Dinarian888
News • Business • Investing & Finance
šŸ’„The US Dollar: An Advanced ObituaryšŸ’„
December 11, 2022
post photo preview

Compliments of the Lifschultz Organization founded in 1899

An ounce of gold in dollars was worth in 1833 $18.93, in 1900 $18.96, in 1920 $20.68, in 1934 $34.69, in 1971 $40.62, in 1974 $154.00, in 2005 $444.74, in 2016 $1250.74, today it is $1769.50. See footnote two for a chart. The depreciation of the dollar against gold is a demonstration that the dollar is dying. šŸ’„It will eventually be worth nothing.šŸ’„ If the inflation were accurately measured the dollar would have lost over 99% of its 1920 value.Ā This is covered in detail in the report below.

How did this happen? The western financial system was founded on interest or usury. If there are 244,000 tons of gold in the world and the interest rate were 5% a year on the loan due in one year for the principal and interest, then at the end of the year you would have a default as there would not be the 5% gold in the world for the interest plus the principal. This is the fallacy that Aristotle treats saying the usury system was against nature as gold could not procreate the interest and of course the Bible forbids it for the same reason (Deuteronomy 23:19).

Making money from money, according to Aristotle, is ā€œunnaturalā€ because money, unlike an orchard, cannot produce additional value.

Aristot. Pol. 1.1258b
[1258b] [1]Ā Usury is not in accordance with nature, but involves men’s taking things from one another. As this is so, usury is most reasonably hated, because its gain comes from money itself and not from that for the sake of which money was invented. For money was brought into existence for the purpose of exchange, but interest increases the amount of the money itself (and this is the actual origin of the Greek word: offspring resembles parent, and interest is money born of money); consequently this form of the business of getting wealth is of all forms the most contrary to nature.Ā Ā 

What the modern man did to circumvent this scientific fact that the interest could not be paid back with the principal was let the currency outrun its gold base until it could no longer be convertible into gold as there was no longer enough of a gold cover which was when Nixon took the US out of the gold system to a fiat system in August of 1971.

Once the convertibility ends the dollar or any other currency it becomes a fiat money.

Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value: zero. – Voltaire

Usury or interest works scientifically in this sense that in the end there will be debt defaults as the gold will not be in existence to repay the debt with interest as demonstrated above so that it will end as in the English economy under King Edward the Pious when all the property in England that secured the debt ended in the end in the hands of the usurers based on defaults as the gold was not available to pay the interest in a relatively closed system as demonstrated in the previous paragraphs.Ā 

In a sense the usury became a control mechanism as it is to this day.Ā Ā When Edward the Pious witnessed this he realized that either the usurer would be King or he would be King only by ending this evil practice whereby he confiscated all the ill gotten gold of the usurers who were violating the Bible and expelled them from England (July 18, 1290). In other words, King Edward the Pious saw usury as a control mechanism and the new rulers were the usurers.Ā Ā He was pious believing in God and was not going to tolerate this or give up his rule a the vicegerent of Heaven. Monarchy is sanctioned by the Bible. This was the essential meaning of Shakespeare’s ā€œMerchant of Veniceā€ where the usurer, Shylock, was waiving his usury for the death of Signor Antonio who was threatening his control mechanism by the Christian concept that usury is a sin. This would outlaw the control mechanism. Today it is the usurer who rules the world as explained by Benjamin Disraeli in his novel ā€œConingsbyā€. Benjamin Disraeli in his novel ā€œConingsbyā€ explained this control mechanism to us and we quote:

The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.Ā (Coningsby)

Benjamin Disraeli

This gives some of the recent history of the control mechanism where the personages are identified.

The gold convertibility of the dollar was ended when the gold cover was insufficient to support the created dollars. šŸ’„The US dollar will die as all fiat currencies will eventually do.šŸ’„ The dollar system was systemically flawed and doomed from the from the first day it was created when the dollar incorporated the usury or interest rate system as a hybrid of a gold dollar system as the gold cannot create its own liquidity to pay the interest.

Now let’s turn to the dollar system or the SWIFT-CHIPS payment system as the mechanism of the central bank system. This is denominated in fiat money called the dollar. There is nothing behind it and this is why the cryptos thought that they could do the same if anyone would accept their crypto currency even though it was as worthless as the dollar neither of which has any intrinsic value. The collapse of the cryptos portends the end of the dollar.

The first symptom of a coming FTX wreckage of the dollar was when the US and others seized the gold and dollar reserves of Russia. This was a fatal error in the sense that if China or any other nation were sanctioned by the US they could lose their reserves also to such confiscation. A precedent has been set. The banking system is based on trust even if the trust is in nothing (fiat money) and this breach of trust is starting the first great schism in the international financial system as major powers are shifting to another system. See footnote one. In a theological sense this is what happened to the Catholic Church when there arose a Protestant Schism.Ā This Schism was sponsored and created by the usurers as part of their effort to gain complete mastery over western civilization.Ā It was a fatal mistake of the Council of Trent not to follow the recommendations of the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V to permit priests to marry which was the main issue used against the Church by the usurers and this would have prevented the Schism.Ā Marriage is commanded by the Bible:

Genesis 2:24Ā Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

It was a fatal mistake by the US to confiscate Russian assets in the international central banks system (SWIFT:CHIPS) as the US incurs each year a $821.4 billion dollar current account deficit on its foreign account, and if half the participants leave the dollar system the US will not be able to sustain this purchasing power as they may not accept dollars. šŸ’„The US will not be able to pay for its imports in the fiat dollar that has no intrinsic value.šŸ’„ There are good aspects about this in that nations as individuals should live within their means. Now this is not so bad theoretically šŸ’„but the adjustment for the US may be catastrophic as it may not be able to pay for half its imports as half the world will be out of the dollar system.šŸ’„

Now my good friend Sergei Glaziev of Russia is creating the new currency system outside the dollar system using a basket of fiat currencies and perhaps some gold to create an alternative international financial system to compete with the dollar. I have advised him if he wants to end the dollar suzerainty he need merely create a gold ruble or Klondike system convertible into gold and this unlike the cryptos would wipe out the dollar system as good money historically drives out the bad money. Of course, he could join hands with China, Brazil, India creating a new currency called the Klondike based on complete gold backing for the new international media of exchange.Ā That is the only one that could work but usury cannot be concluded.Ā The Stalinists of Russia told me that Stalin socialized the usury thereby neutralizing it as a control mechanism separated from the government.

In the absence of effectively enforced legal tender laws, Gresham’s law tends to operate in reverse; good money drives bad money out of circulation because people can decline to accept the less valuable money as a means of payment in transactions.

Below is the fatal error.

Elvira NabiullinaĀ said plans were being made to launch lawsuits after governments including the US, UK and EUĀ froze the Russian central bank’s foreign currency reservesĀ held within their jurisdictions.

ā€œThis freezing of gold and foreign exchange reserves was unprecedented, so we are going to work on legal claims, and we are getting ready to put them forward,ā€Ā NabiullinaĀ was quoted as saying by the Kremlin-backed Tass news agency.

P. S.Ā Alfred Marshall at Cambridge tried to solve the fallacy of the gold standard that it was unworkable according to Aristotle and failed to do so.Ā He was the mentor of John Maynard Keynes when he was at Cambridge.Ā It might be said that Keynes was the father of inflation and fiat money which was as against nature as his homosexual’s life style.

Next is a report from the 1930s by Arnold Deutsch who was Stalin’s NKVD Resident Spy in London in his communication to the center read by Stalin on their British spy Anthony Burgess which demonstrates the moral collapse of the leadership of Great Britain that preceded their collapse as a world power as they are directly connected.Ā It also comments on the John Maynard Keynes perversion.

ā€œMany features of his character can be explained by the fact that he is a homosexual.Ā He became one at Eton, where he grew up in an atmosphere of cynicism, opulence, hypocrisy and superficiality.Ā As he is very clever and well educated, the (Communist) Party was for him a saviour.Ā It gave him above all an opportunity to satisfy his intellectual needs.Ā Therefore, he took to party work with great enthusiasm.Ā Part of his private life is led in a circle of homosexual friends whom he recruited among a wide variety of people, ranging from the famous liberal economist Keynes and extending to the very trash of society down to male prostitutes.Ā His personal degradation, drunkenness, irregular way of life and the feeling of being outside society was connected with this kind of life, but on the other hand his abhorrence of bourgeois morality came from this.Ā This kind of life did not satisfy him.Ā His homosexuality he describes as not inborn because he can also live with women.Ā He learned it at Eton because everyone is engaged in homosexuality there, so he simply joined in.Ā The pupils there lived several to a room and the class masters use their superior position to seduce young boys.ā€

Footnote One:

The Global South births a new game-changing payment system

Footnote Two:

Footnote Three:

THE US DOLLAR: AN ADVANCED OBITUARY BY FRANZ PICK

A BOOK REVIEW

Compliments of the Lifschultz Organization founded in 1899

The 9-15-1931 to 9-16-1931 Invergordon Naval Mutiny caused a panic on theĀ London Stock ExchangeĀ and a run on the pound, bringing Britain’s economic troubles to a head and forcing it off theĀ Gold StandardĀ on 21 September 1931.Ā Since 1588 Britain ruled the seas and this was the beginning of the end of British power.

The British pound was the leading international currency and reserve currency at the time. Its 9-21-1931 devaluation was a shock that led directly to many echo devaluations worldwide. By the end of 1931, 23 countries had left the gold standard.

President Richard Nixon’s actions in 1971 to end dollar convertibility to gold and implement wage/price controls were intended to address the international dilemma of a looming gold run and the domestic problem of inflation. The new economic policy marked the beginning of the end of the Bretton Woods international monetary system and temporarily halted inflation.

TheĀ OPEC oil embargoĀ was a decision to stop exportingĀ oilĀ to the United States. On October 19,Ā 1973, the 12Ā OPECĀ members agreed to theĀ embargo. Over the next six months,Ā oilĀ prices quadrupled. Prices remained at higher levels even after theĀ embargoĀ ended in March 1974.Ā 

Click here to download the book in its entirety

There is a direct connection to the British and Americans going off the gold standard as reflected above and the decline of their military and economic power of Britain and the US as I wrote in the piece below entitled ā€œGoethe, Faust and the Euroā€.

Dr. Franz Pick, the author of this book, ā€œThe US Dollar:Ā An Advanced Obituaryā€, began his meteoric rise selling the pound short on the day the Invergordon Naval Strike took place that made him a fortune.Ā Ā 

During World War Two he was part of the OSS system as the paymaster of the French Resistance.Ā Ā When one of their key OSS agents was arrested in Rome in a drunken state, Franz was assigned to go to Italy to bribe with gold the jailor to release him.Ā He drove him to France where the agent said he had to obey the call of nature and took a walk into the bushes, and never returned going back to his OSS work.Ā The Italians did not know how important an intelligent agent they had in their prison.Ā Ā 

Since the heroin distribution was the largest business in the world, Franz would give the quote in Harlem of the daily fix.Ā Ā The Mafia had come toĀ him for ā€œfinancial adviceā€ offering him a huge amount of money but he instead swapped the advice for the daily heroin quote in Harlem.Ā Ā Ā During the Vietnam War he would quote the prostitution rates for the American Military in Saigon for what Senator Fulbright called the American Military’s whorehouse.Ā Mothers of America were very, very upset at how Fulbright talked about their precious ones but they should have inquired what their husbands were doing in World War Two when the military passed out tens of millions of condoms for what Eisenhower named his book ā€œCrusadeā€ in Europe.Ā Ā His monthly currency report was purchased by just about every central bank in the world and even our GAO Office used it in their studies as the information on blocked currencies was not available in the standard books or articles of reference.

This worthy study can be summarized in this two sentence quote from Dr. Pick:

ā€œEach year I send a copy of the inflation chart to French President Valery d’Estaing who asked me to.Ā When he first saw it, about five years ago, he said, ā€˜But my dear friend, since 1965 there has been no progress in the United States.'ā€Ā Ā In other words, if we take the true inflation out of the GDP figures there has been no growth in the US as half our industries have been destroyed replaced by a growth through inflation figures that are imaginary.Ā This sleight of hand is discussed in the book but what happens in the CPI index is if the price of a product rises too fast they exchange it with a cheaper substitute thereby biasing the index downward.

I came across Franz in the 1970s seeing him often quoted on the front page of the Wall Street Journal.Ā I wrote him that he was a buffoon and did not know what he was talking about.Ā He invited me to his apartment for a meeting in which he said that part of my critique that stated that the usury gold system does not work based on the fact that gold was barren was true and understood by almost no one.Ā (This is explained in detail in the study ā€œGoethe, Faust and the Euroā€Ā below.)Ā Briefly, if there are 200,000 tons of gold in the world and it is lent at 10% to be paid at the end of the year in principal and interest, the interest cannot be paid as it does not exist in gold.Ā That is why Aristotle described the usury system as against nature and unworkable on all the gold is lent out and in the end the lender will control everything.

In 1979 he asked me to write for the new Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker his famous anti-inflation plan which I did, and we sent it to Volcker his beingĀ ordered by Franz to implement it which he did on October 6, 1979 at a Saturday night press conference exactly paralleling what I wrote point by point in the press conference.Ā Ā I later told him when to ease rates at a three hour discussion on the Delta Shuttle between New York and Washington which was delayed.Ā Franz was number one of the deep state in the United States and the three branches of government were under him.

Volcker’s Announcement of Anti-Inflation Measures

Ted Truman (1) used to tell me that Paul required him to answer him on my correspondence within 24 hours.Ā During the 1987 crash Ted was the internal point man in reversing the 1987 cash settlement manipulation while number one in the deep state gave out the order to the Wall Street Giants to reverse their cash settlement positions ending the crash.Ā Ā 

None disobeyed orders.Ā Dr. Pick was not alive to see it but he would have been happy that we prevented a 1929 as we did in 2008.Ā Truman was about the only one there who understood anything as Greenspan was totally incompetent.Ā See study below on the use then in the manipulation of stochastic control theory.Ā In 2008 we did the same but with revisions as can be found in the Goethe analysis below.

See under subtitle Stochastic Control Theory in the next link for a description of this manipulation.

The Straits of Hormuz as a Trigger to World Depression

(1) From 1977 to 1998 Edwin M. Truman directed the Division of International Finance at theĀ Federal Reserve System

Link

community logo
Join the Dinarian888 Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
0
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
🧠 Macrocosmos releases IOTA Decide 4B, its first public model 🧠

Macrocosmos has released IOTA Decide 4B, an open-weight model designed to return structured probabilities for choices such as support-ticket categories, urgency levels, and eligibility checks. Its weights are available under the Apache 2.0 license.

šŸ”‘ Key points

šŸ”¹ Outputs structured probabilities: Developers define possible answers, and the model scores each option in a single pass.

šŸ”¹ Built for software decisions: Potential uses include routing requests, flagging risky activity, checking eligibility, and deciding when a case needs human review.

šŸ”¹ Weights are openly licensed: Developers can download, adapt, and deploy the model under Apache 2.0.

šŸ”¹ Training used 879,000 examples: The model is based on Qwen3.5 4B and was trained on examples labeled by people, public datasets, and synthetic data.

šŸ”¹ Training spanned 16 GPUs: Macrocosmos says the distributed training used RTX A4000 GPUs connected across locations through its IOTA infrastructure.

šŸ”¹ Benchmark results are self-reported: ...

00:00:25
šŸ–„ļø TPN launches Gratis for private, on-device AI

TPN (SN65) has introduced Gratis, a free browser and desktop app for running AI models locally. Once a model is downloaded, conversations are processed on the user’s device and can continue offline—without an account or subscription, according to the project.

šŸ”‘ Key points

šŸ”¹ Models run on-device: Gratis uses the device’s own processing power, rather than sending each prompt to a cloud inference service.

šŸ”¹ Conversations stay local: The team says chats, attachments, images, and voice data remain on the user’s device.

šŸ”¹ Browser and desktop options: Gratis supports a browser version and desktop apps for macOS, Windows, and Linux.

šŸ”¹ Model recommendations included: The app checks available hardware and suggests models based on memory and processing capacity; users can also browse or load compatible Hugging Face models.

šŸ”¹ Offline use follows download: After the model is downloaded, users can chat without a remote inference service.

šŸ”¹ Performance depends on hardware: Available memory, ...

00:00:52
šŸ”„ The Heat Is Up! Mainnet Arrival Locked for Mid-November! āš”ļøšŸ’°

šŸ”„ The Heat Is Up! Mainnet Arrival Locked for Mid-November! āš”ļøšŸ’°

The moment the entire ecosystem has been waiting for is almost here—Forge Lending, the premier native money market powered by Endure (SN30) risk intelligence, is hitting mainnet in Mid-November! šŸ§ šŸ›”ļø

Why This Is a Game-Changer for $TAO:

šŸ”¹ļø Unlocking Ecosystem Liquidity: The first product built directly on Endure's decentralized risk engine is bringing institutional-grade lending, borrowing, and yield mechanics to mainnet. 🌊

šŸ”¹ļø Risk-Engineered DeFi: Driven by real-time predictive models on Subnet 30, Forge ensures borrowing parameters and pool safety are backed by top-tier decentralized intelligence. āš–ļø

šŸ”¹ļø The New Era of Yield: $TAO capital efficiency is about to skyrocket as liquid markets go live on mainnet rails. šŸ“ˆ

Get ready—Bittensor is about to get extremely liquid! šŸ’§šŸ”„

#Forge #Bittensor #TAO #Endure #SN30 #DeFi #Mainnet

00:00:15
🚨 Chutes is being framed as a Hyperliquid-style breakout for decentralized AI inference, with live revenue, verified GPU infrastructure, and a direct challenge to centralized cloud AI 🚨

Chutes is gaining attention as a decentralized AI inference platform that claims to combine real usage, cryptographic verification, confidential computing, and open-source infrastructure into a working production system. The thesis is simple: instead of trusting Big Tech clouds with AI workloads, users get a distributed compute layer built around verification and privacy.

šŸ”‘ Key points

šŸ”¹ Chutes is live in production and reportedly scaled to more than 1,170 active GPU nodes, including large numbers of Nvidia H200s and Blackwell-class hardware.

šŸ”¹ The platform says it has processed nearly 38 trillion tokens since launch across 53 deployed applications and more than 700,000 registered users.

šŸ”¹ The team reportedly cut unprofitable usage programs, reduced total token volume, and still improved revenue efficiency, with revenue per GPU rising sharply after removing subsidized traffic.

šŸ”¹ Chutes is using post-quantum cryptography, trusted execution environments, and Nvidia confidential ...

🚨 Chutes is being framed as a Hyperliquid-style breakout for decentralized AI inference, with live revenue, verified GPU infrastructure, and a direct challenge to centralized cloud AI 🚨
🚨 JPMorgan’s criticism of the CLARITY Act is fueling a fresh power struggle over who gets to write America’s crypto rules 🚨

A new clash is emerging between legacy finance and crypto legislation after JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon reportedly warned that the CLARITY Act could let crypto firms offer bank-like products without bank-level oversight. The dispute is quickly turning into a larger fight over regulation, competitiveness, and who controls the future architecture of digital finance in the United States.

šŸ”‘ Key points

šŸ”¹ Jamie Dimon reportedly called the CLARITY Act a threat to the financial system, arguing it could allow crypto firms to offer yield-like products while avoiding the capital, reserve, and oversight burdens traditional banks face.

šŸ”¹ Senator Cynthia Lummis pushed back publicly, framing the issue as a global strategic race and warning that if the U.S. does not set digital asset standards, other powers will.

šŸ”¹ The core tension is whether the bill creates legitimate regulatory clarity or simply opens the door to regulatory arbitrage for crypto platforms operating outside the traditional banking...

🚨 JPMorgan’s criticism of the CLARITY Act is fueling a fresh power struggle over who gets to write America’s crypto rules 🚨
šŸ‘‰ Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

Custom AI assistants that print money in your sleep? šŸ”œ

The future of Crypto x AI is about to go crazy.

šŸ‘‰ Here’s what you need to know:

šŸ’  'Based Agent' enables creation of custom AI agents
šŸ’  Users set up personalized agents in < 3 minutes
šŸ’  Equipped w/ crypto wallet and on-chain functions
šŸ’  Capable of completing trades, swaps, and staking
šŸ’  Integrates with Coinbase’s SDK, OpenAI, & Replit

šŸ‘‰ What this means for the future of Crypto:

1. Open Access: Democratized access to advanced trading
2. Automated Txns: Complex trades + streamlined on-chain activity
3. AI Dominance: Est ~80% of crypto šŸ‘‰txns done by AI agents by 2025

🚨 I personally wouldn't bet against Brian Armstrong and Jesse Pollak.

šŸ‘‰ Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

āœØļø šŸ“œ Is your name encoded in a 3,000-year-old text? šŸ“œāœØ

In this fascinating discussion, Gregg Braden explores the mystery of the Torah Code (or Bible Code) and how advanced mathematical algorithms reveal complex, interconnected details embedded within ancient scriptures šŸ’»šŸ”.

šŸ”‘ Key Takeaways & Highlights:

ā³ļø A Map of Quantum Timelines ā³

šŸ”¹ Gregg discusses how Einstein’s view of time—where past, present, and future exist simultaneously—aligns with the mechanics of the Torah Code. Rather than locking us into set fates, the code acts as a dynamic map of probabilities.

šŸ‘ Prophecy vs. Remote Viewing šŸ‘ļø

šŸ”¹ Parallels are drawn between ancient prophecy and modern scientific understandings of remote viewing. Both attune to timelines that can shift whenever new choices are made.

Equidistant Letter Sequences (ELS) šŸ”¢

šŸ”¹ Statistical studies published by mathematicians show how skip-code algorithms reveal names, dates, historical events, and modern milestones encoded in ...

🧠 What are Bittensor subnets actually building?

A new overview from TAO Templar points to products and services being developed across Bittensor—not just a cryptocurrency. The ecosystem spans compute, AI inference, storage, robotics, and research, although adoption and revenue vary across subnets.

šŸ”‘ Key points

šŸ”¹ Compute and inference marketplaces: Lium (SN51) offers GPU rentals, while Chutes (SN64) focuses on AI inference and serverless compute.

šŸ”¹ Private compute is emerging: Targon (SN4) offers compute environments designed to protect workloads from infrastructure providers.

šŸ”¹ Storage and vision services: Hippius (SN75) builds cloud storage, while Score focuses on computer vision.

šŸ”¹ Training and research expand: IOTA and Teutonic work on distributed AI training; REAX develops decision models, and Metanova applies subnet competition to drug research.

šŸ”¹ Energy and robotics included: Green Compute aims to turn farm waste into energy for computing, while robotics subnets work on systems ...

šŸ‡°šŸ‡· South Korea proposes delaying crypto tax until 2029

South Korea’s government plans to seek another two-year delay to cryptocurrency income taxation, currently scheduled to begin in January 2027. The proposal also includes allowing investors to carry eligible crypto losses forward for up to three years—but both changes still need National Assembly approval.

šŸ”‘ Key points

šŸ”¹ Proposed start moves to 2029: If lawmakers approve the delay, it would be the fourth postponement since the tax was legislated in 2020.

šŸ”¹ Losses could carry forward: The government proposes letting investors use losses from 2029 onward to offset gains for up to three years. Earlier losses would not qualify.

šŸ”¹ Current tax threshold is 2.5 million won: Under existing law, individuals would pay 22%, including local income tax, on annual net crypto income above that amount.

šŸ”¹ Overseas records are a concern: Officials say exchanges may lack the purchase-price data needed to calculate gains when tokens bought abroad are ...

post photo preview
post photo preview
šŸŽÆWhat’s In Your Vault? — 2026 EditionšŸŽÆ

Sixteen years ago, I posed a question that appeared to be about money but was never really about money at all. What's In Your Wallet? was written at a moment when the world remained intoxicated by the illusion that a representation of value and value itself were interchangeable. The distinction seemed trivial because the machinery of modern finance operated smoothly enough to conceal it. A bank balance purchased goods. A brokerage statement could be exchanged for assets. A warehouse receipt represented commodities. A title represented property. A promise represented delivery. The system functioned, and because it functioned, few bothered to examine the assumptions upon which it rested.

Yet beneath the smooth functioning of the machine lurked a subtle substitution. Somewhere along the way we ceased valuing the thing and began valuing the description of the thing. We stopped demanding possession and settled for evidence of possession. We became comfortable owning records instead of realities, claims instead of assets, promises instead of substance. The map became more important than the territory because most people never wandered far enough from the roads to discover that the two were not the same.

Reading those observations in 2026 feels less like revisiting an old essay and more like observing a fault line that has slowly widened beneath the surface of the global financial order. What has changed is not the distinction itself. What has changed is that the institutions most responsible for maintaining the abstraction appear increasingly unwilling to trust it.

Around the world, central banks have begun bringing gold home. Not merely purchasing gold, though that is certainly occurring, but repatriating it. Bullion that once rested comfortably in the vaults of London and New York is being moved into domestic custody. Public explanations invoke geopolitical uncertainty, sanctions exposure, strategic resilience, and sovereign security. None of those explanations are incorrect. They are simply incomplete. They describe the circumstances without illuminating the realization that appears to be driving the behavior.

A gold bar in your vault is not the same thing as a claim upon a gold bar in someone else's vault. Since the Templars in Jerusalem communicating with the courts of Europe, promises are not the thing that's promised. They never were.

For decades that distinction could be ignored because confidence in the system remained sufficiently high that possession appeared unnecessary. The custodians were trusted. The networks functioned. The legal frameworks appeared durable. The infrastructure seemed permanent. Under those conditions, claims and assets could masquerade as equivalents because the distance between them was rarely tested. Yet every system eventually encounters moments when assumptions become visible. The freezing of sovereign reserves reveals that ownership and access are not identical. Financial crises reveal that liquidity and solvency are not identical. Infrastructure failures reveal that existence and availability are not identical. Again and again reality intrudes upon abstraction and reminds us that the world beneath the ledger still matters.

This is why the movement of gold deserves more attention than the declarations of economists, politicians, central bankers, or global forums. The repatriation of gold is not fundamentally a commodity story, an inflation story, or even a monetary story. It is a custody story. It is a sovereignty story. It is an acknowledgment that possession remains the final court of appeal whenever confidence begins to wobble.

The irony is difficult to miss. At precisely the moment civilization celebrates digital currencies, tokenized assets, algorithmic settlement systems, cloud-based records, and increasingly abstract forms of ownership, many of the institutions responsible for preserving national wealth appear to be moving in the opposite direction. Public narratives race toward virtuality while institutional behavior quietly migrates toward physical custody. The speeches point toward digitization while the bullion trucks point toward reality.

Perhaps nowhere does this contradiction become more visible than when contemplating the fragility of the infrastructure upon which modern finance rests. We speak confidently of balances, portfolios, reserves, pensions, derivatives, and increasingly digital assets as though they possess an existence independent of the systems that record them. Yet the entire architecture rests upon a remarkably delicate foundation of electricity, communications, computation, synchronization, and trust. We have become so accustomed to continuity that we mistake continuity for permanence.

Consider not catastrophe but interruption. Consider a Carrington-scale solar event, a successful cyberattack, a cascading grid failure, or an electromagnetic pulse. The specific mechanism matters less than the principle. The lights go out. The servers stop responding. The networks cease synchronizing. The endless choreography of verification pauses. Legal claims may survive. Contracts may survive. Accounting entries may survive. Yet the practical ability to verify, transfer, access, or exercise those claims becomes uncertain. The abstractions remain theoretically intact while becoming functionally irrelevant.

Gold occupies a peculiar place within this thought experiment because it exists outside the thought experiment. It requires no password, no network connection, no authentication server, no intermediary, and no continuous electrical infrastructure to affirm its existence. The ledger may disappear. The gold remains. Whether one views gold as a monetary asset, a strategic reserve, or simply a historical curiosity, its persistence reveals something deeper about the nature of value itself. Assets that derive their existence from the systems that record them are fundamentally different from assets that exist independently of those systems.

What fascinates me, however, is not the rhetoric surrounding the so-called Great Reset, because the phrase itself has become one of the most effective distractions of the modern era. During the COVID years, populations were conditioned into increasingly reflexive forms of polarization in which every issue was immediately translated into opposing camps, every observation became a declaration of allegiance, and every question became a test of ideological loyalty. One side treated the Great Reset as evidence of a coordinated conspiracy while the other dismissed it as evidence of irrational paranoia. Both reactions produced the same outcome. Attention became fixed upon the slogan while remaining safely distant from the structure beneath it.

History has never required a committee to produce a reset. Resets emerge whenever claims become sufficiently detached from assets, whenever promises become sufficiently detached from productive capacity, whenever leverage becomes sufficiently detached from resilience, and whenever abstractions become sufficiently detached from reality. Long before a reset acquires a name, it exists as a tension embedded within the architecture itself.

This is why the most revealing actions in history are rarely the ones announced from podiums. They are the quiet movements that occur beneath the rhetoric. While populations argue over narratives, central banks move bullion. While commentators debate ideology, nations secure custody. While attention remains fixed upon political theater, the custodians of monetary power appear to be asking an older and more fundamental question concerning what survives when confidence falters, when access becomes uncertain, and when the systems responsible for recording ownership can no longer be assumed to function exactly as they did yesterday.

History repeatedly demonstrates that major transitions rarely emerge from the causes later assigned to them. Wars, sovereign defaults, financial crises, technological disruptions, infrastructure failures, and natural disasters frequently function as explanatory narratives that make visible contradictions that had already been accumulating for decades. The triggering event receives the blame because it is easier to understand than the architecture that rendered the event consequential. Yet the architecture is always where the real story resides. The event merely exposes what was already true.

Seen from this perspective, the most important question is not whether a particular organization intends to implement a Great Reset. The more important question concerns the conditions under which resets become inevitable. Whenever claims multiply faster than assets, whenever obligations expand faster than productive capacity, whenever financial abstractions drift sufficiently far from physical realities, tensions accumulate that eventually demand reconciliation. That reconciliation may arrive through inflation, restructuring, default, crisis, technological disruption, or events conveniently attributed to forces beyond human control, but the mechanism remains secondary to the principle. Reality eventually reasserts itself because reality is the only foundation upon which any abstraction can ultimately stand.

Viewed through that lens, the repatriation of gold appears less like a financial decision than an institutional acknowledgment that the distinction between claims and assets still matters. It represents a quiet recognition that resilience and possession acquire increasing importance precisely when complexity and uncertainty begin to rise. It suggests that beneath the public narratives, beneath the political theater, and beneath the endless distractions that dominate contemporary discourse, some of the world's most consequential actors may be asking the same question that inspired an essay sixteen years ago. What do you actually possess when the systems recording possession become uncertain?

The question is not fundamentally about gold. It is not fundamentally about vaults. It is not fundamentally about central banks. It is a question about the difference between a thing and a description of a thing, between ownership and access, between claims and assets, between abstractions and realities. It is the question that emerges whenever a civilization becomes sufficiently dependent upon representations that it forgets to examine the realities those representations are intended to describe.

Sixteen years ago I asked what was in your wallet. Watching nations quietly move bullion across oceans and into sovereign custody, the question feels sharper today than it did then. Not because the answer has changed, but because the institutions themselves appear increasingly unwilling to pretend that a claim and an asset are the same thing. The distinction sounded eccentric in 2010. It sounds increasingly obvious in 2026. The most interesting question is whether the rest of us will recognize the significance of that realization before history once again forces the issue on its own terms.

Source

šŸ™To support my work, Helping to keep the signal high and the noise low:

šŸ‘‰ Cashapp: $thedinarian

šŸ‘‰ Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian

šŸ‘‰ PayPal: Scan the QR code below šŸ“² or Click Here:Ā 

šŸ‘‡ Crypto Donations šŸ‘‡

XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
post photo preview
āš ļø90 DAYS WITHOUT THE GRIDāš ļø
Why Governments Are Preparing for Critical Systems to Fail

MIND BEND THEORY | DOCUMENTED INVESTIGATION

The United States is preparing major military installations to continue operating if civilian infrastructure goes down. Britain is telling households to prepare for days without essential services. India is warning that an attack on the financial system can weaken a nation. And the Bank of England is asking what happens when cyber defenses fail—not if they can prevent every attack.

Individually, each development has an explanation.

Put them beside one another, however, and a larger pattern becomes visible.

Over the span of only a few weeks, governments and financial authorities in the United States, United Kingdom and India have publicly discussed preparations for disruptions involving some of the systems modern society depends upon most:

Power.

Water.

Fuel.

Communications.

Banking.

Supply chains.

This does not establish that these governments are preparing for one secret event.

There is no public evidence of a coordinated countdown, predetermined blackout date or single intelligence warning connecting them.

But there is something here that can be documented.

Governments are increasingly planning around a question that sounds very different from traditional emergency preparedness:

What happens when the systems we normally assume will be available are no longer available?

And in the United States, that question has now reached the Pentagon.

DOCUMENT 01

UNITED STATES — FORTRESS AMERICA

On September 30, 2026, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth established a program called FORTRESS America.

The acronym stands for:

Federal Operations for Resilience, Troop Resources, Energy, Supply and Survivability.

The program addresses a vulnerability that rarely receives much public attention:

The world's most powerful military still depends extensively on civilian infrastructure.

Electric grids.

Commercial supply chains.

Communications infrastructure.

Fuel.

Foreign sources of critical materials.

FORTRESS America is intended to reduce those dependencies.

The Pentagon's own public description says the initiative is designed to ensure that major U.S. military installations generate independent power so that bases remain operational even if the civilian grid is taken down by cyberattack or sabotage.

It goes beyond electricity.

The program includes five major areas:

Energy independence

Installation hardening and cyber resilience

Supply-chain and defense-industrial-base resilience

Strategic defense reserves

Space and spectrum resilience

The Pentagon also wants deeper reserves of critical supplies so military operations can continue when ordinary supply lines are disrupted.

The underlying idea is simple:

The military should be capable of functioning even when the infrastructure surrounding it cannot.

An October 7 implementation memorandum obtained by DefenseScoop shows that the Pentagon had already begun establishing the FORTRESS America Program Office and assigning officials to implement those objectives.

Then another piece of the story emerged.

DOCUMENT 02

THE 90-DAY REQUIREMENT

On October 25, Fox News published details from additional FORTRESS America documents its reporters reviewed.

According to that reporting, major continental U.S. military installations are being prepared to sustain essential operations for at least 90 days without outside support.

The essential systems reportedly include:

Power.

Water.

Fuel.

Communications.

Think about the distinction carefully.

The Pentagon isn't telling Americans that the United States will lose electricity for 90 days.

It isn't predicting a 90-day blackout.

Military contingency planning deliberately prepares for scenarios officials hope never occur.

But preparing installations for this possibility tells us something about the scenario being considered.

The Pentagon is building resilience around the possibility that a sufficiently serious conflict or attack could interfere with the civilian systems on which military installations normally depend.

The publicly released FORTRESS material specifically discusses:

Cyberattack.

Sabotage.

Grid disruption.

Foreign supply-chain disruption.

Attacks against installations.

And prolonged military contingencies.

That makes the 90-day requirement significant—but it must be described accurately.

Mind Bend Theory verification note:

The September 30 FORTRESS America program itself is documented publicly.

The October 7 implementation memorandum has been reported and described by DefenseScoop.

The 90-day requirement, however, currently comes from documents reviewed by Fox News, rather than a primary 90-day document independently published for the public.

That distinction matters.

We follow the documents as far as they take us—and no farther.

DOCUMENT 03

UNITED KINGDOM — BE READY FOR THREE DAYS

Now cross the Atlantic.

On October 22, the British government launched its new Be Ready campaign.

This time the audience wasn't the military.

It was ordinary households.

The UK government is asking households that are able to do so to prepare to remain self-sufficient for approximately three days during an emergency.

The government specifically discusses disruptions affecting:

Power.

Water.

Phones.

Internet access.

A Parliamentary Written Statement issued the same day explicitly states:

ā€œThe updated advice calls on households to be self-sufficient for three days in the case of an emergency.ā€

The government recommends maintaining three days of bottled water and non-perishable food.

Its expanded preparedness guidance includes:

Approximately three litres of drinking water per person per day

Three days of non-perishable food

Battery-powered or wind-up radio

Torch and spare batteries

Charged power bank

Essential medications

First-aid supplies

Blankets and warm clothing

Important telephone numbers written down

Basic hygiene supplies

Cash

Why cash?

Because during some disruptions, electronic payment systems and ATMs may not function normally.

That creates an important connection between infrastructure and finance.

Electricity isn't isolated from banking.

Communications aren't isolated from payments.

Modern infrastructure is interconnected.

And failure can move through those connections.

DOCUMENT 04

INDIA — ā€œWARS ARE NOT FOUGHT WITH WEAPONS ALONEā€

Three days later, on October 25, another statement appeared.

This one came from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Modi was inaugurating the Reserve Bank of India's newly established Data Centre and Cybersecurity Training Institute in Bhubaneswar.

The facilities are designed to strengthen the technological foundations and cybersecurity resilience of India's financial system.

Four data centres will host mission-critical payment and settlement systems.

But Modi's explanation of why this matters went beyond ordinary cybersecurity.

His official statement says:

ā€œNowadays, wars are not fought with weapons alone; a nation can also be weakened by attacking its economy.ā€

He continued by saying India's growing economy requires its banking system to be protected against cyber looters and cyber terrorists.

That puts another critical system into the picture:

Money.

A modern economy depends on digital banking infrastructure almost as heavily as it depends on electricity and telecommunications.

Payment systems move commerce.

Banks hold liquidity.

Settlement systems move money between financial institutions.

Data centres keep those networks functioning.

Disrupt the financial infrastructure badly enough and the consequences don't remain inside banks.

They reach businesses.

Supply chains.

Payroll.

Purchasing.

Markets.

And households.

DOCUMENT 05

BANK OF ENGLAND — WHAT IF CYBER DEFENSE FAILS?

There is another document worth reading.

On June 30, Bank of England Deputy Governor Sarah Breeden delivered a speech titled:

ā€œAgents of Change.ā€

The subject was artificial intelligence and financial stability.

One section deserves particular attention.

Breeden warned that advanced AI systems are becoming increasingly capable of identifying and chaining together cyber vulnerabilities.

That changes the nature of cyber risk.

AI can help defenders.

But the same capabilities can potentially increase the speed and effectiveness of attackers.

The important change in thinking comes afterward.

Preventing attacks is no longer enough.

Financial institutions must also prepare to recover after a successful attack.

Breeden raised the possibility of simultaneous disruption across multiple financial firms.

She then asked whether critical financial institutions may eventually require completely separate failover capabilities—or even the ability to rebuild compromised core systems from ā€œbare metal.ā€

In October, Reuters reported that the Bank of England was pushing financial institutions further toward this type of recovery planning.

That represents a subtle but significant change in the question.

It isn't simply:

How do we stop the attack?

It's becoming:

What happens if we don't?

And:

How do we keep the system functioning afterward?

CONNECT THE DOCUMENTS

Now put the documents beside one another.

UNITED STATES

Military installations are being hardened so essential operations can continue when civilian infrastructure is disrupted.

UNITED KINGDOM

Households are being told to prepare for three days without services they normally assume will remain available.

INDIA

The prime minister publicly warns that modern conflict can weaken a country by attacking its economy and calls for stronger protection of banking infrastructure.

BANK OF ENGLAND

Financial authorities are examining recovery scenarios in which cyber defenses have already failed and multiple institutions could potentially be disrupted simultaneously.

These aren't identical programs.

They aren't even aimed at the same people.

And there is currently no public evidence demonstrating that they were coordinated.

But they share one important assumption:

CRITICAL SYSTEMS CAN FAIL.

And resilience therefore cannot begin after the failure occurs.

It has to exist beforehand.

THE SYSTEM BEHIND THE SYSTEM

This is where the story becomes bigger than individual announcements.

Modern infrastructure isn't a collection of isolated systems.

It's a network.

Consider what happens when electricity fails.

Without power, telecommunications eventually become difficult to maintain.

Without communications, electronic payments can be affected.

Fuel pumps require electricity.

Water systems depend on pumping and treatment infrastructure.

Businesses depend on payment processing.

Supply chains depend on communications, transportation and fuel.

Hospitals require electricity, communications, water, medicine and logistics simultaneously.

A serious disruption doesn't necessarily remain inside the system where it started.

It can propagate.

POWER → COMMUNICATIONS → BANKING → COMMERCE → SUPPLY CHAINS

And the dependency runs in multiple directions.

That interconnectedness is precisely why governments plan for resilience.

WHAT THIS DOES NOT PROVE

Mind Bend Theory exists to examine unusual patterns.

But a pattern isn't automatically proof of a conspiracy.

There is currently no public evidence showing that Washington, London and New Delhi are secretly preparing for the same scheduled event.

There is no verified date for a coming global blackout.

There is no public document establishing an imminent 90-day collapse of the American electrical grid.

And the Pentagon's 90-day military resilience requirement should not be interpreted as a prediction that Americans will lose electricity for 90 days.

That would go beyond the evidence.

What the evidence actually establishes is interesting enough.

Governments increasingly consider disruption of power, communications, supply chains and financial infrastructure plausible enough to justify concrete preparation.

The UK is preparing households.

The United States is hardening military infrastructure.

India is strengthening the technological backbone of its financial system.

The Bank of England is thinking about how banks recover after cyber defenses fail.

That isn't speculation.

It's in the documents.

THE QUESTION

Perhaps the most important change isn't what governments believe will happen.

It's what they're preparing to survive.

For decades, infrastructure security focused heavily on preventing failure.

The emerging model looks different:

Assume something eventually gets through.

Assume something eventually goes down.

Build the ability to continue operating anyway.

The Pentagon calls that resilience.

The UK calls it being ready.

Central banks call it operational resilience.

Different terminology.

Same fundamental question:

WHAT STILL WORKS WHEN THE SYSTEM DOESN'T?

DOCUMENT TRAIL

Read the Evidence Yourself

Mind Bend Theory strongly encourages readers to examine the original material rather than relying solely on our interpretation.

šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡ø DOCUMENT 01 — FORTRESS America Establishment

September 30, 2026

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's memorandum establishes FORTRESS America as a Department of Defense resilience program.

The publicly reported memorandum establishes the program around installation resilience, independent energy, strategic reserves, supply chains and related national-defense infrastructure.

Source type: Pentagon memorandum / official announcement.

šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡ø DOCUMENT 02 — FORTRESS America Implementation Memorandum

October 7, 2026

DefenseScoop obtained the memorandum from Under Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment Michael Duffey directing officials to begin operationalizing the FORTRESS America Program Office.

It identifies five foundational pillars, including energy independence, installation hardening and cyber resilience, strategic reserves and supply-chain resilience.

Source type: Pentagon memorandum obtained by DefenseScoop.

šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡ø DOCUMENT 03 — 90-Day FORTRESS Requirement

October 25, 2026

Fox News reports that documents it reviewed require major continental U.S. installations to sustain essential operations for at least 90 days without outside support.

Source type: Journalistic reporting based on documents reviewed by reporters.

Important: This is not currently being presented by Mind Bend Theory as a publicly released primary 90-day Pentagon document.

šŸ‡¬šŸ‡§ DOCUMENT 04 — UK Cabinet Office Be Ready Announcement

October 22, 2026

The Cabinet Office announces the three-year Be Ready campaign and describes preparation for disruption affecting power, water, phones and internet.

Source type: Official UK government publication.

šŸ‡¬šŸ‡§ DOCUMENT 05 — Parliamentary Written Statement HCWS409

October 22, 2026

The UK Parliament records the government's explicit recommendation that households prepare to remain self-sufficient for three days.

Source type: Official Parliamentary record.

šŸ‡¬šŸ‡§ DOCUMENT 06 — Be Ready Household Emergency Checklist

The government's practical household guidance provides recommendations for water, food, radio, lighting, medication, power banks, emergency cash and other supplies.

Source type: Official UK government preparedness guidance.

šŸ‡®šŸ‡³ DOCUMENT 07 — Prime Minister of India / RBI Cybersecurity Facilities

October 25, 2026

Official statement documenting the opening of the Reserve Bank of India's Data Centre and Cybersecurity Training Institute and Modi's warning that countries can be weakened through attacks against their economies.

Source type: Official Government of India statement.

šŸ‡¬šŸ‡§ DOCUMENT 08 — ā€œAgents of Changeā€ — Sarah Breeden

June 30, 2026

The Bank of England deputy governor discusses rapidly advancing AI cyber capabilities, simultaneous disruption across financial institutions, separate failover infrastructure and potentially rebuilding compromised systems from bare metal.

Source type: Official Bank of England speech.

DOCUMENT 09 — Bank of England Cyber-Recovery Reporting

October 15, 2026

Reuters reports on the Bank of England's push for stronger recovery capabilities against AI-enabled cyberattacks, including bare-metal recovery.

Source type: Independent reporting.

MIND BEND THEORY

Follow the documents. Separate what they prove from what they don't.

Then ask why the preparation is happening now.

Documents attached to the investigation

FORTRESS America — Sept. 30 memorandum record
Pentagon FORTRESS America implementation memorandum — DefenseScoop
FORTRESS America 90-day documents — Fox News investigation
UK Cabinet Office — Be Ready announcement
UK Parliament — Written Statement HCWS409
India PM's Office — RBI Data Centre & Cybersecurity Training Institute
Bank of England — Sarah Breeden, ā€œAgents of Changeā€
Reuters — Bank of England cyber-recovery warning

Source

šŸ™To support my work, Helping to keep the signal high and the noise low:

šŸ‘‰ Cashapp: $thedinarian

šŸ‘‰ Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian

šŸ‘‰ PayPal: Scan the QR code below šŸ“² or Click Here:Ā 

šŸ‘‡ Crypto Donations šŸ‘‡

XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
September 13, 2026
post photo preview
Revolut Leak Shows the Cost of Constant ID Collection
Revolut’s mistake is the news, but the bigger problem is the growing number of companies being encouraged or required to keep copies of our most sensitive identity documents.

Online bank Revolut has revealed that it gave out sensitive personal and financial information of an undisclosed number of its customers in response to a fake government request.

The information that was handed over to an ā€œunauthorized third partyā€ reportedly includes names, dates of birth, occupations, addresses, phone numbers, account numbers, transaction histories (including Bitcoin), and even copies of government-issued IDs and onboarding verification selfies.

Revolut claims that derived biometric face data was not.

The company said that the data was handed over in response to an email that came from a real government agency’s domain, but was not actually sent or authorized by that agency.

The email passed several authentication checks (SPF, DKIM, and DMARC) that are designed to establish the authenticity of a message’s origin and integrity, but do not verify the legitimacy of the legal request itself.

Revolut said that it complied with the request ā€œunder the reasonable belief that it was an authentic government agency requestā€ – and only later found out that it was not.

Revolut said it later realized its mistake, blocked the email address, and reported the incident to the relevant authorities.

Revolut said that only a ā€œlimitedā€ number of its customers were affected by the data leak, and that the company’s systems were not hacked, nor was any money stolen.

The story broke on September 11 when Revolut customers started receiving an email notice about a data leak, and the news was picked up by media outlets the following day.

Revolut notice explaining customer identity and financial data was shared after an unauthorized government email request.

The reason this is a recurring problem is that companies are keeping highly sensitive information about their customers’ identities, and sometimes even financial transactions, for a long time, and this data is then available to be disclosed to third parties – either in response to valid legal requests, or, as in the case of Revolut, fake ones.

One reason for this is know your customer (KYC) and anti-money laundering (AML) rules. Revolut’s current UK customer privacy notice spells it out: the company generally keeps personal data of UK customers for no more than seven years after the relationship ends, and sometimes longer – for legal reasons.

This means that even if you close your account, your identity documents don’t disappear.

And while the incident with Revolut happened in the financial sector, it’s by no means the only one that requires customers to hand over sensitive identity information. Discord, a popular chat service, said in an October 9, 2025 security update that government ID photos of approximately 70,000 users may have been exposed after a third-party customer service provider got hacked.

This was not a financial service, nor the same type of attack. But the result was similar – because the underlying business process was the same: requiring and storing sensitive identity documents. In the case of Discord, these were used to review age-related appeals.

It’s hard to do anything about a copy of your old passport, or a photo of your face, or a record of your past transactions. These can be used to identify and profile you, and can be used to carry out targeted fraud. And this can happen even if the initial disclosure didn’t result in financial loss.

The more companies are forced to collect and store such information, and the more of it they have, the more opportunities there are for this data to be leaked, either by the company itself or a third party it works with. That's what makes governments' push for more ID checks just to access ordinary parts of life so reckless.

Source

šŸ™To support my work, Helping to keep the signal high and the noise low:

šŸ‘‰ Cashapp: $thedinarian

šŸ‘‰ Buy me a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/thedinarian

šŸ‘‰ PayPal: Scan the QR code below šŸ“² or Click Here:Ā 

šŸ‘‡ Crypto Donations šŸ‘‡

XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals