Bruce Wagner and Wired..

[memvola]

"Shady people representing Bitcoin" appears to me like a self-fulfilling prophecy. If some people are paying attention to what Wagner is saying, that's because he's doing service to the community that no one else is doing competitively. If there is a problem with this, it won't go away by demanding press to do their work the way you want them to do it. Obviously Wagner's program is useful, why not make a better one, more fit for an international audience even? Maybe even he could contribute to such a project. Of course, I'll do absolutely nothing to start it, but I'm not complaining either.

[1714788546]

1714788546

[1714788546]

1714788546

[1714788546]

1714788546

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Ben Wallace was clearly familiar with Bruce's scandal when he interviewed me, so I'm not sure why he's still giving Bruce any attention.

benwallace: Do think the Bruce thing will have any significant fallout? Do you expect him to step back from his frontman role? Or that the community will pay less attention to him? Or neither?

Perhaps, I may be able to provide an answer. I believe it was the best current opportunity to promote the Benjamin Wallace brand--himself, as a writer. He surely has a family to feed, therefore any exposure perpetuating the Benjamin Wallace brand is thereby warranted. It doesn't necessarily hurt the Wired brand, either, otherwise Wired would have had a voice in Benjamin's decision (or was it Wired's?) to appear on the show.

Full Disclosure: I, too, watched the entire show.

Please accept my apologies for quoting myself, but I have a need to not only edit this post, but add some insight on the interview.

Full Disclosure 2: When I penned that I, too, watched the entire show, that was not exactly true--I was still viewing it. I have since watched the entire show, and now have a comment. Note to self: Quit doing things ass-backwards!

At 33:50, Ben mentions MyBitCoin. I get the sense that Bruce is a tad uncomfortable. At 34:15, Ben finishes up and Bruce's oh's and ah's and oh my's (paraphrased) seems contrived. I almost think that Ben bought up this issue on purpose to get a reaction on record. Remember, he's a reporter. Bruce may somehow realize this as a ploy because for the the duration of the interview, Bruce does all the talking--tripping over every other word while doing so. Ben does get in a word edgewise, though. After several minutes of Bruce interviewing himself, Ben realizes this fact and reverses the interview by asking Bruce a question, whereupon Bruce doesn't realize that the interview table has been turned and goes on to answering the question--all the way up to the end of the show. Bruce mentally thanks God Gaia for providing him the dialog to spew out to the closing of the interview, otherwise Ben may hit him with another MyBitcoin/Tom Williams statement/question.

[chickenado]

I'm pretty sure Wired was aware of all this and showed Bruce deliberately because of the controversy that surrounds him.  

Makes their stories more juicy.

[Raoul Duke]

Just one thing that I find amusing/interesting... Why would such a bad guy(Bruce) want to be on a magazine photo and have such a public life? Something doesn't smell right... Or is Bruce that stupid? <-- This may be true

Also, the casino operator saying Bruce is such a criminal, well, casino operators are criminals also, just ask the US government...

PS: I can't stand Bruce, but some things just need to be said

[Herodes]

Just one thing that I find amusing/interesting... Why would such a bad guy(Bruce) want to be on a magazine photo and have such a public life?

Some people just love the attention, I think it's about that. For instance, some politicians do their job and then stay out of the spotlight when they're not working, while others says yes to sponsored vacations, goes to leisure talkshows, let magazines make 'home with politician X' reportages etc.

And some people even make a career out of being in the public spotlight without actually having accomplished anything useful at all. Often their 'career' starts with a realityshow, and then because they're controversial, og pretty looking, they go on to become 'pets' of the media. But once they stop being displayed in the media, they use their media value, and media will no longer use them.

I never understood why people actually need this kind of attention, but I think there's a term that cover it's perfectly: Media whore or PR-whore.

And a lot of the people that are like this, certainly are 'dumb', but I guess a small percentage also exploit media to their own advantage, and actually comes out with a lot of money in the other end.

The point is that smart, intelligent and educated people usually don't have the need for the drama, fuss and controversy that the media loves.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Latest video of BW and EG for those wondering what they've been up to since... (if you don't laugh at :55 onward for a few seconds, then see a doctor) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JogkyQJ8y74

[ssaCEO]

Also, the casino operator saying Bruce is such a criminal, well, casino operators are criminals also, just ask the US government...

PS: I can't stand Bruce, but some things just need to be said

Balls. First of all, we don't take players or bets in the US. We're the only Bitcoin casino to say that. We've never done anything illegal. Or anything unethical, I'd contend, and I'd challenge you to find a player of ours who had a problem with their experience at our site.

Casinos in general, like the ones in Vegas, are also perfectly legal under American law. And there's nothing wrong with that. Y'know why? Because the disclaim to their adult customers exactly what to expect when playing. They aren't making false representations and lying and telling people they'll be bailed out of a foreclosure. People who play at our site have disposable income, and they understand they're taking bets, risking money on propositions where they stand to lose it. In short, Our customers are adults.

Nowhere do we say our lawyers are going to help them. Nowhere do we promise to deliver loans. We give them a provably fair shot to win something for their money, and we stake our own money against it.

So I have no moral problem with what I do. What Bruce has done, at least based the judge's findings in 2006, is despicable. It's offensive and insulting that you'd try to equivocate and tar our business with that brush, when the difference is obvious to any right-thinking intelligent person.

[Raoul Duke]

You are 1 US player away from being a full blown criminal, and Bitcoin will not help you on screening those players out, so, stop being politically correct cause I'm not buying it.

All gamblers are adults and know what they are doing? That's the funniest shit I've read in the last 2 years.

[ssaCEO]

You are 1 US player away from being a full blown criminal, and Bitcoin will not help you on screening those players out, so, stop being politically correct cause I'm not buying it.

Whatever
Any reasonable person can see the gaping hole in your comparison. I don't need to discuss our security measures here again. We don't operate in your country. What we do is legal in the countries where we operate. We respect US laws and don't take American players.

You're mistaking the laws in your country for a guide to morality. America passing a law by fiat does not automatically make something wrong that's legal in the rest of the world. Morally speaking, we don't falsely represent, lie, cheat or steal from people. We treat others the way we expect to be treated. We block problem gamblers and don't let those people sign up again. We pay people what we owe them and we treat our customers ethically and with respect.

Surely you can see the difference.

There's no country in the world where Wagner could do what he did legally. Or where it wouldn't be morally repugnant.

Anyway, I've taken enough flame bait on this.

[Raoul Duke]

My country?? lol I'm not from the US. Nor did I say I agreed with their stupid laws...