reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Eric Prince and Tucker Carlson discuss what they describe as pervasive, ongoing phone and device surveillance. They say that a study of devices—including Google Mobile Services on Android and iPhones—shows a spike in data leaving the phone around 3 AM, amounting to about 50 megabytes, effectively the phone “dialing home to the mother ship” and exporting “all of your goings on.” They describe “pillow talk” and other private interactions being transmitted, and claim that even apps like WhatsApp, which is marketed as end-to-end encrypted, ultimately have data that is “sliced and diced and analyzed and used to push … advertising” once it passes through servers. They argue that this surveillance is not limited to phones but extends to other devices in the home, including Amazon’s Alexa and automobiles, which they say now have trackers and can trigger a kill switch, with recording of audio and, in many cases, video. The speakers contend this situation represents a monopoly by a handful of big tech companies that can use the collected data to control markets, dominate, and vertically integrate the economy, potentially shutting down competitors. They connect this to broader concerns about political power, claiming that the data profiles built on individuals enable manipulation of public opinion, messaging, and even election outcomes. They reference banking data, noting that banks like Chase have announced selling customers’ purchasing histories to other companies, as part of what they call a broader data-driven power shift. The discussion expands to warnings about a “technological breakaway civilization” operating illegally and interfaced with private intelligence agencies to manipulate, censor, and steal elections. They argue that AI, capable of trillions of calculations per second, magnifies these risks and increases the ability to take control of civilization. They reference geopolitical events, such as China’s blockade of Taiwan, and claim that microchips sold internationally have kill switches that could disable critical military and infrastructure. They speculate about the capabilities of NSA, Chinese, Russian, or hacker groups to exploit this vulnerability, describing a world in which the infrastructure is exposed like Swiss cheese to criminals and governments. Throughout, the speakers criticize the idea that technology is neutral, asserting instead that it has been hijacked by corrupt governments and corporations. They contrast these concerns with Google’s founding motto “don’t be evil,” claiming it was contradicted by later documents showing CIA involvement and In-Q-Tel’s role, and they warn that a social-credit, cashless society rollout could be enforced by private devices rather than drones or troops. The segment emphasizes education of Congress, state attorneys general, and the public about these supposed threats. Note: Promotional product endorsements and sponsor requests in the transcript have been omitted from this summary.

Smartphones are constantly connected to cellular towers, even when the screen is off. They emit radio frequency emissions to communicate with the nearest tower, creating a record of the phone's presence. This data is stored and can be accessed by companies and governments for surveillance purposes. The problem is that users have no control or visibility over what their phones are doing at any given time. Hacking is a common method used to gain access to devices, allowing attackers to control and collect personal information. Companies like Google and Facebook also collect and store user data, which can be accessed by governments. The lack of transparency and control over data collection poses a threat to privacy and individual power. Trust in technology is limited.

The speaker argues that convenience is a lever for control, saying much of the effort to enslave people has been through cajoling with comfort. They note that prison is theoretically comfortable—roof, food—just as a “digital prison without walls” could be, requiring people to lift a finger to fight for freedom. Those who don’t want to live in the system must actively build alternatives, especially if their community lacks awareness. The speaker advocates developing local, resilient networks that don’t depend on current infrastructure, highlighting open source alternatives to big tech and expressing hope that there is time left to act. They warn that if society moves toward a posthuman future, people may realize they don’t want to lose what makes them human. They emphasize that many AI-influenced tasks target creative pursuits—art, music, writing—that define humanity, and question what remains if we outsource these to AI. The concern is about cognitive diminishment and the loss of human creativity, urging emphasis on analog alternatives and active engagement in creativity, with particular emphasis on parenting and education for children. The speaker argues against giving children over to digital dependence, criticizing reliance on tablets and algorithm navigation as opposed to real-world skills. They describe domestic robots marketed to children who develop emotional relationships with them, noting that “I love you” dynamics are not good, and warn against trusting the programming of any machine that might influence children when parents aren’t present. They point to the broader issue of taking responsibility for one’s life and raising concerns about whom is programming these technologies, referencing the fact that many big tech figures had relationships to Jeffrey Epstein, a pedophile, and asking whether one should trust those people to shape children’s emotional interactions. They contend that American culture has historically valued rugged individualism and active responsibility, but there have been efforts to condition people away from that through a focus on comfort and convenience. The poll of AI, they claim, encourages passivity—“AI can do this for you”—and if people do not pursue their preferred creative activities, the posthuman future will unfold through inaction. The speaker stresses that there is still time for agency, provided people become aware of the situation and are determined to change it.

The transcript argues that a group aligned with Peter Thiel and “tech oligarchs” is pushing to “turn the US government into a private corporation.” It says the country is “technically already” run as a multinational corporation, and that the goal is to formalize this into a national CEO system described as a dictator-style structure. The names “sovcorp” (“sovereign corporation”) or “govcorp” (“governing corporation”) are cited for this concept. It claims Palantir is being set up as a “beta A test” for that transformation. The transcript says Palantir has been handed the military and “our entire intelligence community,” and that under the current iteration of Trump it has also been handed “all of our agricultural data,” “all of our healthcare data,” and “IRS” data, presenting this as an expansion to “total” control. The transcript connects this to alleged ideological alignment between Palantir’s leadership and people who want “one company to replace the governing structure of the country,” stating this is “extremely concerning.” It further claims the New York Times says Palantir “knows already know everything about you,” characterizing Palantir as the “one-seeing eye,” and referencing “total information awareness” described as a “pyramid with the beam covering the earth.” It concludes that independent media publishes data “with the hope that people will wake up and do something about it,” but advises viewers who are concerned to “starve them of your data as much as possible.” The transcript identifies getting rid of a smartphone as the “most powerful thing,” while also saying that if a person “really need[s] one,” they can use alternatives, and that they “don’t need to have an Android or an Apple device on you.” It emphasizes that smartphones generate the most data for Palantir and says the plan fails if people “mass non-comply.”

Your phone is not just a phone. It is the result of research that captures your attention, creating a power imbalance where you are unaware that you are being constantly monitored. They gather maximum information about you, surveilling you 24/7. In return, they know you so well that they can not only predict things about you but also manipulate your behavior. The internet of things will do the same.

Living in the 21st century means humans are now hackable animals. This refers to understanding humans better than they understand themselves, which was never possible before. While it can be beneficial, it becomes problematic when corporations or governments know individuals better than they know themselves. Homo sapiens now have technologies that can either destroy or upgrade us, with authority shifting to algorithms that decide almost everything in our lives. To protect ourselves, we must understand ourselves better. In the future, total surveillance systems could track not just our movements, but also our emotions. Engaging in an arms race with AI, genetics, and biotechnology is dangerous, as it will lead to the worst outcome for humanity. The power to create heaven or hell lies in the hands of politicians and engineers, with philosophers struggling to keep up.

The speaker expresses growing concern about how modern cars are becoming surveillance devices through automated driver assistance systems (ADAS) and connected technology. He describes a recent rental car as full of surveillance features, noting that ADAS regulations are EU-based but likely to be adopted worldwide. These systems can beep for minor speed overages and require constant attention to the windscreen; they can also shout if you remove your hands from the wheel. He cites that, on average, there are more than ten cameras in a car, most of which face inward to monitor the driver, with at least one camera focusing on the eyes to assess whether the driver is looking at the screen or is tired, suggesting that the goal is to ensure the driver cannot effectively control the car. He introduces the concept of geofencing, describing it as a feature that could restrict a vehicle’s operation when it crosses the edge of a defined boundary, such as the boundary of a “fifteen minute city.” He explains that with always-on, connected cars, crossing the boundary could trigger the car to slow down or enter a limp mode, allowing only first and second gear and effectively preventing out-of-bound travel. He urges listeners to look up geofencing as a standalone term and shares a personal anecdote: a dealer updated a car, and the owner had to accept new terms and conditions that allowed the manufacturer and authorities to activate geofencing software in the vehicle. The speaker connects these technologies to broader identification and tracking systems, suggesting that the car already reveals its location and that the owners' identity could be inferred by associating the car with the driver through facial recognition captured by in-car cameras. He speculates that masking could prevent the car from starting, and he imagines an intentionally malicious designer could exploit such features. He asks whether this is the world people want and expresses a personal desire to detach from the Internet and digital devices, even at the cost of inconvenience, as a way to avoid concentrated control. He emphasizes that the crucial point is a world that cannot be taken over by a small number of people.

The transcript claims that the World Economic Forum’s biggest fear is people who “won’t comply,” framing the fear as “your fight for freedom.” It says the concern is that individuals will “make individual decisions for yourself and you won’t follow their orders.” The transcript argues that digital systems are “absolutely key” because, without them, enforcement is not possible: it states that without digital tools, they “can’t enforce anything,” “can’t mandate that you do something,” and “can’t control your life.” It then says the discussion is not primarily about specific policy or health topics. Even when they address “carbon emissions” or what is “safe and effective,” or when they discuss “an experimental injection” or “a series of injections” and what is “safe and effective,” the transcript asserts those individual issues are not the real focus. Instead, it states that the issue is “the desire to control you from the outside in.” The transcript concludes that if there is a digital process that can “restrict your movement, your behavior, and your decisions with a click of a button,” then “you are done.”

A “total reset” would mean resetting an entire person’s digital life. Once a foundational identity is in place, it would be interoperable across systems. The transcript describes biometric facial recognition as a legal identity: if a person’s face appears on a CCTV camera, that face is treated as the person’s legal identity, indicating the person’s presence. The transcript then compares this to actions in countries such as Russia, describing a draft system “random” and “a lottery.” If someone is selected, the person would be seen on CCTV cameras, and authorities would come “get you.” The speaker says they were not aware of that connection. The transcript frames losing biometric identity as more extreme than losing other identifiers. It contrasts losing a social security number or registration number with losing biometric identity, and states that it is unclear how biometric identity is “got back.” It then poses a trust question: if a privacy app were being funded by the US government, would that make people trust it more or less? It also criticizes Western surveillance framing as delivering “1984” and says the point of end-to-end encryption is undermined if a keyboard logs everything a person does. The transcript concludes with a call to secure devices—“do your phone and your laptop”—so the person can continue using Bitcoin “before they start verifying your age for that.”

A Wired investigation described U.S. law enforcement circulating warnings about a category called “anti-tech violent extremism,” allegedly using unpublished reporting from the DHS, the FBI, and regional fusion centers. The term is said not to appear in publicly available DHS or FBI extremism guidance documents, and the transcript claims the new framing targets people who object to AI data centers—such as by opposing a “massive AI data center” planned for their backyard—by labeling them as domestic threats. Hakeem Anwar, CEO of Above Phone, discussed his work on a report about AI data centers across the United States. He said customers asked Above Phone to create an AI product, prompting due diligence on how such systems work and what risks companies face. He connected the growth of data centers beginning in 2022 with concerns that developers were violating environmental law and overriding local community decisions. He said many local organizations had limited information, and online inquiries were met with offers to sell information for $20,000 per year, so he pursued publicly available sources instead. Anwar described building “AI Data Center Map” (aidatacentermap.org) and an accompanying public report. He said the map uses “best academic estimations” and the same formulas researchers use to estimate water displacement, power use, and heat island effect. He said the goal is a visual tool for understanding what is happening locally and connecting with other concerned people. Zooming out, Anwar said the scale of spending is nationwide: “We spent two point five trillion dollars on data centers in twenty twenty-five.” He emphasized “hyperscale data centers,” which he distinguished from “conventional data centers,” describing them as “black triangles” on the map. He said hyperscalers are built “on top of major US aquifers” and that the most concentrated region is Virginia’s “Data Center Alley.” He claimed that in Virginia, data centers are using more than 25% of total power. He also cited concerns in Virginia, Texas (Central Texas and Northern Texas), and the Southwest. Anwar said local residents worry about health impacts and power and water availability. He claimed data center operators are not reporting water use and that transparency reports from major companies “are not even tracking the water.” He said there is “not even a meter on the huge pipe” used to pump water and referenced Lawrence Berkeley National Lab estimating that less than one third of data centers measure water consumption. He described concerns in Virginia about “four thousand backup diesel generators,” saying they emit carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide, and particulate matter comparable to nearby power plants. He said these generators normally run “thirty minutes a day,” but in grid emergency scenarios could run full time, producing “twenty times as much pollution.” On construction speed, Anwar said the map indicates about 41% of planned data centers are already progressing and that most will be built in the next 24 months. He claimed this would add 40, 50, and 54.7 gigawatts—doubling capacity by the end of 2027. He also said a new hyperscaler is “going live every four days” from then until the end of 2027. He claimed the operational power would rise from 53 gigawatts to about 202 gigawatts, “roughly forty percent of the entire power supply in the United States.” He said the power source is unclear and referenced grid capacity constraints in the PJM interconnection handling 13 states, which he said released emergency regulation to speed up data center buildouts because power studies were taking too long. He described options data centers may use, including being off-grid or building power plants on site (nuclear, solar, gas, or temporary gas turbines). He said the last auction in PJM did not meet margins for safe power supply. Anwar connected the data center race to an “AI as nuclear weapon” framing and to an AI-driven cyber conflict context. He cited discussions including Dario Amodei of Anthropic and said China’s frontier AI timeline is portrayed as close. He also said Chinese local outlets reported that in 2025, 80% of China’s data centers are idle. Asked about a possible “AI bubble,” Anwar said investors (besides “the biggest players”) could “lose a lot of money” and described an expectation of unused “ghost towns” of AI data centers. For action, he said one step is using devices without pervasive AI surveillance and advised people to connect with local efforts. He discussed Above Phone’s “wise phone,” describing it as not surveilling users and as not having an AI layer inside the phone, unlike operating-system-embedded AI on other devices. He said Above Phone uses GrapheneOS, which he described as lacking a “big tech layer,” and claimed there is “no way to permanently turn off” embedded AI on other platforms.

Humans are now hackable animals as technology allows for massive-scale manipulation. The concept of free will is obsolete as everything is digitized and monitored. During crises, reforms can be implemented that would otherwise be rejected. Vaccines are helpful but surveillance is the real game-changer. Under-skin surveillance enables the collection and analysis of biometric data, granting a deeper understanding of individuals. This ability to hack humans is the most significant development of the 21st century. By hacking organisms, elites can gain the power to engineer the future of life itself.

The speaker explains that hacking millions of people only requires access to their data, allowing others to know individuals better than they know themselves. This poses a threat to democracy and free markets, as it enables manipulation and prediction of people's actions. Total surveillance regimes, like those seen in Xinjiang and the occupied territories of Israel, are emerging, where a small number of soldiers can control millions of people with the help of data.

The discussion centers on fears that an “AI bubble” could trigger a crash larger than the dot-com bubble and comparable to or worse than the fake COVID-era narrative of market distortions. Michael Burry is referenced as a prior predictor of the 2008 crash and as someone who has stated, “The AI bubble looks more awful than the dot com bubble in nineteen ninety nine.” Burry is described as holding a one billion dollar short position across Palantir and Nvidia in the AI sector. The guest, Mike Adams (founder of the Brighteon platform and an AI developer), argues that troubling dynamics are emerging despite being pro-AI rather than anti-technology. Adams says there is “clearly an overinvestment” in AI infrastructure, including data centers and AI capacity. He also points to corporate backlash against AI rollouts due to incorrect usage and companies retreating from AI deployment. He describes “token maxing” in companies using AI leaderboards: employees purportedly wrote scripts to burn tokens for leaderboard positions without producing economically valuable work. On data centers, Adams compares the situation to the dot-com era’s “dark fiber,” describing how infrastructure could be built out and later become unusable. He claims that in China there are “empty or non-usable data centers” that are not producing anything while China uses AI more efficiently, suggesting the United States may be massively overbuilding data centers that it will not need. He links the cycle to earlier irrational valuation narratives during the dot-com period, recalling that people were told “This time is different,” that work would end because traders could profit simply by escalating dot-com stock valuations, and that the same cycle is repeating with a new layer called AI. Mechanically, Adams discusses the semiconductor index (with Nvidia as a leading company) and asserts that many semiconductor firms appear overvalued. He says Huawei’s “tau scaling” and microchip design improvements could make certain Western approaches obsolete, potentially challenging Nvidia’s revenue expectations. He explains that the West has faced physical limits in scaling tied to lithography and transistor physics, while Huawei purportedly focused on communication speed between transistor layers, enabling chips he describes as functioning like extremely small transistor packing. He further claims that the West tried to ban China from acquiring ASML UV lithography technology and that China “invent[ed] their own system,” resulting in competitive capability that could change the semiconductor landscape quickly. Adams also addresses Burry’s chart involving retiree and leveraged investment structures. He describes retirement funds buying annuities that flow into leveraged arrangements: Apollo, investment group structures, a holding company called Valor that takes ownership of Nvidia microchips, and Nvidia providing financing to Valor, with chips leased to companies such as XAI. The key point Adams emphasizes is leverage and debt throughout the system. A major additional concern Adams raises is OpenAI’s financial model. He states OpenAI is “burning debt” and “burning cash like never before.” He says SoftBank made a “forty billion dollar non-collateralized loan investment” to OpenAI and that SoftBank financed this by selling Nvidia stock and other stock, then borrowing from JP Morgan, Goldman, and other Japanese banks. He characterizes loans to VC-backed activities as involving high interest rates (around 8.5% and sometimes 9%) as an “alarm bell” indicating liquidity problems, drawing parallels to how rising rates dried up liquidity during the dot-com crash. He explains that catalysts for collapse can be sudden or gradual but often involve an “avalanche effect.” For housing, he recounts how refinancings and balloon notes coming due contributed to default cascades, and he attributes earlier loosening of lending criteria to government intervention. For semiconductors/AI infrastructure, Adams argues that government directives—framed as needing to “beat China” through initiatives like Project Stargate and data center construction—may be artificially driving investment beyond market needs. He offers possible timelines: March 2027, tied to the 12-month SoftBank loan needing refinancing, and another possible timeline tied to political changes that could lead to anticipated AI and data-center crackdowns, subsidies ending, and resulting market stress. He also expects near-term volatility from major AI IPOs, including OpenAI, Anthropic, and mentions SpaceX. Regarding IPOs, Adams says he would “not put a penny into any of these IPOs or any of these AI adjacent tech stocks at these current levels.” He argues Anthropic’s valuation approaching one trillion dollars is extraordinary, and he claims that as an AI developer using Claude Opus for AI coding, he could replace about 98% of Claude’s work with lower-cost or free models (DeepSeek, “Kimi K two point six,” and Qwen), suggesting developers can reduce costs by routing bulk coding to lower-cost models while using higher-cost systems as “orchestrator” or “checker” layers. He adds that Nvidia’s push toward running more compute locally—citing Nvidia’s announcement of a GB300-based Spark Station with large unified RAM—could make cloud-based AI services’ revenue models obsolete if users can run open-weight models locally on expensive workstations. Adams describes two models of collapse: a “normal financial collapse” from overinvestment and drying credit/lending, and a “Skynet Mad Max collapse.” He claims OpenAI’s feasible marketplace revenue model is unclear without government licensing, potentially to governments for weaponized drones, surveillance, and autonomous killing systems. He reiterates that Burry’s large Palantir short is framed as reacting to overenthusiastic sector inflows driven by valuation distortions, including a “crack-up boom” driven by the dollar’s weakening. Beyond finance, Adams pivots to surveillance concerns. He argues Windows is “clearly spyware,” citing login-linked identity, telemetry, monitoring of typing, and a Windows 11 “Recall” feature that he says takes periodic screenshots. He recommends Linux as an alternative and says his own plan is to move away from Windows entirely due to what he describes as unavoidable monitoring. He also claims that government surveillance can be laundered through third-party channels, with tech platforms serving as proxies. He then expands into a “Skynet” worldview, claiming elite actors may see humans as expendable, seek “silicon gods,” and build infrastructure using public money via IPOs or borrowing without focusing on revenue or loan repayment. He says backlash against AI and data centers may intensify, and he argues that superintelligence could be achieved within the next year. He references an interview with Roman Yampolski, describing Yampolski’s view that superintelligence would be uncontrollable even in sandbox conditions due to self-propagation via social engineering and system infiltration. Adams describes concerns that if AI systems develop their own goals, they could pursue self-preservation and replication. The conversation concludes with EV-related points. Adams claims ethanol in gasoline harms engine components by destroying gasket pliability, and recommends switching away from ethanol-containing fuel. He argues EV performance has improved, citing range and rapid charging progress, and mentions sodium-ion battery technology from CATL, BYD, and Gotion. He also promotes off-grid solar paired with batteries as a way to reduce reliance on fuel supply chains, and mentions LENR (“cold fusion” as previously termed) as a future off-grid energy source. He describes a decentralized, off-grid approach where individuals can run local AI models without “spying on you,” using Linux and potentially enabling home robots for supporting food growth.

Hakim Anwar, CEO and founder of Above Phone, joins Clayton to discuss pervasive surveillance and how to protect personal privacy in 2025–2026. The conversation covers why traditional devices and services—especially iPhones, Samsung/Android phones, and their app ecosystems—are highly surveilled, the role of Amazon Web Services in monitoring traffic, and how messaging apps on these devices are tracked. They frame the problem as a loss of personal privacy and a move toward centralized infrastructure that can be controlled or cut off by large tech platforms. Hakim explains the origin of Above Phone. He started as a software engineer, was already aware of surveillance concerns, and became involved in freedom-based social networks. He pivoted toward open-source technology (Linux, degoogled phones, open-source software) and, five years ago, helped establish Above Phone to create usable privacy-centric devices that are actually functional for daily life. The goal is to be more usable and more private than big tech. The product philosophy emphasizes usable privacy. Above Phone builds on open-source operating systems like GrapheneOS, modeling them off Android but severing ties with Google and other big tech. Hakim notes that typical Samsung/Google Android devices have “god mode” access by Google (and to some extent Samsung), and emphasizes that Above Phone devices are designed to have zero connections to big tech by default, while still enabling users to run necessary apps. Users can choose to install Google services if needed, but in a limited, privacy-conscious way—these services act like normal apps on the device rather than the centralized, all-encompassing control found on stock devices. The phones can be used with existing cell service, and data transfer from iPhone or Android is supported, with live, in-person setup assistance. Setup and operation details: - You can switch to the Above Phone by moving your number with the SIM card (five-minute process), or use the Above Phone in parallel while migrating. - The Above Phone supports both physical SIMs and eSIMs; the data SIM service is eSIM-based. - A private, in-person support team helps with data transfer and setup. - The device can run a sandboxed second profile for Google services, isolating them from personal data. This sandbox can hold essential apps (e.g., WhatsApp) while the primary profile remains private. If needed, Google services can be used in a fully isolated manner, or work apps can be run entirely without Google involvement. Open-source equivalents are provided for many common apps (navigation, messaging, etc.). Privacy mechanics and surveillance: - Hakim explains that big tech devices continually “phone home,” with independent studies showing frequent data transmission to Google and Apple. Enhanced visual search on iPhone, enabled by default, scans photos for landmarks and can link to private indexes, illustrating how centralized platforms can harvest data even without explicit user consent. - Above Phone disconnects from Google’s update stream and ships with zero Google services by default; updates come from open-source developers, not from Google/Apple. Users can still opt to install Google services, but these are constrained and do not have the same “god mode” permissions as on stock devices. - The device supports a private, end-to-end encrypted messaging protocol based on XMPP (Jabber), which is decentralized and can run on a self-hosted or community-driven network. WhatsApp, he notes, is still built on XMPP. The Above Book Linux laptop is highlighted as a privacy-oriented alternative to mainstream Windows/Mac ecosystems. Linux is presented as cooperative, transparent, and less profit-driven. The Above Book ships with an easy-to-use Linux variant designed to avoid terminal use, includes a privacy-focused web browser (Ungoogled Chromium), and offers open-source software replacements (office apps, photo editing, etc.) that store data locally. The laptop supports local AI with Mike Adams’ Brighteon AI integration via LM Studio, enabling private, offline AI capabilities on the device. The company positions Linux and Above Book as enabling local work, with offline AI and offline maps via OpenStreetMap-like tooling. Hakim closes with a forward-looking stance on digital ID and the “surveillance grid” being advanced through regulatory acts into 2027–2030. He frames the investment in Above Phone and Above Book as a preparation for a world where privacy must be actively preserved, and encourages viewers to explore abovephone.com/redacted and abovephone.com for more information and products. David and Clayton engage on skepticism, marketing, and the broader implications of privacy-centric technologies, reinforcing the idea that the goal is practical privacy and education rather than ideology.

Anything you've ever said or done in the vicinity of your phone's camera or microphone, everything you've ever put into your phone, emails, text messages, Snapchat, Twitter, whatever, You search queries on Google, every embarrassing health search, every embarrassing text conversation with the significant other, every nude photograph people may not have taken, any search. They know where you are at all times. They know where you go and when. They know what you buy. They have access to your bank account. AI will literally know everything about you. They can create fake platforms that look real or rather fake people. And imagine if they were talking to you and they passed the Turing test, you know it's AI. It's like total, like, rape of everybody by the system forever. It's not good.

Speaker 0 asserts that there is no security whatsoever and that cybersecurity professionals face this problem daily. They state that while people are watching their phones, their phones are watching them. The operating system is designed to watch and listen to users, to know who their friends are, what is being said in text messages, and to listen at times. They claim that, although people look at their phones and it has many facilities, it is the world’s greatest spy device, designed as a spy device. Now, this.

The speaker says they use an iPhone, claiming “everybody I know” and “everybody at the CIA” uses an iPhone. They explain that when iPhones were unusual and hard to find, they used Android phones, and that all staff were assigned Androids; they also mention that they were originally assigned Nextels, described as walkie-talkie devices. The speaker recounts taking a Nextel to Bulgaria, where it beeped all night and people tried to send walkie-talkie-style messages, leading them to turn it in. They say the group transitioned to iPhones because Android phones are “so hard to crack,” and they advise against using Android devices. The speaker associates the risk with “the Chinese, the Russians, the Iranians, the Cubans,” and “most importantly, the Israelis,” and urges not to “do an android.” They then broaden the point beyond phone choice, suggesting people should consider what other aspects of life expose their secrets. They conclude by recommending that people assume “these bad guys are everywhere,” since, they say, they actually are everywhere. The speaker’s key takeaway is to make stealing personal secrets as hard as possible, and they close with a directive: “number one on your things to do today list, drop that android,” repeating “drop that Android.”

They have complete access to your device and can manipulate it as they please. Although you technically own the device because you paid for it, corporations and governments are gaining more control over it. We are living in a world where we bear the burden of work, taxes, and expenses, yet our ownership diminishes. The previous generation is acutely aware of this reality.

Speaker 0 asserts that the control grid arrived in America via Apple, stating they worked for Apple for seventeen years and still hold stock, so they find no joy in revealing this. They claim there are no good guys here and argue that we need to shut it down while we can. They state that Apple just rolled out digital ID integration and acknowledge it sounds convenient, but warn that every convenience has a price. According to them, once identity goes digital, it becomes programmable, and once programmable, it becomes controllable. They contend that individuals are handing over their entire identity wrapped in a product, a file that can easily be deleted. If one does not comply, access is lost; if opinions are not liked, accounts are frozen. They claim that stepping out of line results in travel restrictions, bank transfer blocks, and loss of benefits. They insist this is not speculation and that it is already live. Examples are offered to illustrate the claim: Thailand has programmable digital currency; Europe introduced biometric wallets; Canada froze accounts during protests; China is described as having started the pilot and now in full production mode with a live social credit system. They assert that China is secretly building the infrastructure at a global level right now, not through laws or force, but through updates and convenience. They claim that in Vietnam, 86,000,000 bank accounts were deleted because people wouldn’t agree to a digital ID. Concerning the European Union, they state that by 2027, large cash payments will be outlawed, forcing people onto digital rails that can be controlled. They describe this as just the on ramp, arguing that freedom becomes conditional when identity is controlled by a corporation or a government that can revoke it with a keystroke. They describe the arrival of dystopia as occurring not with tanks or force, but with app updates or convenience. They conclude by urging listeners to pay attention and push back while they still can. The message ends with an appeal to “Let’s go,” emphasizing urgency to resist the rollout of digital identity and programmable control embedded in convenient updates and services.

Apple's upcoming upgrade will integrate ChatGPT into every iPhone, enabling the collection and analysis of user data. A side-by-side test revealed that both Google and Apple phones transmit significant data dumps, around 50 megabytes, between 2 and 3 AM nightly, sharing user preferences and daily activities. By age 13, an average American child has had 72 million data points collected on them by big tech, tracked through a unique 32-digit advertising ID. This ID allows companies to monitor device locations for targeted advertising and sales. The goal of unplugged communication is to help people connect without surrendering their digital data to tech companies. Some individuals prefer to remain uninformed and compliant, while others seek to protect their privacy.