That is the setting, but what is true and what is ‘planned’ is another matter. We have several settings, but let me start by giving you two parts before I start ‘presuming’ stuff, so you will be able to keep up. /The first one was the one I got last, but it matters. SBS (at https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/trumps-america-wants-access-to-australian-biometric-data/ftomgcy5j) gives us ‘Australians’ personal data could soon be accessible by US agencies. Here’s why’ and we are given “Now, reports are emerging that the Australian government may be compelled to share Australians’ biometric data and other information with the US and its agencies, including ICE, as part of a compliance measure to vet travelers entering the country under its Visa Waiver Program (VWP). The Australian government, via the Department of Home Affairs, has so far declined to confirm whether it is currently complying with the demands or has plans to negotiate a data-sharing agreement. That’s despite the US setting a deadline of 31 December for finalising agreements with countries participating in its visa-free travel arrangement, including Australia.” This was nothing new to me, but as it is ‘now’ officially recognised, it adheres to a different field as well. We are further given “The proposed changes to the US’ vetting processes would primarily affect Australians eligible for the ESTA visa waiver program, which allows travelers from 42 countries to visit the US for up to 90 days visa-free, provided they first obtain an electronic travel authorisation.” I personally do not think it will end there, but it is the start that the United States desire, because if the first hurdle is passed, the rest becomes easy and it connects to the second article, even though you might not think that it does. The second article comes from Forbes (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2026/02/09/the-new-chatgpt-caricature-trend-comes-with-a-privacy-warning/) with the setting of ‘The New ChatGPT Caricature Trend Comes With A Privacy Warning’ where we see “The ChatGPT caricatures are created by entering a seemingly benign prompt into the AI tool: “Create a caricature of me and my job based on everything you know about me.” The AI caricatures are pretty cool, so it’s easy to see why people are jumping on this viral trend. But to create the caricatures, ChatGPT needs a lot of data about you.” With the added “It means you are handing over a bunch of potentially sensitive data to ChatGPT — all to jump on a viral trend that will soon be forgotten. But that data could potentially be out there forever, at least on the social media platforms you post it on.”
Now consider the new setting and this becomes laughably easy with the 700 platforms being added this year (source: Cleanview) they told us “the United States leads global data center growth with 577+ operating data centers and over 660+ planned or under-construction projects” that is the setting and I have warned people for this setting for over 30 years. Matching and adding data has been possible since the 80’s, but for the longest time we just never had the data technology (like massive hard drives) now we get suppliers like Kioxia with 245TB drives, with 1 petabyte in a few years. But for now you could use 4 of those bad boys and you are already there. Now to the larger setting. Do you think that the USA needs that much data in data centres to regulate the weather?
It comes to the stage where the Dutch journalist Luc Sala is proven correct. We are headed towards a setting of the “have’s” and the “have not’s” (1988/1989) the market is already there now, the rest is trying to catch up. So we get a world the separates the enablers from the consumers and when we get that, we merely need to define the cut off point of the consumers. This is the world where those who do not consume enough become a liability to that system. He predicted it and now we see the execution towards that point and weirdly enough you are all helping the United States complete that setting, in one hand the government enabling the biometrics collection and in the pother hand the people trying to appease its ‘fanbase’ by handing over whatever they need towards ChatGTP to look cool and no-one considered that these two parts could be combined? This was relatively simple in 1992, now with an evolved Oracle and Snowflake it becomes mere Childs play and the data centres to capture the essence of 8,000,000,000 people is already out there. So where will you end up getting selected under? Because in this setting you do not get to have a choice. It is what governments and their spreadsheets and revenue driving numbers say you are to be. It is basically that simple.
So whilst you think you are doing the fool thing, others can salvage a lot more data out of that setting than places like ChatGPT can vouch for and remember, the Cloud Act 2018 we are told “to improve procedures for both foreign and US investigators to obtain access to vital electronic information held by service providers.” And in this case, anything that helps the US investigators is valid for capture and whatever that is is not precisely defined and whilst we think we are safe, we really are not and every ‘cool’ AI (merely NIP) is based on getting as much data as they can whilst giving you the option to look cool and there is nothing uncool about a caricature of yourself. The fact that hundreds of these are floating around LinkedIn is reason enough to see that and when the second stage starts (basically American companies selectively poaching) and that is when governments finally realise that they all fell for the trap that was there next to phishing and data transfers and they let it all happen.
So when you see the SBS article, fear the setting that they give “As well as extensive biometric data, including DNA, the proposal requests that inbound travelers to the US provide five years of social media history, five years of personal and work contact details, extensive personal information on family members, and even the IP address and metadata of any photos uploaded as part of their application. So far, the United Kingdom has signed onto the agreement, and the European Union is in negotiations.” Do you really think that this is needed to keep the United States safe, or is there more in play? The fact that the UK signed it is as I see it stupid beyond believe and this comes from the nation that seemingly holds ‘freedom of speech’ in such high regards.
Have a great day today, because as I see it, some governments are selling you out as you speak.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 