I fully understand the difference between blockchain and cloud, my point is that it is similar to cloud in that your data is distributed and sitting out somewhere that you can't control - whether among a lot of unknown people or a number of cloud data centers.
It's not about tax, it's about privacy of data in general since data is used to profile and target people. This is the most dangerous application whether the average person realizes it or not.
Oh it is a problem. When enough sheeple finally give up their data, they will start coming after those that resist with an iron fist by labelling them as threats to society. The sheeple will then happily support it since they've already given in and don't want to have any troubles with the government themselves.
I also notice that you didn't answer my last point about the data being collected regardless of a "Pillar-like" solution. It's a joke that this will stop any data collection, Pillar will instead just make it easier to centralize it.
I've never said nor implied that blockchain is inherently nefarious. This is an interpretation solely from you. I suggest you stick to my direct statements without exaggeration. The only point that I am implying is that leaving all your most private data out on a publicly available blockchain (encrypted or not) just because it sounds convenient, is totally asinine. Blockchain technology is designed to be a public ledger not a secure location for storing all your most private data.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Sheeple confirmed.
This is from the "Key Terms" section of the Pillar Project Grey Paper, p9:
The former is the means that Pillar will use.
If you think about it, all of our data is already stolen and accessible by some powerful and toxic institutions and people. Wouldn't it be nice to at least be able to claim ownership of our personal data and manage it ourselves?
I do see part of your reasoning, really. Projects like Pillar are walking a fine rope by asking for users to trust in a service that manages their entire identity. But for the reason in the paragraph above, I don't see Pillar Project as worse than the current system. For one, the personal data locker software will be designed to work without human intervention other than whoever has access to a wallet's keys.
Oh by the way, Pillar is building a wallet, not a blockchain. This is from p14 of the Grey Paper:
If I've translated their vision correctly, personal information and physical assets will soon be represented in various ways (such as tokens) on blockchains, which will allow for very complex transactions and auditing to occur.
The Pillar Grey Paper can be found here.
You can obviously believe what you want from Pillar, but I've seen plenty to completely distrust them and their ultimate intentions. As much as most people don't want to believe it, there are a lot of modern day Pied Pipers out there that are selling solutions that people deeply want to believe are genuine. They play off people's inherent trust, emotions, and desire for a new direction. The only way that I know to sniff these Pied Pipers out is to read between the lines of what they are telling you. I've done that and I believe it's all just an empty sales pitch for a deeper NWO plan.
There will never be a data storage system that TPTB will not have access to. Just watched vid y'day of real ID and companies access to enable selling of the data, so it would just be giant FB with everything about you on it, and the network will continuously learn all new items, transactions of any kind, and they want this to be global. Vatican supports 'banking access' for the poor, so they will have 'greater access' to global economy. So we have to do it for the poor.
I fully agree, but trying to explain this to people is almost impossible because no one wants to hear it. Instead you've got lots of sheeple now screaming "hooray" for a crypto-based centralization of your data, even though if that was done elsewhere, they wouldn't like it at all. It's bonkers.