The psychology of a con man - Zhou

[Rarity]

Who said I'm not?  I just believe that market needs to be very strictly regulated and people should not take unfair levels of compensation, as many top executives and business owners do today.
-
 what  are you talking about?

Well for instance the average CEO in America makes 380 times what the average workers do.  I think it would be fair to legislatively limit that to 2 or 3 times what the average worker makes, or if we really have to stretch up to ten times more for the sake of compromise okay.  You have a livable minimum wage and a generous maximum wage so that high achievers still have something to drive for but they can do it without leaving behind people in poverty or bankruptcy from medical bills.

[dancingnancy]

Who said I'm not?  I just believe that market needs to be very strictly regulated and people should not take unfair levels of compensation, as many top executives and business owners do today.
-
 what  are you talking about?

Well for instance the average CEO in America makes 380 times what the average workers do.  I think it would be fair to legislatively limit that to 2 or 3 times what the average worker makes, or if we really have to stretch up to ten times more for the sake of compromise okay.  You have a livable minimum wage and a generous maximum wage so that high achievers still have something to drive for but they can do it without leaving behind people in poverty or bankruptcy from medical bills.

Just shut up.

There would be no reward for taking enormous risks in the marketplace.

[augustocroppo]

Who said I'm not?  I just believe that market needs to be very strictly regulated and people should not take unfair levels of compensation, as many top executives and business owners do today.
-
 what  are you talking about?

Well for instance the average CEO in America makes 380 times what the average workers do.  I think it would be fair to legislatively limit that to 2 or 3 times what the average worker makes, or if we really have to stretch up to ten times more for the sake of compromise okay.  You have a livable minimum wage and a generous maximum wage so that high achievers still have something to drive for but they can do it without leaving behind people in poverty or bankruptcy from medical bills.

1 - This is a thread about the psychology of a con man, so you are off the line.

2 - Your source is a biased news channel with no concern to accurate statistical data...

 

Could you stop to throw the pony's manure in the fan and keep for yourself, please?

[Rarity]

Who said I'm not?  I just believe that market needs to be very strictly regulated and people should not take unfair levels of compensation, as many top executives and business owners do today.
-
 what  are you talking about?

Well for instance the average CEO in America makes 380 times what the average workers do.  I think it would be fair to legislatively limit that to 2 or 3 times what the average worker makes, or if we really have to stretch up to ten times more for the sake of compromise okay.  You have a livable minimum wage and a generous maximum wage so that high achievers still have something to drive for but they can do it without leaving behind people in poverty or bankruptcy from medical bills.

Just shut up.

There would be no reward for taking enormous risks in the marketplace.

Sure there would be, people work to the mutual benefit of themselves and their company and the rest of the country.  Our current system encourages excessive risk which is why it collapsed and required the government to save it.

1 - This is a thread about the psychology of a con man, so you are off the line.

I pointed out this was off topic before but folks seemed to want to peruse it.  *shrug*.

2 - Your source is a biased news channel with no concern to accurate statistical data...

Okay, what is the correct number?

[Phinnaeus Gage]

So, if I'm all caught up on everything, the community is currently trying to decide which scenario is more likely?

1. The guy who has all of the tools, knowledge and access required to steal the bitcoins did it.

2. Actually, it was a non-english speaking Chinese man who makes a livelyhood of credit card fraud that had a "business" conversation with him online several years ago, in which he revealed that he was a millionaire, but also not very technically inclined. The subject of bitcoin came up in their discussions, and the Chinese millionaire not having heard of it, took this information to one of his more technical associates, who figured it all out for him, commited the crimes, and gave him all the money (he's very loyal). Afterward, he explained every step of what he did to the Chinese millionaire, in case his associate from long ago who's email account he used for the crime would call him up asking about it, he would be able to provide all of the details if pressured with the threat of "people on the internet are looking into this". As someone who makes millions in the credit card fraud industry, this is something that he is genuinely unprepared for.

Am I missing something?

The "magic" 69 minutes is all I can think of. Anybody else?

[the joint]

Believing in an article about a phony, fraudulent science is just falling for one more scam.

As someone with multiple degrees in psychology and mental health and with experience in a multitude of mental health settings, I would love to hear you explain this one, particularly the words 'phony,' 'fraudulent,' and 'scam.'

Scientology 

Lol.  Oh.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Believing in an article about a phony, fraudulent science is just falling for one more scam.

As someone with multiple degrees in psychology and mental health and with experience in a multitude of mental health settings, I would love to hear you explain this one, particularly the words 'phony,' 'fraudulent,' and 'scam.'

Scientology 

Lol.  Oh.

Im excited

[kentrolla]

Psychology is a barbaric and corrupt practice

+1

[dancingnancy]

Who said I'm not?  I just believe that market needs to be very strictly regulated and people should not take unfair levels of compensation, as many top executives and business owners do today.
-
 what  are you talking about?

Well for instance the average CEO in America makes 380 times what the average workers do.  I think it would be fair to legislatively limit that to 2 or 3 times what the average worker makes, or if we really have to stretch up to ten times more for the sake of compromise okay.  You have a livable minimum wage and a generous maximum wage so that high achievers still have something to drive for but they can do it without leaving behind people in poverty or bankruptcy from medical bills.

Just shut up.

There would be no reward for taking enormous risks in the marketplace.

Sure there would be, people work to the mutual benefit of themselves and their company and the rest of the country.  Our current system encourages excessive risk which is why it collapsed and required the government to save it.

1 - This is a thread about the psychology of a con man, so you are off the line.

I pointed out this was off topic before but folks seemed to want to peruse it.  *shrug*.

2 - Your source is a biased news channel with no concern to accurate statistical data...

Okay, what is the correct number?

Who the hell is going to do that - work for the mutual benefit of everyone?  This isn't the starship enterprise.

[the joint]

Psychology is a barbaric and corrupt practice

+1

-2

[Bitcoin Oz]

Who said I'm not?  I just believe that market needs to be very strictly regulated and people should not take unfair levels of compensation, as many top executives and business owners do today.
-
 what  are you talking about?

Well for instance the average CEO in America makes 380 times what the average workers do.  I think it would be fair to legislatively limit that to 2 or 3 times what the average worker makes, or if we really have to stretch up to ten times more for the sake of compromise okay.  You have a livable minimum wage and a generous maximum wage so that high achievers still have something to drive for but they can do it without leaving behind people in poverty or bankruptcy from medical bills.

Just shut up.

There would be no reward for taking enormous risks in the marketplace.

Sure there would be, people work to the mutual benefit of themselves and their company and the rest of the country.  Our current system encourages excessive risk which is why it collapsed and required the government to save it.

1 - This is a thread about the psychology of a con man, so you are off the line.

I pointed out this was off topic before but folks seemed to want to peruse it.  *shrug*.

2 - Your source is a biased news channel with no concern to accurate statistical data...

Okay, what is the correct number?

Who the hell is going to do that - work for the mutual benefit of everyone?  This isn't the starship enterprise.

Slaves.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Who said I'm not?  I just believe that market needs to be very strictly regulated and people should not take unfair levels of compensation, as many top executives and business owners do today.
-
 what  are you talking about?

Well for instance the average CEO in America makes 380 times what the average workers do.  I think it would be fair to legislatively limit that to 2 or 3 times what the average worker makes, or if we really have to stretch up to ten times more for the sake of compromise okay.  You have a livable minimum wage and a generous maximum wage so that high achievers still have something to drive for but they can do it without leaving behind people in poverty or bankruptcy from medical bills.

Just shut up.

There would be no reward for taking enormous risks in the marketplace.

Sure there would be, people work to the mutual benefit of themselves and their company and the rest of the country.  Our current system encourages excessive risk which is why it collapsed and required the government to save it.

1 - This is a thread about the psychology of a con man, so you are off the line.

I pointed out this was off topic before but folks seemed to want to peruse it.  *shrug*.

2 - Your source is a biased news channel with no concern to accurate statistical data...

Okay, what is the correct number?

Who the hell is going to do that - work for the mutual benefit of everyone?  This isn't the starship enterprise.

Slaves.

I think you meant Orion Slave Girls.

[Rarity]

Who the hell is going to do that - work for the mutual benefit of everyone?  This isn't the starship enterprise.

Scotty, beam us up.

According to the NCCS Table Wizard, there are currently over 1.5 million nonprofit organizations in the United States.

http://foundationcenter.org/getstarted/faqs/html/howmany.html

Keep in mind however, we aren't talking about a world where everyone is non-profit.  People who still want ten times as much income as everyone else, or wherever you set the max pay, will still have that to drive for and it will encourage them to build new companies and work hard.

[blablahblah]

Bravo, we will have you as a free market advocate before we are done!

Who said I'm not?  I just believe that market needs to be very strictly regulated and people should not take unfair levels of compensation, as many top executives and business owners do today.  They should be more like the mining cooperatives were most of the profit is going back to the labor force.

While I think you had a couple of important points earlier about trying to avoid "mob justice", you have to bear in mind that a lot of people on this forum live under a system whose government is utterly evil, corrupt, "gone beyond the point of no return", routinely dishes out its own brutality against dissidents (and to scare others), and it also annoys the shit out of the entire world by being a massive warmongering asshole-bully on the world stage. And yet, they lull their people to sleep by pretending to be kind and caring, "there for the people", "protecting you from the bad guys" and all that crap.

(Just in case anyone had doubts, I was talking about the US of A!)

So, when you suggest things like strict government regulation, or getting government to enforce laws the old-fashioned way, understandably that idea does not go down too well.

And I'm sure Marxism looked utterly fantastic on paper, which I guess would explain why a huge group of countries enthusiastically implemented Communism across Eastern Europe all the way out to China and killed millions of people in the process (and set their civilisations back by decades)... What's a few million when it's sure to create everlasting world peace, love and harmony?

In practice it just doesn't work. People are naturally lazy and the free market/Capitalism deals with that perfectly: there's always pressure to do enough work to survive, and extra productivity gets rewarded with extra desires being met. Centrally planned societies break that system so that you're either working like a dog because some bureaucrat decided to send workers elsewhere, or you're "working" 2 hours a day instead of being productive where you're really needed. So you get massive under-employment, low production levels, and of course the government has to be corrupt and dictatorial to keep the system running.

But in practice most people are part of the pools where the gains are socialized and distributed equally because they recognize the benefits of such cooperation and equitable distribution!  Don't you see, our WHOLE economy could be like that!

No, people join mining pools because of greed and trying to reduce risk. When faced with a choice:
1)Wait X months or years for a 50btc reward, and have low confidence about exactly when a reward will arrive, despite steady effort.
2)Get a steady trickle of bitcoins coming in right now.
Most people would pay a little bit extra and choose 2. People work together when it works for them. This is different from saying that people 'must' work together for some centrally planned purpose.

[Soros Shorts]

^ But in practice most people are part of the pools where the gains are socialized and distributed equally because they recognize the benefits of such cooperation and equitable distribution!  Don't you see, our WHOLE economy could be like that!

The gains per hash might be distributed equally amongst pool members, but the hashes are not. Depending on the technology available to the different members of the pool they will be generating hashes at different rates and at different joules per hash. The large FPGA miner might be the equivalent or your real-life CEO and the CPU miner the equivalent of your real-life slave laborer working for minimum wage (with an even larger disparity). Our economy IS already working like a pool.

[bitlizard]

Who the hell is going to do that - work for the mutual benefit of everyone?  This isn't the starship enterprise.

Scotty, beam us up.

According to the NCCS Table Wizard, there are currently over 1.5 million nonprofit organizations in the United States.

http://foundationcenter.org/getstarted/faqs/html/howmany.html

Keep in mind however, we aren't talking about a world where everyone is non-profit.  People who still want ten times as much income as everyone else, or wherever you set the max pay, will still have that to drive for and it will encourage them to build new companies and work hard.

Charity you are talking about centralized control. You are talking about the total and complete opposite of what bitcoin is all about. You are trolling whether you know it or not. This is not a forum that will take kindly to your collectivist ideals. You are advocating for the initiation violent of force. Setting a max limit on someones income just like setting a minimum wage, requires a third party to enforce their opinion with the threat of violence. I appreciate what you are trying to achieve (a more fair and equitable world). Free market thinkers like myself and probably many others on this forum have found that the best way to achieve more fair and equitable interactions between people is to allow them enter into voluntary agreements with one another for mutual benifit. Without a third party imposing, by threat of force their views, regulations, rules, etc. Party A does business with party B and everyone else minds their own business. If party A earns 10,000,000 BTC per year then she is obviously creating amazing value for others.
TL;DR interfering with the free market = initiating violent force

[Portnoy]

TL;DR interfering with the free market = initiating violent force

Rarity doesn't seem to have a problem with that...

I wonder how many loyal subjects will adhere to the regulated block chain as opposed to the free market block chain that will certainly continue to exist.

Businesses who engaged in such activity would be severely punished.

Not just punished but severely punished.   

And no doubt it wouldn't be just those who failed to obey all the proper laws and regulations who would
suffer, as hir views on psychology seem to suggest.  Anyone deemed to be abnormal ( the government
being the sole arbiter no doubt ) would perhaps be considered to be possessed by demons and simply
exterminated...  no need for things like psychology and psychologists.

[Vod]

Innocent people will fight and fight and fight to defend their name.   That's why the police ask you the same questions over and over - they know that if you are guilty, you will eventually give up and admit it.   There is psychology behind this, but I was unable to Google the correct term to find it - maybe someone else will have more luck?

Now let's look at Zhou - he made up his big story and when no one (save for an ignorant few) believed it, he quickly stopped posting.  Didn't try to defend himself at all.

Does anyone know his real name yet?

[dree12]

Innocent people will fight and fight and fight to defend their name.   That's why the police ask you the same questions over and over - they know that if you are guilty, you will eventually give up and admit it.   There is psychology behind this, but I was unable to Google the correct term to find it - maybe someone else will have more luck?

Now let's look at Zhou - he made up his big story and when no one (save for an ignorant few) believed it, he quickly stopped posting.  Didn't try to defend himself at all.

Does anyone know his real name yet?

He's definitely still fighting, so this point isn't helping your case. Check his post history.

[Vod]

Innocent people will fight and fight and fight to defend their name.   That's why the police ask you the same questions over and over - they know that if you are guilty, you will eventually give up and admit it.   There is psychology behind this, but I was unable to Google the correct term to find it - maybe someone else will have more luck?

Now let's look at Zhou - he made up his big story and when no one (save for an ignorant few) believed it, he quickly stopped posting.  Didn't try to defend himself at all.

Does anyone know his real name yet?

He's definitely still fighting, so this point isn't helping your case. Check his post history.

My case is tight as it is, thank you.  He started posting again 10 minutes after I wrote this.