Registered for Life? Not in Namibia!

 You’d think that registering your cellphone number in Namibia meant it was yours for life. That’s what I believed—until I found out the hard truth.

MTC, our biggest mobile operator, has a policy: if you don’t top up for six months, your number gets deactivated and recycled. Just like that, your “forever” number is gone. Want it back? You’ll have to apply for a new one—and there’s no guarantee you’ll get your old digits.

The whole point of registering SIM cards was to help with things like tracing people—whether for criminal investigations or even to reunite them with unclaimed money. But if the number is recycled every time someone goes half a year without topping up, that tracing system is already broken.

It’s a reminder that in Namibia, “registration” doesn’t mean permanent ownership—it just means your number is on file… until it isn’t.

See video: 
Registered for Life? Not in Namibia!

Beyond Misinformation: Why Namibia Needs Digital Sovereignty

The recent poll by NBC Digital News on the ethical use of social media sparked a vital conversation. While the overwhelming majority rightly pointed to fighting misinformation and fake news as the primary challenge, I contend that this focus, while crucial, only scratches the surface of a far more profound issue facing our nation: digital sovereignty.

Misinformation is a symptom, not the disease. The true ailment lies in our collective reliance on digital platforms and infrastructures that are neither owned nor controlled by Namibians. We are, in essence, digital tenants in a global landscape, subject to the whims and algorithms of foreign entities whose interests may not always align with our national aspirations.

The Peril of Digital Dependence: Why Foreign Platforms Fall Short

Our current digital reality is one of profound dependence. We connect, share, learn, and even conduct business on platforms designed and operated thousands of miles away. While these platforms offer undeniable convenience, they come with inherent risks that directly undermine our national development and ethical digital engagement:

• Data Vulnerability: Every click, every post, every interaction on these platforms generates data – a new form of currency in the digital age. This data, often personal and sensitive, is stored on foreign servers, subject to foreign laws, and potentially vulnerable to foreign interests. Namibia has initiated moves to establish technological sovereignty by investing in domestic data infrastructure and cybersecurity, with the construction of a data centre envisaged to better support the local digital economy and strengthen the country's digital sovereignty. However, the bulk of our social media data still resides beyond our direct control.
• Algorithmic Control and Bias: The algorithms that govern what we see and how we interact are opaque. They are designed to maximise engagement, often at the expense of nuanced discourse or exposure to diverse viewpoints. This can lead to the creation of 'echo chambers' and the amplification of sensational or divisive content, making the fight against misinformation an uphill battle. These algorithms are not programmed with the unique social fabric or developmental goals of Namibia in mind.
• Economic Leakage: The vast advertising revenues and data monetisation generated by our digital activity flow out of our economy. Imagine the potential if even a fraction of this digital wealth remained within Namibia, reinvested into local innovation, job creation, and digital infrastructure.
• Censorship and Control: In times of crisis or political sensitivity, foreign platforms can become tools for external influence or even censorship, potentially stifling local voices or narratives that do not align with their own corporate or national interests. This directly impacts our ability to shape our own national discourse and protect our sovereignty in the digital realm.

Digital sovereignty, therefore, is not merely a technical concept; it is a matter of national security, economic independence, and cultural preservation. It is about reclaiming control over our digital destiny.

The Path to Digital Sovereignty: Building Our Own Digital Future

So, how do we move from digital dependence to digital sovereignty? The answer lies not in isolation, but in strategic investment in our own capabilities and a fundamental shift in mindset. We must embrace the spirit of self-reliance that defined our liberation struggle and apply it to the digital frontier.

1. Invest in Local Infrastructure and Data Centres: The foundation of digital sovereignty is physical. We must accelerate the development of robust, secure, and locally-owned data centres and internet infrastructure. This ensures that our data resides within our borders, subject to our laws, and accessible for our own innovation. Namibia is already making strides in this direction, with plans for data centre construction to support the local digital economy.
2.  Cultivate Homegrown Digital Platforms: Why should our national conversations, our community building, and our local commerce be confined to platforms built and controlled by Silicon Valley or Beijing? The time has come for Namibian innovation to rise to the challenge. Imagine a national social network, developed by our own universities like NUST or UNAM, tailored to our unique cultural nuances, and designed to serve the interests of our people. Such a platform would not only foster local content creation but also keep the economic benefits of digital engagement within our economy. African apps are already paving the way for digital sovereignty by owning and operating social media platforms within the continent, ensuring data security and sovereignty.
3. Prioritise Digital Literacy and Skills Development: True digital empowerment comes from understanding, not just consumption. Our education system must aggressively integrate digital literacy, coding, and cybersecurity from an early age. The Youth Coding Initiative, which is delivering tablets to schools and integrating coding and AI, is a commendable step. We need to equip our youth not just to be users of technology, but to be its architects, innovators, and guardians. This is how we build a knowledge-based society capable of competing and thriving in the global digital economy.
4. Develop Robust Regulatory Frameworks: Digital sovereignty also requires a legal and policy framework that protects our citizens, promotes fair competition, and safeguards our national interests in the digital realm. This includes data protection laws, cybersecurity policies, and regulations that encourage local digital entrepreneurship while holding foreign platforms accountable.

Beyond the 'Free-for-All': A Call to Action

The notion that social media will always be a 'free-for-all' is a dangerous resignation. It is a surrender of our agency in shaping the digital spaces that increasingly define our lives. The ethical use of social media is not merely about individual responsibility in avoiding fake news or promoting respect; it is fundamentally about collective responsibility in building a digital ecosystem that serves our national interests.

This is not a call for digital isolation, but for digital self-determination. It is a challenge to our youth, our innovators, our policymakers, and our educators to collaborate in building a digital future that is truly Namibian – one that is secure, equitable, and empowers every citizen. Let us move beyond being mere consumers of technology and become its masters, shaping it to reflect our values and advance our collective prosperity. Only then can we truly ensure the ethical use of social media in today's digital age, and indeed, in the digital ages to come.

I’m not scaremongering—I’m informing: The hidden danger of “undress with AI” tools

I am a consumer activist and also a father of four. Three of my children—my daughters—are now in their early thirties, raising families of their own. But my youngest is just ten years old, and he lives with me full-time as a single dad.

It is from this place—both as a campaigner for consumer rights and as a parent of a young boy growing up in an increasingly digital world—that I feel compelled to write about a disturbing new trend. Let me be clear: I am not here to scaremonger. I am here to inform.

The rise of ClothOff and similar sites – what are we dealing with?

ClothOff is an AI-powered tool—accessible via websites and even Telegram bots—that promises to “undress anyone using AI”. Essentially, you upload a clothed image and, for a fee, receive an illusion of nudity created by deep-learning algorithms. It attracted over 9.4 million visitors in late 2024 alone.

Behind the scenes, investigations revealed ties to Belarus and Russia, involving individuals such as Dasha Babicheva and Alaiksandr Babichau. The business structure is opaque and untrustworthy—payments are routed through shell companies, and fake “support” groups cloak the operation.

Though some pages claim images are not stored and emphasise user privacy, the very nature of the technology is predatory.

So what’s the real risk?

1. Privacy invasion and shame

   Victims—often minors—have images created without consent. The result can resurface years later, long after reputational damage has occurred.

2. Psychological harm, bullying, even worse

   In the UK, a 16-year-old took his life following sextortion with deepfake nudes. In Australia, schoolchildren were targeted—Victorian authorities reported instances of AI “undressing” used to shame and harass students. One school circulated deepfake images featuring 50 girls. The emotional toll is colossal.

3. Accessible and unchecked abuse

   Apps advertise brazenly—some even allow sign-ins via Google, Apple or Discord, lending them undeserved credibility. Telegram hosts bots with millions of users churning out explicit deepfake content in seconds.

4. Legal gaps and delayed action

   Although some jurisdictions are acting—like San Francisco prosecuting “undress” app makers, and Californians introducing laws criminalising non-consensual AI porn—most places remain entirely unprepared. Law enforcement is only now beginning to treat AI-created child abuse material with the seriousness it deserves.

I say again: I am not scaremongering!

I am holding a match—not so I can burn the house down, but so we can turn the light on.

As a father to a vulnerable ten-year-old boy, I worry. And as a consumer advocate, I insist we all stay informed:

• Have open conversations with your children about what’s circulating online—and how freakishly realistic AI can be.

• Teach media literacy—even in schools. Deepfake education must be part of the curriculum so that students understand the difference between reality and AI-generated illusions.

• Call on platforms and regulators to act now. These apps should never profit off fake nudity created without consent.

The bottom line: This is not fiction

These AI tools—ClothOff and its many imitators—threaten the privacy, self-esteem and safety of our children. What angers me most is that our opposition isn’t exaggeration—it’s indifference.

As a single dad, a vigilant consumer campaigner, and someone who wakes up each day determined to do right by my children, I urge you: let’s face this threat head on—together.

Namibians are Miserable

What does it truly mean to be miserable? The dictionary offers a rather stark definition: “causing extreme discomfort or unhappiness, for example in a miserable situation.” It was with a certain degree of national pride, and perhaps a touch of indignation, that I stumbled upon a report ranking Namibia as the 34th most miserable country in the world. (Down since 2013 when we were 7th in the world.) This rather unflattering assessment is rooted in the misery index, a somewhat crude economic gauge devised by Arthur Okun. It essentially aggregates a country’s unemployment and inflation rates to provide a snapshot of prevailing economic conditions – the higher the number, the more miserable the populace. The rationale is straightforward: most citizens keenly feel the pinch of high joblessness and the relentless surge in prices.

Our current Misery Index score, based on the latest available figures, stands at approximately 40.4%. This is derived from our Consumer Price Inflation (CPI) of 3.5% as of May 2025, and a rather concerning unemployment rate of 36.9% in 2023. The report further highlights Namibia’s heavy reliance on its mineral wealth, with significant exports of diamonds, uranium, and gold. However, the mining sector, despite its economic contribution, only accounts for a mere 3% of the nation’s labour force. Given the limited diversification of our economy, it’s perhaps unsurprising that a substantial portion of Namibia’s workforce remains without employment. Furthermore, income inequality remains a glaring issue. Despite a respectable GDP per capita, Namibia continues to grapple with one of the highest GINI coefficients globally, last recorded at 59.1% in 2015.

My initial reaction to this article was, I must confess, one of immediate dismissal. “How dare these Westerners label us as miserable?” I thought, instinctively preparing a barrage of arguments about statistical flaws and cultural nuances. However, after a moment of reflection, I decided to delve deeper into the author’s perspective. And, regrettably, the core assertions hold true. Our consumer prices are indeed rising at a pace that outstrips salary increases, and our unemployment figures are, frankly, alarming. For those of us fortunate enough to be employed, this translates into a diminishing purchasing power year on year, often coupled with the added burden of supporting extended family members who are struggling to find work. A truly miserable situation, wouldn’t you agree?

This ought to serve as a stark wake-up call for Namibia. When our nation slides down the rankings in competitiveness or business confidence, the Namibia Chamber of Commerce and Industry (NCCI) and various business leaders are quick to lament the increasing difficulty of turning a profit, often urging the government to exercise greater caution. Yet, when the Misery Index comes into focus, the discussion often veers away from the underlying issues contributing to our ranking, instead devolving into debates about the index’s methodology.

This index, for all its simplicity, effectively shines a spotlight on the root causes of our misery: persistent employment challenges (too few jobs, and those that exist often pay too little) and the relentless upward trajectory of consumer prices.

It’s crucial to reiterate: I wrote ‘Namibians are Miserable’ – not ‘Namibia is a miserable place to stay.’

Incidentally, the Gini coefficient, for those unfamiliar, is a measure of income inequality, ranging from 0 (perfect equality, where everyone earns the same) to 1 (perfect inequality, where one person possesses all the income) to 1 (perfect inequality, where one person possesses all the income). Namibia, regrettably, has historically topped this list, with a GINI coefficient of 59.1%. This stark reality of income disparity is a fact we simply cannot afford to ignore.

Is the Veldbridge Offer to Trustco Legitimate? A Deep Dive

The recent murmurs around a “private offer” from a so-called Veldbridge Holdings to Trustco’s founding Van Rooyen family have stirred intrigue and skepticism—especially amid rising debt concerns and strategic manoeuvering by Trustco Group Holdings (TGH).

1. Trustco’s Debt Picture: A Tangled Web

• As of March 2025, Trustco’s debt owed to Next Capital (the Van Rooyen family’s investment vehicle) soared to approximately US $280 million, encompassing a mix of secured, unsecured, interest-bearing, and equity-linked liabilities. This positions the family as the holder of 70% of the group’s long-term debt  .

• Earlier, in mid-2024, Trustco had already converted N$4.4 billion (~US $250 million) of debt to equity at a price reflecting a 350% premium over its 90-day VWAP—boosting its net asset value by around N$1.5 billion  .

2. Strategic Restructuring & Governance Moves

• Trustco is amidst a debt restructuring spree:

  • In early 2024, it introduced a punitive caution for shareholders via SENS, warning that ongoing conversion and recapitalisation negotiations—especially involving the U.S.-based Riskowitz Value Fund (for up to N$950 million)—could materially affect share value  .

  • This capital would help Trustco increase its stake in Legal Shield Holdings to around 91% and prepare its balance sheet for future growth  .

3. The Veldbridge Claim: Fact or Fiction?

• Despite extensive coverage of Trustco’s financial restructuring and high-profile debt-to-equity swaps, no credible reporting or official filings reference Veldbridge Holdings or any offer from such an entity.

• Given the opaque nature of corporate disclosures and the Van Rooyen family’s tight control, it’s entirely plausible such a proposal could be under consideration—but with no public confirmation to substantiate it, caution is essential.

  
  

Final Verdict: Is the Veldbridge Offer Legitimate?

At present, there’s no verified evidence that Veldbridge Holdings has made a formal or credible offer to Trustco.

• On one hand, repeated debt-to-equity conversions, family interventions, and capital raises suggest a deeper knowledge of investor and corporate maneuvers—so an external offer isn’t inherently implausible.

• On the other, without public documentation (press releases, regulatory filings, or media reports), the claim remains unverified.

Bottom line: Treat references to a “Veldbridge offer” as speculative until official confirmation is released.

Suggested Actions for Investors and Observers

1. Watch for official disclosures—monitor Trustco’s SENS announcements, investor relations pages, and filings on JSE/NSX/SEC websites.

2. Vet sources carefully—social media claims or opaque posts should be cross-checked with reputable local or international business news outlets.

3. Understand the context—Trustco’s recent fiscal manoeuvers suggest a company navigating complex strategic shifts, possibly fuelling speculative reporting.

Summary Table

Issue	Facts Found
Debt Levels	~$280M owed to Van Rooyen’s Next Capital; recent debt-to-equity conversions
Recent Actions	Equity swaps, Riskowitz recapitalization plan, Nasdaq listing path
Veldbridge Offer	No independent confirmation; appears speculative

Caveat: This post is based solely on publicly available sources. If substantiated details or disclosures about Veldbridge emerge, the analysis should be updated accordingly.