Re: Hello world, meet American driver’s licenses

Elaboration. There are a number of AlexJones/Infowars articles. They mostly
boil down into creating a control grid.  Whether there is an actual agenda
is up to debate. Some of the points are still valid.

Here is an example with biometric identification:
https://www.infowars.com/posts/third-world-countries-continue-rolling-out-digital-biometric-ids-as-id4africa-agenda-is-underway

Key points:
+ "digital ID app could be theoretically shut off if the user fails to meet
specific requirements"
   They cite covid-19 vaccination certificates. I remember earlier
arguments against this on the grounds that it was a slippery slope toward
identification for everything. The premise is good. But like they argue
against some of the precautions put in
   place after 9-11, the desire to be safe leads to a trade between
perceived safety and freedom. The agenda part would be the same site saying
that both covid-19 and 911 were planned events for the purpose of a
hegelian dialectic (i.e. create a
  situation where a trade off between safety and freedom seems logical,
when otherwise it would face wide public opposition) In my opinion,
discussion should take place before an emergency arises. Perhaps there
should be no bending of the rules.
+ *"*digital ID smartphone apps for increased tracking abilities
*"*
   This is like what Kim said. People like Edward Snowden and William Benny
would also agree that the government already has stepped too far in
collecting unnecessary data. So there are elements in government that do
favor hoarding data, beyond
  what may be considered reasonable [1]. If there is abuse, how can checks
be put in place to prevent further abuse? Most people are good. Few people
are bad.
+ "digital ID for children to access, or not access, age-restricted
content."
This seems good. However, a common argument against this is that the road
to dystopia leads with good intention. Start with something that is easily
accepted, then allow scope creep to restrict access for ever more
situations.
+ "One inherent danger of biometric identification is that the data cannot
be altered if compromised, such as with a database hack."
+ "Facial recognition images could be fed into A.I. software to create fake
surveillance camera video of a targeted individual conducting a crime. "
The two previous could be seen together. Creating fake footage is easier
than ever. It is good that deep fakes have already been thought about in
this community through verifiable data.
+ " likely scenario will be a new push for the global microchip
implantation of the human race, as microchips can have their information
altered upon being compromised."
I frequently hear talk about the Book of Revelation and the Mark of the
Beast shortly after hearing talk like this. Identification to buy or sell
should be seen as a warning.

I realize that some are involved with ID4Africa. Unfortunately on this
Infowars site I see a lot of comments that are begging for edification. I
wish there was more intelligent discourse than finger pointing.

I hope this is constructive in the sense there are danger zones.


[1] NSA Whistle-Blower Tells All: The Program | Op-Docs | The New York
Times <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9-3K3rkPRE>

-Brent Shambaugh

GitHub: https://github.com/bshambaugh
Website: http://bshambaugh.org/
LinkedIN: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brent-shambaugh-9b91259
Skype: brent.shambaugh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Brent_Shambaugh
WebID: http://bshambaugh.org/foaf.rdf#me


On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 11:04 AM Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Interesting perspective; can you elaborate? Please keep the conversation
> constructive.
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 9:01 AM Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Almost sent last night too:
>>
>> Another solution is to be educated and continually skeptical. Some of
>> Kim's arguments remind me of some Alex Jones/Infowars articles I have seen.
>> While this may not be a flattering comparison, it is important to be
>> skeptical of the skeptics
>>
>> I am adding this now because I believe it is an argument for open
>> standards. Transparency and public involvement builds trust, but also
>> builds the opportunity for edification and discourse.
>>
>> -Brent Shambaugh
>>
>> GitHub: https://github.com/bshambaugh
>> Website: http://bshambaugh.org/
>> LinkedIN: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brent-shambaugh-9b91259
>> Skype: brent.shambaugh
>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/Brent_Shambaugh
>> WebID: http://bshambaugh.org/foaf.rdf#me
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 1:06 AM Brent Shambaugh <
>> brent.shambaugh@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> To be honest, sometimes I "forget" my phone. On occasion, I wear a "tin
>>> foil hat" and put my phone in a faraday cage. I do not trust my government.
>>> The next "Save American Privacy Act" may be really the "Take American
>>> Privacy Act" passed on Christmas Eve.
>>>
>>> Some say the solution is  to somehow take money out of politics.
>>>
>>> -Brent
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 10:25 PM Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> I realized we’ve been talking past each other in the mDL discussion,
>>>> and a large factor is likely different assumptions and use based on where
>>>> we live. So I wrote a US driver’s license explainer:
>>>> http://kimdhamilton.com/american_privacy/
>>>>
>>>> I hope this will help move the discussion forward when we talk about
>>>> the risks in the US context.
>>>> Kim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> -Brent Shambaugh
>>
>> GitHub: https://github.com/bshambaugh
>> Website: http://bshambaugh.org/
>> LinkedIN: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brent-shambaugh-9b91259
>> Skype: brent.shambaugh
>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/Brent_Shambaugh
>> WebID: http://bshambaugh.org/foaf.rdf#me
>>
>