DEI
WEF report suggests digital ‘metaverse identity’ will become central to daily life
From LifeSiteNews
Your digital identity will be your passport in the metaverse, where it will be used to surveil, predict, and mimic your behavior while determining your level of access to information and spaces.
Your metaverse identity, with its digital ID, biometric data capture, and behavior profiling, will be central to your everyday life, according to a World Economic Forum (WEF) report.
“Metaverse identity” is a relatively new concept that the WEF and Accenture describe in great detail in a new 48-page report entitled “Metaverse Identity: Defining the Self in a Blended Reality.”
According to the report:
“As people spend more time exploring, playing and socializing in digital experiences, a person’s metaverse identity will be central to their day-to-day life as well as to the way they express their personal identity.”
But what exactly do the unelected globalists mean by “metaverse identity?”
Metaverse identity encompasses three components:
- Representation: including personal, social and role identity, be it through avatars, pseudonyms or other digital expressions.
- Data: capturing the intricate web of knowledge about individuals generated by metaverse supporting hardware and software.
- Identification (ID): be it through driver’s licenses, government-issued IDs, passports, birth certificates, attestations, labels, or usernames and passwords.
According to the report, “Metaverse identity broadens ‘identity’ as it is known today and combines it with the digital underpinnings of the internet. It is a multi-layered construct of an individual or entity, including everything from representation to data and identification.”

With these three components, identity in the metaverse “connects and anchors a person to the physical and virtual world.”
Let’s break them down, starting with representation.
The notion of ‘representation’ is not just about pixels and graphics; it’s a reflection of societal values, inclusivity and the human desire for authenticity […] Representational design choices extend to the design of digital entities – from embodied virtual agents to non-embodied virtual assistant.
Representation has to do with how you present and express yourself in the metaverse, whether it’s a realistic likeness of yourself or an abstract, creative, or artistic version.
The authors say that, “These expressions may extend to include words, actions, behaviors and mannerisms,” so there is an element of behavior profiling going on in the representation category, which we will also see in the data capture and identification categories.
Representation in the metaverse will also take on a new meaning with the introduction of digital entities that act on your behalf.
According to the report, “Digital entities may represent humans, objects, systems or abstract concepts, and are capable of varying degrees of interaction, autonomy and behavior within digital experiences […] They are capable of mimicking human communication and may be used as sales assistants, corporate trainers, social media influencers and more.”

Like non-player characters (NPCs) in videogames, these digital doppelgangers attempt to mimic human behavior.
And like a virtual voodoo doll, if something goes wrong with your digital entity, it could spill over into your personal life in the real world.
“While digital entities can offer innovative interactions and functionalities within the metaverse, they may commit real-world harms,” the report cautions, adding, “The ability to manipulate or create misinformation through digital entities – such as chatbots and photoreal avatars – raises ethical and security concerns.”
Now let’s dig into the data category.
Identity goes beyond ID, like a passport or driver’s license. Metaverse identity includes data points.
The data category of metaverse identity is aimed at gathering and analyzing data to make inferences about you, and it will be used to predict your behavior, thanks to AI and Machine Learning.
“Paired with artificial intelligence (AI)/machine learning (ML) models that can analyze a person’s interactions, movements and preferences further generates identity,” the report reads.
Whether these (inferred) data points are capturing a person’s current activities, predicting their next action or future preferences, these data-based breadcrumbs provide information into one’s identity.
These attributes may influence the way the virtual environment responds to an individual, and outsiders perceive an individual or entity.
This data aspect of metaverse identity is important to unelected globalists who are obsessed with manipulating human behavior and controlling what people think and do.
There is a risk that governments could use aggregated inferred data for surveillance, monitoring dissidents, or suppressing certain groups without their active consent.

Inferred data, “now aided by AI/ML, can examine seemingly unrelated behaviors, actions and choices to draw meaningful conclusions about a person’s preferences, background and intentions,” according to the report.
Once you know intent, whether of an individual or an unelected globalist think tank, then it becomes a lot easier to predict what they’ll do or say next, even if they deceptively try to mask their true intentions.
And, “While this data is collected to enhance the person’s experience, it could also be analyzed to make inferences as to their real-world identity or preferences and used for targeted advertising or other purposes without their consent.”
Making inferences for “other purposes” without the user’s consent is what defense and intelligence agencies are after in the metaverse.
A recent RAND Corporation report suggests as much with respect to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) looking to spy on users in the metaverse, stating, “As DHS grapples with emerging challenges by monitoring and analyzing users’ activity in metaverses, it should undertake legal and ethical reviews of what information is collected and how it is managed.”
Now, we shall move on to the identification category.
The concept of identity is contextual, flexible, complex and fluid […] Identity extends into the intricacies of an individual’s behaviors, actions and choices.

Perhaps the most confusing part of metaverse identity is the identification or ID aspect because digital ID and digital identity are terms that are often used interchangeably, including by yours truly, but they are quite different.
Identification is about identifying, verifying, and authenticating who someone is.
Identity on the other hand, “consists of layered aspects of cultural heritage, ethnicity, age, professional and social roles, hobbies, gender identification, sexual orientation and much more,” according to the report.
Now that we’ve taken care of the distinction between the two, your digital ID will be your passport to the metaverse, and like with a passport, there will be certain areas that you will not be able to access.
According to the report, “Similar to today’s traditional identification systems – like passports and driver’s licenses – IDs may evolve to include unique avatar designs, new body-based attestations or unique virtual signatures that validate one’s existence and grant access to specific realms or activities.”
To illustrate how digital ID plays into digital identity, the authors say, “Forms of ID – such as passports and government IDs – formalize an individual’s identity; additionally, these can serve as credentials or means of authenticating and verifying individuals across physical and digital spaces.”
Metaverse identity is integral to future internet interactions.

Now that we’ve gone through the three components that make up metaverse identity, what are some of the potential drawbacks?
For starters, the report says, “There is a risk that governments could use aggregated inferred data for surveillance, monitoring dissidents or suppressing certain groups without their active consent.”
Your metaverse identity can include your real-time biometrics, such as pupil dilation, heart rate, and brainwaves, so that companies and governments can infer how you are feeling and reacting to their goods, services, or policies.
Historian Yuval Noah Harari spoke of this same technology falling into the hands of dictators at the 2020 WEF Annual Meeting in Davos. There, he said:
Just imagine North Korea in 20 years where everybody has to wear a biometric bracelet, which constantly monitors your blood pressure, your heart rate, your brain activity 24 hours a day.
You listen to a speech on the radio by the ‘Great Leader,’ and they know what you actually feel – you can clap your hands and smile, but if you’re angry, they know you’ll be in the gulag tomorrow morning.
Having a biometric data capturing device attached to your body that knows what you’ll do before you do it raises serious ethical questions about how the data is collected, where that data goes, and who has access to some of the most intimate details of your life.
For the past few years, Meta has been working on Project Aria, which combines augmented reality with artificial intelligence to create realistic 3D renderings of people, places, and things, including living spaces.
When Mark Zuckerberg explained his vision for the metaverse at Connect 2021, he highlighted how Project Aria could map a person’s apartment, including everything in it (see video below).
Imagine how valuable that information would be to companies – knowing which products you use, which ones they think you’ll want, and how you organize your living space, so they can manufacture extremely personalized ads.
What could insurance companies do with that data? How would landlords react?
Now, think about how governments, intelligence agencies, and law enforcement would love to get their hands on that type of data.
With the data collected from someone wearing a pair of AR glasses, who needs facial recognition, geolocation tracking, or contact tracing when governments and corporations can see what you see, hear what you hear, and know where you and what you are doing in real-time?
Of course, these dystopian scenarios need not come to pass, and indeed great efforts are being made to safeguard privacy in the design of these tools and systems – at least for now.
The metaverse identity report is replete with cautionary tales and references to building systems that are fair, just, diverse, equitable, inclusive, privacy-preserving, and every other type of virtuous buzzword they think you want to hear.
Over time, however, goalposts may shift, emergencies may be declared, and laws and regulations may be circumvented.
And what do the authors of the metaverse identity report propose to safeguard the metaverse and its integrity?
Their solution is to put “the onus on the global community.”
The metaverse could be fertile ground for powerful manipulative tactics, putting the onus on the global community to establish robust frameworks that not only facilitate the growth of the metaverse but also safeguard its integrity.
Is “the global community” ever defined in the report? No, but the WEF calls itself the “International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation” and has its Global Innovators, Young Global Leaders, and Global Shapers communities, which might give us a clue as to whom they are referring.
The metaverse will no doubt change the way we work and play, leading to exciting cross-disciplinary collaborations, scientific discoveries, and untapped marketplaces.
But if the unelected globalists and unaccountable technocrats are in charge of governance, the metaverse will be nothing more than a digital playground for the great reset agenda where your digital identity determines your level of entry and where anything you say or do in the virtual world will come back to haunt you in the physical one and vice versa – there will be no distinction between the two.
Once everyone is hooked up to a digital identity while plugged into the metaverse, all that is needed to quash dissent is a simple flick a switch on someone’s digital identity and voila! it’s like that person doesn’t exist anymore.
Your metaverse identity, with its virtual voodoo dolls, autonomous avatars, and digital doppelgangers will be your passport in the metaverse, where it will be used to surveil, predict, and mimic your behavior while determining your level of access to information and spaces.
But not to worry, your metaverse identity will only be essential to your day-to-day life and will only be integral to all your future internet interactions.
Reprinted with permission from The Sociable.
DEI
AT&T ditches DE&I
AT&T’s retreat from the diversity, equity, and inclusion playbook marks one of the most significant corporate course corrections of the year — and it didn’t happen by accident. After months of pressure from FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, the telecom giant has confirmed it will unwind its DEI programs top to bottom, ending everything from race-based training modules to staff positions dedicated to enforcing ideological compliance.
The move follows years of controversy, much of it fueled by revelations that AT&T’s internal training materials pushed the notion that racism was a “uniquely white trait” and urged white employees to accept blame as part of a broader critical-race-theory framework. Those claims first surfaced in 2021 through documents obtained by researcher Christopher Rufo, who reported that the company’s curriculum told white staffers they “are the problem.” The backlash never fully subsided — and with Carr signaling that companies seeking key FCC licenses would need to demonstrate they are not running discriminatory programs, the pressure point became impossible for AT&T to ignore.
In a letter sent Monday to Carr, AT&T Senior Executive Vice President and General Counsel David McAtee said the company has overhauled its employment and business practices “to ensure compliance with all applicable laws,” emphasizing that the changes would be substantive, not cosmetic. According to AT&T, that means no hiring quotas, no supplier-contract quotas, no race-based training, and no positions devoted to policing identity-based metrics. DEI courses have been stripped from employee requirements, and the company says it will not resurrect them.
AT&T’s announcement mirrors what has become a growing trend in the corporate world as the regulatory environment shifts. In May, Verizon made a similar pledge, informing the FCC that it, too, would dissolve its DEI department and reassign staff to conventional HR roles. Carr praised that decision at the time as “a good step forward for equal opportunity, nondiscrimination, and the public interest.”
The broader message coming out of Washington is unmistakable: the days of federally regulated industries running ideological experiments under the guise of “equity” are coming to an end. Companies that want federal approval for major licenses are being told to stick to the law, treat employees equally, and drop programs that sort workers by skin color or political theory. AT&T is the latest to fall in line — and almost certainly not the last.
Agriculture
Federal cabinet calls for Canadian bank used primarily by white farmers to be more diverse
From LifeSiteNews
A finance department review suggested women, youth, Indigenous, LGBTQ, Black and racialized entrepreneurs are underserved by Farm Credit Canada.
The Cabinet of Prime Minister Mark Carney said in a note that a Canadian Crown bank mostly used by farmers is too “white” and not diverse enough in its lending to “traditionally underrepresented groups” such as LGBT minorities.
Farm Credit Canada Regina, in Saskatchewan, is used by thousands of farmers, yet federal cabinet overseers claim its loan portfolio needs greater diversity.
The finance department note, which aims to make amendments to the Farm Credit Canada Act, claims that agriculture is “predominantly older white men.”
Proposed changes to the Act mean the government will mandate “regular legislative reviews to ensure alignment with the needs of the agriculture and agri-food sector.”
“Farm operators are predominantly older white men and farm families tend to have higher average incomes compared to all Canadians,” the note reads.
“Traditionally underrepresented groups such as women, youth, Indigenous, LGBTQ, and Black and racialized entrepreneurs may particularly benefit from regular legislative reviews to better enable Farm Credit Canada to align its activities with their specific needs.”
The text includes no legal amendment, and the finance department did not say why it was brought forward or who asked for the changes.
Canadian census data shows that there are only 590,710 farmers and their families, a number that keeps going down. The average farmer is a 55-year-old male and predominantly Christian, either Catholic or from the United Church.
Data shows that 6.9 percent of farmers are immigrants, with about 3.7 percent being “from racialized groups.”
National census data from 2021 indicates that about four percent of Canadians say they are LGBT; however, those who are farmers is not stated.
Historically, most farmers in Canada are multi-generational descendants of Christian/Catholic Europeans who came to Canada in the mid to late 1800s, mainly from the United Kingdom, Ireland, Ukraine, Russia, Italy, Poland, the Netherlands, Germany, and France.
-
Business2 days agoAlbertans give most on average but Canadian generosity hits lowest point in 20 years
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoOttawa’s New Hate Law Goes Too Far
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days agoCarney Hears A Who: Here Comes The Grinch
-
Fraser Institute1 day agoClaims about ‘unmarked graves’ don’t withstand scrutiny
-
National1 day agoCanada’s free speech record is cracking under pressure
-
Digital ID1 day agoCanada considers creating national ID system using digital passports for domestic use
-
Energy1 day agoMeet REEF — the massive new export engine Canadians have never heard of
-
Business2 days agoTaxpayers Federation calls on politicians to reject funding for new Ottawa Senators arena


