A dead giveaway of delusion in progress is when defenders necessarily include ad hominem arguments, given that they have nothing else to offer. I don't have a dog in this fight, but it is an interesting phenomenon, watching a massive con game in progress. Read the pro-bitcoin arguments here and note the insults central to the defense.
In the movie House of Games, David Mamet notes that the confidence man does not instill the mark's confidence in the confidence man, but in the mark. It is when the victim has confidence in the scam that the scam will work. The added benefit is when taken, the victim tends to shut up about it, since the scales drop from the eyes and the victim sees just how self-inflicted the wound in fact is. Perpetrators will tend to claim they too were victims.
Anyone involved in bitcoins today is either a con artist or a mark, as I see it. Time will tell.
The saga is instructive for details emerging as people take one side or the other...
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
In the movie House of Games, David Mamet notes that the confidence man does not instill the mark's confidence in the confidence man, but in the mark. It is when the victim has confidence in the scam that the scam will work. The added benefit is when taken, the victim tends to shut up about it, since the scales drop from the eyes and the victim sees just how self-inflicted the wound in fact is. Perpetrators will tend to claim they too were victims.
Anyone involved in bitcoins today is either a con artist or a mark, as I see it. Time will tell.
The saga is instructive for details emerging as people take one side or the other...
But such claims of monetary sovereignty collided with the realities of monetary exchange. For centuries, rulers found it impossible to keep competing currencies out of circulation. This was particularly true of the sorts of coins that served as small change for the lower classes of society. According to monetary historian Eric Helleiner, merchants in England issued low-denomination coins made of copper, lead and tin from the 13th century onward. By the 17th century, approximately 3,000 different businesses in London alone issued “unauthorized” tokens.These coins were not money, they were tally. they were backed by the produce of a days labor. The Pub Keeper could take the pennies he collected per pint and give them to the brewer who could give them to the hops and maltmen who could use them to buy other things... such tokens were asset backed circulating tallies. Yes, efficiencies eventually allowed states to control down to that level, but the lesson here is when our currency system fails, don't worry. We already know working systems so we can bring order out of the chaos of our current financial system.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
0 comments:
Post a Comment