Lynette Zang explains:
“The goal is to capture your wealth, and when they say this is the LAST wealth transfer mechanism they mean it because they want it all. All of it.”
Intel Software designer Brad peters takes it one step further, saying:
“If a global crypto coin controlled by the Bank For International Settlements (BIS) comes to internationalize PROPERTY onto their crypto blockchain, they get their one world government and one world currency all in the same stroke. This IS your 1988 (2018 prediction) Economist magazine cover.”
Recently, I came across the article below. And so the digitization begins, ALL in the name of something good. The article details the problems with charities and donation money not getting to the intended recipients, basically fraud. Never fear, block chain IS here and WILL be the solution. The article mentions the creepiness of it but really doesn’t hold the intended uses of this technology to the fire. What do TBPers think?
Is block chain technology part of the overall control grid in this impending, out-in-the-open NEW WORLD ORDER?
When you read the news that they put a baby on the blockchain, your reaction makes you one of two types of people. Either you think, Mon dieu, is there anything the magical fairy dust known as blockchain can’t solve? Or you think: Surely, this is child abuse.
For the past few years, techies have frothed and proselytized over the potential salvation of blockchain, the tech behind cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. So it’s hard to even know what babies and blockchain could even have to do with each other. Typically, outside of grifter circles, blockchain is associated with vaporware, shady fraudulent ICOs or solving things that aren’t suited at all for blockchain’s “distributed ledger” system. Oh, and largely solving things that aren’t even problems.
Rather than try and part the foolish with their actual money, for once the crypto craze might be doing some useful good — which is how a baby ended up on the blockchain. In this instance, the international organization AID:Tech is using the technology as a way to get charitable donations to their destinations: as in, getting soon-to-be moms in need funds for things like vitamins and medical care.
Of course, we think, why not just give it to established care orgs — why make a whole blockchain mess of it? This is an extremely reasonable question, seldom asked in the presence of crypto-critters. AID:Tech is a medical-aid project positioned to combat the huge problem of fraud in the world of charitable donations, and to help at-risk women with their medical information. And on July 13th, a baby was added to a blockchain ledger (a first). This was followed by two more births on the 19th.
The idea of grafting blockchain to charity was to prevent fraud — which seems ironic given cryptocurrency’s reputation. Founder Joseph Thompson told CIO in a March interview:
In 2009, I ran 151 miles in the Sahara Desert as part of the tough world marathon, the 6-day Marathon des Sables. For the race, I raised over $120k for a charity I trusted. But the funds did not go where they were intended to.
With this experience, I became a cynic and decided never to donate again. But I always wanted to solve this problem. In 2010, I then saw the potential of Blockchain for traceability, and then the United Nations included this goal as part of the SDGs [Sustainable Development Goals].
And so in December 2015, hundreds of Syrian refugees at a camp in Lebanon took part in AID:Tech’s pilot program. The org partnered with the Irish Red Cross to give 500 digital credit cards to the refugees for use in a supermarket, each preloaded with $20 — in total, $10K was distributed to 100 Syrian refugee families.
“A traditional paper-voucher system was simultaneously in place. These are problematic because fraudulent copies inevitably emerge,” wrote Irish Times. “Within a matter of hours, the same thing was attempted with the AID:Tech cards — perfect copies were being presented to shopkeepers but were useless once the QR code was scanned and showed the attempted transaction to be invalid.” An estimated 20 fraudulent cards were made, and all of the fakes failed. The Irish Red Cross monitored the transactions in real time.
It’s all about supply-chain tracking. Thompson said that after the success in Lebanon, “we have been working to deliver solutions in welfare distribution, international remittance, health-care delivery, P2P donations … we have implemented projects in Ireland, where digital identities were provisioned to homeless women, as a means to transparently distribute welfare entitlements.”
Refreshingly, Thompson is aware of blockchain’s reputation as something often misapplied and inappropriate for many uses. “There is so much noise and putting it bluntly, a lot of nonsense in this space,” he said.
With blockchain baby, AID:Tech partnered with PharmAccess to get donations to pregnant women in Tanzania — and they use the blockchain ledger to track the women’s health progress. Sounds great, though the details feel potentially creepy — depending on the implementation, there are valid privacy questions for those on the receiving end of AID:Tech’s blockchain benevolence. “Every pregnant woman is provided with a digital ID, which tells anyone that accesses the platform that they need pregnancy vitamins,” explained press. “It also records the woman’s progress on the blockchain, logging every medical record from the first doctor’s appointment to the day the baby is born.”
Engadget made contact with AID:Tech and asked how the organization was handling the privacy of its recipients, particularly in the case of the pregnant Tanzanian women. Mr. Thompson responded via email, saying:
“A key feature of the AID:Tech platform is that we’ve created a complete separation of private data, held on a traditional Structured Query Language (SQL) database that is encrypted and not accessible by the blockchain. The blockchain data itself holds identities in the form of anonymous, unique identifiers linked to other items that are associated to the identity, such as medical records, prescription drugs, tests or entitlements.
This enables the anonymous analyses of trends and patterns in the treatment provided and drugs administered by practitioners without compromising the identity of the mothers.”
It is good news for a change if blockchain can solve charity fraud. It might even be nice to apply that kind of accountability to certain organizations, like ones that rhyme with “rump.”
We do hope the privacy issue doesn’t resurface negatively in the future for AID:Tech’s people in need, though it’s hard to be optimistic these days about anything privacy and tech related, let alone any confluence of blockchain and positive effect on the world. Because at least at this stage, it seems like AID:Tech is actually doing something positive with something excreted from this harrowing, casualty-laden tech gold rush. Even if it sounds as weird as blockchain babies.
Though it could be said that if one wanted to avoid putting more babies on ledgers, one thing we’ve gleaned is that the purest form of birth control is just talking about blockchain. Avoiding crypto-toddlers, however, is a whole different problem.
Hey Plato
Boom Boom Boom
http://mileswmathis.com/bitfraud.pdf
Look closely… Bitcoins have an NSA mint mark.
Sounds like MERS, only worse.
T4C-what does M Aventi have to do with missile launch on the 10th?
Slavery Never Dies!
Step right up! Get your free bar codes here!
The masters have to keep track of their property somehow.
I like Lynette. She shys away from politics and sticks to finance and keeps her videos at around 30 minutes, and for the chart lover, she includes lots of those with links under her videos.
I looked around and you can find all kinds of articles about the SDR going digital but they will tell you that is what they are working on in their own paper.
“Box 5. Distributed Ledger Technologies and Cryptocurrencies
DLTs provide the platforms for cryptocurrencies and promise a range of other improvements in commerce,
yet introduce risks. They present challenges and opportunities for central banks.
Private cryptocurrencies present challenges to financial stability and macroeconomic management
DLTs can enable other institutional improvements affecting cross-border flows.
Central banks are investigating if central bank cryptocurrencies (CBCC) could improve their
functions (He and others, 2017).
• For domestic payments systems, the Bank of Canada conducted an exercise where a limited
number of wholesale market participants pledge cash in exchange for a CBDC (Cad-Coin)
redeemable at par, while the Monetary Authority of Singapore introduced SGD-on-ledger for the
interbank market (MAS, 2017). However, some have questioned whether touted improvements in
monetary operations would be worth the additional expenditure and risk relative to other
technological investments, for example in real-time payments systems (Quarles, 2017; Engert and
Fung, 2017).
• If issued for broader retail banking, CBCCs may expand the monetary policy toolkit because they
would be part of the monetary base and, like reserves and unlike cash, can have (possibly
negative) interest rates. However, central banks could alternatively consider issuing digital
currency through publicly available accounts (as done in Ecuador) rather than as tokens using
DLTs (Bordo and Levin, 2017). The Bank of Sweden is yet to make its choice for the eKrona.
• DLTs might streamline regional cross-border interbank systems that facilitate payment in regional
or local currencies, as considered in a pilot by the Central Bank of Brazil and some of its neighbors
(Burgos, Filho, Suares, and Almeida, 2017). This could be a step toward widespread use of DLTs or
specifically CBCCs for cross-border commerce. ”
This is a PDF that I won’t link but you can find it under:
Considerations on the Role of the SDR; IMF Policy Paper, March 6, 2018
Then there is this:
https://venturebeat.com/2018/03/23/saga-lands-30-million-to-create-a-new-breed-of-stable-cryptocurrency/
“To remove the volatility associated with other cryptocurrencies, Saga is backed by a variable fractional reserve that is anchored to the International Monetary Fund’s Special Drawing Right (SDR).”
This is so much more than digitized babies. And, yeah, that is creepy.
Lynette stated in her video at the link you provided that China digitized tea. They also digitized an entire real estate development in Texas that US citizens are excluded from buying into.
Did you notice that they mentioned negative interest rates. Lynette thinks this will cause retail establishments to upcharge customers because of the negative interest rates. This will speed up the phasing out of cash still in the system. I’m not sure I paraphrased this well but you get the idea. Nudge the public into getting rid of cash.
Prepare accordingly.
M.C.
Thank you for asking some depth to the conversation. Much appreciated.
I guess we’re about the only ones who care?
M C
Mary C.
More good sleuthing. Just now getting to this one. I like to read everything twice first. BTW that was a surprise about the NDI.
If memory serves me blockchain was being billed as safer and more secret than gold. As in the feds couldn’t trace it or get their hands on it. I never bought that line. I saw and still see it as the ultimate mark. None can buy or sell lest they have the mark. The good news is the line about God will make a way to avoid it.
The fraud (that matters, especially in terms of institutional fraud) still exists and just as easy as it ever has been at the SQL layer. Both in terms of vulnerability to hacking and in terms of just outright manipulation of the data.
They *have* made it much harder for the poor people on the ground to commit fraud though. So that’s one thing, but kinda lends credence to the premise that this will not play out the way the boots on the ground will want, and they will be even more removed from visibility to what’s happening on the other side of that chain ID.