Global Risks Report 2023: What does the WEF have in store for us now?

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has made headlines, particularly over the last few years, and more people have become aware of who and what they are. The WEF recently published a report detailing the risks the world will experience over the next two to ten years, according to so-called experts in various fields. The WEF Global Risks Report 2023 is the 18th edition and covers all aspects of worldly affairs, which they’ve named a polycrisis. 

Following is a summary of the WEF’s 98-page document on the upcoming polycrisis. Most, if not all, of what I would argue are arrogant, contradictory, and delusional assumptions. They’ve been known to call them predictions, and some would label them as promises. 

Image source: WEF Global Risks Report 2023

Preface: The Blame Game

The report begins with a brief preface by WEF managing director Saadia Zahidi. She discusses how carbon emissions have increased because pandemic restrictions have been dropped and blame the energy crisis, the food crisis, and soaring inflation on the war in Ukraine. 

The fact is the energy crisis began long before the war in Ukraine and is the consequence of the ESG ideology that the WEF invented. Although the war has contributed over the last year, the ESG-induced energy crisis that has been in play for years is causing inflation. 

Saadia notes, "The resulting shift in monetary policy marks the end of an economic era defined by easy access to cheap debt and will have vast ramifications for governments, companies, and individuals, widening inequality within and between countries.” She explains that the world is quickly deglobalizing and that only a few countries can be truly independent. 

Regarding the so-called polycrisis, Saadia says this will be caused primarily by “shortages in natural resources, such as food, water and metals, and minerals.” She concludes by saying that this year's edition of the global risks report is a call to action to prevent this polycrisis. 

Overview Of Methodology

The second part of the report details its methodology. The WEF got one part of the information for the account from 1,200 of its so-called experts from all areas of the economy. The report also specifies that the WEF got the other part of the information from the WEF’s executive opinion survey, which includes over 12,000 business leaders in 121 countries.

The report itself was written by 40 WEF members and 50 other influential people. The authors then define the term ‘Global Risk’ as “The possibility of the occurrence of an event or condition which, if it occurs, would negatively impact a significant proportion of global GDP, population, or natural resources.” 

Executive Summary

In the third part of the report, the authors say that the new normal of the pandemic was quickly disrupted by another crisis: the war in Ukraine. What's interesting is that the authors talk about the pandemic as if it were over. However, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), we're still technically in a pandemic. The decision for this public health emergency was recently renewed at a WHO meeting on Friday, January 27, 2023.  

The authors then list all the issues the world is facing today, including “unsustainable levels of debt and a new era of low growth, low global investment, and deglobalization, a decline in human development after decades of progress,” and every other disastrous thing, you can think of.

They provide the infographic below, which shows the issues the WEF experts are concerned with, ranked by severity. It illustrates that the cost of living crisis, natural disasters, and economic war is at the top of the list for the two-year period, while environmental-related issues are at the top of the list for the ten-year period.

The authors reveal that the polycrisis caused by the shortage of resources will simultaneously hit its peak in 2030, which is aligned with the deadline that the WEF and its affiliates have set for total world domination. What better way to do this than through successive manufactured crises?

Image source: WEF Global Risks Report 2023

The authors then warned that central banks worldwide would likely be fighting inflationary forces for the next two years. The resulting monetary policy, that is, high-interest rates, will do the most damage to developing countries, risking the collapse of these countries and mass migration. 

While the wars we’re going to see will be primarily economic, the authors seem to imply that China could soon invade Taiwan. To lessen the likelihood ground level combat in wars, the authors call for global controls to be imposed on the production and movement of weapons. They forgot that weapons would inevitably be easy for anyone to manufacture using 3D printers.

Additionally, the authors implicitly confirm that the technologies the WEF and its affiliates are developing will be designed to control the population. They claim that any country that does not have access to these technologies will fall victim to misinformation, the ultimate elite buzzword. 

The authors also predict that there will be “attacks against agriculture and water, financial systems, public security, transport, energy, and domestic, space and undersea communication infrastructure.” 

Image source: World Economic Forum

Notably, the WEF has recently been discussing these targeted cyber attacks a lot. Did you know cyber-attacks are a great way to justify online digital IDs? The authors argue that a failure to address the climate crisis means that crises such as the upcoming shortage of natural resources will be much worse. The authors fail to mention that government agencies have had the power to modify the weather for decades.

 
Cost Of Living Crisis

Regarding the cost of living crisis, the authors note, “Associated, social, unrest and political instability will not be contained to emerging markets as economic pressures continue to hollow out the middle-income bracket.”  

In other words, the only two economic categories will be rich and poor. The ray of hope is that four in five WEF experts believe most of the damage will be done over the next two years. Half of them think these issues will be resolved by the decade's end. This may be because they brazenly believe the WEF and its cohorts will achieve total control.

The impressive infographic below shows you how all these different crises will be connected. According to the WEF, the most critical emergencies will be the collapse of supply chains, erosion of social cohesion, and state collapse. It sounds like they know they're losing control. 

Image source: WEF Global Risks Report 2023

This ties into another infographic, which reveals that the participants in the WEF’s report believe that the powers that be are unprepared to address misinformation and disinformation. They recommend that governments act now. It looks like that’s exactly what they’re doing, which this article discusses. 

Image source: WEF Global Risks Report 2023

Today's Crisis

The fourth part of the report is aptly titled “Today's Crisis,” with the WEF experts noting that the energy crisis, cost of living crisis, and rising inflation are the most important. One could argue that’s because these crises destroy people's trust in the elites. Funnily enough, the pandemic is noted as one of the least critical crises.

The authors refer to these crises as “older risks that were faced by previous generations.” However, they cautioned that these old crises are intertwined with new risks, such as high levels of debt, significant technological innovation, and an increasing skepticism of WEF-like institutions.

The report then breaks down some of today's crises in more detail. For the cost of living, they caution that energy prices will likely remain 50% higher than last year and say that China's reopening could lead to a surge in energy-driven inflation. 
This will cause central banks to keep interest rates higher for longer. 

They also claimed the cost of living crisis had provoked mass protests in 92 countries. 92?!; this is arguably a claim that is a somewhat exaggerated and distorted statistic. It underlines that the people in their apparent power are more desperate than ever to keep the narrative under control. 

The authors explain that the international monetary fund (IMF) expects global inflation to drop from 9% in 2022 to 6.4% in 2023 and a further decline to 4.1% in 2024. They note that this slowdown in inflation will be felt the most in developed countries but caution that unemployment could keep it high. 

They also caution that keeping interest rates higher for longer in developed countries could cause issues in developing countries, notably for their governments. In short, money is moving out of emerging market government bonds, risking a spike in interest rates that could cause defaults. 

The authors then dare to claim that the geoeconomic dynamic caused Sri Lanka to collapse. In reality, Sri Lanka collapsed because it was trying to implement the WEF’s ESG policies on a national scale. The result was effectively a shortage of everything.

Image source: Twitter

The authors also note the Netherlands as the country most concerned about commitment to arbitrary and ever-changing climate goals. The Dutch government recently announced it would buy up and close down 3,000 family farms. The government claims this is because of the climate crisis, but many argue it has more to do with the Tri-State City that the Netherlands is building in partnership with the United Nations. 

As for the geoeconomic warfare we're witnessing, the report states that the unprecedented sanctions against Russia sent a clear message to any country that opposes Western interests. ‘Western governments will seize your assets.’ It appears that this hostility is even occurring between allies; as the authors point out that the US president’s ironically titled Inflation Reduction Act incentivizes some EU companies to relocate to the US. 

The Digital Markets Act was the EU's response to this blatant overreach. The authors caution that this situation will “likely continue to weaken existing alliances as nations turn inwards with enhanced state intervention perceived to drive a race to the bottom.” They even warn that global organizations such as the WHO will be weaponized for geo-political purposes.

Meanwhile, the authors say there's been a “divergence between what is scientifically necessary and what is politically expedient.” They go as far as criticizing Europe for turning to fossil fuels when it faced imminent energy shortages but also say that intermittent energy sources will not be sufficient. 

When it comes to the societal polarization we're seeing, the authors assert that it lies at the core of all the other crises we're currently experiencing and could experience. Not surprisingly, they blame the free sharing of information, stating, “This is further amplified by social media, which increases polarization and distrust in institutions alongside political engagement.” 

The WEF believes this free sharing of information is just misinformation and disinformation. They also acknowledge that “Regulatory constraints and educational efforts will likely fail to keep pace, and its impact will expand with the more widespread usage of automation and machine learning technologies from bots that imitate human written text to deep fakes of politicians.” 

Tomorrow’s Catastrophes

If today's crises aren't terrifying enough for the WEF to control the population, the fifth part of the report talks about “tomorrow's catastrophes,” which might pay off if the WEF gets its way. Remembering that the top catastrophes have to do with the weather, which governments can, in fact, influence. 

The authors group these long-term catastrophes into five categories: Natural ecosystems, Human health, Human security, Digital rights, and Economic stability. They stress that these categories are incomplete and can be used as templates for preparing for other upcoming crises.

1: Natural Ecosystems: past the point of no return

For natural ecosystems, the authors state that humans have disturbed the natural balance of nature, which is a bit funny considering that humans are a part of nature too. Some aspects of human life have gone to extremes, and this is doing damage to the environment. 

According to them, the only solution is to control what the population consumes and where individuals can go. But of course, these restrictions won’t apply to them; they will continue to live the comfortable lives that nature intended for all of us, not just the elite few.   

If that wasn't frustrating enough, consider the following, “land use change remains the most prolific threat to nature, according to many experts. Agriculture and animal farming alone take up more than 35% of Earth's terrestrial surface and are the biggest direct drivers of wildlife decline globally.” 

Moreover, “The ongoing crisis in the affordability and availability of food supplies positions efforts to conserve and restore terrestrial biodiversity at odds with domestic food security.” Now, this is patently false because more farm animals could, in fact, potentially be part of the solution to climate change. I urge you to watch this video in its entirety. It proves these climate change extremists are dangerously messing with nature.

What's insane is that the authors suggest forgiving the debt owed by developing countries in exchange for their land so that it can be conserved. They admit that this would create serious food security challenges in these countries but don't seem to care all that much about this side effect. 

For what it's worth, the authors acknowledge that mining the minerals required to make things like electric vehicles and massive batteries for intermittent energy sources is hugely damaging to the environment and could disrupt ecosystems. It's a shame that they also seem to shrug off this side effect. The authors also discuss the issuance of carbon credits, which I discussed in this article. 

2: Human Health: Perma-pandemics

Now for human health, the authors pitch the possibility of permanent pandemics, which I'm sure the WEF would love to see. Fun fact; research has shown that pandemics tend to occur every time there's a solar minimum when the sun is shining the least because it lowers vitamin D levels globally. Coincidently, the last solar minimum was around 2020. Could the WEF have known that? 

Image source: Universe Magazine 

Anyway, conspiracy theories aside, the authors can't help but insist that much of the human health issues we're going to see will be related to climate change. And, of course, they claim that all these issues will ultimately be due to disinformation and misinformation, causing distrust in evidently untrustworthy authorities. 

3: Human Security: new weapons, new conflicts

In the case of human security, the report highlights concerns that the WEF experts have about internal conflicts. The authors also caution that the recent resurgence in militarization could set the stage for international disputes. They cover what weapons governments are constructing, such as anti-satellite and hypersonic weapons, directed energy weapons, and quantum computers. 

They explain that Directed Energy Weapons are expected to make significant progress over the next decade, with the potential to disable satellites, electronics, communications, and positioning systems. Quantum computing may be harnessed and deployed to target vulnerabilities in sophisticated military technologies, ranging from disinformation campaigns to hacking hardware in nuclear defense systems.

The authors abstained from suggesting that hostile countries actively use weather modification weapons against each other. However, they did predict a rise in so-called rogue actors that eventually will get their hands on these advanced weapons, be they, individuals or organized groups. 

 4: Digital Rights: privacy in peril

Regarding digital rights, the authors point to the ever-increasing erosion of privacy as the primary issue. Ironically, the WEF doesn't want the average person to have privacy. Instead, they want to make sure their constituents have privacy while they make massive profits from our data.

The authors confirmed that “Individuals will be targeted and monitored by the public and private sector to an unprecedented degree, often without adequate anonymity or consent.” Most of the people who run these institutions in the public and private sectors are part of the WEF. 

If that wasn't bad enough, the report says, “This pattern will only be enhanced by the metaverse, which could collect and track even more sensitive data, including facial expressions, gait, vital signs, brain wave patterns, and vocal inflections.” According to the WEF research, the poor will love the metaverse. 

Additionally, it states, "Research suggests that 99.98% of US residents could be correctly re-identified in any data set, including those that are heavily sampled and anonymized.” In other words, these systems are so advanced that they can identify you, even if the information isn't directly linked to your identity. 

As far as the authors are concerned, this is fine because “The right to privacy is not absolute. It is traded off against government surveillance and preventative policing for the purposes of National Security.” To be fair, they admit that this justification can, and often does, go too far. 

5: Economic Stability: global debt distress

In the matter of economic stability, the authors emphasize the debt crisis that many countries are facing due to rising interest rates. What's funny is that the authors seem to be hoping for a recession because it will cause central banks to lower interest rates, reducing the debt default risk. They point to the UK's Gilt Market as an example of what could happen elsewhere if interest rates don't come down soon.

The authors reveal that China has become the world's largest creditor. In other words, China owns more of everyone's debt than anyone else. This is primarily due to China's Belt and Road initiative, which has given infrastructure loans to developing countries.

The authors caution that the credit crunch currently experienced by many countries means they'll be less able to spend money on building public infrastructure. This will further contribute to the world's other issues, hence why the authors are so obsessed with the term polycrisis. 

Image source: Financial Times

Possible Outcomes For The Polycrisis

The authors then proceed to provide a clear definition of ‘polycrisis.’ “A cluster of related, global risks with compounding effects, such that the overall impact exceeds the sum of each part.” 

It’s laughable that the authors admit that the polycrisis, which will again be caused primarily by a shortage of natural resources, is due mainly to the United Nations’ sustainable development goals (SDGs), which member countries of the UN are expected to achieve by 2030.

The report states the possible outcomes of this polycrisis defined in four categories. They are resource collaboration, resource constraints, resource competition, and resource control. The timeline for these possible outcomes is, of course, 2030.

The outcome of resource collaboration sounds like what's already happening. Countries cooperate, but the actual shortage of natural resources causes inflation to continue, leading to many of the same issues the authors have discussed.

Resource constraints are the same outcome but worse. The authors state, “In the absence of intervention, the water and mineral shortages experienced in the resource collaboration scenario act as a multiplier to broader risks.” 

As for resource competition, the outcome sounds like what many analysts have predicted. Countries decide to reshore their supply chains in an attempt to become self-sufficient. The effect of resource control is self-explanatory. Nations fight each other for resources to become self-sufficient. 

Ironically, the authors admit that the urgency of protecting the environment conflicts with strip-mining the planet for materials to make EVs and batteries. What's sad is that there's almost no mention of nuclear energy anywhere in this report; it's only mentioned in passing, not as a valid topic.

Besides precious metals and minerals, the authors are also concerned about water. They fail to acknowledge that most of the natural resource shortages they claim would occur could easily be solved by not relying on intermittent energy sources like wind and solar. Somehow, this isn't an option. Is it because most solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries are made in China? 

The infographic below illustrates that China plays a role at every step of the green energy roll-out. 

Image source: WEF Global Risks Report 2023

Below is another infographic that shows China doesn't have all the minerals the WEF needs to create its centralized smart grids and cities. Consider that countries could create nuclear power sources without relying on China, but then, the WEF wouldn't have centralized control of all the world's energy. 

To clarify, countries like the DRC, Turkey, Chili, Australia, and South Africa, hold all the aces. The authors caution that there will be an intense power struggle for the resources in these regions. Nuclear is much easier, but according to the report, it's not an option, despite the recent breakthrough with nuclear fusion. 

Image source: WEF Global Risks Report 2023

The Conclusion Of The Report 

The authors repeat that we're entering a “low growth, low investment, and low cooperation era.” They recommend that the leaders at the WEF do four things to prepare for the upcoming polycrisis. 

The first is to improve risk identification. The authors imply that the people in power should try to crush dissent when identifying future risks. They also call for establishing global organizations to keep track of future risks and tell countries how to address them. 

The second is to rethink future risks. By this, the authors mean that the people in power should try and minimize the coverage of real-time risks that pertain to the average person. Instead, they should try and push people to become obsessed with future risks that have yet to occur, like climate catastrophes.  

The third is to invest in preparedness. The authors reveal that the United States, the United Kingdom, and others are preparing to pass laws that will mandate public and private institutions to prepare for any kind of crisis that could occur over the next 30 Years. 

The fourth is cooperating with other powerful individuals and institutions in the public and private sectors. The authors complain that international cooperation is deteriorating and urge countries not to become self-sufficient. Instead, they should become reliant on each other.

How Do We Prepare?

What do we do to prepare for the impending so-called polycrisis? The answer is to do the opposite of whatever the WEF wants. As mentioned above, the shortages in natural resources at the core of this polycrisis are rooted in the WEF’s ESG obsessions, per the author's admissions. If you read this article about how to survive the great reset, you'll know that ESG is the way that the private sector is driving the United Nations' SDGs.

There's no denying that some genuine global issues need to be addressed. Some of the concerns that the WEFs correspondents have are very real. The problem is that they want to centralize control of the entire system to ensure it doesn't collapse, but that's not the solution. The solution is to decentralize everything.

We can start by decentralizing money with cryptocurrency. This cryptocurrency should be hard money like gold to incentivize saving instead of spending, which will eliminate overconsumption. Then we can decentralize energy with nuclear power and accelerate the development of fusion power. 

After that, we must decentralize information. Everything should be as open source as possible, and it should be possible to get information about the same issue or event from multiple sources—no more coordinated censorship by the trifecta of big tech, the mainstream media, and governments.

Voting systems should be publicly verifiable too, and can already be done today, but governments won't allow this degree of transparency for some unexplained reason. Is it possible that the corrupt elite has hijacked the democratic systems?

Regarding food production and water security, as mentioned above, it is possible to combat climate change using farm animals. The short story is about having farm animals graze as they did historically; this can turn literal deserts into an oasis, resulting in more food and water. If you haven’t already, seriously, watch the video above. It certainly made an impact on me. 

So, with sound money, near-infinite energy, uncensored information, and plenty of food and water, it would be a GOD-given paradise of nature in which we all belong and would flourish. More importantly, it would become possible to overcome any crisis the WEF and its cronies could predict or promise. That is the world I’m sure we all want, and it's the one we’ll continue to fight for with God’s help and guidance. 

Tim Moseley

Unprecedented Media Censorship Bills By Governments Leave Big Tech Nervous

The lack of trust in institutions continues to rise worldwide, prompting governments from various countries to up the ante on controlling the flow of information before their citizens lose complete confidence in them. Many governments have proposed regulations over the past two years that would lead to an unprecedented level of online censorship, and some countries have already passed their legislation. 

This article focuses on the online censorship bills in Canada, the United Kingdom, Europe, and the United States and what effects they may have on the internet, particularly legacy tech and its users. 

Canada – Online Streaming Act 

Canada’s online censorship bill titled Bill C11, also known as the Online Streaming Act, seems to be the most dystopian of all. Bill C11 was first proposed in November 2020 as Bill C10 but failed to pass due to its concerning contents.  Bill C10 was reintroduced in February 2022 as Bill C11 and was approved by the Canadian House of Commons, the first of a two-step process to becoming law. 

The first approval took many by surprise, including YouTube. YouTube’s concern over the bill compelled them to publish a blog post warning about the Online Streaming Act. As explained in the blog post, Bill C11 would effectively give the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC: A government regulator) the power to decide exactly what content Canadians can see on YouTube and other social media platforms. 

Image source: Youtube

This bill states that these regulations will apply to user-generated content. Besides controlling the amount and type of advertising appearing on YouTubers' videos, the CRTC would have the power to dictate what content they make as per CANCON requirements. They would also be able to label any YouTuber as a so-called broadcaster, which means complying with the CRTC’s criteria or risk being blocked in the country. 

Moreover, some broadcasters will also be required to contribute to the Canada Media Fund, which funds mainstream media in Canada. It appears this requirement will only be applied to streaming services and social media platforms, but it could also apply to content creators of other sources. This is significant as most Canadian media is funded directly or indirectly by the Canadian government via the Canada Media Fund. Mandatory contributions by broadcasters would expand the Canada Media Fund, further increasing government control of the media. 

Clearly, the Canadian government is desperate to ensure that it continues to control the narrative in the country. This makes sense, considering that trust in the government has been declining for years and exacerbated since the pandemic began. To put things into perspective, 40% of Canadians trusted their government at the beginning of the pandemic. Today this figure stands at 20%, a 50% drop in three years. 

The Canadian Senate will vote on Bill C11 in February 2023; if passed, it will go to the Canadian Parliament for debate. Although YouTube presented its case to the senate, it failed to convince the Senate to omit user-generated content from the bill. YouTube expressed that the legislation could set a harmful global precedent for other countries to follow suit. This makes it harder for creators to access international audiences and would impact millions of businesses and the livelihoods of entrepreneurial creators globally. 
    

Image source: Legal 60

The United Kingdom – The Online Safety Bill 

In contrast to Canada’s brazen title of Online Streaming Act, the UK politicians chose a more harmless title for their online censorship bill, the Online Safety Bill. The bill was introduced in May 2021 and has been slowly working toward approval since then. Similar to Canada's online streaming act, the UK Online safety Bill initially came under fire for wanting to regulate “legal but harmful content.” 

This provision would have been a concern because it would give the UK government the power to censor whatever it deems harmful. In the case of the UK, the regulator overseeing this provision's enforcement is the Office of Communications (Ofcom), which is comparable to Canada's CRTC. Fortunately, the requirement to police legal but harmful content was removed from the Online Safety Bill in November.

Unfortunately, there are other dubious provisions in the bill, which include various requirements that direct Ofcom to protect “content of democratic importance, protect news, publisher content, and protect journalistic content.” Presumably, it means the mainstream media. Moreover, Ofcom still has the power to police illegal content being distributed online and will issue fines to tech companies that fail to police unlawful content. Fines will start at £18 million or 10% of a tech company's annual total revenue, whichever is higher. 

The fines would specifically apply when illegal content is shown to children meaning tech companies will be encouraged to do age verification to avoid inadvertently displaying harmful content to minors and then getting fined. This means social media companies will be forced to require KYC from all their users, which isn’t bad relating to scammers and bots. But the trust issues with legacy media and governments weigh heavily in this instance. 

Besides, many would argue that it’s up to the parents to take responsibility for what their children see online, not a ruling government body. Furthermore, when you consider the woke society in which some authorities are condoning the content and topics minors are encouraged to see and even participate in is very questionable, to say the least. Also, what’s being taught in schools, specifically relating to gender identity and sexual orientation. We live in a highly polarized society, so who will really benefit from this legislation? 

On another note, an ambiguous provision in section 131 of the bill states that Ofcom will have the power to restrict so-called ancillary services, including “services which enable funds to be transferred.” The mind boggles at what this could mean, but hopefully, decentralized cryptocurrency will circumvent this overreach of power.

Trust in the UK government has also plummeted, particularly during the pandemic. With the recent chaos and resignations of four prime ministers in 3 years, one survey shows only 10% trust the government, with 61% polling an emphatic ‘untrustworthy.’ The primary motive for the UK's online censorship efforts appears to stem from a desire for more oversight rather than censorship per se. A significant reduction in government trust has occurred in other countries; however, the motivations for censorship vary.

Image source: Digital Strategy Europa

European Union – The Digital Market Act/Digital Services Act

The European Union (EU) consists of several countries. In contrast to Canada and the UK, European authorities separated their online censorship efforts into the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the Digital Services Act. (DSA) These are two of five bills known as the Digital Services Package, introduced in December 2020 and the second phase of the EU’s 2030 digital agenda. The EU's DMA and DSA were adopted in July and October 2022, respectively, with the new rules to be applied 6 -15 months after their entry into force. 

The EU’s Digital Governance Act (DGA) was passed in June 2022 and will fully apply in September 2023. They are also in the process of passing the Data Act (DA), and the takeaway here is the mandatory sharing of data with governments and corporations. The fifth Act is the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Regulation (AI Reg), which could enter into force in early 2023 in a transitional period, and late 2024 is the earliest time the regulation could become applicable. Note that all five bills are regulations, meaning they will override the national laws of EU countries.

The Digital Markets Act (DMA)

The Digital Markets Act has little to do with online censorship, and it could paradoxically make it possible to bypass many of the restrictions that the Digital Services Act seeks to introduce. That’s because the Digital Markets Act would impose massive fines on mega-tech or so-called gatekeepers who maintain their monopolies by giving preference to their products and services. The implications of this are profound and could do severe damage to big tech company profits. 

One example is that Apple has a monopoly on its apps for iPhone, meaning all apps must be downloaded from the Apple Store, and some apps can’t be uninstalled. Under the DMA, you can install apps from other stores and uninstall everything from your iPhone. The same would apply to other phones, computers, tablets, etc. 

Given that Apple and the like make a lot of money from mining your data with mandatory apps and making developers pay massive fees, the Digital Markets Act could deliver an enormous blow to their bottom line. Big tech companies are not happy and are expected to look for ways to diminish the impact of this Act through court proceedings. 

The motivation for the DMA is to increase Europe's competitiveness in the tech space. More importantly, the Digital Markets Act could be a precedent for all sorts of innovation in cryptocurrency in the EU because there would be an entirely new set of hardware available to crypto developers in the region. 

The downside of this bill is that it will also require all gatekeepers to provide detailed data about the individuals and institutions purchasing their products and using their services to the EU. This will be facilitated by the Data Governance Act and Data Act which mandate data sharing.

The Digital Services Act (DSA)

The DSA’s motivating force is to create its interpretation of a safer online environment for digital users and companies. In other words, it will establish a Ministry of Truth in every EU country, censoring certain information and pushing government propaganda. Each country will have the deceptive title “digital services coordinator,” which will function as a Ministry of Truth. Each digital services coordinator will appoint “trusted flaggers” to monitor and take down content. Trusted flaggers will be law enforcement, NGOs, and other unelected institutions.

Regarding the kind of content trusted flaggers would track and take down, the scope seems limited to Illegal content, as in the UK. However, the bill suggests disinformation could be on their radar as well. Now, this begs the question of who defines disinformation and the answer is probably the EU. Violators of the EU's upcoming regulations will face fines of up to 6% of their annual income per infraction, and repeat offenders will be banned. The Digital Services act also contains a provision that could impose KYC on social media platforms, in the name of child safety, like in the UK. 

The bill explicitly states that in a crisis, the European Board for Digital Services will instruct social media platforms to enhance content moderation, change their terms and conditions, work closely with trusted flaggers, and tweak the algorithm to “promote trusted information.” In other words, the next time there's a crisis, the government narrative will be promoted, and opposing ideas and positions will be down-ranked or deleted. 

Moreover, there's no limit on how long these emergency social media measures would last. As 'they' say, “never let a good crisis go to waste.” Not surprisingly, the World Economic Forum (WEF) is a big fan of the EU's Digital Services Act and claims it will be used as the standard for online censorship worldwide once other countries see its success. 

Also, not surprisingly, the WEF has criticized the UK for dropping its ‘legal but harmful speech’ regulation. This further supports the idea that the Digital Services Act will apply not just to explicitly illegal content. The WEF’s article suggests they will also include things like hate speech. It’s inherently a human trait to get emotional with certain occurrences, so if people are angry, why not address the cause rather than censor them; now there’s a thought! 

Trust in EU governments fell by almost 25% during the pandemic, and that's the average drop. Many EU countries saw even more significant declines in confidence. The Czech Republic leads the pack, with just 15% of Czechs now trusting their government. It’s evident the EU's totalitarian approach has failed so far.

Whereas the Digital Markets Act was created to make Europe's technology sector more competitive, the Digital Services Act was designed to control European citizens. The last thing the EU wants is for people to lose trust in it, but given the magnitude of these laws will only accelerate that process. 

Image Source: The Heritage Foundation

The United States – Kids Online Safety Act / Section 230

Similarly to the European Union, the United States has two significant documents related to online censorship. The first bill is titled the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), and the second is a Supreme Court case and pertains to the Section 230 bill. The Kids Online Safety Act was introduced in February last year and is still sitting in Congress but is expected to pass later this year because it has bipartisan support. 

However, outside Congress and from both sides of the political spectrum, dozens of civil society groups have criticized the bill. They warned the bill could actually pose further danger to kids by encouraging more data collection on minors in the form of a KYC protocol. It will ultimately force online service providers to collect KYC data to ensure they're not showing harmful content to children. 

The provision in the US bill does not explicitly require tech companies to do this, but the bill acknowledges it's the only real option. As in Canada and the UK, a US Government regulator will ultimately decide when kids have been made unsafe online, specifically by the Federal Trade Commission. (FTC) This has also been criticized because it should be the parent's responsibility to watch what their children consume instead of being used as an excuse to monitor and censor everyone else.

What’s more, it's not just the FTC that will be issuing fines. The Kids Online Safety Act will allow parents to sue tech companies if their children have been harmed online. It's assumed social media platforms will turn the censorship up to full throttle to ensure they don't get sued, even with KYC.

Section 230

The second bill relates to Section 230, in which the Supreme Court will hear two cases about central internet moderation in February 2023. For those unfamiliar, Section 230 is a US law passed in 1996, which allows social media platforms to moderate content to a limited extent without violating the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech and the press in the United States. 

However, big tech has leaned on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to avoid being held responsible for some of the most controversial content on their platforms. The companies have invoked this federal law to dismiss potentially costly lawsuits in numerous cases. 

The Supreme Court case called Gonzalez v. Google alleges that Google supported terrorism with its algorithmic recommendations and contributed to the 2015 terror attacks in Paris, which killed an American student named Nohemi Gonzalez, among many others. It was picked up by the Supreme Court last October after being passed up by various courts of appeal. The same applied to another case called Twitter v. Taamneh, where a Jordanian was killed in a terror attack in Istanbul, and Twitter's algorithms allegedly contributed to the attack. 

So, what are the outcomes? If the Supreme Court sides with Gonzales, big tech will be hit with related lawsuits and have to engage in more online censorship to ensure no more cases occur. Notably, this is the outcome the Democrats are pushing for as US President Joe Biden filed a legal brief with the Supreme Court, asking them to increase the liability of social media companies under Section 230. The Department of Justice also filed a legal brief with the same request. 

On the other hand, six of the nine Supreme Court Justices were appointed by Republican presidents. Republicans have been calling for Section 230 to be thrown out altogether, arguing that there is too much censorship. Should the Supreme Court decide that Section 230 is unconstitutional, online censorship would instantly become illegal and also apply to algorithms. 

Google and Twitter have argued that stripping Section 230 protections for recommendation algorithms would have wide-ranging adverse effects on the internet. Some argue the internet won’t work very well without algorithms. This begs the question, would they be able to remedy the algorithm issues by allowing the user access, with the ability to shape it to their desires? It makes one wonder about the hidden agendas. 

Another outcome would be for the Supreme Court to rule in favor of Google and for Congress to amend Section 230. However, allowing Congress to change Section 230 would likely result in even more online censorship. Consider that trust in US institutions has been falling fast and recently hit record lows. Only 27% of Americans have confidence in 14 major American institutions on average, according to a poll conducted by Gallup, which found sharp declines in trust for the three branches of the federal government, the Supreme Court (25%), the presidency (23%) and Congress. (7%)

Image source: Ricochet.com

The Best Outcome

All is being revealed among centralized entities, governments, and the non-government organization cartels. They are literally turning on each other only to cripple themselves. The Divine end game has been actioned and is very positive for decentralized media platforms. Billionaires are flipping, and technology has made it possible to disseminate critical information that uncovers secrets and lies that have enslaved us, is now prolific. No centralized entity of a few can control the masses if we don’t let them. Free speech will find a way. 

And be mindful that in this world,

“The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture, and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink. For it is only by reconciling contradictions that power can be retained indefinitely. In no other way could the ancient cycle be broken. If human equality is to be forever averted—if the High, as we have called them, are to keep their places permanently—then the prevailing mental condition must be controlled insanity. — Part II, Chapter IX 1984

Tim Moseley

2023 Predictions For The Crypto Industry. Is The Tide Turning?

Across the board, 2022 was a crazy year and devastating for most. In terms of the crypto market, it was arguably the most unsettling year since its inception. A series of unprecedented events, like prominent altcoins plummeting to almost zero, companies going bankrupt, and $billions being hacked, are just a few. 

So what’s in store for 2023? Will it be bullish or bearish for the crypto market? Although many pundits postulate the coming year in crypto, I have outlined ten predictions from a reputable source, Guy, the investigative presenter at Coinbureau.com, which explains why they're likely to occur and how they could affect the crypto market. I offer my 2 cents worth also.
  
#1. Crypto Market Begins To Recover

The first prediction tends to be positive, with Guy suggesting the crypto market will improve, albeit not a bull market as we know it. The worst of the bear market will be behind us by the end of this year. The primary reason the crypto bear market could bottom in Q1 is that the Federal Reserve is expected to stop raising interest rates. Notably, stopping interest rates is not the same as lowering them, but it will likely be enough to prevent crypto from crashing further. 
   
Likewise, the bottom for BTC will likely come in the first quarter and could be 10K or slightly lower, with the main reason being that the stock market has yet to find its bottom, and the crypto market is highly correlated to the stock market. The stock market is expected to drop by another 20 to 30%, translating to a 40 to 60% drop in BTC's price. 

It’s important to point out that BTC could flash crash lower than 10K due to a crypto-specific factor such as a Bitcoin mining ban due to energy shortages. Also, Mount Gox creditors could sell the BTC they were due to receive in Q1; however, more recent news states the Mt. Gox payouts have been postponed till September. 

#2. SEC Crack Down Seems Likely

The second crypto prediction for 2023 is that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) will crack down on another big crypto project or company. The presenter opines that another crackdown seems highly likely if Gary Gensler continues to be the chairman of the SEC. Gary's term will expire in 2026, so there's a lot of time for him to do damage, assuming he won't be expelled from the SEC for his close encounters with Sam Bankman Fried and FTX.

The criteria the SEC has been using to crack down on cryptocurrency have yet to be made clear. These opaque criteria can be summed up as a subjective interpretation of the fourth part of the Howey test. For context, the Howey test is used to assess whether an asset is a security, such as a stock in a company that requires additional regulation from the SEC. 

Image source: NickGrossman.xyz

The fourth part of the Howey test is the most relevant to crypto if an asset can identify a third party creating an expectation of profit for a coin or token” Gary Gensler has made it clear that no cryptocurrency is safe aside from BTC. He's even targeted stablecoins, which makes no sense. This could mean that every cryptocurrency besides BTC on an exchange is a potential target, particularly POS cryptos. 

However, the former director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, William Hinman, said cryptocurrencies must be "sufficiently decentralized" not to be deemed securities. Coin Center does not believe that the technological differences between POS and POW warrant any different treatment. And that it’s a misconception of policymakers that “staking” and “staking rewards” is some kind of security or interest-bearing lending activity that should be subject to regulation.

It will be interesting to see if Gary Gensler gets his way and if so, a first-quarter crackdown could be a catalyst for crypto lows. 

#3. Good And Bad Crypto Regulations 

Guy’s third prediction for 2023 is that there will be many crypto regulations, which suggests that most of these regulations will be good; however, a few will not. It’s also very likely that crypto regulations will vary from region to region, despite attempts to create global crypto rules. The European Union's Markets In Crypto Assets (MiCA) finalized its laws to be released in early 2023. Although they won't be coming into force for another one to two years after that, they will give institutional investors regulatory clarity for crypto. 

The absence of regulatory clarity is why institutions have been hesitant to invest in crypto, especially altcoins. Establishing regulatory clarity in the EU and elsewhere could result in lots of inflows and contribute to a Q1 recovery for crypto. More importantly, crypto regulations will effectively force crypto projects to decentralize. This is because the only way to avoid many of these regulations will be to be decentralized from top to bottom. 

Some crypto regulations are likely to be adverse concerning payments, DeFi, and privacy. That's because all of these niches are a threat to the traditional financial system. Fortunately, the crypto industry is likely to grow significantly with sound regulations. Furthermore, an increase in adoption and capital will likely make it possible for the crypto industry to lobby to remove the harmful rules. Keep in mind that powerful individuals and institutions want privacy the most. 

#4. DeFi To Go Mainstream

The fourth crypto prediction is that DeFi will go mainstream due to better front-ends, regulatory clarity resulting in increased liquidity, and proof of resiliency from some DeFi protocols. This will increase trust in DeFi and decrease confidence in centralized entities in the crypto industry. Guy also states that the caveat is that harmful crypto regulations could slow the adoption of DeFi. So far, however, DeFi has yet to be included in most crypto regulations providing the protocols are genuinely decentralized. 

Thankfully, most of the most significant DeFi protocols are, in fact, indeed decentralized, notably those on Ethereum. Most of the prominent DeFi protocols on Ethereum have also been tested by institutions in permissioned environments, namely Aave. It’s interesting to note that DeFi is technically a direct competitor to the traditional financial system, as it makes it possible to trade, borrow, lend and save. 

Guy expresses that institutional adoption of DeFi is inevitable because many institutions have acknowledged that the advent of new technologies, such as blockchain, means there will be a race to the bottom regarding transaction fees and settlement times. 

#5. Crypto Payments More Common

The fifth crypto prediction for 2023 relates to the third, and that's that crypto payments will become more common. This will again be due to a combination of better front-ends, regulatory clarity, increasing liquidity, and, most importantly, an increase in scalability that finally makes crypto payments feasible. Guy notes that his prediction comes from headlines about Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin saying how Layer-2 scaling on Ethereum will power crypto payments. 

Moreover, developers will reportedly implement Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP #4844) in March 2023. For those unfamiliar, EIP 4844 will increase the scalability of Layer 2s on Ethereum by between 10 and 100x. Given that most Layer 2s already process thousands of TPS, such an increase will put them on par with Visa. The author believes it’s very likely that Layer 2s on Ethereum will be ground zero for crypto payments once EIP 4844 is implemented. 

He also stipulated that other smart contract cryptocurrencies will play a role, but they'll likely have to find their own niches. The catch is that increasing crypto payments could lead to more regulatory scrutiny. His greatest fear is that regulators will eventually require you to complete KYC if you want to use stablecoins on a smart contract cryptocurrency like Ethereum, quoting, 

“This has been mentioned by a few regulators already. The scariest part about this possibility is that it would be easy to implement since the larger stablecoins are centrally controlled. 

The silver lining is that a KYC crackdown on payments would drive innovation in the decentralized stablecoin niche. And some DeFi protocols are ahead of the curve. So to speak.”

Image source: cryptoslate.com

#6. Crypto Holders To Increase 

Guy’s sixth crypto prediction for 2023 is the number of crypto holders will increase significantly. For context, crypto adoption currently stands at around 4% of the global population. It doesn’t sound like much, but the growth has been exponential, and there are many reasons why this trend will continue this year. 

A significant reason is that media platforms have been integrating crypto features, such as  Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, which have tested NFTs on multiple smart contract cryptocurrencies. Even Starbucks has been working on NFT loyalty and member programs on Polygon. Notably, free speech-focused social media platforms, like Telegram and Signal, have been integrating crypto features with TON coin and MobileCoin, respectively. 

Markethive has taken privacy, free speech, and sovereignty on one decentralized platform to a new level involving social media and inbound marketing, including email broadcasting, content creation, press releases, sponsored articles, and page-making systems. Also, a video channel and conference room facilities make it a complete entrepreneurial ecosystem underpinned by blockchain technology and its native currency, Hivecoin. 

All these companies have billions of users combined. Even just a tiny percentage of crypto adoption by their users would be significant. There are three reasons why people adopt crypto; 

1. Speculation, in other words, profit.
2. Out of necessity. 
3. Just for fun. 

Given the current sideways climate, there isn't going to be too much speculative adoption in 2023. This leaves “out of necessity” and “just for fun.” While much of the crypto adoption this year will potentially be driven by “just for fun” factors such as those mentioned above with social media, there could be a surge in necessity-related crypto adoption. Many countries are on the brink of collapse due to economic, social, and political issues. 

We've already seen a few of them fall, such as in Sri Lanka. Cash and crypto will be the only options when financial systems fail, especially as foreign currencies fall against the US dollar. 

Hence, an ecosystem like Markethive catering to a cottage industry of entrepreneurs, business owners, and the rank and file worldwide needs a sovereign base to facilitate their operations with the opportunity to be involved in a crypto monetary system that pays the user. Markethive enables everyone to realize their potential regardless of what is happening.

#7. More Countries To Adopt BTC As A Legal Tender

The seventh crypto prediction ties into the fifth: at least one additional country will adopt BTC as legal tender. Tonga is top of the list since the island nation announced it would make BTC legal tender by Q2 and begin mining BTC with volcanoes by Q3 of 2023. The assertions for this move are a need for more financial infrastructure, reliance on remittance payments, and using a foreign currency whose monetary policy cannot be controlled, such as the US dollar. 

These are the same reasons El Salvador adopted BTC as legal tender in September 2021.  It's also why some Latin American countries are the most likely to follow suit. It's even why the Central African Republic adopted BTC as a legal currency in April 2022 and uses it alongside the Central African CFA Franc.

The countries adopting BTC as legal tender doesn't mean they will ditch their national currencies. It's more than likely they'll continue to use their national currencies alongside BTC, assuming there isn't a total collapse of the financial system. It's also possible that some countries will adopt cryptocurrency alongside a new central bank digital currency (CBDC). This seems unlikely, given that crypto and digital currencies are a blatant contradiction, but it has been hinted at in various reports, including one from Harvard University.

#8. Big Tech Companies Ramp Up Crypto Integrations

Guy’s eighth crypto prediction for 2023 ties into the previous two, and that's that big tech companies will continue to announce crypto Integrations. Like the countries that could espouse BTC, big tech giants are ultimately adopting crypto because they're losing money and are trying to find ways to plug the hole. 

Tech giants such as Apple and Amazon have been seeking to hire people for crypto-related positions over the last couple of years. Although there haven’t been any meaningful developments from them or the other big tech companies with similar job openings as yet, those could all come sometime this year. 

Although Twitter’s new owner Elon Musk is currently balancing free speech and censorship in the face of government scrutiny, he has clarified that he intends to integrate crypto features on the platform. It’s becoming clear that this is the direction big tech is moving. The crypto or NFT adoption by Facebook, Instagram, et al. mentioned above will almost certainly inspire the rest of big tech to do the same. 

He also posits that big tech adoption of crypto could be related to the Metaverse because very few are fans of the centralized Metaverse that Meta has created. They know that they're nothing more than a means of extracting even more data to be sold to advertisers and shared with governments obsessed with surveillance and censorship. 

Meta and others will eventually understand that the only way they can make money on this new technology is to integrate it with existing decentralized alternatives. Big tech’s role will likely involve providing hardware and access points that enhance user experience. 

#9. Wall Street To Acquire Blue Chip Crypto Company

The ninth crypto prediction is that the wolves on Wall Street will acquire at least one blue chip crypto company. Guy speculates this is highly likely given that Goldman Sachs and others are interested in buying up a few subsidiaries of FTX that remain solvent. Moreover, other crypto exchanges and platforms have gone bankrupt over the last year. Celsius, BlockFi, and Voyager Digital are easy examples, and some of their business assets may be acquired by a traditional financial institution looking to offer crypto services.

There's even speculation that a megabank could acquire Coinbase like JP Morgan, because the potential collapse of troubled crypto companies in the United States, like Digital Currency Group, Greyscale, and Genesis Trading, could have knock-on effects on Coinbase. Coinbase is also involved with USDC issuer Circle, which posted a surprisingly small profit in Q3 last year.  

If Coinbase stock goes low enough, there's a scenario wherein a takeover of some kind could occur. After all, Coinbase is the largest cryptocurrency exchange in the US, and the big banks on Wall Street have been watching billions of dollars flow from their accounts onto the exchange over the last two years. They've also seen how much money Coinbase can make and probably how much data it can gather. 

Image source: Forbes

#10. BTC To Be Used For International Trade

The tenth crypto prediction for 2023 is that BTC will start being used for international trade. Some countries have signaled their interest in using BTC for international trade, including those that face sanctions or scrutiny from the United States and its allies. The sanctioned list was once limited to a few so-called rogue actors, but it's quickly expanding as we enter a multipolar world. 

At one pole, we have the United States and its allies; at the other, we have the BRICS, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, plus their allies. As mentioned in this article, the BRICS are reportedly working on their reserve currency, a combination of their existing currencies. 

Iran has already officially approved the use of cryptocurrency for international trade, and Saudi Arabia has a renewed interest in crypto as its central bank has hired a crypto chief to boost digital ambitions. Hong Kong will also ease restrictions, and Russia appears to be working on crypto legislation. This apparent crypto adoption by the BRICS could see them add BTC to their reserve currency basket.

Once it becomes clear that BTC is a viable option, it won’t be just the so-called naughty or sanctioned nations adopting it. When that tipping point occurs, we'll see what Fidelity has called Bitcoin, a “very high stakes game theory” where countries will rapidly adopt BTC. 

My Thoughts

All things considered, as I am a "glass half full" kinda gal, this year could see a positive turn for crypto on various levels. Given the turmoil and backlash crypto has received for over a decade. All the predicaments the crypto industry has found itself in have inspired new technology to mitigate the bugs and growth in maturity. 

It takes decades of trial and error to implement a robust and sound financial system, and all it takes is a couple of years of onerous or corrupt leadership to bring the global economy to its knees. Although the crypto market is currently deemed low, compared to the historical highs, we see a more stabilized price action, and BTC and authentic altcoins will be considered less volatile going forward.  

In other words, crypto can and will be used as intended, not for speculation but as a comprehensive cross-border payment system and a store of value inherently deflationary given its limited money supply. It will find an equilibrium and be decentralized enough to withstand the failing traditional finance systems with its inflationary fiat currency. 

Tim Moseley