The World Is Accelerating Towards Digital IDs For All

The coronavirus pandemic has triggered a new focus on a global ID system. But if we're unlucky, it could be an Orwellian nightmare.

The coronavirus outbreak has accelerated initiatives focused on creating a global digital ID system.

Governments and Big Tech are building surveillance apps to control the spread of COVID-19.

But if the apps aren't built with privacy in mind they could be a dystopian disaster.

The United Nations, World Economic Forum, and Big Tech have been working together to create global digital IDs since 2014, in an effort recognized by the World Bank as important for sustainable development. Now the coronavirus is pushing this development even further.

The coronavirus pandemic has already prompted a shift towards a digital everything—including digital ID. With many people working from home, conferences are now being held virtually, work is being done remotely and people are having to sign documents electronically. But to prove that you’re you, digital ID is a must.

With more than 1.6 million confirmed cases of coronavirus and the death total set to hit 100,000 deaths in the next 24 hours, the effects of the virus haven’t stopped there. COVID-19 has had a huge impact on the global economy, with the US Federal Reserve resorting to printing money at a rate of $1 million a second just to keep it afloat.

Towards a technological surveillance regime

According to Jacob Nordangård, PhD student at Linköping University in Sweden and a speaker at the Eighth International Conference on Climate Change, this shows the world needs a global pandemic response.

“The COVID19 outbreak, with all its tragic consequences, happened to be the perfect trigger event to show the world the need for a global coordination and management of the planet, as well as the need for [a] technological surveillance regime in order to track and monitor all people and diseases (and the global value chains),” he said, in a blog post on April 6.

Tech companies and governments are already working together to build surveillance apps in order to control the spread of the coronavirus. There are at least 60 apps trying to collect this data—but while some are privacy-first, others are dystopian hellscapes.

Microsoft founder Bill Gates said, in a TED Talk last month, “Eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it.”

A global identity system

Microsoft is already a founding member of a platform designed to create a global identity system, which could be used to track the spread of outbreaks, called ID2020.

ID2020 launched an alliance, funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and consulting firm Accenture, in 2017. The alliance’s main goals were also defined that year: to develop and test technological solutions for digital identity, and to work with governments and “existing, established agencies to implement these solutions.”

In the same year, the World Economic Forum stated, in a report called Digital Borders, that its goals—including for a global digital ID technology—should be prioritized because of threats such as pandemics.

The report identified key problems with the growing global population—in particular, the expected growth of international travel over the next decade. But in order to find a solution to such global problems, it said that a global digital ID is necessary.

“Yet, the proposed solutions are based on the premise that individuals have a recognized identity, when 1.5 billion people today do not,” the report stated. To ensure that such a framework is inclusive, the report added, “the broader issue of identity and digital identity has to be addressed to determine how to create effective and efficient digital identity management through acceptable global standards and norms.”

“The objective is to combine and enable the customer’s sharing of data and verified identity through a platform which, in turn, creates an effortless experience by connecting systems, facilitating passage and improving security,” it said.

Could a global digital ID threaten privacy?

A global digital ID could be used to track the spread of the coronavirus, to monitor travel and restrict the movement of those who are infected. In China, it’s already common to have your body temperature checked when you enter a building, if this data was matched to your ID—then you would have an identity that proved you weren’t infected.

But here’s the catch. It would give governments a lot of information and control over their citizens—which could be a bad idea.

Nordangård argues that the “utopian smart society” that is currently being built by ID2020 and its partners around the world may lead to people losing access to all basic human services—unless they opt-in and have their digital identity recorded.

“Just like the Social Credit system in China,” he added.''

On the other hand, it’s possible for this information to be collected and stored in a privacy-preserving way. For example, Elastos is building a blockchain-based system that will log certain health information but where you own your own data.

Likewise, privacy-first protocol Enigma is building a coronavirus monitoring app that shares location data and infection status without revealing the personal data of the people involved.

“It is possible to leverage the power of highly detailed, accurate and widespread data to fight viral infections, without putting individuals at risk by exposing this sensitive data,” it stated, in a blog post.

With governments around the world stepping up work on digital currencies, the world might be digital before we know it.

Coronavirus Surveillance May Mean The End Of Personal Privacy

Authorities around the world are launching increasingly intrusive mass surveillance systems to track COVID-19. But will they step back afterwards?

Governments around the world are increasing surveillance.

This surveillance will be used to help stop the spread of the coronavirus.

But once over, will governments stop acting like Big Brother?

Numerous governments around the world are beginning to roll out mass surveillance systems in an attempt to slow the pandemic.

But privacy advocates are worried that when these measures have been introduced, there will be no going back. Once governments have this ability to track the population, they may be loath to give it up, begging the question, is it worth the risk?

According to The New York Times, various governments around the world are taking increasingly drastic measures in their attempt to slow the coronavirus’s spread. Many countries are currently working on or already have implemented various tracking systems that could potentially help to identify people who came in contact with positive-tested individuals.

Per the report, South Korea’s government started to post disturbingly detailed location histories of people who tested positive for the coronavirus in January. The information included when individuals went for work, whether they wore protective masks in the subway and at what stations they changed trains. Even more uncanny, people’s favorite massage parlors and karaoke bars were also publicly disclosed.

Unsurprisingly, this patient data was soon exploited and used to identify the individuals. Later on, the South Korean government made a u-turn on the decision, stating they would revise the data-sharing guidelines “to minimize patient risk.”

“We will balance the value of protecting individual human rights and privacy and the value of upholding public interest in preventing mass infections,” said Jung Eun-kyeong, the director of South Korea’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Yet, South Korea is just one example as mass surveillance related to the coronavirus is getting traction in many more countries around the world. EUobserver reports that people under home quarantine in Poland are required to take geo-located selfies within 20 minutes of receiving the corresponding SMS-request. Fail to comply, and you risk to face a police squad on your doorstep.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has recently approved a surveillance program that uses the domestic security agency’s data cache to track the locations of people potentially infected with the virus. The system, initially designed to fight terrorism, has now been turned against the country’s own people.

An amendment to an emergency bill in France is proposing to enable telecoms data collection for six months, in Belgium—for three months. At the same time, Austrian telecom operator A1 has reportedly granted limited government access to anonymized location data for the first two Saturdays in March.

The US is not too far behind. According to the NYT, the White House is currently in talks with Google, Facebook and other tech companies that could potentially provide aggregated location data captured from Americans’ mobile phones to help track the coronavirus.

“We could so easily end up in a situation where we empower local, state or federal government to take measures in response to this pandemic that fundamentally change the scope of American civil rights,” Albert Fox Cahn, the executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, told the NYT.

Big Brother gets out of control

Experts around the world are expressing concerns that mass surveillance on such a scale might not stop with the outbreak. When the governments are given such power during times of crisis, who can be sure that they’ll easily let go of it when the pandemic starts to decline? 
There are a lot of ways even location data could be used for political or other gains—to track political opponents and their acquaintances, for example.

"We need to make sure it doesn't lead to surveillance after the outbreak," Estelle Massé, a senior policy analyst at the Access Now, told EUobserver.

The outlet also reports that Belgium, France and the United Kingdom are already facing the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg for their “Big Brother approach” to the pandemic.

“We need to have a framework that would allow companies and public authorities to cooperate, to enable proper response for the public good. To reduce the risk that coronavirus surveillance efforts might violate people’s privacy, governments and companies should limit the collection and use of data to only what is needed,” noted Mila Romanoff, data and governance lead for United Nations Global Pulse.

But how much data is enough?

The Point of No Return: Climate Change Nightmares Are Already Here

Walruses, like these in Alaska, are being forced ashore in record numbers. Corey Accardo/NOAA/AP

Historians may look to 2015 as the year when things really started getting worse. In just the past few months, record-setting heat waves in Pakistan and India each killed more than 1,000 people. In Washington state's Olympic National Park, the rainforest caught fire for the first time in living memory.

London reached 98 degrees Fahrenheit during the hottest July day ever recorded in the U.K.; The Guardian briefly had to pause its live blog of the heat wave because its computer servers overheated. In California, suffering from its worst drought in a millennium, a 50-acre brush fire swelled seventy fold in a matter of hours, jumping across the I-15 freeway during rush-hour traffic. Then, a few days later, the region was pounded by intense, virtually unheard-of summer rains. Puerto Rico is under its strictest water rationing in history as a monster El Niño forms in the tropical Pacific Ocean, shifting weather patterns worldwide.

On July 20th, James Hansen, the former NASA climatologist who brought climate change to the public's attention in the summer of 1988, issued a bombshell: He and a team of climate scientists had identified a newly important feedback mechanism off the coast of Antarctica that suggests mean sea levels could rise 10 times faster than previously predicted: 10 feet by 2065. The authors included this chilling warning: If emissions aren't cut, "We conclude that multi-meter sea-level rise would become practically unavoidable. Social disruption and economic consequences of such large sea-level rise could be devastating. It is not difficult to imagine that conflicts arising from forced migrations and economic collapse might make the planet ungovernable, threatening the fabric of civilization."

Eric Rignot, a climate scientist at NASA and the University of California-Irvine and a co-author on Hansen's study, said their new research doesn't necessarily change the worst-case scenario on sea-level rise, it just makes it much more pressing to think about and discuss, especially among world leaders. In particular, says Rignot, the new research shows a two-degree Celsius rise in global temperature — the previously agreed upon "safe" level of climate change — "would be a catastrophe for sea-level rise."

Hansen's new study also shows how complicated and unpredictable climate change can be. Even as global ocean temperatures rise to their highest levels in recorded history, some parts of the ocean, near where ice is melting exceptionally fast, are actually cooling, slowing ocean circulation currents and sending weather patterns into a frenzy. Sure enough, a persistently cold patch of ocean is starting to show up just south of Greenland, exactly where previous experimental predictions of a sudden surge of freshwater from melting ice expected it to be. Michael Mann, another prominent climate scientist, recently said of the unexpectedly sudden Atlantic slowdown, "This is yet another example of where observations suggest that climate model predictions may be too conservative when it comes to the pace at which certain aspects of climate change are proceeding."

Since storm systems and jet streams in the United States and Europe partially draw their energy from the difference in ocean temperatures, the implication of one patch of ocean cooling while the rest of the ocean warms is profound. Storms will get stronger, and sea-level rise will accelerate. Scientists like Hansen only expect extreme weather to get worse in the years to come, though Mann said it was still "unclear" whether recent severe winters on the East Coast are connected to the phenomenon.

And yet, these aren't even the most disturbing changes happening to the Earth's biosphere that climate scientists are discovering this year. For that, you have to look not at the rising sea levels but to what is actually happening within the oceans themselves.

Water temperatures this year in the North Pacific have never been this high for this long over such a large area — and it is already having a profound effect on marine life.

Eighty-year-old Roger Thomas runs whale-watching trips out of San Francisco. On an excursion earlier this year, Thomas spotted 25 humpbacks and three blue whales. During a survey on July 4th, federal officials spotted 115 whales in a single hour near the Farallon Islands — enough to issue a boating warning. Humpbacks are occasionally seen offshore in California, but rarely so close to the coast or in such numbers. Why are they coming so close to shore? Exceptionally warm water has concentrated the krill and anchovies they feed on into a narrow band of relatively cool coastal water. The whales are having a heyday. "It's unbelievable," Thomas told a local paper. 
"Whales are all over the place."

Last fall, in northern Alaska, in the same part of the Arctic where Shell is planning to drill for oil, federal scientists discovered 35,000 walruses congregating on a single beach. It was the largest-ever documented "haul out" of walruses, and a sign that sea ice, their favored habitat, is becoming harder and harder to find.

Marine life is moving north, adapting in real time to the warming ocean. Great white sharks have been sighted breeding near Monterey Bay, California, the farthest north that's ever been known to occur. A blue marlin was caught last summer near Catalina Island — 1,000 miles north of its typical range. Across California, there have been sightings of non-native animals moving north, such as Mexican red crabs. 

No species may be as uniquely endangered as the one most associated with the Pacific Northwest, the salmon. Every two weeks, Bill Peterson, an oceanographer and senior scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Northwest Fisheries Science Center in Oregon, takes to the sea to collect data he uses to forecast the return of salmon. What he's been seeing this year is deeply troubling.

Salmon are crucial to their coastal ecosystem like perhaps few other species on the planet. A significant portion of the nitrogen in West Coast forests has been traced back to salmon, which can travel hundreds of miles upstream to lay their eggs. The largest trees on Earth simply wouldn't exist without salmon.

But their situation is precarious. This year, officials in California are bringing salmon downstream in convoys of trucks, because river levels are too low and the temperatures too warm for them to have a reasonable chance of surviving. One species, the winter-run Chinook salmon, is at a particularly increased risk of decline in the next few years, should the warm water persist offshore.

"You talk to fishermen, and they all say: 'We've never seen anything like this before,' " says Peterson. "So when you have no experience with something like this, it gets like, 'What the hell's going on?' "

Atmospheric scientists increasingly believe that the exceptionally warm waters over the past months are the early indications of a phase shift in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a cyclical warming of the North Pacific that happens a few times each century. Positive phases of the PDO have been known to last for 15 to 20 years, during which global warming can increase at double the rate as during negative phases of the PDO. It also makes big El Niños, like this year's, more likely.

The nature of PDO phase shifts is unpredictable — climate scientists simply haven't yet figured out precisely what's behind them and why they happen when they do. It's not a permanent change — the ocean's temperature will likely drop from these record highs, at least temporarily, some time over the next few years — but the impact on marine species will be lasting, and scientists have pointed to the PDO as a global-warming preview.

"The climate [change] models predict this gentle, slow increase in temperature," says Peterson, "but the main problem we've had for the last few years is the variability is so high. As scientists, we can't keep up with it, and neither can the animals." Peterson likens it to a boxer getting pummeled round after round: "At some point, you knock them down, and the fight is over." 

Attendant with this weird wildlife behavior is a stunning drop in the number of plankton — the basis of the ocean's food chain. In July,another major study concluded that acidifying oceans are likely to have a "quite traumatic" impact on plankton diversity, with some species dying out while others flourish. As the oceans absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, it's converted into carbonic acid — and the pH of seawater declines. According to lead author Stephanie Dutkiewicz of MIT, that trend means "the whole food chain is going to be different."

The Hansen study may have gotten more attention, but the Dutkiewicz study, and others like it, could have even more dire implications for our future. The rapid changes Dutkiewicz and her colleagues are observing have shocked some of their fellow scientists into thinking that yes, actually, we're heading toward the worst-case scenario. Unlike a prediction of massive sea-level rise just decades away, the warming and acidifying oceans represent a problem that seems to have kick-started a mass extinction on the same time scale.

Jacquelyn Gill is a paleoecologist at the University of Maine. She knows a lot about extinction, and her work is more relevant than ever. Essentially, she's trying to save the species that are alive right now by learning more about what killed off the ones that aren't. The ancient data she studies shows "really compelling evidence that there can be events of abrupt climate change that can happen well within human life spans. We're talking less than a decade."

For the past year or two, a persistent change in winds over the North Pacific has given rise to what meteorologists and oceanographers are calling "the blob" — a highly anomalous patch of warm water between Hawaii, Alaska and Baja California that's thrown the marine ecosystem into a tailspin. Amid warmer temperatures, plankton numbers have plummeted, and the myriad species that depend on them have migrated or seen their own numbers dwindle.

Significant northward surges of warm water have happened before, even frequently. El Niño, for example, does this on a predictable basis. But what's happening this year appears to be something new. Some climate scientists think that the wind shift is linked to the rapid decline in Arctic sea ice over the past few years, which separate research has shown makes weather patterns more likely to get stuck.

A similar shift in the behavior of the jet stream has also contributed to the California drought and severe polar vortex winters in the Northeast over the past two years. An amplified jet-stream pattern has produced an unusual doldrum off the West Coast that's persisted for most of the past 18 months. Daniel Swain, a Stanford University meteorologist, has called it the "Ridiculously Resilient Ridge" — weather patterns just aren't supposed to last this long.

What's increasingly uncontroversial among scientists is that in many ecosystems, the impacts of the current off-the-charts temperatures in the North Pacific will linger for years, or longer. The largest ocean on Earth, the Pacific is exhibiting cyclical variability to greater extremes than other ocean basins. 

While the North Pacific is currently the most dramatic area of change in the world's oceans, it's not alone: Globally, 2014 was a record-setting year for ocean temperatures, and 2015 is on pace to beat it soundly, boosted by the El Niño in the Pacific.

Six percent of the world's reefs could disappear before the end of the decade, perhaps permanently, thanks to warming waters.

Since warmer oceans expand in volume, it's also leading to a surge in sea-level rise. One recent study showed a slowdown in Atlantic Ocean currents, perhaps linked to glacial melt from Greenland, that caused a four-inch rise in sea levels along the Northeast coast in just two years, from 2009 to 2010. To be sure, it seems like this sudden and unpredicted surge was only temporary, but scientists who studied the surge estimated it to be a 1-in-850-year event, and it's been blamed on accelerated beach erosion "almost as significant as some hurricane events." 

Possibly worse than rising ocean temperatures is the acidification of the waters. Acidification has a direct effect on mollusks and other marine animals with hard outer bodies: A striking study last year showed that, along the West Coast, the shells of tiny snails are already dissolving, with as-yet-unknown consequences on the ecosystem. One of the study's authors, Nina Bednaršek, told Science magazine that the snails' shells, pitted by the acidifying ocean, resembled "cauliflower" or "sandpaper." A similarly striking study by more than a dozen of the world's top ocean scientists this July said that the current pace of increasing carbon emissions would force an "effectively irreversible" change on ocean ecosystems during this century. In as little as a decade, the study suggested, chemical changes will rise significantly above background levels in nearly half of the world's oceans.

"I used to think it was kind of hard to make things in the ocean go extinct," James Barry of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in California told the Seattle Times in 2013. "But this change we're seeing is happening so fast it's almost instantaneous." 

Thanks to the pressure we're putting on the planet's ecosystem — warming, acidification and good old-fashioned pollution — the oceans are set up for several decades of rapid change. Here's what could happen next.

The combination of excessive nutrients from agricultural runoff, abnormal wind patterns and the warming oceans is already creating seasonal dead zones in coastal regions when algae blooms suck up most of the available oxygen. The appearance of low-oxygen regions has doubled in frequency every 10 years since 1960 and should continue to grow over the coming decades at an even greater rate.

So far, dead zones have remained mostly close to the coasts, but in the 21st century, deep-ocean dead zones could become common. These low-oxygen regions could gradually expand in size — potentially thousands of miles across — which would force fish, whales, pretty much everything upward. If this were to occur, large sections of the temperate deep oceans would suffer should the oxygen-free layer grow so pronounced that it stratifies, pushing surface ocean warming into overdrive and hindering upwelling of cooler, nutrient-rich deeper water.

Enhanced evaporation from the warmer oceans will create heavier downpours, perhaps destabilizing the root systems of forests, and accelerated runoff will pour more excess nutrients into coastal areas, further enhancing dead zones. In the past year, downpours have broken records in Long Island, Phoenix, Detroit, Baltimore, Houston and Pensacola, Florida.

Evidence for the above scenario comes in large part from our best understanding of what happened 250 million years ago, during the "Great Dying," when more than 90 percent of all oceanic species perished after a pulse of carbon dioxide and methane from land-based sources began a period of profound climate change. The conditions that triggered "Great Dying" took hundreds of thousands of years to develop. But humans have been emitting carbon dioxide at a much quicker rate, so the current mass extinction only took 100 years or so to kick-start.

With all these stressors working against it, a hypoxic feedback loop could wind up destroying some of the oceans' most species-rich ecosystems within our lifetime. A recent study by Sarah Moffitt of the University of California-Davis said it could take the ocean thousands of years to recover. "Looking forward for my kid, people in the future are not going to have the same ocean that I have today," Moffitt said.

As you might expect, having tickets to the front row of a global environmental catastrophe is taking an increasingly emotional toll on scientists, and in some cases pushing them toward advocacy. Of the two dozen or so scientists interviewed for this piece, virtually all drifted into apocalyptic language at some point.

For Simone Alin, an oceanographer focusing on ocean acidification at NOAA's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, the changes she's seeing hit close to home. The Puget Sound is a natural laboratory for the coming decades of rapid change because its waters are naturally more acidified than most of the world's marine ecosystems.

The local oyster industry here is already seeing serious impacts from acidifying waters and is going to great lengths to avoid a total collapse. Alin calls oysters, which are non-native, the canary in the coal mine for the Puget Sound: "A canary is also not native to a coal mine, but that doesn't mean it's not a good indicator of change."

Though she works on fundamental oceanic changes every day, the Dutkiewicz study on the impending large-scale changes to plankton caught her off-guard: "This was alarming to me because if the basis of the food web changes, then . . . everything could change, right?"

Alin's frank discussion of the looming oceanic apocalypse is perhaps a product of studying unfathomable change every day. But four years ago, the birth of her twins "heightened the whole issue," she says. "I was worried enough about these problems before having kids that I maybe wondered whether it was a good idea. Now, it just makes me feel crushed." 

Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist and evangelical Christian, moved from Canada to Texas with her husband, a pastor, precisely because of its vulnerability to climate change. There, she engages with the evangelical community on science — almost as a missionary would. But she's already planning her exit strategy: "If we continue on our current pathway, Canada will be home for us long term. But the majority of people don't have an exit strategy. . . . So that's who I'm here trying to help."

James Hansen, the dean of climate scientists, retired from NASA in 2013 to become a climate activist. But for all the gloom of the report he just put his name to, Hansen is actually somewhat hopeful. That's because he knows that climate change has a straightforward solution: End fossil-fuel use as quickly as possible. If tomorrow, the leaders of the United States and China would agree to a sufficiently strong, coordinated carbon tax that's also applied to imports, the rest of the world would have no choice but to sign up. This idea has already been pitched to Congress several times, with tepid bipartisan support. Even though a carbon tax is probably a long shot, for Hansen, even the slim possibility that bold action like this might happen is enough for him to devote the rest of his life to working to achieve it. On a conference call with reporters in July, Hansen said a potential joint U.S.-China carbon tax is more important than whatever happens at the United Nations climate talks in Paris.

One group Hansen is helping is Our Children's Trust, a legal advocacy organization that's filed a number of novel challenges on behalf of minors under the idea that climate change is a violation of intergenerational equity — children, the group argues, are lawfully entitled to inherit a healthy planet.

A separate challenge to U.S. law is being brought by a former EPA scientist arguing that carbon dioxide isn't just a pollutant (which, under the Clean Air Act, can dissipate on its own), it's also a toxic substance. In general, these substances have exceptionally long life spans in the environment, cause an unreasonable risk, and therefore require remediation. In this case, remediation may involve planting vast numbers of trees or restoring wetlands to bury excess carbon underground.

Even if these novel challenges succeed, it will take years before a bend in the curve is noticeable. But maybe that's enough. When all feels lost, saving a few species will feel like a triumph.        
Odds are good that the worst wildfire disaster in U.S. history might not happen in the West – but in New Jersey.

The Temple Vessels Are Ready for the Rebuilding of Jerusalem’s Third Temple

“Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus [Yeshua] was in the Temple area walking in Solomon’s Colonnade.” (John 10:22–23)

Some years ago, a group of Jewish visitors to the Temple Mount reported seeing ancient beams dated to the First and Second Temple period being used as firewood by the Arab community.

The beams were used in the construction of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and became visible to the public in the 1930s while the building was being refurbished. These beams may have originally been part of the Holy Temple’s roof structure.

Byzantine-era designs were also discovered etched on some of these beams.

“It appears that this is part of the systematic attempts by Arabs to destroy all connections between the Jewish people and the Temple Mount,” a spokesperson from one of the groups trying to secure Jewish rights on the Temple Mount said (Arutz Sheva).

Despite Arab denial that any Jewish Temples ever existed on the Mount, and despite their unauthorized excavations on the Mount that destroy evidence of such a Jewish presence, there are groups of Jews and Christians planning to build a Third Temple on this holiest site in the world.

In fact, the furnishings, instruments, and vessels for Temple worship have already been created and are on display at the Holy Temple Visitors Center in Jerusalem.

“They shall make for me a sanctuary, and I will dwell among them.” (Exodus 25:8)

The Temple Institute

Just beyond the courtyard of the Western Wall in the Old City of Jerusalem is Misgav Ladach Street, a sheltered cobblestone road that leads Israelis and tourists to the Temple Institute (Machon HaMikdash). There, visitors can view Temple treasures that have not been seen in over 2,000 years.

The Temple Institute also offers group tours that can be organized ahead of time and given in Hebrew, English or other languages so that anyone can take in the well-documented history of the Jewish Temple.

A gift shop with Temple-themed books, posters, puzzles, games, jewelry, and replicas await visitors. But these items pale in comparison to the 25 years of research and craftmanship that the Institute has invested in creating the Temple treasures.

These are no mere models or replicas. They have been created for use in the Third Temple, which could possibly be constructed within our lifetime. Every dazzling piece in the Institute’s collection is made of pure gold, silver, copper, and other authentic materials.

They have been crafted only after lengthy research into the designs and practices of the original Temple, as required in the Torah and Talmud (oral law). Researchers also studied images on ancient coins and other artifacts that survived the Second Temple era.

The Institute relied on dozens of people—rabbis, scholars, scientists and other experts—who contributed their talents to recreate the Temple vessels.

According to its website, one of the Temple Institute is “dedicated to all aspects of the Divine commandment for Israel to build a house for G-d’s presence, the Holy Temple, on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem.”

So, in addition to the vessels and furnishings, a variety of paintings, which were commissioned by the Temple Institute, cover the exhibit walls.

Each one provides a rich context for understanding the various utensils, golden bowls, jugs for sanctified oil, the Golden Altar, Showbread Table, and other tools used for cleaning or preparing sacrifices that line the rooms.

The Temple Treasures on Display

The clothing and breastplate of the Kohen Gadol (High Priest) are on display along with instruments specific to prayer, sacred assembly, and musical worship.

This includes silver-plated shofars (ram’s horns) for fast days and gold-plated shofars for blowing on Rosh HaShanah (literally, Head of the Year, the Jewish New Year).

“On the first day of the seventh month you are to have a day of Sabbath rest, a sacred assembly commemorated with trumpet [shofar] blasts.” (Leviticus 23:24)

Silver trumpets used for public prayer and multiple lyres also line the walls. The lyres have 10 strings based upon verses in the Psalms.

Symbolic Treasures: A Journey to Wholeness

“Every morning and evening they present burnt offerings and fragrant incense to the LORD. They set out the bread on the ceremonially clean table and light the lamps on the gold lampstand every evening.” (2 Chronicles 13:11)

The Institute also highlights three pieces from the Holy Sanctuary that are symbolically linked:

the Menorah (Exodus 25:31–40), signifying spiritual blessing;

the Shulkan (Exodus 25:30), which held the Lechem HaPanim (Showbread), signifying physical blessing; and the Golden Altar (Exodus 30: 1–9) between them, on which the Ketores (Incense Offering) burned as a physical element that was “transformed into spiritual.”

“The three vessels of the Sanctuary thus signify the correct balance of life; a mixture of the spiritual and physical worlds that brings the human soul to wholeness,” an exhibit sign explains.

The Menorah

Although the table and vessels for the oil and incense are on display inside the Temple Institute, the Menorah stands outside in full view in the Old City’s Jewish Quarter, which is fitting since its light would have been visible during Temple times.

The Menorah had a central role because it is a sign of God’s Shekhinah (Divine Presence) among B’nai Yisrael (Children of Israel) and is symbolic of spiritual illumination. It was, therefore, the first sacred vessel to be recreated since the Second Temple was destroyed in AD 70.

Although the Menorah sits outside, the Menorah’s two-litre oil pitcher, used to replenish oil in the jug that feeds the golden menorah, is on display inside the Institute.

Along with the Menorah, this was the vessel involved in the miracle of Hanukkah. After defeating the Greek invaders, the Hasmonean priests found such a pitcher, which was sealed to protect the purity of its oil.

The Table of the Showbread

Exodus 25 provides instructions for the design of the Table of the Showbread, which stood within the Sanctuary in Jerusalem.

Twelve loaves of bread called Lechem HaPanim (Bread of the Presence) were to be on this table to stand before God at all times.

“This bread is to be set out before the LORD regularly, Sabbath after Sabbath, on behalf of the Israelites, as a lasting covenant.” (Leviticus 24:8, see also Exodus 25:30; Numbers 4:7; 2 Chronicles 2:4; 1 Kings 7:48; Hebrews 9:2)

Leviticus 24 describes how these loaves were to be made and placed on the Golden Altar.

“Take fine flour and bake twelve loaves of bread, using two-tenths of an ephah for each loaf. Set them in two rows, six in each row, on the table of pure gold before the Lord. Along each row put some pure incense as a memorial portion ….” (Leviticus 24:5–7)

The Talmud (oral tradition) states that these loaves miraculously remained fresh and hot all week—just like freshly baked bread, and that this was taken as a confirmation of the Divine Presence (Shekhinah).

The bread symbolized, among other things, God’s providence and physical provision.

The Incense Offering

Like the light of the Menorah shining forth from the Temple windows, the incense offering also had a palpable presence during Temple times. It is believed that its aroma would travel 25 miles beyond the Temple itself, connecting the greater community with this offering of worship.

An institute sign explains how the incense was offered: “Once the coals were on the Golden Altar [Mizbach HaZahav], one priest would pour the incense spice mixture from the chalice into the second priest’s hand. The second priest would then sprinkle the incense over the coals and a wonderful aroma would fill the sanctuary.”

This incense was sacred, and its formulation was a closely guarded secret, passed down through the generations.

Exodus 30:34 identifies four of the 11 ingredients: balsam, onycha, galbanum, and pure frankincense. The Bible does not identify the herb that caused the smoke to rise in a straight column, which is called Ma’aleh Ashan, or the other spices.

The Torah makes it plain why this formulation was guarded:

“Whoever makes perfume like it and whoever puts it on anyone other than a priest must be cut off from his people.” (Exodus 30:33)

For that reason, even though the priest offered it on the Golden Altar, according to the Talmud (oral tradition), only one family—the Avtinas—knew the identity of the spices, as well as the exact amounts and the manner they were prepared.

Rebuilding the Temple in the Last Days

“My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations.” (Isaiah 56:7)

The Temple Institute is entirely dedicated to rebuilding the Temple on the Temple Mount.

A major obstacle to the realization of that goal is the presence of two Islamic structures now occupying part of the Temple Mount: the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

While Jews look forward to the building of the Temple as a beacon of hope and spiritual reconciliation for the entire world, Believers in Yeshua and the Brit Chadashah understand another reality for the Temple and for the world.

In the Last Days, the “man of lawlessness” will “oppose and exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.” (2 Thessalonians 2:4)

Who could this man of lawlessness be? How will we know when he has arrived?

Daniel gives us good clues: “He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.” (Daniel 9:27)

Some translations don’t use the word “Temple,” but the idea is similar: the man of lawlessness will do what is detestable to the Lord, and according to the Brit Chadashah (New Testament), he will clearly do it in the Temple for all the world to see.

The Last Days are here and two things remain before the Anti-Messiah arrives on the scene: the building of the Temple and the confirming of a covenant with Israel.

Those two events are in sight.

“I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, ‘My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.'” (Isaiah 46:10)


Also:


End-Time Prophecy: Why is the Third Temple so Important?

The Hebrew prophets all proclaimed that in the last days, the exiles of Israel would return to the Promised Land and that the Temple would be rebuilt.

“Then the nations will know that I the Lord make Israel holy, when my sanctuary is among them forever.” (Ezekiel 37:28)

These phenomenal end-time events are unfolding before our very eyes!

The Prophetic Return to Israel and the Third Temple

“I will bring back my exiled people Israel; they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them. They will plant vineyards and drink their wine; they will make gardens and eat their fruit. I will plant Israel in their own land, never again to be uprooted from the land I have given them.” (Amos 9:14–15)

So many skeptics around the globe like to proclaim that God has rejected the People of Israel and that Israel has been rebirthed by man alone. Yet, we find in Scripture that God never intended to reject His People forever:

“You, Israel, My servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, Descendant of Abraham My friend, you whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called from its remotest parts and said to you, ‘You are My servant, I have chosen you and not rejected you.” (Isaiah 41:9)

God always planned to bring the Jewish People back to the Land on His terms not man’s. And just as the prophets foretold, the Jewish People are returning to the Holy Land from the four corners of the earth after 19 centuries of global exile:

“Do not fear, for I am with you; I will bring your offspring from the east, And gather you from the west. “I will say to the north, ‘Give them up!’ And to the south, ‘Do not hold them back.’ Bring My sons from afar And My daughters from the ends of the earth.” (Isaiah 43:5–6)

Not only are the exiles of Israel returning to the Promised Land, but preparations to build the Third Temple are progressing through the efforts of the Temple Institute and various Temple Mount advocacy movements.

Why Build the Third Temple?

“Here am I, and the children the Lord has given me. We are signs and symbols in Israel from the Lord Almighty, who dwells on Mount Zion.”

(Isaiah 8:18)

You might ask yourself, “If the sanctuary was ‘a copy and a shadow of what is in Heaven (Hebrews 8:5),’ and Yeshua (Jesus) ‘serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord (Hebrews 8:2),’ why contemplate building the Holy Temple?”

The Holy Temple in Jerusa

lem was never simply a building or structure, but an earthly dwelling place for the Divine Presence of God.

The Lord said,

“Let them construct a sanctuary for Me, that I may dwell [shakan] among them.” (Exodus 25:8; see also Exodus 40:34–35 and 1 Kings 8:11)

This dwelling (shakan) forms the related word Shekhinah, which is not found in the original Hebrew Bible, but it is used in rabbinic literature and Bible translations to describe the Lord’s Divine Presence.

The Prophet Ezekiel witnessed the departure of this Divine Presence from the Temple (Ezekiel 10:18–19).

But he also saw the rebuilding of an eternal and permanent dwelling place of God on the Temple Mount in the Holy City of Jerusalem.

“The glory of the Lord entered the temple through the gate facing east. … I heard someone speaking to me from inside the temple. He said: ‘Son of man, this is the place of my throne and the place for the soles of my feet. This is where I will live among the Israelites forever.’” (Ezekiel 43:4–7)

Rambam (Rabbi Moses Maimonides), a medieval Jewish philosopher and Torah scholar, said that the Temple has eternal significance.

He wrote in Hilchos Bais HaBechirah (The Laws of God’s Chosen House) that the Temple had two primary purposes:

To reveal to mankind the Divine Presence of God, which dwelt above the mercy seat of the Ark of the Covenant. “There, above the cover between the two cherubim that are over the Ark of the Testimony, I will meet with you and give you all my commands for the Israelites.” (Exodus 25:22)

To facilitate the offering of the required sacrifices. Since the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70, however, the Jewish People can no longer offer these sacrifices. In fact, 202 out of the 613 mitzvot (commandments) in the Torah cannot be performed without a Temple. (Temple Institute)

With no Temple in Jerusalem, the Jewish people now worship the God of Israel in their local community synagogues and in the study of Torah.

Instead of offering animal sacrifices, they now offer Tefillah (prayer), Teshuvah (repentance), and Tzedakah (charity).

Many think that animal sacrifices have been done away with forever, but according to Bible prophecy, this simply isn’t so. The Lord tells the Prophet Ezekiel that in a future Temple, the prescribed sacrifices will be offered:

“The north and south rooms facing the temple courtyard are the priests’ rooms, where the priests who approach the Lord will eat the most holy offerings. There they will put the most holy offerings—the grain offerings, the sin offerings and the guilt offerings—for the place is holy.” (Ezekiel 42:13)

But a serious question arises not only for the Jewish community, but for all Believers in Yeshua: will the next Temple—the Third Temple—be Ezekiel’s Temple where the Divine Presence will once again reside—or will some other presence reside in another Temple?

Daniel, Yeshua, the Anti-Messiah, and the Third Temple

In the prophetic writings of the Book of Daniel and the Brit Chadashah (New Testament), we find significant details about the role of a rebuilt Temple in the end times.

Both Daniel and Yeshua (Jesus) tell us that the Anti-Messiah will defile the Third Temple before the return of the true Messiah.

They both call this spiritual defilement in the Temple the abomination of desolation:

“So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.” (Matthew 24:15–16; compare with Daniel 9:27, 11:31, and 12:11)

According to the Prophet Daniel, the Messiah would be cut off before the Temple is destroyed:

“After the sixty-two weeks the Messiah [Mashiach] will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince [ruler, nagid] who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.” (Daniel 9:26)

This prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70 with the destruction of the Temple, just forty years after Yeshua HaMashiach (Jesus the Messiah) was cut off by his execution on a tree.

Through the study of numerous end-time Scriptures, we believe that this prince or ruler (nagid)—the anti-Messiah—will appear just as Daniel describes.

Daniel says he will confirm a covenant of peace “for one week” (often interpreted as seven years) but break that covenant in the middle of the term.

“And he [the prince] will make [some translations say ‘confirm’] a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate [some interpretations say, set up an idol on the wing or precipice of the Temple], even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.” (Daniel 9:27; see also Matthew 24:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:4)

The anti-Messiah will also proclaim himself to be God!

“He [the man of lawlessness] will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.” (2 Thess. 2:4)

The Temple Institute is the main Jewish organization responsible for making preparations for the Third Temple and the reinstatement of sacrificial worship, supported by a growing network of modern Temple Mount advocacy groups. v Other organizations have plans, too. One wants to pitch a tabernacle-style tent on the Mount; another wants to build a synagogue in one of the corners of the platform.

Why? Because as Rabbi Chaim Richman, the long-time director of the Temple Institute states in his Myth Buster video series, “Buildings don’t fall down from heaven.” He adds that “it’s a mitzvah to build the Temple,” citing Exodus 23:8 and that Jews should be performing all 613 mitzvot, which requires a Temple.

He also says that the Third Temple will “bring the Light back into the world” that left the Temple Mount when the Lord’s Divine Presence departed.

Moreover, he believes the Temple will “reconnect all of creation with one another. It is the Holy Temple that enables all of humanity to engage in direct dynamic relationship with God and provides the opportunity for every individual to rise to our greatest potential.” (Temple Institute YouTube: Myth Busters Part 1)

Daniel 9 and 11 as well as Brit Chadashah writings, however, help us see that an alternate reality exists for the Temple.

Nevertheless, the ritual garments and vessels have been created.

Even the Golden Menorah—the seven branched candelabra—has been crafted, along with Levitical musical instruments, such as silver trumpets, lyres, and harps to worship the Lord, just as King David did 3,000 years ago (1 Chronicles 23:5).

The Temple Institute’s School is training certified Cohen (descendants of the High Priest Aaron) to perform the Temple duties.

And the final element, candidates for the Red Heifer, are being raised and monitored in Israel to be sacrificed in the ritual purification of the priests and the vessels, so they may formally enter the holiest of holy area on the entire earth.

Everything is ready for the rebuilding of the Third Temple. Everything, that is, except the land on which to build it.

Since the liberation of the Mount in 1967, the Muslim world has made great efforts to claim the entire 37-acre (150,000 square meter) platform as its own sacred land, calling the site in Arabic al-Ḥaram al-Šarīf—the Noble Sanctuary.

To protect the Noble Sanctuary, the Muslim world has become expert organizers of riots on the Temple Mount and terror on the streets of Israel. Incitement to such violence increases whenever rumors spread that a Jewish presence will be established on the Temple Mount or its own Muslim structures harmed.

Only an incredibly respected, trusted, and honored man by both Muslims and Jews will be able to establish a peace plan that allows the Jewish People to worship the Lord in a Temple on the Mount that King David purchased (2 Samuel 24:18–25).

Whoever this man is and whatever trouble awaits us (known as Jacob’s Trouble) when he breaks the peace plan as Daniel 9:27 predicts, we can be confident that God is on the throne and in control.

As King David writes in Psalm 121:4: “He who watches over Israel will neither slumber nor sleep.”

We know that end-time Bible prophecy concerning the Third Temple is soon to be fulfilled because Israel was prophetically reborn as a nation in 1948 (Isaiah 66:8), and most of these Temple preparations only started in the last 40 years.

As we persevere through these end-times, join us in introducing the Sar Shalom (Prince of Peace) Yeshua HaMashiach to the Jewish People so that He may dwell in them and bring them a peace and Joy they have not yet known.


Also:


Are we building the Third Temple?

Now that the whole world is talking about the Third Temple in Jerusalem, let’s go there. I am a Jew, a Chabad follower, and a rabbi, so you can trust what I’m about to share a lot more than the conspiracy theories podcasters have tried to share in my name.

First, the old news:

Yes, Jews believe that we will have a Third Temple, on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, in the same location where our first two Temples once stood. It’s not some secret that the Mossad is hiding, nor something that Chabad subtly pushes, and it’s certainly not a code being signaled through patches on IDF uniforms.

It has been in the public record for thousands of years:

2,800 years ago, Isaiah prophesied: “… concerning Judah and Jerusalem … at the end of the days, the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be firmly established at the top of the mountains … and many peoples shall go, and they shall say, ‘Come, let us go up to the Lord’s mount, to the house of the God of Jacob …’” (Isaiah 2:2)

2,600 years ago, Ezekiel prophesied: “In the visions of God … He placed me on a very lofty mountain and upon it was like the building of a city from the south … And He said to me, ‘This is the place of My throne where I shall dwell … this is the teaching of the House; Upon the top of the mountain, all its boundary round about shall be most holy…’” (Ezekiel 40:2)

2,000 years ago, Jewish sages composed a blessing that is recited in our daily prayer liturgy: “Return in mercy to Jerusalem Your city and dwell therein as You have promised … rebuild it, soon in our days, as an everlasting edifice … restore the service to Your Sanctuary and accept with love and favor Israel’s fire-offerings and prayer…”

1,900 years ago, the Talmudic sage Rabbi Yehuda composed a prayer that we recite several times every day: “May it be Your will, L-rd our G‑d and G‑d of our fathers, that the Holy Temple be rebuilt speedily in our days.”

So now that we’ve cleared that up, let’s continue.

What about the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock shrine? Aren’t we going to be sensitive to these holy Islamic sites? This is an important consideration, but I wonder – is anyone sensitive to the fact that the Temple Mount was a holy site for Jews thousands of years before Muslims conquered and built their sites?

The Muslim conquest of Jerusalem occurred in the 7th century CE. Shortly after that, they built both the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa on the Temple Mount, the site where the two Jewish Temples had stood.

Now let’s take a trip down Jewish memory lane.

The Bible is filled with references to the Temple Mount. Adam, the first human, was created out of earth gathered from the Temple Mount. 3,700 years ago, G-d told Avraham to offer his son Isaac to Him. Where? Upon the Temple Mount. 3,600 years ago, when Jacob was running away from his brother Esav, he fell asleep and had a dream. In it, G-d told him: “I am the Lord, the God of Abraham your father, and the God of Isaac; the land upon which you are lying, to you I will give it and to your seed.” Where did this occur? Yes, upon the Temple Mount.

Before entering Israel, the Bible records what G-d told the Jewish people (Deuteronomy 12:11): “And you shall cross the Jordan and settle in the land the Lord, your God, is giving you as an inheritance … And it will be, that the place the Lord, your God, will choose in which to establish His Name, there you shall bring your sacrifices…”

Again, that “place that G-d chose” – the place where we were commanded to build a Temple – is the Temple Mount.

About 3,000 years ago, King David successfully conquered Jerusalem, fulfilling G-d’s promise and beginning preparations for the Temple. It was his son King Shlomo who built the first Temple, which stood on the Temple Mount for 410 years, until the Babylonians savagely destroyed the Temple and exiled the Jews.

About 2,500 years ago, the Persian Emperor Cyrus permitted the Jews to return to Israel and build a second Temple, on the Temple Mount. This Temple stood for 420 years, until the Romans destroyed it and exiled the Jews.

If you ask where the Jews have been since then, the answer is simple. We wish we could have been living as G-d had promised – as a sovereign nation in the land of Israel, with a Temple on the Temple Mount. But alas, antisemitic hatred and persecution led to our destruction and banishment from the land. We never “left” the land or “gave away” our G-d-given gift to anyone else.

Let’s move on. Are we going to build a Third Temple?

In 1948, we Jews finally reclaimed control over our homeland – or at least some of it. Only in 1967 did we gain control over Jerusalem’s Old City and the Temple Mount. That is when this question became realistic.

And yet, in the past 60 years, we haven’t built the Third Temple, nor are there any substantial plans or efforts to do so. Why?

Obviously, there are geopolitical considerations, which are significant, but my focus is on what the Jewish sources say. Contrary to what many assume, and as my colleague Rabbi Y. Shurpin explains so well on Chabad.org, Jewish tradition does not say we should simply start building a Temple tomorrow. In fact, a close examination of the sources reveals several major obstacles:

The obligation to rebuild the Temple is understood by many to apply only when the majority of the Jewish nation resides in Israel. Currently, less than 50% of Jews live in Israel.

The obligation to rebuild the Temple is understood by many to apply only when there is a Jewish king or prophet, which we don’t have nowadays.

We don’t even know how to construct it. Ezekiel’s prophecy outlines the blueprint of the Temple, but there are many different interpretations about how to understand these instructions.

One of the central items in the Temple is the altar for sacrifices. Our sages teach that the altar must be placed in the exact spot where Adam was first formed, and where Avraham built an altar for Isaac. Today, we don’t really know where this is. (When building the Second Temple, prophets came to vouch for the precise location.)

Even if we figured out how and where to build the Temple, we might be forbidden to enter it in our state of impurity. To become purified requires the ashes of a red heifer, which we don’t currently have.

The Temple will be staffed by “kohanim” – descendants of the biblical priest class. To be appointed, a kohen will need a genealogical verification of being a direct descendant of Aaron – something most kohanim don’t have nowadays.

The kohanim will need to wear special clothing, and today we aren’t clear about the identity of some of the materials, such as the techelet dye or the precious stones for the High Priest’s breastplate.

So how will the Third Temple be built?

The answer to this is not so clear.

In general, regarding all matters concerning the Jewish belief about messianic times, including universal peace, ingathering of the exiles, an end to evil, restoration of the Jewish monarchy, resurrection of the dead, and the return of worship in the holy Temple, all of these are shrouded in mystery and ambiguity. Not for lack of certainty about them, nor for a shortage of sources confirming them. Rather, these sources have been understood differently over the ages, and ultimately it appears that G-d deliberately wants these matters to remain enigmatic – for now.

That being said, there seem to be two general opinions about how the Temple will be built:

Maimonides rules that the Temple will be built by King Moshiach. In other words, we will need to wait for the arrival of Moshiach.

Others are of the opinion that in the Messianic era, the Temple will miraculously descend ready-built from heaven. The bottom line:

In summary, as much as we yearn for the building of the Third Temple, and we know that it will happen one day, we are not currently in a position to fulfill this Jewish religious commandment.

So, for now, will everyone please relax, and will the conspiracists please educate themselves. Neither Chabad nor any other community with influence is making any such plans.

Instead, as per a core teaching of the Chabad-Lubavitcher Rebbe, we are focused on something more important for now: To practice unconditional love, to promote acts of kindness, to teach the word of G-d, to strengthen faith and purpose, to fill the world with true peace, and to prepare humanity for Messianic times.

‘No Cash’ Signs Everywhere Has Sweden Worried It’s Gone Too Far

“No cash accepted” signs are becoming an increasingly common sight in shops and eateries across Sweden as payments go digital and mobile.

But the pace at which cash is vanishing has authorities worried. A broad review of central bank legislation that’s under way is now taking a special look at the situation, with an interim report due as early as the summer.

“If this development with cash disappearing happens too fast, it can be difficult to maintain the infrastructure” for handling cash, said Mats Dillen, the head of the parliamentary review. He declined to give more details on the types of proposals that could be included in the report.

Sweden is widely regarded as the most cashless society on the planet. Most of the country’s bank branches have stopped handling cash; many shops, museums and restaurants now only accept plastic or mobile payments. But there’s a downside, since many people, in particular the elderly, don’t have access to the digital society.

“One may get into a negative spiral which can threaten the cash infrastructure,” Dillen said. “It’s those types of issues we are looking more closely at.”

Last year, the amount of cash in circulation in Sweden dropped to the lowest level since 1990 and is more than 40 percent below its 2007 peak. The declines in 2016 and 2017 were the biggest on record.

An annual survey by Insight Intelligence released last month found that only 25 percent of Swedes paid in cash at least once a week in 2017, down from 63 percent just four years ago. A full 36 percent never use cash, or just pay with it once or twice a year.

In response, the central bank is considering whether there’s a need for an official form of digital currency, an e-krona. A final proposal isn’t expected until late next year, but the idea is that the e-krona would work as a complement to cash, not replace it completely.

Riksbank Governor Stefan Ingves has said Sweden should consider forcing banks to provide cash to customers. In its annual report on Monday, the Riksbank said the question is what role it should play in a future with even fewer cash payments.

“The Riksbank is carefully analyzing this development,” Ingves said. “Overall, I think we are facing structural changes in areas that have previously been stable. This is a development which will affect all the Riksbank’s departments and we will need to make strategic decisions regarding the way forward.”

 

 

  

 

In Sweden, A Cash-Free Future Nears

 

Parishioners text tithes to their churches. Homeless street vendors carry mobile credit-card readers. Even the Abba Museum, despite being a shrine to the 1970s pop group that wrote “Money, Money, Money,” considers cash so last-century that it does not accept bills and coins.

Few places are tilting toward a cashless future as quickly as Sweden, which has become hooked on the convenience of paying by app and plastic.

This tech-forward country, home to the music streaming service Spotify and the maker of the Candy Crush mobile games, has been lured by the innovations that make digital payments easier. It is also a practical matter, as many of the country’s banks no longer accept or dispense cash.

At the Abba Museum, “we don’t want to be behind the times by taking cash while cash is dying out,” said Bjorn Ulvaeus, a former Abba member who has leveraged the band’s legacy into a sprawling business empire, including the museum.

Not everyone is cheering. Sweden’s embrace of electronic payments has alarmed consumer organizations and critics who warn of a rising threat to privacy and increased vulnerability to sophisticated Internet crimes. Last year, the number of electronic fraud cases surged to 140,000, more than double the amount a decade ago, according to Sweden’s Ministry of Justice.

Older adults and refugees in Sweden who use cash may be marginalized, critics say. And young people who use apps to pay for everything or take out loans via their mobile phones risk falling into debt.

“It might be trendy,” said Bjorn Eriksson, a former director of the Swedish police force and former president of Interpol. “But there are all sorts of risks when a society starts to go cashless.”

But advocates like Mr. Ulvaeus cite personal safety as a reason that countries should go cash-free. He switched to using only card and electronic payments after his son’s Stockholm apartment was burglarized twice several years ago.

“There was such a feeling of insecurity,” said Mr. Ulvaeus, who carries no cash at all. “It made me think: What would happen if this was a cashless society, and the robbers couldn’t sell what they stole?”

Bills and coins now represent just 2 percent of Sweden’s economy, compared with 7.7 percent in the United States and 10 percent in the euro area. This year, only about 20 percent of all consumer payments in Sweden have been made in cash, compared with an average of 75 percent in the rest of the world, according to Euromonitor International.

Cards are still king in Sweden — with nearly 2.4 billion credit and debit transactions in 2013, compared with 213 million 15 years earlier. But even plastic is facing competition, as a rising number of Swedes use apps for everyday commerce.

At more than half of the branches of the country’s biggest banks, including SEB, Swedbank, Nordea Bank and others, no cash is kept on hand, nor are cash deposits accepted. They say they are saving a significant amount on security by removing the incentive for bank robberies.

Last year, Swedish bank vaults held around 3.6 billion kronor in notes and coins, down from 8.7 billion in 2010, according to the Bank for International Settlements. Cash machines, which are controlled by a Swedish bank consortium, are being dismantled by the hundreds, especially in rural areas.

Mr. Eriksson, who now heads the Association of Swedish Private Security Companies, a lobbying group for firms providing security for cash transfers, accuses banks and credit card companies of trying to “price cash out of the market” to make way for cards and electronic payments, which generate fee income.

“I don’t think that’s something they should decide on their own,” he said. “Should they really be able to use their market force to turn Sweden into a cashless society?”

The government has not sought to stem the cashless tide. If anything, it has benefited from more efficient tax collection, because electronic transactions leave a trail; in countries like Greece and Italy, where cash is still heavily used, tax evasion remains a big problem.

Leif Trogen, an official at the Swedish Bankers’ Association, acknowledged that banks were earning substantial fee income from the cashless revolution. But because it costs money for banks and businesses to conduct commerce in cash, reducing its use makes financial sense, Mr. Trogen said.

Cash is certainly not dead. The Swedish central bank, the Riksbank, predicts it will decline fast but still be circulating in 20 years. Recently, the Riksbank issued newly redesigned coins and notes.

But for an increasing number of consumers, cash is no longer a habit.

At the University of Gothenburg, students said they almost exclusively used cards and electronic payments. “No one uses cash,” said Hannah Ek, 23. “I think our generation can live without it.”

The downside, she conceded, was that it was easy to spend without thinking. “I do spend more,” Ms. Ek said. “But if I had a 500 krona bill, I’d think twice about spending it all.” (Five hundred kronor is about $58.)

The shift has rippled through even the most unlikely corners of the Swedish economy.

Stefan Wikberg, 65, was homeless for four years after losing his job as an I.T. technician. He has a place to live now and sells magazines for Situation Stockholm, a charitable organization, and began using a mobile card reader to take payments, after noticing that almost no one carried cash.

“Now people can’t get away,” said Mr. Wikberg, who carries a sign saying he accepts Visa, MasterCard and American Express. “When they say, ‘I don’t have change,’ I tell them they can pay with card or even by SMS,” he said, referring to text messages. His sales have grown by 30 percent since he adopted the card reader two years ago.

At the Filadelfia Stockholm church, so few of the 1,000 parishioners now carry cash that the church had to adapt, said Soren Eskilsson, the executive pastor.

During a recent Sunday service, the church’s bank account number was projected onto a large screen. Worshipers pulled out cellphones and tithed through an app called Swish, a payment system set up by Sweden’s biggest banks that is fast becoming a rival to cards.

Other congregants lined up at a special “Kollektomat” card machine, where they could transfer funds to various church operations. Last year, out of 20 million kronor in tithes collected, more than 85 percent came in by card or digital payment.

“People give more money to the church now because it’s electronic and easy,” said Mr. Eskilsson, adding that the church saved on security costs by handling less cash.

Despite the convenience, even some who stand to gain from a cashless society see drawbacks.

“Sweden has always been at the forefront of technology, so it’s easy to embrace this,” said Jacob de Geer, a founder of iZettle, which makes a mobile-powered card reader.

“But Big Brother can watch exactly what you’re doing if you purchase things only electronically,” he said.

But for Mr. Ulvaeus, the music magnate, such concerns are overblown.

“Everything speaks in favor of a cashless society,” he said as he strolled past the Abba Museum to retrieve his car. “It’s a utopian thought, but we’re very close to it.”

He paused at a hot-dog stand for a snack. But when he was ready to pay, the card reader was broken.

“Sorry,” the vendor said. “You’ll have to use cash.”

Prepare To Be Scanned

I am whoever I say I am?

The claim that biometrics are not ready for widespread application may seem puzzling, given the advances in computer technology. To understand the reservations of the experts, it is necessary to take a closer look at how biometrics work. Biometrics can be used in two ways. The first is identification (“who is this person?”), in which a subject's identity is determined by comparing a measured biometric against a database of stored records—a one-to-many comparison. The second is verification (“is this person who he claims to be?”), which involves a one-to-one comparison between a measured biometric and one known to come from a particular person. All biometrics can be used for verification, but different kinds of biometric vary in the extent to which they can be used for identification. They also vary in cost, complexity and intrusiveness. So which biometrics have been chosen for the new passports, visas and identity cards, and why? The oldest biometric is the one we use most frequently—a person's face. But while recognising faces is something that people can do easily, computers find it very difficult. Most computerised face-recognition systems work by building a template based on 30 or so “markers”—the positions of the edges of the eyes, the cheekbones, the base of the nose, and so on. These markers are chosen so that they are unaffected by expression or the presence of facial hair. Matching faces is then a matter of matching the templates. “Biometrics still do not work well enough for many applications in which they are being deployed” However, the results of an American government test released in March cast doubt on the accuracy of face-recognition systems. The test, called the Face Recognition Vendor Test, used systems from ten leading firms and a database of 121,589 images of 37,437 people. None of the systems worked well in a formal identification mode when shown a face and asked to identify the subject; nor did they work well when trying to recognise a face surreptitiously. However, three of the systems could be used for verifying identity in a controlled environment, such as the booths used to take passport photos. Joseph Atick of Identix, a biometrics vendor based in Minnetonka, Minnesota that took part in the test, insists that the deployment of his company's system by customers such as the state of Colorado, which is using it to try to prevent individuals from obtaining multiple driving licences, attests to the viability of facial biometrics. But Joel Lisker, a biometrics consultant who has worked extensively with America's Transportation Security Administration (TSA), says face-recognition systems have yet to prove themselves. In the TSA's own tests, not a single wanted person was spotted. 

A hands-on approach

The first biometric technology to become widely used was hand geometry. It involves scanning the shape, size and other characteristics (such as finger length) of some or all of the hand. Users are required to make some claim about who they are—by swiping a card, for example—before a scan. The biometric template of the person they claim to be (in some cases, stored on the card itself) is then compared with the scan. Because it relies on comparatively simple sensors, hand geometry does not require the fancy technology that underpins other biometric systems, which gave it a head start. Bill Spence of Recognition Systems, a biometrics company based in Campbell, California, says San Francisco's international airport has used hand-geometry systems to control employee access since 1993. Another system, at Ben Gurion airport in Israel, uses hand geometry to allow trusted passengers to pass security control. A similar system deployed in America, called INSPASS, allows frequent travellers to the United States to skip immigration queues at several large airports. Hand-geometry systems are already used to control access and verify identities at many airports, offices, factories, schools, hospitals, nuclear-power plants and high-security government buildings. They are also used in “time and attendance” systems, in which shift workers clock on and off using their handprints—preventing time-card fraud through “buddy punching”. One benefit of hand geometry is that unlike fingerprint scanning, it is not stigmatised by an association with law enforcement. However, hand geometry has a key problem: people's hands do not differ enough for it to be used as an identification system. As a result, says Dr Atick, hand geometry's market share is plunging. The technology which is perhaps most responsible for the decline in hand geometry is finger scanning. Ink-based fingerprints have been in use for over a century, but in recent years they have gone digital. Modern electronic systems distil the arches, loops and whorls of conventional fingerprints into a numerical code. This can be compared with a database in seconds and with an extraordinary degree of accuracy. Identix, which sells such a system, was recently selected by America's Department of Homeland Security to provide fingerprint scanners at Citizenship and Immigration Services offices across the country. The remarkable success of fingerprints as a forensic tool for law-enforcement agencies has come about because these agencies take fingerprints very meticulously. All ten fingers are used, and each finger must be rolled back and forth, to get “nail-to-nail coverage”. Such thoroughness is appropriate in a police station, however, but not in an airport. Another problem is that around 5% of people do not have readable fingerprints, either because their fingerprints are genetically indistinct or because years of manual labour have worn them down. And while the technology is now relatively cheap—basic digital fingerprint readers cost less than $100—it is not foolproof. Some fingerprint scanners can be spoofed with nothing more than a breath of hot air, which reactivates latent prints left on the scanner. And Tsutomu Matsumoto, a researcher at Yokohama National University, was able to fool fingerprint scanners around 80% of the time using fingers made of moulded gelatin. 

An eye for an eye

Another option is to scan the eye. Such systems date back to the 1970s, when the retina, the surface of the back of the eye, was considered the useful bit, mostly because medical techniques for probing it had been developed. The iris, the coloured part surrounding the pupil, had been less thoroughly investigated. However, almost all experts now agree that the iris makes a better biometric than the retina, because it can be more easily examined. The use of cameras to measure the fibres, furrows and freckles in the iris is familiar from numerous spy films, with good reason: iris scanning is generally deemed to be the most reliable biometric. According to Peter Higgins, a biometrics consultant, the most widespread use of iris biometrics to date has been in Afghanistan, where the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is using iris scans to attempt to prevent refugees from collecting benefits more than once. Though the system has logged over 7m transactions, Mr Higgins points out that, because it is impossible to collect meaningful statistics in such an uncontrolled environment, no one has any idea how well the system has performed. Smaller-scale tests of other state-of-the-art iris systems, described in a GAO report, indicate that the rate of false non-matches can be as a high as 6%. This would mean that one in 20 attempts to claim benefits twice would be successful. Given the paltry sums being given to each refugee, it is not clear that the cost of deploying this anti-fraud system was justified. However, the UNHCR points out that it may have had a useful deterrent effect. Other biometrics include voice recognition, which is cheap, but not terribly reliable; gait recognition, which attempts to recognise people from the way they walk; dynamic signature-recognition, based on analysis of the shape of a signature and the way the pen moves while it is being written; and thermal imaging, which seeks to identify people by the pattern of heat which their bodies emit. But none of these technologies is taken seriously enough for use in a passport. Given all the limitations of individual biometrics, the best way forward in the long run, according to a forthcoming paper by Anil Jain, a biometrics expert at Michigan State University, will be the use of “multibiometric” systems. These combine several different biometrics in a single security system with almost universal coverage. For even if someone's fingerprints cannot be read, it is likely that his irises can be, and vice versa. Furthermore, Dr Jain points out that combining several different systems can lead to substantial improvements in error rates. 

And the winner is...

So it is only logical to expect biometric passports and visas to take a multibiometric approach. America has decided on a combination of finger scanning and face recognition, and Europe seems to be leaning towards the same combination. Oman and the United Arab Emirates will issue biometric identity cards based on finger-scanning technology, to which Britain plans to add iris scans. All of these plans accord with the recommendation of the International Civil Aviation Organisation, which recently proposed that finger scanning should be adopted as an international standard, chiefly because fingerprint readers are much cheaper than iris scanners. However, America is also adopting face recognition because, say officials, they do not have the fingerprints of many terrorists, but they do have pictures. While this sounds like a logical explanation, Mr Higgins notes that, given the high error rates of facial-recognition systems, in relying on such a system, “you would really be exposing yourself.” The other critical choice, driven by the limitations of biometric technology, is that these biometrics will be used for verification, not identification. That is because identification is simply not feasible with databases containing millions of users. There are two key measures of how good a biometric system is: the false match rate, and the false non-match rate. These two can be balanced against each other. Tune the system to be tolerant, so that everything matches, and you have a false non-match rate of zero, but a very high false match rate; conversely, in a system that is so strict that it allows no matches, the false match rate is zero, but the false non-match rate is 100%. In an identification system, particularly one that has to search a large database of millions of templates, the task is much harder. Even a false match rate of one in 10,000 would produce thousands of false matches. And if you are trying to spot members of a small group of known terrorists, even the best of today's biometric systems produce hundreds of false matches for every correct match with a terrorist. The result is that the system is flooded with false alarms, which are routinely ignored, providing almost no additional security. As a result, the new border-control systems now being implemented at American border posts are merely verification systems. 

Now for the catch

The trouble is, it is not clear that these identity-verification systems are worth the cost and trouble of introducing them. All 19 of the September 11th hijackers entered the United States using valid visas, on their own passports, for example. Verifying their identities using biometric visas would have made no difference. Worse, spending the billions of dollars that the GAO estimates will be necessary to implement biometric systems at border-crossing points—$1.4 billion to $2.9 billion initially, and $700m to $1.5 billion annually thereafter—may mean there is less to spend on other areas of security. America has long land-borders with Canada and Mexico, and tens of thousands of miles of coastline. Using biometrics at airports does little to reduce the level of illegal immigration, since most such entries do not occur at airports, but over the far more porous land and sea borders. The new system will, however, be ideally suited for spotting tourists or students who overstay on their visas, but that is a trivial issue. The cost of the new system will not just be financial. All visas will now have to be issued face to face, so that scanning can take place. This will put a huge administrative load on America's consulates around the world, which currently issue two-fifths of visas by post. Given the limitations of current biometric technology, the Big Brotherish concerns raised by privacy advocates are largely misplaced, at least for the time being. Other technologies, such as internet wiretapping and the ability to track the location of mobile phones, will arguably make much more substantial encroachments on privacy over the next few years. However, in the long term, biometrics, by their very nature, will compromise privacy in a deep and thorough fashion. If and when face-recognition technology improves to the point where surreptitious cameras can routinely recognise individuals, privacy, as it has existed in the public sphere, will in effect be wiped out. No doubt there will be some benefits: fraud, in particular the persistent and increasingly annoying problem of identity theft, might be substantially reduced if biometric-identification systems, introduced in the form of passports, visas and identity cards, become widespread. But privacy advocates argue that such benefits are not worth the risk of “function creep”—that once biometric passes have been issued by governments, it will be tempting to use them for all sorts of things, from buspasses to logging on to your office PC. Spurred by the misplaced enthusiasm of governments around the world, biometrics seem headed for dramatic growth in the next few years. But calm, public discussion of their benefits and drawbacks has been lamentably lacking. Such discussion is necessary both to prevent the waste of public money in the short term—for the most part, the private sector has been wiser in its adoption of biometrics—but also to regulate what will eventually have the potential to become a powerful mechanism for social control.