[flagged]
A simple google search reveals that this information is false.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/bill-gates-id2020/
Please, @csense - this is only a digital certificate, one which is clearly designed not to actively track someone, but to provide much needed medical info in 3rd world countries who don't have the infrastructure to store vaccination records across borders.
Personally, I think you should be ashamed of making such a disingenuous connection.
Second, let's think for a few seconds how this technology would actually work in practice.
The technology is a method which allows you to put a few bits of information into the skin. Presumably it's permanent, non-user-visible and non-user-removable.
From there it's protocol design. Option (a), you could store the data of which vaccines directly on the person. Option (b), you could store some kind of ID number to an online database.
We can have a fine flamewar over the merits and drawbacks of Option (a) vs Option (b). But I think it's safe to assume there's maybe a 50% chance they'll end up going with Option (b).
This is pretty worrying. You state the fact it'll presumably only be deployed in Africa, but this is not reassuring. In African countries, it seems like it happens frequently that the government decides this week, it's your tribe's turn for genocide. In this case you'd want to make a run for it, escape your tribe's normal haunts where the death squads will be out in force.
Of course you could sneak across a border, or openly walk into a foreign customs post and ask for asylum, but changing countries has its own set of risks and problems.
An alternative survival strategy would be to simply destroy your identifying documents, if you ever had any, and try to blend in somewhere else. If your identifying document's a non-removable tattoo, you can't do this.
I also want to point out that blockchain identification is inherent in the design of ID2020, so even if it was implemented, it would not give a central database a way to track everyone, only a way to look up an individuals vaccine history at the time of scan, similar to how Google and Microsoft's data sharing for COVID is operating.
A quick look at your comment history tells me you are only here to bridage the site with anti-vaxx messaging.
The actual idea, which he doesn't particularly seem to be "pushing", is to have invisible tattoos injected into people in the developing world as an immutable vaccine record, not an ID. It's not unlike the way vets give dogs a small tattoo dot when the dog has been spayed. Medical records don't always survive or travel with patients.
1. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/09/instagram-...
Is it really any better that this is happening in the "developing world"? You even make the case that it's identical to the practices we uphold to track animals.
Furthermore, appeal to authority is not proof or evidence of anything but the opinion of authority. Try to avoid doing that if you want to engage ideas in good faith.
Yes. You didn't read the article I posted, and you're already making assumptions to create a straw man.
The proposed research[1] (that Gates has been falsely linked to) proposes using quantum dots in a pattern. They need not be PII. A random person in a developing country would have no method or incentive to forge the quantum dots in their skin, so the pattern would be exactly the same on every person. Nothing personally identifiable.