Globalism/One World Government/Great Reset

[DrTiTus]

Want to talk about the Great Reset with Klaus Schwab?

Want to complain about the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization, or any other international organization that you have absolutely no say in controlling your life? Feel free to post your rants in here.

Keep the COVID thread specifically to talk about the deadly disease that wasn't, and the safe and effective vaccine that wasn't. (I'm obviously trolling, no need to discuss that statement here).

Also covers digital IDs/social credit scores/China-fication of Western democracies, pro-communism arguments etc, since that seems to have a bit of a crossover with the paranoia surrounding the future.

There seems to be a bit of a balance to be struck between trying to regulate the use of resources on the planet that we all share, and retaining national sovereignty and having a right to make our own decisions as independent nations.

Have at it if you've got anything to say. I don't mind being the conspiracy theorist that starts this off.

[Nich]

Where to start!?

virus mimicking nano-particles
smart dust, smart drugs
nudge units
immune system as a service
erosion of privacy, normalisation of erosion of privacy
central bank digital currencies
digital ID (are you too dumb to remember passwords!? wahey let us manage that! it'll be sooo convenient.)
Zionists killed JFK
mRNA, gene therapy and the precedent of Monsanto Canada Inc v Schmeiser applied to human bodies
Agenda 2030

[_indigo1]

So what's the guts with Digital ID then.
I can already imagine the beef with it - yay more ways for our lives to be arbitrated and controlled.

But can I actually see a specification or list of goals this Digital ID initiative is about?

I looked through WEF but there was too much waffle.
I just want "Digital ID is this:"

I know that it is a way to replace the current forms of ID we use already such as passports, drivers licenses, birth certificates - with an interoperative digital standard.
But I want to know the specific goals of what "Digital ID" means as a project.

Can't critique it without that.

[Ajax]

Birds aren’t real
Havana syndrome
Freetown engine
Expanding spiral
Darkside orbital
Liminal seeding
Pork Board Summit

[Cyberbob]

Originally Posted by Ajax

Pork Board Summit
Havana syndrome
Freetown engine
Expanding spiral
Darkside orbital
Liminal seeding
Pork Board Summit

What is this, Nu-Metal Band Name bingo?

Birds Aren't Real and Pork Board Summit do sound more ska punk though.

[Know me.]

Has the cycle come back round to the Jews? Or at least a few Jewish names thrown in there?

[Ajax]

Originally Posted by Cyberbob

What is this, Nu-Metal Band Name bingo?

These are legit concerns you need to take this seriously. The Pork Board controls everything.

[Ab]

Originally Posted by Know me.

Has the cycle come back round to the Jews? Or at least a few Jewish names thrown in there?

#alwayshasbeen

[Nich]

Originally Posted by _indigo1

I looked through WEF but there was too much waffle.
I just want "Digital ID is this:"

It's a pandoras' box of problems affecting agency, privacy, human rights, and liberty, which means it's easy to strawman for 5-10 minutes until people get bored and their attention is back on Netflix, computer games, porn, or their crippling debt.


Canada's final solution:
https://twitter.com/ChickenGate/stat...72056178159619

Australia's final solution (big four banks are on board, will roll out in 2023):
https://www.eftposaustralia.com.au/p...ness/connectid

Digital ID Wallet - Thales ("Lucy is reminded of her mandatory vaccination" - October 2020)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxvNzzgoJX8&t=30s
Thales is one of the largest defense contractors in the world. Why the fuck did they develop a Digital ID app?!

Note that the Guardian in December 2020 was telling us this:
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...own-conspiracy

In its most implausible version, this conspiracy imagines that a global elite is using Covid-19 as an opportunity to roll out radical policies such as forced vaccinations, digital ID cards and the renunciation of private property.

Global elite, using this as an opportunity!? naw, We're all in this together... right?
build back better
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkcaeaD45MY&t=13s


With energy prices where they are, you can already observe we've entered the "renunciation of private property" phase of this implausible conspiracy theory.





Hybrid war. Our governments have declared war on us.

[Ajax]

Originally Posted by Nich

Hybrid war. Our governments have declared war on us.

Get with the programme. All governments are just puppets on a string. All corporations are secretly controlled from the shadows. Behind them all lurks the one true apex predator:


The Pork Board.

[Nich]

Originally Posted by Ajax

The Pork Board.

Let's run this through the Youtube Survivorship Bias Test:

https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...the+pork+board

benchmarked against

https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...ael+killed+jfk


Looks like we've found a new benchmark!

[Ajax]

Originally Posted by Nich

Looks like we've found a new benchmark!

Sounds like something a person from a Board-Affiliated Covert Operative Network (BACON) would say.

[Nich]

When it's unveiled, bacon simply is available and it's delicious.

Then when the pool of willful participants is exhausted, there is enticement to get people to take bacon. Free donuts, free beer, pizza, ice cream, hookers et al.

Then when that pool of people is exhausted, you can point to the people who didn't take the bacon and marginalize them (even if they are the majority). If you don't eat bacon (like the rest of polite society) you can't attend school, work, gym, pubs, concerts.

Then when that pool of people is exhausted, you simply apply fines, taxes, violence, theft to the stragglers. Even if they start taking the bacon, at this point they are and always will be infidels. No one believes them, no one trusts them, they are to be avoided for their anti bacon beliefs.

[_indigo1]

I hope your reply that quoted me was not a serious attempt at answering the quoted text, Nich.
I sense that there is deliberate self-deprecating jest going on but I really can't tell sometimes.

[Nich]

Well OK, fair enough.

I'll presume you already know / agree with the following:
- Pretty much every country has announced their roadmap for digital ID linked to central bank digital currencies, and where they are along that roadmap
- Pretty much ZERO countries are debating digital ID in parliament. It was just decided it was going to be developed. Should it happen!? What are the pros / cons!?
- a rushed job delivers shit outcomes
- governments are terrible at digital rollouts
- governments pay lip service to encryption, but would prefer a "backdoor". A system designed by governments will have a backdoor built in (ie we're all an Optus customer by default)
- every government discriminates (even when they make their "caring face", there's still people and scenarios they cannot imagine)
- once the rules of the game are known, corruption / cheating always finds a way
- laws only exist if there is interest in enforcing it
- anyone in government can be bribed
- you don't beat corruption by making the citizen transparent to the government. The government must be transparent to the citizen.


With that basis, let's get into it.

Did you know theres an ITU "standard" document for Digital ID?
ITU: Digital Identity Roadmap Guide:
https://www.itu.int/pub/D-STR-DIGITAL.01-2018

- The benefits of a Digital Identity System for citizens include: greater convenience and usability; reduced costs for government services; and improved citizen inclusion in government programmes.
- The benefits of a Digital Identity System for governments include: improved service delivery; reduced costs for staffing, document processing and storage; reductions in benefits ‘leakage’ through elimination of duplicate or fraudulent identities; better government planning through better data on the use of government services; and improved national security

Translation:
- Citizens get convenience over security (no option). and they get included in government programmes even when they wish they weren't included.
- Tighten the screws on free-loaders, big data, less staff, more algorithms and AI.

Central Bank Digital Currency global rollout tracker
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/cbdctracker/


NYU School of Law: Paving a Digital Road to Hell
https://chrgj.org/wp-content/uploads...ad-to-Hell.pdf

The spread of these systems is driven by a new development
consensus which holds that digital ID can contribute to inclusive and
sustainable development and is a prerequisite for the realization of
human rights. But a specific model of digital ID is being promoted,
which draws heavily on the Aadhaar system in India as a source of
inspiration.

...
As outlined in this primer, and as many of our partners and colleagues have
documented, the World Bank and a wider network of global actors are promoting a specific
model of digital ID. This model privileges economic identity, is disconnected from legal
status, and steers attention away from civil registration. Contrary to the human rights
and inclusive development language used to promote this vision of digital ID, this model
threatens a range of fundamental rights, from the right to social security to the right to
privacy. The purported benefits remain mostly unsubstantiated in the absence of serious
baseline studies, cost-benefit and value for money analyses, and impact assessments.
Meanwhile, researching and revealing the impacts of these systems has mostly been
outsourced to an already overburdened and under-resourced community of human rights
organizations, advocates, scholars, journalists, and other civil society actors.

Resisting these developments can seem hopeless at times, despite the high stakes
involved. With its significant resources, the World Bank’s ID4D Initiative has published a
dizzying array of materials emphasizing the benefits and wisdom of its vision of digital ID.
It has relied on the legitimacy of the Sustainable Development Goals and human rights to
justify its race towards what seems to be an inevitable future. It has fostered a network of
actors who have collectively manufactured a new consensus around digital ID and dressed
it in the language of development goals and rights. It has facilitated network building and
learning, including by evangelizing the experiences of Aadhaar in India. And it has directly
supported governments through technical assistance as well as through financing the
design and creation of new digital ID systems.

...
At an event in 2013 at the Center for Global Development, he described the Indian approach to adopting Aadhaar as follows:
“Our view was that there’s bound to be opposition, right, so that’s a given. So we
said how do we address that? One was, do it quickly. Because if you do it quickly
it’s less likely to coalesce against you. The second was do it quietly, get it done. And
third was we said that in any case there is going to be a coalition of opponents,
so is there a way to create a positive coalition of people who have a stake in its
success?”

Rush it out, be secretive about it, and have your gaggle of sycophants ready to counter any "fringe dissent". Yay, democracy!

Worth reading in full. But what's this Aadhaar system? Looks to be India's response to rampant corruption and inequality. Just like the ITU document says is the benefits for citizens and government. Citizens become "visible" and get greater access to government teat, while governments get better tools to track and stop corruption.

But that's not how it's actually working in reality

‘Dissent on Aadhaar — Big Data Meets Big Brother’ review: Rhetoric and ground reality
https://www.thehindu.com/books/books...le26340384.ece

If there’s one book one ought to read to understand the various ills of the Aadhaar project — on its flawed digital architecture, its impingement of basic civil liberties, its deleterious impact on welfare programmes, its aid in creating the foundation for a surveillance state, and its utter undermining of democratic processes — it is this.

[_indigo1]

A lot of that is your projection into what Digital ID is going to *result* in.

Back up the truck.
Before we can even address that - we need to agree what Digital ID *IS*
This is all I am asking. Not an interpretation of it and it's pitfalls or how it could be abused, but the basic bullet list of specific features Digital ID is a collection of.

I can see there are Digital ID projects in various countries, including ours.
I have read ours. But if Digital ID is some global WEF agenda, there must be a common definition of what it *IS*, which all the countries implementing it are adhering to.

Absent that I am left to my own interpretation which is thus:

- Digital ID is a standard, streamlined set of technologies and procedures which will allow agencies and businesses (in an OPT IN basis) to query a users identity (NOT their authentication!) with an authoritative body, establishing digital trust that the user is who they say they are, replacing the existing paper forms of identity verification such as birth certificate, drivers license, passport.

Assumptions on technological implementation:
- (Possibly federated) central repository in the form of blockchain, where the miners (minters) are the participating authorities.
- When going through the process of receiving your Digital ID, after establishing valid line of identity using non-digital means, client will generate a block with some information attached, signed by a private key known only to the client.
- After verification, authoritative body will mine said block into the authority blockchain as permanent proof of said authorities acceptance that whomever can produce public keys matching said block is established as the identity encoded in the block.
- When *authenticating* with an online service, client *may be* requested to verify identity. In this case, client is queried for a *public key* which the third party may then validate against the authority blockchain to establish proof that the client is the identity stipulated.

NOW, this technical implementation is wrong. It's full of holes, not the least being if someone steals your private key, they steal your identity - but it works as a general idea of the scope of what is trying to be achieved.

Have I got any of the scope of this hugely wrong?

[Nich]

Forget the WEF. They are not designers or implementers, they are only pie in the sky thought leaders (and government "penetrators" with young global leaders et al)

World Bank and a wider network of global actors are promoting a specific
model of digital ID.*

* The Aadhaar model. Which started as just what you describe, a new system for verifying identity. first it was opt-in. over time more layers were appended to it (biometrics, etc), and more services shifted to REQUIRING a digital ID. Now every new birth goes into the Aadhaar system.

Australia tries the same thing with My Gov (my health record). An abomination of mishmashed government services. Always increasing in scope, never reducing.

Phase 1: available and opt-in
Phase 2: enticement (free vouchers, for those with digital ID)
Phase 3: some services not available without digital ID
Phase 4: punished for not having it


I've seen enough completely fucked government initiatives to be opposed by default until they have a public debate. As it stands, even mentioning digital ID is a "conspiracy theory", when we all know they are developing them. Where is the public discourse?

[_indigo1]

So what I'm getting is that there is no definition of Digital ID beyond what each country decides to implement and outline.

You are railing against some undefined thing that you cannot even cite, some shadow background players are pushing as some kind of agenda, which doesn't really bear any relation to Digital ID itself in the scope which I have outlined above.

So in reality you have no justification for lumping abuse and widening of powers - the 'extras' in you have mentioned, with Digital ID as a basic form of facilitating the digital version of pre-existing digital or non-digital forms of identity management or representation, be it birth certificates, drivers licenses, passports, MSD Client ID's, NHI number, etc etc.

These forms of identity management already exist, some are already digital, and some are already required for interaction with certain parties.

So expansion or abuse of identity tracking be it digital or not, really bears no relevance to Digital ID.

What your argument comes down to is losing anonymity. That is a different issue than Digital ID, and is largely redundant in the age of electronic currency anyway.

[_indigo1]

Tell me, Nich;
Do you do all your transactions with Monero?

[xor]

The ASB bank knew you were buying tinnies in 2003 when you withdrew $20 from an ATM in Otara at 10pm on a Friday night, Nich.

[_indigo1]

Originally Posted by xor

The ASB bank knew you were buying tinnies in 2003 when you withdrew $20 from an ATM in Otara at 10pm on a Friday night, Nich.

That and the fast food orders later that night

[Nich]

I've linked to perhaps the ONLY comprehensive study on the biggest digital ID system in production, which the West is using as a development roadmap. These people have thought more about the legal, privacy, corruption, and human rights issues with expertise that we will never possess. We can read their report and heed their many warnings. Or we can discuss our opinions.

Sure, corrupt analog India just becomes ultra corrupt digital India. My view is that we currently have THE worst batch of governments internationally the world has ever known. Too dumb (or well-intentioned) to know they've impinged human rights, or become corrupt. To make matters worse institutions and regulatory bodies have been hemorrhaging (resigning in protest, or being fired for not following COVID mandates) the kind of people you want who might object when boundaries start getting crossed.

One benign step at a time. Into the abyss of totalitarianism. "It's just a digital version of identity documents we already have.", "The data leak has happened, so privacy isn't important anymore."

This kind of "horse has bolted" argument on privacy is stupid.

I'm an agorist. Count me out by default. Or maybe until they just shut the fuck up about how CONVENIENT it's all going to be for me.

[_indigo1]

Originally Posted by Nich

These people have thought more about the legal, privacy, corruption, and human rights issues with expertise that we will never possess. We can read their report and heed their many warnings. Or we can discuss our opinions.

Oh ok, listen to the experts - gotcha.

One benign step at a time. Into the abyss of totalitarianism.

Yes, I was thinking just that when I saw that the NZ Govt is relinquishing a good portion of the extended legal powers it gave itself during the pandemic.
Funny how certain people were sure this only goes in one direction.

[Nich]

September 2022
‘Draconian’: Rebranded WA pandemic laws will shock public, opposition claims
https://www.watoday.com.au/national/...21-p5bjtz.html
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT (TEMPORARY COVID-19 PROVISIONS) BILL 2022
https://web.archive.org/web/20221003...EM%2B084-1.pdf

amends the Emergency Management Act 2005 to provide for a temporary scheme, to be in operation for 2 years
...

It provides a “catch-all” power that allows authorised officers and hazard management officers to direct a person or class of persons to take any action the officer considers reasonably necessary to prevent, control or abate the risks associated with the emergency.
Section 72A also contains information gathering powers.
...
This section provides authorised COVID-19 officers with the power to take
control or use any place, vehicle or other thing (whether inside or outside the
declaration area) for COVID-19 management purposes
...

The bill got pulled, but holy shit these retards thought it was a good idea to even write these words with potential to become law, policy. They'll be back.


Take away extended legal powers, and bring in information police.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_4Cjki3SOM
(funny she brings up Christchurch shooter (another Azov recruit) after vowing to support Ukraine.)


Regarding experts. Until such time as NYU is shown to have written this report not for human rights awareness but for financial, or other gains I will take their report seriously. If they were paid off, or get other benefits it calls the entire report into question.

[Nich]

IBM partnered with Sovrin Foundation 2018
https://sovrin.org/

Sovrin puts people, not the organizations that traditionally centralize identity, in charge of
decisions about their own privacy and disclosure. This, and the combination of the pervasive
nature of the network and the open source nature of its code, enables all kinds of rich
innovation: privacy-protected data sharing, revocation, novel payment workflows, asset and
document management features, creative forms of escrow, curated reputation, and so on.

https://www.weforum.org/press/2018/0...ital-identity/

IBM 'dealt directly with Holocaust organisers'
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ighereducation

...shows that executives at the firm's New York headquarters directly controlled a Polish subsidiary which leased punch-card machines used to "calculate exactly how many Jews should be emptied out of the ghettos each day" and to transport them efficiently on railways leading to the camps.

All the crypto bros are gonna love that it's called Sovrin. "Sign me up, I'm a sovereign individual!"

[_indigo1]

*IF* there were a pandemic outbreak that was proven beyond a doubt (and you agreed) to be dangerous enough that spread must be mitigated at any cost - let's say it killed one out of every three people it infected, and it's transmission rate and mechanism was similar to omicron.

Given that scenario, what would you expect government response and legislation to look like?

Just interested in where your line is given appropriate circumstances.

[Nich]

I "expect" the government to go from analogue emergency extra-legal (COVID), to ultra digital emergency extra-legal:
-No debate (because "emergency!")
-Instant health passes
-instant vaccine development, no clinical trials (because "inject before it mutates!")
-Geofencing linked to simcard, bank, Police
-Social credit (because "health")
-Masks

And I "expect" the response to be complete regime-changing violent dissent.

The response to COVID was a hollywood response. I don't sense that any world leaders feel at all embarrassed about that fact. So they'll likely just do it all again but with their new tools.

[Nich]

But you're asking me what I think SHOULD happen. So:
-if a virus is killing 1 in 3 it is probably going to run out of live bodies to infect
-The affected areas do their best to identify and quarantine SYMPTOMATIC AND INFECTIOUS PEOPLE ONLY
-For the love of god don't use PCR test
-any claims about the virus should be clearly labelled as "BULLSHIT" until proof can be provided (asymptomatic spread! causes myocarditis! young people are equally at risk! patented drugs work but unpatented drugs don't!)
-all unaffected countries should set travel restrictions to affected areas
-all unaffected countries do their best to ensure normal life continues unmolested by fear mongering
-Corporate media put on a leash, Alex Jones level fines for disinformation.
-Disinformation no longer defined by the opinions of people behind podiums, in boardrooms.

[_indigo1]

I pulled the 1 in 3 example out of a hat. My intention was to remove any debate as to whether critical action need be taken to stop the spread, or not.
So assuming that this thing is the worst possible combination of R number vs lethality - i.e. we really do have to STOP it. Then does your response still stand?

[Nich]

even you are turning it into hollywood. All of humanity figures out THE SINGLE STRATEGY for stopping a humanity-ending pandemic (and they do it in one month!). World peace and harmony is achieved in our hour of crisis, all people on planet earth can say "we" and sincerely mean to include all humans.

No, what you're getting at is an anointed coalition gets to decide what the response will be. Their talking heads all repeat the mantra: "I'm just saying in my expert opinion we need to lockdown, and I can't be wrong because go to the next institution and they're saying exactly what I'm saying, so THEY can't be wrong either!"

So we lockdown, wear masks, inject whatever gene therapy because "we're all in it together." . And they go mountain biking, no masks, and inject saline solution.


CDC could be considered one of these anointed institutions. The director came out recently saying they need to reimagine the CDC in light of some of their shortcomings during COVID-19. So what did they do to prepare for the next pandemic? They created an in-house PR department...

[Nich]

However, if in the next pandemic some lab in Ukraine or Wuhan says:

"Oh, whoops! Yeah that's our virus with funding from NIAID. Look, sorry everyone but fortunately we developed the working vaccine too! It's just $17 per dose, and everyone regardless of risk profile needs 3-4 doses. Here's a link to our e-store."


In that case, I think I'd just slit my wrists and end it.

[_indigo1]

No, I'm not turning it into Hollywood.
I never talked about some single strategy or any of the other stuff in your reply - that is all coming from you.

What I was interested in is where you place the upper limit with government action and the intersection of individual 'rights'
Not ALL governments - just any - ours for the sake of argument.

And so what are the upper most actions you believe a government would be justified in taking given the most dire of circumstances.

What, if anything, would it take for you to feel the right thing to do was lockdowns, or even stronger measures - and what would they be.

[Nich]

posted my reply to wrong thread
https://forums.nzgames.com/showpost....postcount=3132

[Nich]

If you want to hear the smartest person in the world speak on why digital ID is a shit idea, and that there is an infinitely better way. Listen to Balaji Srinivasan talk about charter cities, pseudonymous economy, discrimination and unconscious bias associated with firstname / lastname.

[Nich]

If EVERYTHING you do and have ever done is linked to your Firstname/Lastname (or citizen #, or facebook, or linkedin), the government (Five Eyes) can collect an "excessive" amount of data on you.
https://twitter.com/kennardmatt/stat...RRQL42h8S4jUvg

If you do SOME things linked to your Firstname/Lastname (or citizen #), and SOME other things linked to pseudonyms (i.e Satoshi Nakamoto, Bunnyfucker776, Verax, John Dobbertin), you're more likely to express & apply your true, full potential free from self-censoring, discrimination, political malignment.

Federal government considers forcing Australians to provide ID to use social media and dating sites
https://7news.com.au/sunrise/on-the-...ites-c-2497510

Of course, the government thinks internet anonymity is ONLY used for cyber fraud, bullying, and sexual harrassment. They took the same approach for NBN (only bad things can come from high bandwidth internet, like Foxtel subscriptions dropping off a cliff). They are so focused on the harms, they are completely blind to the net good that occurs when the government can't possibly get in the way "for safety". Of course, they can't IMAGINE that societal, economic, or technological progress can be made outside their purview.

Now, take the situation of requiring your Firstname/Lastname (citizen #) to access the internet. Currently it would be a big burden on ISPs to manage this. Each account has an ID and bank account associated, but how to do you manage each connected device to the router? The ISP isn't equipped to perform a 100-point ID check for every WiFi connection.

Enter Digital ID. If it is a cryptographic proof that I am who I am (citizen #), then surely it would be rather easy in hardware/software to set up a "quick and convenient" QR code scan for any new MAC address that logs into a router enabled for Digital ID Checkpoint. You might even do away with having to enter the SSID & password (Because those are sooooooo annoying, right!). Now, any internet activity done on that device is done in the name of the citizen # registered to it.

[_indigo1]

All of this still hinges on Digital ID somehow being required for EVERTHING which is exactly what you just said, and there is zero justification for thinking that.

On top of that any company that takes digital payment is already deanonymized anyway thanks to KYC laws, so the point is moot for those ones - and a different hill to die on.

For in-person transactions anonymity hinges on the acceptability of cash rather than digital. That is a hill to die on for sure - not Digital ID.

That leaves websites which don't take payment.
The government can't dictate how those behave on the global internet without deploying an even more obvious sledgehammer to legislation that would definitely be taken notice of, and again, it's own hill to die on completely orthogonal to Digital ID.

If Digital ID is truly not wanted, then the market will route around the ones that try it on.

[DrTiTus]

Originally Posted by _indigo1

If Digital ID is truly not wanted, then the market will route around the ones that try it on.

Unless it's pushed by international bodies that we didn't vote for, and taken up by governments that we did.

My only problem with this "globalism" (unelected rich people telling us how to live) is that we don't get a say in anything because "representative democracy" which is not democracy at all, as far as I'm concerned.

But I'm not caught up in panic, I'd rather come up with tools that allow sensible pure democracy and a better way to debate policy that doesn't lead to polarised extreme binary views.

No matter what happens, there's always guillotines and starting again.

[_indigo1]

You cherry picked one sentence from my reply out of context.

I already addressed everything you said in the non-cherry-picked portion of my reply.
The specific comment about routing around it was specifically pegged to this statement:

That leaves websites which don't take payment.
The government can't dictate how those behave on the global internet without deploying an even more obvious sledgehammer to legislation that would definitely be taken notice of, and again, it's own hill to die on completely orthogonal to Digital ID.

If Digital ID is truly not wanted, then the market will route around the ones that try it on.

To clarify - I am talking about non-payment-taking digital services on the net - lets say Facebook, Google, Reddit, NZGames.
(I spoke directly to payment taking ones already)
If any of those go to opt in to Digital ID and the market truly has a distaste for it, then other services will pop up that are identical but without Digital ID requirements, and the users will go.
This will create pressure for other services not to even try it to retain users.

[Nich]

As Bajalis says: What we call democracy is 51% dictatorship over 49%, in an endless see-saw of dissatisfaction.

Indigo,
Yes! You've got the optimism of Andreas Antonopoulos. and I'm confident a move by the government to gain leverage from Digital ID, cashless society (both inevitable) will simply spawn a parallel society. Just the same as COVID policies did.

Governments can and do dictate how people should behave on the internet:
-US with backchannels to Facebook, Twitter, Amazon AWS, Linkedin. And rumour has it Biden admin is highly likely to block Musk's Twitter acquisition.
-UK with police arresting people who post problematic reposts
-Australia sent police to houses of facebook users (want a law that requires real ID when using social media... I'm sure that won't have scope creep)
-Canada's response to honk honk (bank account closures, insurance cancellations)

Monopoly on violence makes people change their behaviour when people are made an example of.

KYC law has many good reasons to be in place. But a transaction should just be a transaction. In Canada a transaction to the truckers protest meant your bank account could be closed. and yes, the people I follow said that was the best advertisement for Bitcoin ever.

If you've ever applied for a mortgage, you see there's a comprehensive rating system on transactions. Add to that banks are now rating your carbon footprint. Based on some arbitrary parameters that I'm sure any questions will be met with claims that the science is settled. To me, it just looks like gamification of austerity. But just another way to measure good little citizens and micro punish any slight deviation.

The walls are always closing in, never retreating.

[_indigo1]

I hope to god you two aren't proposing direct democracy.