reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Life is about to change for every Australian. This bill will be misused because this bill is written to be misused. No hiding behind anonymous accounts or faulted false addresses. You can expect a knock on your door at home, work, or school as we're seeing happening in other countries with digital identity already in The government knows digital ID will be compulsory by the device of preventing access to government services, banking services, air travel, and major purchases for any Australian who does not have a digital ID. The digital ID will in effect create a live data file of your movements, purchases, accounts, and associates containing reference to every piece of data being held in the private and government sector as a first step in a wider agenda.

Speaker argues digital ID is being pushed with investment to force voluntary adoption, and that without it, it will fail and is the cornerstone of UN Agenda 2030; programmable, surveillable money and digital ecosystems depend on it. They compare to vaccine passports and urge planning to avoid compliance, like avoiding vaccine mandates. In the US, conservatives are framed as solutions to illegal migration and voter fraud; biometric IDs pitched as addressing cybercrime and societal ills. Digital ID is seen as essential to social credit scores and Orwellian designs. The speaker says convenience is used to ensnare people into compliance: opt-in smartphones, voting for two evils. The carrot approach may come with a stick; people have power and should act locally to opt out, starting with no to digital ID to avoid biometric surveillance state, predictive policing, precrime, and health care prevention measures and emergency use authorizations. We can opt out.

Smart devices and wireless networks are connecting everything from lights to cars, promising safety and convenience. However, there is a darker side to this technology. Our streets, mobile phones, and cities are spying on us, setting us up to be tracked and monitored. By surrendering our data, we are giving away the ability to control our behavior, leading to a social credit score. Central Bank digital currencies will further restrict our spending, and digital IDs will become mandatory, already being implemented in Australia, Canada, Scotland, and other countries. Without a digital ID, we will lose access to government services, travel, healthcare, and the internet. Australians are unknowingly heading towards a dystopian digital future.

The digital ID provides government the ability to track, analyze, predict, and control a person's private activities. It is the antithesis of individual freedom and will not require an implantable chip as many have feared for decades. Evidence clearly shows that biometrics such as fingerprints and facial scans will do the job much more efficiently. And the aftermath of the COVID lockdown shows us how it will be deployed. During the COVID era, governments said that masks were recommended, while private companies said no mask, no entry. And the public overwhelmingly complied, but not with an overreaching government. They complied with the grocery store to buy food, the airlines to travel, and their own banks to access money. Looking back, it is quite clear. The COVID lockdowns provided an opportunity to beta test digital ID compliance through private company mandates and helps normalize the use of QR scans and facial pics for entry into private businesses. And it proved to be a success. Now we are seeing the same techniques being used with the rollout of the digital ID. The gold standard for biometric regulation was written in 2008 as the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act and is being replicated all over The United States. It mandates that private entities obtain written consent before collecting biometrics, disclose their policies, and destroy data after a set period. And most importantly, it exempts government entities entirely, allowing state and federal government to collect and utilize biometric data while passing the liability to private corporations. These laws have been met with over a thousand class action lawsuits since 2015, which resulted in the standardization of consent prompts in apps and services, such as a firm's biometric consent, which now states by clicking accept or proceeding, you consent to collection of biometric data. Click a button and you're in the new system. If government were to mandate the digital ID, it would predictably ignite mass protest. We can see this happening today in The UK. The United States will avoid this by utilizing the private sector in what appears to be voluntary action. The FBI's Clearview AI has harvested over 30,000,000,000 faces from social media. And because Clearview is technically a private company, the FBI has access to all this without the need for asking. In over 43 states, the Department of Motor Vehicles have sold driver's license photos to private firms who resold to local police for facial recognition. The government doesn't need to mandate biometric ID, which would most likely be considered a violation of American rights. And so it outsources the mandate to private companies who are legally required to get consent, while the government is free to collect and utilize this data under legal immunity. Just like the COVID era, you will be free to give consent. But if you choose not to, you will have to leave the reservation and find a way to fend for yourself. Greg Reiss reporting. The Reiss report is now fully funded by my Substack subscribers. Subscribe today and support my work at gregreese.substack.com.

The speaker argues against digital IDs, listing 20 concerns: functionality creep into immigration, healthcare, banking, voting, driving, and travel; loss of anonymity; government overreach; it won't stop illegal immigration; it would rely on phones; enforcement could be undermined by cash-paying employers; single point of failure; government as the nexus of verification; a state surveillance honeypot; inevitable future abuses by any regime; massive cost and bureaucratic drag; marginalization of those unable or unwilling to comply; UK previously rejected ID cards; examples of failures in other countries (India ANWA, EU database); authoritarian temptations; excuses for illegal immigration and labor; burden shifting to citizens; ratchet effect; not for stated reasons but globalist aims; alternative is zero-knowledge proofs where individuals hold ID; digital IDs from the state are a horrendous idea and must be stopped.

The transcript argues that the entities behind “Digital ID” can be mapped into four main players: the United Nations (UN), the World Economic Forum (WEF), the World Bank, and ID2020. The UN is presented as a starting point. The UN has Sustainable Development Goals, and the transcript cites SDG 16.9, which says that by 2030 it wants to provide legal identity for all, including birth registration. The transcript claims UN agencies frame digital ID as necessary to participate in the digital economy in order to access services, describing this as a way to “lock you in.” The UN is described as working closely with the World Bank. The World Bank’s “Identification for Development” program (ID4D) is said to promote biometric digital ID systems for low and middle income countries, beginning there because it is “easier” to get compliance and roll out, and then gradually moving toward first world countries. The transcript lists top donors as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the UK government, the French government, Norway, and the “Amadhyar Network,” described as created by the eBay founder. ID4D is also described as having partnerships with UN and other groups. The transcript says ID4D has a partnership with the WEF, the European Commission, and the GSMA. The GSMA is identified as a nonprofit association representing mobile network providers’ interests, described as enabling a digital ID for a phone that could eventually progress to “a microchip… implanted in you,” with step one being adoption on mobile phones. The WEF is described as the main thought leader for digital ID and as setting the global agenda for frameworks rolled out. The transcript notes that Larry Fink is a board member of the WEF and CEO of BlackRock, and adds he is part of Trump’s inner circle, stating that Trump will not stop rolling out digital ID. The final entity is ID2020, described as a US-based NGO alliance formed in 2014. It is characterized as promoting “privacy protecting digital ID” aligned with UN strategic development goals, operating as a public-private partnership with major corporations, including Microsoft, Accenture, Gavi Vaccine Alliance, and Mastercard. The transcript highlights ID2020 partnerships: Gavi and Mastercard created a “digital vaccine record” to track children in underdeveloped countries using Mastercard’s technology, with Gavi described as the vaccine passport component. It also states that Gavi says digital ID innovation is central to its mission, and lists Gavi’s alliance with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, WHO, UNICEF, World Bank, and others. Another partnership mentioned is Microsoft and Accenture as “founding alliance partners” of ID2020, building a blockchain-based identity prototype using biometrics and blockchain for undocumented people, with the transcript concluding by describing future steps connecting digital infrastructure to everything people do.

Your wake up call. The British government is pushing forward with plans for a national digital ID system. They've called it the Brit card and if that name doesn't send a chill down your spine you have not been paying attention. This is about building a centralized state controlled digital identity system that could be used to link your finances, your medical history, your travel movements, your social media activity, even your social activity in real life and more. It's quite frankly a digital dog tag and once it's clipped around your neck, you will not be able to take it off. There are active conversations now about linking spending capabilities to your digital identity. That means if your ID is flagged, limited or suspended, I don't know because maybe you said some hurt words on social media, that will mean you can't access your own money.

A speaker discusses India's nationwide digital ID system, Aadhaar, and chip away at the assurances given by officials who praised its rollout. The speaker notes that about a week or so earlier, Kirstjarma met with Prime Minister Modi and top officials in India to extol the benefits of digital ID, highlighting Aadhaar and claiming a fabulous nationwide rollout. The speaker then presents a troubling counterpoint: cybercriminals are claiming they have stolen the entire Aadhaar database—describing it as the database of 815,000,000 people with details such as names, addresses, identity confirmations, bank details, and more. According to these claims, the criminals are currently selling the entire database for $80,000 at a time. The speaker acknowledges uncertainty about verification but states that this story is circulating and raises questions about security. The core concern is about how secure the system will be when every facet of a person’s life could be held in one place: passport, driving license, NHS records, criminal records, bank details, every transaction, gas and electricity bills, travel records, flight records, car tax, council tax, and any arrest or hospital appointment information. The speaker asks whether we can trust the people running these systems to keep data secure, given the frequency of data breaches and data thefts, including several large incidents in the past year in the country. The concern is framed as a general warning about the viability of a centralized digital ID system that aggregates extensive personal information, and how well it would function in practice if it were compromised. A specific anecdotal point is raised: India’s example is cited as a real-world instance of the system’s security challenges, with the speaker encouraging listeners to look up the incident. The speaker notes that Star Lord was out in India holding up India as an example of how well the system could work, referencing a perceived contrast between the praise and the security breach claim. The segment closes with a skeptical modulo—“Right, Kia. We believe you.”—casting doubt on official assurances. In summary, the speaker highlights a purported massive data breach claim against India’s Aadhaar system, questions the security of a centralized digital identity that consolidates extensive personal data, and contrasts official praise with concerns about data vulnerability and trust in those who manage such systems.

Age verification is a normalisation of identification, the introduction of digital surveillance, and the end of privacy. It is described as giving the state and corporations excessive powers and creating more KYC honeypots. The speaker says we should fight that because it will start creeping into any centralised large social media website.

They're rolling out digital ID even when people don't want it? In The UK, over 2,000,000 people said no. We don't want it. The government's response? We're gonna do it anyway. And now the line is no digital ID, no jobs. They said you will not be able to work in The United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID. It's as simple as that. Just a reminder, pilot programs always start somewhere and then scale to the rest of the world. Today, it's The UK. Tomorrow, it's where you live. They will market it as if it's for your convenience or your safety, like they are doing now by saying it's to tackle illegal immigration. But once your likelihood is tied to a QR code or a government app, your freedoms can be taken away with the flip of a switch. Now it's just for a job. Soon it will be banking, travel, grocery shopping. You will be completely under control.

Speaker 0 explains that these groups have invested heavily to find excuses to push digital ID, urging voluntary adoption. They argue digital ID is the cornerstone of the entire UN Agenda 2030; without it, programmable, surveillable money and many online designs won’t work, and they frame it as something people must comply with, even though it’s pitched as voluntary. They compare digital ID to vaccine passports, suggesting that to change the direction of the world, people must plan to live in a way that avoids compliance with digital ID, just as one might navigate around vaccine mandates. In the United States, conservatives are portrayed as being pitched digital ID as a solution to illegal migration and voter fraud, while claims are made that biometric digital ideas are presented as essential to solving cybercrime, hacking, cyberbullying, and other societal ills. The speaker contends that digital ID underpins social credit and other Orwellian designs that are part of the agenda. A key theme is that the push relies on convenience: opting in is convenient, having money on a phone and a life centered on a smartphone is convenient, and voting every four years is convenient but framed within a system of “two lesser evils.” The speaker argues this convenience is a carrot used to enslave people, while resisting adoption is inconvenient and requires changing one’s life to be more resilient and sustainable for families and communities. They call for reconnecting with neighbors, meeting in person, and reducing online dependence to build real human connections and solutions. The speaker notes that during COVID, lockdowns contributed to isolation and pushed people toward virtual-only connections controlled by those who own the infrastructure, software, and platforms. The claim is that the power to set up digital ID resides with those investing in it, and people should reclaim power by actions in neighborhoods and families and by saying no to digital ID and the surveillance state. There is concern that digital ID enables not only real-time surveillance but predictive capabilities about future behavior, with intelligence agencies pursuing predictive policing (precrime) and extending similar predictions to health care to prevent the next pandemic, potentially eliminating the need for pandemics to be declared to justify emergency use authorizations or mandates in communities. The overall message is to opt out of digital ID, recognizing that this is the world some are trying to create, and that opting out is possible.

There's a coordinated global policy push for digital IDs, as the new form of government issued identification credentials. Digital IDs are not really a separate project from CBDCs and this new digital financial system. And UN documentation and also documentation from the Bank of International Settlements, they very overtly state that CBDCs and digital IDs are meant to go together. And without digital IDs, the CBDC digital finance system cannot exist. One of the reasons it can't exist without that is because of the KYC functionality built into this digital financial system. They have to know who you are. They give you a unique identifier, a digital ID, and it's inherently tied to a digital wallet. It's called building blocks. It involves refugees scanning their irises.

In this video, the speaker discusses the potential implications of a global digital ID system. They explain that this digital ID would be a single format, containing personal data such as health, financial, and driving history. The speaker expresses concerns about the erosion of cash and the increasing use of digital currencies. They also suggest that the government and pharmaceutical companies may use the digital ID system to enforce mandatory vaccinations. The speaker believes that this system could be used to control and manipulate populations. They urge viewers to resist the implementation of digital IDs.

The speaker explains that understanding the digital control grid requires grasping three parts: programmable money, digital IDs, and a supporting hardware infrastructure. First, programmable money is presented as the most important element. The speaker argues that guardrails are needed to prevent programmable money from interfering with “financial freedom.” Second, programmable money is said to depend on a digital ID. The speaker claims they fought against digital IDs and lists excuses used to justify them, including online safety, vaccinations, election fraud, and immigration. The speaker says tight borders existed before digital technology and asserts there is no need for digital IDs. According to the speaker, proponents want a high-quality, globally interoperable digital ID in order to implement a “third lock,” and that digital IDs are required for that third lock. Third, the speaker says the final requirement is hardware infrastructure. They describe this as increasingly visible in America, citing FLAC cameras, drones overhead, and large data centers. The speaker references an approval of a data center in Utah described as 63 miles wide or long, with an estimate that full capacity would use three times more energy than the entire state of Utah currently uses. They add that the United States has approximately 4,500 data centers, while China has about 368, claiming the U.S. has more than ten times as many despite having a much smaller population. The speaker connects these data centers to collecting data and implementing the “third lock,” not only on American citizens but also on people worldwide who have stable coins or trade digital tokens. The speaker concludes that as hardware becomes more present and visible, more people—especially young people—start objecting and pushing back, saying they do not want to be part of it.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss the UK government’s rollout of a national digital ID, presenting it as imminent and not merely a future possibility. Speaker 0 states that the government is rolling out a national digital ID in the UK and asserts it is happening now, not something to consider for someday. Speaker 1 reinforces the opposition to digital ID, urging a rejection of it. Speaker 0 reports that they are outside BBC Broadcasting House for a digital ID protest, framing the event as a mobilization against the rollout. Speaker 1 warns that saying yes to digital ID could lead to an inability to say no to the government ever again, not just to the current government but to future ones unknown. Speaker 0 recalls assurances that national ID cards were dead and not representative of Britain, noting that the modern version is not a plastic card but a “live connection.” Speaker 1 calls on people to raise their heads out of complacency, asserting that humans are not data and emphasizing that the issue concerns everyone’s freedom. Speaker 0 contends that what is happening is an attempt to funnel humanity into being a number, implying a loss of individuality. Speaker 1 describes a future where the ability to earn, move, buy, or speak is not a right but a permission, and permissions can be switched off, framing this as a consequence of Digital ID. Speaker 0 summarizes the topic as Digital ID: how it started, how it is being sold, and what life looks like behind a biometric paper.

Speaker contends digital ID would bundle everything you have under one, centrally governed ID that can be shut off at will. He uses a World Economic Forum wheel to claim that health care, financial services, food and sustainability, travel, humanitarian response, e-commerce, social media, e-government, taxes, voting, telecommunications, and smart cities would be encompassed and controlled. Dangers cited include overriding existing authority—so that a speeding ticket could lead to cutting off your cell phone and bank access. Right now health cards are governed by the Department of Health, but digital ID would bypass that. You would not be able to access your bank or book travel without it, and CBDCs would enable nearly total monitoring. He also cites Canada's trucker protests where bank accounts were cut, calling such actions illegal.

Mike Schellenberger argues against digital IDs: "We don't need digital IDs for any of those things. The United States just stopped illegal migration without digital IDs." He says centralizing data would undermine cybersecurity: "Having separate logins ... ensures that if one of them is hacked, they aren't all hacked." He warns that "if the digital ID were to actually link social media vaccine records and bank accounts, that would allow governments to censor and control the population." He notes Kirstarmer: "every working person must have a digital ID or Brit card." Real IDs contain embedded microchips; MDLs are digital IDs; Gavin Newsom moved driver's licenses to Apple and Google wallets. Ellison: "The secret is to get all and get all of that data in one place." China’s 2019 social credit system; UK Big Brother Watch warns it could be gateway to surveillance. Starmer: "Digital ID will make it tougher to work illegally" and YouGov: 42% in favor, 45% against; Gates documentary on AI censorship; "The Starmer government's digital IDs should be a wake up call to all of us."

The transcript argues that a digital ID system would allow the government to track, analyze, predict, and control private activities, describing it as the antithesis of individual freedom. It asserts that an implantable chip is not required, and that biometrics like fingerprints and facial scans would work more efficiently. It references the COVID-19 lockdown as a demonstration of how such systems could be deployed, noting that masks were recommended by authorities while private businesses enacted entry restrictions, and the public largely complied with private mandates to access essentials like groceries, travel, and banking. The claim is that these private mandates served as a beta test for digital ID compliance, normalizing the use of QR scans and facial recognition for entry into private businesses, and that this was deemed a success. The speaker describes the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act of 2008 as the gold standard for biometric regulation, saying it is being replicated across the United States. The Act allegedly requires private entities to obtain written consent before collecting biometrics, disclose policies, and destroy data after a set period, while exempting government entities from such restrictions. It is claimed that these laws have resulted in over a thousand class-action lawsuits since 2015, which purportedly led to standardized biometric consent prompts in apps and services, such as consent statements like by clicking accept or proceeding, you consent to collection of biometric data. The argument continues with a warning that a government-mandated digital ID would likely provoke mass protest, citing the UK as an example. It contends the United States will avoid a direct mandate by outsourcing to the private sector, creating a system that appears voluntary. It is claimed that the FBI’s Clearview AI has harvested over 30,000,000,000 faces from social media, and that because Clearview is a private company, the FBI can access this data without direct government action. It is asserted that in over 43 states, Department of Motor Vehicles offices have sold driver’s license photos to private firms that resold them to local police for facial recognition, implying that the government can collect and use biometric data via private entities under legal immunity, without a formal mandate. The piece concludes that, as with COVID-era practices, individuals will be free to give consent, but if they choose not to, they will be constrained. The report is presented by Greg Reiss. It notes that The Reiss Report is fully funded by Substack subscribers, inviting readers to subscribe at gregreese.substack.com.

You don't need a mandatory digital ID to live your life, travel, or buy things. The push for a global digital ID is driven by those who want constant surveillance and control over you. With a managed security digital ID, they can use excuses like a viral pandemic to force you to do things or restrict your freedom. Central bank digital currencies eliminate the need for traditional banks and allow for precise tracking of your purchases and interactions. Algorithms could be used to limit your access to certain goods based on your location. This control will be in the hands of malicious individuals, and there will be no democratic oversight. Their goal is to restrict your mobility, leave you cold and hungry, and create an unlivable world without freedom.

Speaker described India's digital ID program as a cautionary example of how tying essential needs to a single ID can fail catastrophically. More than a billion people were forced into a system that linked food rations, pensions, and even hospital access to a digital ID, with criminal networks learning how to hack and manipulate biometric data. The core problems were practical and systemic. When fingerprints didn’t match or when hackers swapped someone’s identity, people were locked out of survival. Entire families were denied food, and in one state at least two dozen people starved to death after being cut off from rations. Some elderly pensioners went months with no income as hospitals turned them away because their ID had been cloned. The scenario described paints a situation where being sick, hungry, or elderly could be life-threatening if a glitch or a hacker interfered with one’s access to vital services. The speaker emphasized that this was not a minor glitch. Organized criminal groups exploited the system to steal benefits, reroute funds, and sell fake identities. At one point, millions of fake accounts were uncovered, used to siphon money meant for the poor. The system, marketed as secure, ended up creating a black market for identities in which the poor suffered and criminals thrived. The overarching message is presented as a warning about the real dangers of digital ID, focusing on control and exploitation rather than safety. Once everything a person needs to live—food, money, medicine—is tied to a single ID, all it takes is an error or a criminal to cut you off. The India experiment is described as showing what happens when such a system is deployed at scale: hunger and deprivation, alongside a thriving illicit market for manipulated identities.

Signing up for digital ID will be the last important decision you make, as it will replace your identity with a QR code linked to editable resources, including vaccination status. Digital IDs will only remain valid if you comply with conditions, such as receiving recommended or mandated vaccines, which are designed to harm you. Without a valid digital ID, transactions will be refused, and access to goods will be denied. This system extends to controlling internet usage and movement. Refusing to sign up is crucial to prevent this "digital gulag," even if it means facing consequences like losing benefits or employment. Deferring the decision and resisting collectively can defeat this system, as demonstrated by the NHS jab mandate reversal. Refuse to sign up, even at the risk of losing access to money or employment.

Key claims cited include: "It will stop illegal migration." "The United States just stopped illegal migration without digital IDs." "If the digital ID were to actually link social media vaccine records and bank accounts, that would allow governments to censor and control the population." "Real IDs contain embedded microchips that bring us one step closer to digital IDs." "Those mobile driver's licenses or MDLs are digital IDs, and they're just one more link in the chain." "A YouGov poll found that UK opinion towards digital IDs was 42% in favor and 45% against." "The good news is that the backlash to the digital IDs appears to be strong and growing, and real corruption is on display."

You don't need a mandatory digital ID to live your life, travel, or buy things. The push for a global digital ID is driven by those who want to monitor your every move and control your actions. With a managed security digital ID, authorities can use excuses like a viral pandemic to enforce vaccinations or restrict your movements. Central bank digital currencies eliminate the need for traditional banks and allow for precise tracking of your purchases and interactions. Algorithms could be used to limit your access to goods based on distance or other criteria. The control of this database and its algorithms could be in the hands of malicious individuals, making it impossible to resist their restrictions. This loss of freedom is unacceptable.

Digital ID: what could possibly go wrong? The transcript recalls Kirstyama’s recent visit to India to meet Modi and top officials, promoting India’s nationwide digital ID system called Aadhaar. It then presents a provocative claim: cyber criminals are reportedly saying they have stolen the entire Aadhaar database—815,000,000 people's details, including names, addresses, identity confirmations, bank details, and more—and are allegedly selling the database for $80,000 at a time. It notes uncertainty about verification but says the story is circulating. The speaker emphasizes concerns about security and the practicality of such a system: if every aspect of a person’s life—passport, driving license, NHS records, criminal record, bank details, all transactions, bills, travel and flight records, vehicle taxes, council taxes, hospital appointments, arrest records, and other personal data—are stored in one place, how safe and secure can it be? The question is raised of whether the people running these systems can be trusted to protect data, given ongoing data breaches and thefts, including several large incidents in the past year within the country. There’s a rhetorical comparison to India’s example, suggesting that this is a test case for the security of a highly centralized digital ID system. The speaker notes that StarMove had previously used India as an example of how well such a system could work, implying skepticism about that portrayal with the closing line, “The ironic thing is that StarMove was just out there holding them up as an example of how well the system could work. Yeah. Right, Kia. We believe you.” Key points: - Aadhaar is India’s nationwide digital ID system. - Alleged theft of 815,000,000 Aadhaar records, with claims of selling the data in chunks for $80,000; verification of this claim is uncertain. - The aggregation of extensive personal data in one system raises concerns about security and trust in the guardians of the data. - Data breaches are frequent, including notable incidents in the past year. - The India example is presented as a cautionary reference, contrasting with prior praise from StarMove.

Independent journalist Michael Schellenberger has been digging into the digital ID issue. He just released a lengthy piece on Substack called Public. He joins us with his thoughts. Michael says: The argument that digital IDs help thwart illegal immigration, ID fraud, streamline health care services sounds fantastic. But what’s the problem? Michael responds: Hey, great to be with you. Yeah. Another conspiracy theory that has started coming true. We saw this announcement in September. The World Economic Forum had been pushing digital IDs, the United Nations, the European Union, Britain. Of course, the really terrifying example is China, which uses digital IDs and a social credit score to control speech and to control what people think and say online. It could come in a lot of different ways. They’ll start voluntary, then they’ll make it mandatory. They’ll have rewards, and then they’ll have punishments. It’s quite terrifying. And when you listen to what the advocates for digital IDs say, it’s terrifying. And, you know, Laura, one thing I learned from this last round of investigations is that this is a huge cybersecurity threat. The idea that, I mean, imagine if you get hacked in one of the many websites that you log into. Imagine everything suddenly being hacked because it’s all centralized in a single place. That cybersecurity threat alone ought to be enough to kill the digital ID. But, again, this is potentially digital totalitarianism.