Category Archives: Covid. Passports/ Digital ID.

THE BEADY EYE SAYS : IT IS NO LONGER WHO YOUR ARE ITS WHERE YOU ARE.

08 Tuesday Jun 2021

Posted by in 2021. The year for change., Artificial Intelligence., Big Data., Biometric technology., Civilization., Covid Passports., Covid. Passports/ Digital ID., Dehumanization., Digital age., Emergency powers., Facial Recognition., GPS-Tracking., Human Collective Stupidity., Human values., Immunity passports., Modern day Slavery, Morphological identifiers., Our Common Values., POST COVID-19., Technology v Humanity, The common good., The essence of our humanity., The Obvious., The state of the World., The world to day., THE WORLD YOU LIVE IN., THIS IS THE STATE OF THE WORLD.  , Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAYS : IT IS NO LONGER WHO YOUR ARE ITS WHERE YOU ARE.

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

(Six-minute read)

“Who are you?” What are you? Where do you come from? Are you contagious or not?

Freedom in modern society has come to become a loaded term.

The current covid pandemic is showing us that we are living in an infinitely

connected world and most of us are using biometric technologies every day.

 

However, the whole concept of authority when it comes to freedom seems to

be in conflict with the principles of self-determination.

As a result, Biometric technology is now going beyond human ability and will be used for many more physical and behavioral characteristics to identify them.

The implementation of digital IDs/Passport systems carries far-reaching implications for individuals with access to services and livelihoods so the question of what is meant by freedom is now in the hands of Artificial Intelligence.  

Mostly we don’t notice these limitations because we’ve been programmed to not even think about being released from them.

It turns out that our freedom to make even the simplest of choices may not just be more limited than we think—it may not exist at all.  

You could say so what! we are already tracked.

I have no prejudice to those that are, but no pass should assume everyone is because society takes that as one meaning only.

The part of our minds we identify as “us”—is now powerfully influenced by technology. 

It really is an indignity to have to carry a document that explains the difficulties one might have. Proving one’s identity is one thing knowing where you are in another sort of measurement without the same level of reliability.

The difficult truth is that “we” aren’t free even from our unconscious selves. 

The argument is that Biometrics is the most suitable means of identifying and authenticating individuals in a reliable and fast way through unique biological characteristics. But the question is. 

Should people be informed about the use of these technologies as a biometric template is a representation of an individual’s unique traits?

As biometric characteristics are immutable, when a biometric template is stolen, that characteristic is compromised for good.

Biometric templates cannot be updated or renewed.

Biometric identification is a computer-controlled analysis that identifies an individual by measuring some biological traits scanned by sensors and matching them with the data stored in a database. 

So should we have the power to apply for the Canceling of Biometric ID that allows us to revoke a compromised biometric template as if it was a stolen password?

                                         __________________


Biometric identification schemes and “immunity passports” are already being rolled out.

Programs for tracking tracing and surveilling the entire population are already being beta-tested and the digital payment infrastructure; the system of financial exclusion that will allow governments to turn off our access to the economy at will is being put into place. 

This is not about the world that we are living in but about the one that we are being thrust into.

Biometrics perceives human beings as subjects of biometric data collection, which offends human dignity. Not only dehumanizes the person, but also infringes bodily integrity, leading to human indignity.

Biometrics severely infringes privacy.

It is way more complicated than tracking your online activity or placing cookies on your phone or computer. Business organizations have already been collecting biometric data of their users and the fate of this data remains uncertain.

Biometrics is a technology-based identification and authentication approach, which may require several other systems to work together to stay operational. Despite all technological advancements, downtimes and system failures are still a reality.

If you have made it this far, it is incumbent on you to help inoculate those around you against the corrupt ideology of morphological identifiers before our ability to speak out against this agenda is taken away for good.

Morphological identifiers are another thing altogether and time is not on our side.

Why? 

Because not everyone in the target population can be fit for biometric identification, which will lead to discrimination and exclusion.

Morphological identifiers will be used to find out subconscious emotional structures behind everyday human experience and behavior.

95% of all purchase decisions are made subconsciously deep down in customers’ minds.

                                     ——————–

Both forms of ID will result in discrimination on a global scale.

What would you do if being in a continuously authenticated state is a necessity?

The day is not far when your car and even the refrigerator will be able to identify you as you hold the handle to open the door.

To quote  Jonathan Haidt’s metaphor from his book The Happiness. 

Hypothesis—needn’t only be made to do “our” bidding against its will, but that we can also train it to want what we want. Perhaps then the greatest potential for freedom lies in creating as much unity between our conscious and unconscious selves as possible.

So, you may be asking yourself at this point, “well if I can’t choose for myself how to live my life, how am I free?”

In answering remember that freedom and opportunity are not the same.

We cannot properly assess the quality of our freedom until we have established whether and to what extent the choices we make are based on adequate understanding.

Freedom is something we say we want, but what sort of freedom would be worth wanting?

Take freedom of movement for instance.

With a growing disregard for individual and collective abilities to properly understand those choices and their broader context by allowing the introduction of Biometric identification schemes we are in fact allowing the erosion of whats is left of Freedom. 

Liberty means being free to make your own choices about your own life, that what you do with your body and your property ought to be up to you. Other people must not forcibly interfere with your liberty, and you must not forcibly interfere with theirs.

Across the years of wars around the world, no single issue unites people more than freedom and no other issue is more important but it remains hard to see just what freedom a human being is supposed to possess.

No matter.  There is one certainty and that is a world without freedom is too cruel to live in.  Of course, freedoms aren’t absolute.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

Advertisement

THE BEADY EYE ASK. SHOULD WE AGREED TO COVID PASSPORTS?

26 Friday Feb 2021

Posted by in #whatif.com, Covid. Passports/ Digital ID.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASK. SHOULD WE AGREED TO COVID PASSPORTS?

Tags

, , ,

 

(Seven-minute read) 

 


COVID LIKE THE FLU IS A VIRUS IT MUTATES IT DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE, UNLIKE PASSPORTS WHICH ARE DISCRIMINATORY.

They should be fought against “tooth and nail.

They will become a backdoor to the rules yet to be made up, mutating into a wider digital identity scheme with the data more than likely to flow to third-parties with varying degrees of repurposing trustworthiness.

Even with the most privacy-preserving technology, the expectation is that health data will be viewed by different actors, from healthcare settings, employers, clients, police, and pubs to insurance companies, who may have different levels of experience and trustworthiness in handling personal data. 

For those without a passport, they will constitute a denial of liberties that others are being granted.

Such a program could potentially bring about invidious discrimination against racial and ethnic groups and stigma against an uninfected individual fracturing the solidarity of societies so the introduction of a vaccine passport or any such document that would deem someone “immune” goes beyond just the obvious challenge of logistics.

Why?

By replicating existing inequities, the use of immunity passports would exacerbate the harm inflicted by COVID-19 on already vulnerable populations.

The choice is not between returning to a normal life versus issuing immunity passports. Instead, the choice is between periodic lockdowns, attempting to emerge from lockdowns with immunity passports, and attempting to emerge from lockdowns without immunity passports.

First, a strong presumption should be in favor of preserving people’s free movement if at all feasible.

Passports or Digital IDs will eventually be weaponized creating coercive and stigmatizing work environments and are more likely to compound than redress…structural disadvantages and…social stigmatization.

In either form they will create a perverse incentive for individuals to seek out infection or choose to fraudulently acquire passports permitting immune individuals to exercise more freedoms than those who are not immune would undermine the message that we are “all in this together”

Although we recognize the deep existing inequalities in all countries and the ways in which COVID-19 has increased the hardships for the worst off they will turn the population into products to be are traced and tracked with employees risking losing their jobs if they don’t get vaccinated.

The advantages accruing to those with immunity (and immunity passports) would persist into the future. 

                                           —————————-

Faced with a deep economic recession/ depression governments around the world are considering the use of immunity passports to allow a degree of normality to return.

It is unethical to require someone to avoid contact with others if they pose no or minimal risk of spreading the virus. I acted in the belief that I was immune.

Some have claimed that “the whole point of immunity passports is to control movement”.  However, this claim is a gross mischaracterization: the point of immunity passports is to facilitate movement when it is safe to do so.

The root of the concern for many is the unknown degree to which past infection confers future immunity. Until it is understood whether or not people can be reinfected with the disease, and how long any immunity lasts, the move to issuing covid passport is premature.

For certificates or any form of passport to work internationally, they must be recognized by countries around the world.

COVID jabs certificates are readily available to creative forgers to copy.

Individuals who are immune to SARS-CoV-2 are expected to be at a vastly reduced risk of getting and transmitting the virus, and so removing their civil liberties would be unjustified.

The main argument for their issue is that it is unethical to restrict freedom unless there is a real risk to other people.

We have the technology to decide who is not a risk, we should use it.

Whether immunity passports should be used to reliably identify immune individuals it would be better to look for solutions to the inequitable distribution of resources and to tackle the upstream causes of inequality.

This same reasoning should be applied to immunity passports.

Furthermore, as some have highlighted, the advantages of COVID-19 immunity might not entrench existing inequalities in the way often assumed. We might wish to certify only those who are unlikely to transmit the virus.

The U.K., now shut out of the E.U. thanks to Brexit, is considering its own brand of immunity proof that would allow vaccinated people to go to restaurants, pubs, and—if other countries allow—the airport.

The safety-first mentality could spread into almost every area of modern life. When it does, there’s no telling where it will lead – this is murky territory that will develop into an app.

Everyone’s vaccination status is already being logged centrally by the National Immunisation Vaccination System using their NHS number. This information could be easily linked with an app.

Will, there use be legal or illegal?

That’s the crucial, still unanswered question.

Unless such discrimination is ruled out under the law, we can expect more of it.

The moral quandary is the same: Is vaccine ID a harmless tool that creates a safer society — or a sudden expansion of a surveillance state?

God forbid if I am ever asked to produce my ID card as evidence that I am who I say I am. I will take that card out of my wallet and physically eat it in the presence of whatever emanation of the state has demanded that I produce it.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.