Honest and heartfelt question.
Firstly, let me be clear, I save in Bitcoin. I’m not easily swayed by FUD or hysteria. But this concern has been weighing on me.
I live in the UK, where talk of mandatory digital ID is becoming increasingly hard to ignore. I believe the infrastructure is already quietly in place, hidden beneath layers of legislation, buried like a silent kill switch waiting for activation.
Here’s my worry: if internet access itself becomes state-controlled, if permission is required to connect, how do we access Bitcoin?
I don’t ask this to spread fear or doubt. I ask because I genuinely care about freedom, truth, and the future we’re building. Most people seem unaware of how existential this risk truly is.
Replies (6)
Maybe they don’t care about Bitcoin, because they have digital ID and a permission based society in mind as an end goal.
I run knots, but we may not be able to run anything if they shut off access to the internet via ISP’s.
I know these are uncomfortable questions, but if we don’t ask them, we can’t identify solutions. That’s all I’m looking for.
We are in big trouble here, read my other post, I linked it to this one. It’s long, sorry I can be long winded. But pretty important I feel.
Most of it has already been put in place.
They may not have to bring digital id in via a single vote, because it’s already in under cover of multiple acts of legislation.
There is precedent for this, it’s been done before.
Welcome to Airstrip One.
I mean yeah. But banks watch what you do already. Digital ID will make it a bit worse. Saving in bitcoin is legal, so its like an escape hatch. Oppose digital ID and oppose core v30.
That’s where the real danger lies.
With KYC, they already know who holds Bitcoin. If digital ID becomes mandatory, it’s not hard to imagine a world where those same people can simply be “turned off” accounts frozen, exchanges geo-fenced, access denied.
Now imagine if that same digital ID is linked directly to internet access itself. ISPs could be compelled to restrict or monitor what you do online, or even cut off your connection entirely if you fall outside the “approved” parameters.
It wouldn’t even need to be a total ban, just quiet de-banking and silent disconnection, one person at a time until compliance becomes normalised. The infrastructure for that already exists, buried under layers of “safety” and “trust.”
This isn’t paranoia; it’s pattern recognition. Every safeguard can be flipped into a control mechanism once the political wind shifts.
Correct, we can’t do this for another 4 years.
