get to 2030 and the system is in place internationally. There's digital ID for everybody everywhere. And you have two options. You can either have 90%

complicity. And the 10% aren't on the internet. They're not anywhere. They're living the little agrarian lives or whatever, totally separate from the digital control grid. And the 90%, 45% of the 90% are aware that the system is wrong. Or you have a lot. Or you going to have 80% complicity and the 20% have scraped off and doing their own thing, but all 80 of those 80% are totally fine with it, which of those situations is worse. Yeah, interesting. I think it's an interesting to think about, I genuinely don't know the answer. It's just something I was thinking about. Well, that's the best kind of, you know, it's thought provoking, you know,

and just to kind of wrap up, I think it's, that's what, that's why I think I've really enjoyed this discussion today. And I do agree, kid. I mean, we will do more of these. I think we have one plan coming up for the general control grade with Catherine, you know, but it's, there are points we, like interoperability. Like I recommend and I'll include in the show notes, you know, Hakeem's outline because this is, I think, one of the central parts in it. But, you know, it's, what I enjoyed today was the thought provoking ideas, like that we don't all have the same opinion. You know, we definitely see things a different way. And that's what is going to happen for each one of us as we, as this all continues. So I really appreciated more than anything today. I did Eric and Corbett,

you know, this conversation of where your line is. I think we need to reflect on that and think about where that is for each of us and what choices we're going to make. We can't wait until this is in front of you, right? Where they're demanding your papers until you make these choices. It has to happen now and you have to plan for where that life is, deliberately plan for where you want your life to go. Right. I'll just share one last real quick.

Just reiterate what everybody said. This has been a great conversation. I hope everybody listening is taking something from it in terms of getting these thoughts in your mind, talking about this with your family, with your loved ones, with your churches, your communities, what have you, your neighborhoods, because these are conversations we need to be having. And I am sometimes blackfield, like James was saying earlier, with like, this is going forward. There's nothing we can do to stop it. You know, that's why I tend to focus on exit and build, try to build outside the system. I still think that for me is the path,

but I recognize there's many paths. And I'll just end with one of the things my grandmother used to tell me was that as long as there's life, there's hope. And I try to remember that with everything going on. It's like even if the cage gets tighter and tighter, you know, if we're still breathing and we're still, as you were saying, Kit, keeping this in the consciousness and having people being aware of this, however we have to navigate that, even if it's not perfectly in line with our principles, which is going to be difficult. And I think we should still strive to stick to them, even if we end up in that place. If we're alive, if we're breathing, the resistance is still going on, and that means there's still a chance. And yet, we shouldn't

let it get to the point where it feels impossible to go back and to resist it, you know, because we've all seen what past totalitarian regimes have done without any of this infrastructure. So we know what they think they can do once they have it in place. Great point, Derek. Well, it's a good place to wrap, guys. And I hope you'll join us for the next one. There will be plenty more coming. As always, question everything.

Come to your own conclusions. Stay vigilant. In the long term, the plan is to pretty much lock up humanity in smart cities, which is kind of a super set of a 15-minute city. They've sold all the state and local governments and countries. that smart cities are about sustainability and the good of the city. But in reality, the language from the UN and WEF and their white papers is all inverted. So, air monitoring is really about limiting mobility and no car ownership.

Surveillance control via LED grid is why the smart lighting is death. Water management is about water rationing, noise pollution is about speech surveillance, Traffic monitoring is about limiting mobility, and then, of course, energy conservation is all about rationing heat, electricity and gasoline. Another concept one should be familiar with is called geo-fencing, and think of it as an invisible fence around you, where you cannot go beyond a certain point, and that will be related to your face recognition, digital identity and access control.

Your smart contracts, software can turn off your digital currency beyond a certain, point from your house. Our world has been turned into a digital panopticon. That means you can be monitored, analyzed, managed and monetized.