Do you possess any form reading comprehension?
Where did I say a person "enters" the "digital twin"?
>A digital twin simulates hardware on a virtual world
Did I not recognize this in both of my posts?
Industrial machines and systems are not getting "Digital Twins" to improve their maintenance and performance by taking advantage of the data that is collected by sensors and Machine Learning that can use that data to make all sorts of predictions about the behavior and what not.
In a similar vein, by taking all the internet based services a person has, both commercial and governmental, and centralized them to a single account on a unified cloud infrastructure, you could create an e-Identity of a person which is necessary for basic functionality and have it locked by that persons biometrics, i.e., a "Digital Twin"
I don't know where you get this "entering into" and "hub of users" thing, did you misunderstand the idea of being able to access this account from any digital, connected interface as me implying you enter the metaverse or something?
It sounds like buzzwords because
>feel that someone eventually will try to conglomerate the current internet assets [..] people have into a personal "Digital Twin"
was supposed to imply
>Some executive learns about "Digital Twinning" of Industrial Systems and now wants to "Digitally Twin" people too
But I apologize for not getting that across. I didn't imply "Digital Twin" as understood by industry applied to a person, but that absolute digitalization of a person could also refer to a "Digital Twin"
However, don't worry, I am sure taking all these health monitoring systems and use those to create an actual "Digital Twin" of a person will also come up in some meeting eventually.
This idea would represent the paradigm shift of
>Computers are used by governments
>Computers are used by businesses
>Computers are now in your home
>Computers are now in your pocket