Slashdot Mirror
The Neurological Basis of Con Games
Hugh Pickens writes "If we humans have such big brains, how can we get conned? Neuroeconomist Paul J. Zak has an interesting post on Psychology Today in which he recounts how he was the victim of a classic con called 'The Pigeon Drop' when he was a teenager and explains how con men take advantage of the Human Oxytocin Mediated Attachment System, called THOMAS, a powerful brain circuit that releases the neurochemical oxytocin when we are trusted and induces a desire to reciprocate the trust we have been shown. 'The key to a con is not that you trust the con man, but that he shows he trusts you. Con men ply their trade by appearing fragile or needing help, by seeming vulnerable,' writes Zak. 'Because of THOMAS, the human brain makes us feel good when we help others — this is the basis for attachment to family and friends and cooperation with strangers.' Zak's laboratory studies have shown that two percent of the college students he tested are 'unconditional nonreciprocators' who have learned how to simulate trustworthiness and would make good con men. Watch a video of Skeptics Society founder Michael Shermer running the classic pigeon drop on an unsuspecting victim and see if you wouldn't be taken in by a professional con man yourself."
How we can we know this article is truthful? Can we really trust the author? He's a con man, after all.
I think most fairly successful people in business have to have a little con man in them to some degree.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
If you know you would be taken in by a profession con man ... I'll trust you to let me know ;)
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
The trouble is, I have to get to a job interview. I have a client coming around right now with the cash. Can you do me a favour? I'll split the proceeds of the sale with you, but because I have to go, I'll grab my share now. That fine with you?
Cool.
---
I was trying to think of something serious to say, but honestly, I couldn't. I even read the first article and loaded up the video and second article. I guess I could make a random attack on capitalism as an economic system, but that would probably be unsubstantiated, so I won't.
I wank in the shower.
Forget all the babble about neurochemicals. Most con men aren't particularly smart and 99.9% of all cons aren't particularly clever. Con men are successful for one reason and one reason alone -- their victims are greedy and hoping to get something for nothing. This one sentence from the article sums it up perfectly:
"The greed-o-meter goes off in my head, suppressing all rational thought."
If you aren't greedy, if you aren't looking to get something for nothing, it will be nearly impossible for you to be conned.
Doesn't everyone do this subconsciously, when they feel they would benefit from it? I know i have to stop myself sometimes, when i put myself in "vulnerable mode" to make people trust me more. I don't try to con people, i just do it because it... works? On the other hand, I'm into computer security. Maybe stuff like that is just part of the "security mindset" Bruce Schneier et. al. espouses? 2% sounds like a surprisingly small figure though.
"The skeptic does not mean him who doubts, but him who investigates or researches, as opposed to him who asserts and thinks that he has found"
--Manuel Noriega
J.R. "Bob" Dobbs explains it eloquently: "You know how dumb the average person is? Well, by definition, half of 'em are even dumber than THAT."
GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
"My research has demonstrated that they have highly dysregulated THOMASes." ;)
so in otherwods if you are bastard it is because you have brain damage
Seriouly though, does anyone know if this kind of research argues for better or an inborn train as opposed to one the 'grew' later on within a person enviourment. ( otherwise known as raised that way?)
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
Jesus wants you to have some candy. Come in my van.
If cons work by making us feel good about helping the con man, then how come so many are based on the mark trying to rip off someone? In the pigeon drop, the mark is trying to rip off the con man. In insider-knowledge scams, the mark is trying to rip off honest traders or gamblers. With "white van" scams, the mark thinks he's buying stolen goods.
I don't easily trust strangers who inexplicably trust me. I'm not easily conned. I guess I have a doubting THOMAS.
Proverbs 21:19
We feel good when we help others?
"You just stay the hell away from me, ALAS. I won't be your patsy. I won't be your vector."
I suggest this guy needs to read Dostoevsky as a matter of urgency. He clearly has limited experience with actual members of the human race. Greed is the primary motivation for most of the species.
Con men ply their trade by appearing fragile or needing help, by seeming vulnerable...
Sounds like a few women I've dated. Sometimes, love and romance is also a con game, now isn't it?
"You've got my fifty bucks, I've got the envelope with half the money, he's going to that building - we've got a 3 way thing going on here"..
No, you've got a two way thing going on - I don't know either of you two guys, that wallet wasn't there when I started talking to you, this smells funny and I'm out of here.
Cons work because some people are greedy or lazy and want something for nothing. There's no need to resort to talking about neurons or computers or whatever.
So about 6 million in America alone.
Say, isn't that about the population of Los Angeles and Manhattan (just the island, not the rest of NYC) combined? That would explain a lot.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
The example they give is ridiculous... The swindle has NOTHING to do with it. They could have just as easily been honest and carried on the act, giving the guy his share of the money afterward.
The point was to win someone's trust. Betraying him afterward is an afterthought, and completely irrelevant.
I suggest you read Slashdot
It takes a certain amount of 'nad to appear weak and helpless, get people to help you, and then rob them blind and walk way.
I certainly don't have the stomach for it...
Adman
or perhaps the "Insightful" mod explained. You need only to bait the hook.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Request for urgent business relationship
First, I must solicit your strictest confidence in this transaction. This is by virtue of its nature as being utterly confidential and 'top secret'. I am sure and have confidence of your ability and reliability to prosecute a transaction of this great magnitude involving a pending transaction requiring maxiimum confidence.
We are top official of the federal government contract review panel who are interested in imporation of goods into our country with funds which are presently trapped in nigeria. In order to commence this business we solicit your assistance to enable us transfer into your account the said trapped funds.
The source of this fund is as follows; during the last military regime here in nigeria, the government officials set up companies and awarded themselves contracts which were grossly over-invoiced in various ministries. The present civilian government set up a contract review panel and we have identified a lot of inflated contract funds which are presently floating in the central bank of nigeria ready for payment.
However, by virtue of our position as civil servants and members of this panel, we cannot acquire this money in our names. I have therefore, been delegated as a matter of trust by my colleagues of the panel to look for an overseas partner into whose account we would transfer the sum of us$21,320,000.00(Twenty one million, three hundred and twenty thousand u.S dollars). Hence we are writing you this letter. We have agreed to share the money thus; 1. 20% For the account owner 2. 70% For us (the officials) 3. 10% To be used in settling taxation and all local and foreign expenses. It is from the 70% that we wish to commence the importation business.
Please,note that this transaction is 100% safe and we hope to commence the transfer latest seven (7) banking days from the date of the receipt of the following informatiom by tel/fax; 234-1-7740449, your company's signed, and stamped letterhead paper the above information will enable us write letters of claim and job description respectively. This way we will use your company's name to apply for payment and re-award the contract in your company's name.
We are looking forward to doing this business with you and solicit your confidentiality in this transation. Please acknowledge the receipt of this letter using the above tel/fax numbers. I will send you detailed information of this pending project when I have heard from you.
Yours faithfully,
Dr. Clement Okon
note; please quote this reference number (ve/s/09/99) in all your responses.
...it's because you're a gullible fool. When I get conned, it's because someone "took advantage of the human oxytocin-mediated attachment system". Well, who wouldn't fall for that?
I love the voters!
Invest in me = invest in YOURSELF!
I suggest you read Slashdot
That explains all the suspicious "please help me" posts on Craigslist.
One of these days I'm going to open CL and see this:
Dear Esteemed Sir;
I represent mYself, a poor Nigerian pe asant with FIVE MILLION CHILDREN to feed. I beg of you please do not send food or it will be STOLEN by corrupt officials. Instead please wire THE SUM OF 10 MILLIION US DOLLARS to [Western Union recipient information deleted for posting to Slashdot] so that I may buy food for my fAamily and pay off the police so they don't rape my daughters.
Thank You and God Bless.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
"If we humans have such big brains, how can we get conned?"
Because, of the miserably depressing truth. That perhaps only a tiny percentage of human beings are actually smart, they get to design and engineer stuff and ponder quantum mechanics and zip about in orbit and fly jet fighters, these few are what we measure the success of the human endeavour on. While the rest of us do the equivalent contribution in intellectual terms of plowing fields and shoveling shit. Going further, there are also many of us who actively work against the continued prosperity of the human civilization and some even outright threaten our long term survival. In reality were are defenseless overclocked monkeys that are easily duped.
Conclusion: The human brain is incredible bit of computational kit, but it doesn't necessarily follow that it is any good. It is a unstable, bloated and virus ridden computer, with numerous security flaws, and rather than merely crashing and rebooting, by design it never stops, it continues running producing bad data until corruption overruns it and causes the human to get killed (hopefully not breeding first).
Further reduced conclusion: Humans are as stupid as possible for an intelligent species.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
Its the bottom feeders you see, the smartest of that 2 percent aspire to Manage large multinational companies where they play the role of Neutral Evil Management. Treating you like crap, pilfering the company, and making you think its a Career.
Wall street anyone? It looks like the biggest Pidgen drop game in the world. AIG has to be the biggest winner here.
If you view a targeted con as one extreme of a continuum of interpersonal behaviors designed to "influence" the target (the conner) in some way for the "benefit" of the connee, and establishing oneself as vulnerable in some way is a way to establish trust, then there are probably a variety of situations where such vulnerability could be effective in achieving a desired outcome. The con may just be someone who "consciously" and systematically exploits this mechanism for material, physical, emotional or social gain. We may all use the mechanism in certain situations, even unconsciously, so it doesn't have to be nefarious. But being conscious, mindful, that vulnerability is in play in a situation might enable us to mitigate it's more "automatic" effects. Of course, if you're dealing with a predator, which is how we usually describe a hard core con, being vulnerable to the predator only insures your loss or demise. So we have to recognize when we're dealing with a smart predator / con, who can lull us into unwise actions by appearing vulnerable and engaging our trust. That's where that gut level feeling comes in of "uh oh", this doesn't sound, seem, smell right, or the con detector. I assume we can differ in ability to detect cons, just as cons can differ in their level of sophistication.
When dealing with $3,000 a light has to go off in your head that says "there are procedures for dealing with this". Go to the police. Tell the guy you'll walk to the nearest police station with him, or that you'll call the non-emergency number with your cel phone. The police will hold the money for a statutory limit, and if nobody claims it, THEN you might get it. YMMV on the laws in your jurisdiction and how honest the cops are.
Now, if you're not a totally honest man a different light goes off in your head. That light says "How can I get this money, nevermind the victim or due process".
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
A huge Ponzi network just fell in Colombia, encompassing many cities and more than a billion dollars in loses:
http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=320773&CategoryId=12393
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_JZL9pC6-8
I've heard somthing similar also happened in Bolivia. I think it's all about greed/dreams of easy money.
There is no doubt that functional imaging such as fMRI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fmri) PET (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron_emission_tomography) and MEG (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetoencephalography) have been a tremendous boon to the field of neuroscience. But seeing localized activity in the brain and then drawing a conclusion about the mechanisms of behavior is the wrong way to interpret the data. I hate Psychology Today for pulling this crap all the time, activity in the brain is simply data to be interpreted, not a conclusion in itself. This is like when a segment of DNA is implicated in some sort of behavior or developmental trait, and we see the headlines "X gene discovered!!!". The question is simply too complex to answer with that kind of analysis.
We cannot view the brain as a simple modular system, which merely needs a circuit diagram drawn to discover its mysteries. Functional specialization no doubt exists, but in an interconnected and complex way that resists simple explanations of "oh, this part of the brain lit up during this therefore this". Localization alone tells us little, it is only in complement with studies of neurotransmitter mechanisms, single cell recordings, computational theories, and numerous other techniques of brain exploration that any real answers are going to be found. THOMAS doesn't explain anything, its just a piece in the puzzle.
Germany during World War II, for example, most believed and followed Hitler. Germany had some smart people, but they made stupid decisions and fell for Hitler's scam.
The same is true of Democratic and Republican US citizens falling for their candidate's scams. Once elected into office, do you really think they will keep every promise they made and do what they told their supporters they would do?
If it sounds too good to be true, most of the time it isn't true at all, it is a scam.
If, for example, you get an email saying you won the UK lottery chances are it is a scam, or Bill Gates giving out millions if you forward this email to 20 of your friends and family, it is a scam, or someone dying in Nigeria with your last name and has $10 million waiting to be wired to you and need your contact info and banking numbers etc, it is a scam.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
It would be very interesting if he just took it. After all the wallet had no ID and the other two did claim it was not theirs.
... Because he just asked me to wire him $50,000 to help him get the funds out of the country.
If, as the article claims, oxytocin "induces a desire to reciprocate [trust]", whether it could form the basis of some sort of truth serum? Inject some oxytocin into somebody who has something to hide, and introduce this person to an actor who pretends to be very trusting. I wonder if this would encourage the oxytocin-induced person to reveal secrets once sufficient trust is gained by the actor...
...just pause a little and wait for the other guy to react with a "no", then follow it up with a "yup, that's mine".
You then put them on the back foot to fight for it, or you get the whole thing, take the moolah and then turn the rest of the card/license etc into authorities. For someone losing their wallet, getting their card and stuff back is the fair-result, not too many would be lucky enough to keep the cash... so you're still a good samaritan for giving back the stuff that's hard to manage :p
You can't cheat an honest man because an honest man doesn't want something for nothing. -Hustle
~ I am logged on, therefore I am.
of the college students are potential con artists. Come on, just ask the college students about relationships and count how many that have been screwed over. Somehow I doubt it will be anywhere near 2 percent.
Some very successful cons have happened right in the public eye recently.... ...one to the tune of 700 billion...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
OK, obvious flamebait. However, there must be an explanation somewhere for how people will work for weeks (BOTH patrties) to get someone elected and they don't even know the job descriptions or the candidate's background.
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
Greed is where in your selfish desire for something you do something "wrong" to get it that harms another. However, sometimes it's hard to know who you are harming, but still you know you are doing something "wrong."
If someone simply lies to you and rips you off, that's not a "con". That's just fraud. If you are careful, you can avoid most fraud, but "cons" always rely on greed.
A lot of people say that some cons work on "honesty" or some other virtue, but I still haven't seen one that would work on an "honest man." For example, in your craigslist scam, you say that the mark expects to get the original asking price, so he's not being greedy. But an honest person is always going to do the right thing, and here the "right" thing to do is to send the check back. Why would the buyer not agree to that? Some kind of hurry? So now you have to decide how badly you want to make your sale. If the buyer is not in a hurry then... send the check back. If you want to make the sale so badly that you'll take the wrong payment just because the buyer is in a hurry... ask the IRS how honest you are in your accounting and bookkeeping. It's not honest to knowingly sell a $10 thing for $100 now and "fix it later." Of course it is an honest mistake to sell something that you meant to sell for $50 for $100, and then refund the difference, but that's not what's happening here. Oh, you can "let's just say that's what happened" but hey, you would be a liar.
I think its obvious that the "mark is working on" the desire to make the sale, and if he does something that's wrong, shady or just doesn't make sense to make it happen, hey, most of us call that greed.
Sometimes the "other person" that gets harmed is yourself. But if you always follow the "right path" nobody will get hurt.
Now, if you come up to me and tell me you lost your wallet and I give you $20 out of kindness, because I "trust" you... well, you aren't Paul Newman in "The Sting" here... you are just a liar.
And I thought of that before I gave you the $20.
Also, in the linked video, if the mark had simply said, "Uh, let's just call the police. I don't care what you do, I think I'm just going to call the police right now. We definitely should turn $3000 lying on the sidewalk over to the authorities." Then, no con would have happened. Or maybe even, "I don't want any part of this." In the latter he's perhaps not the best citizen, but at least he honest.
No?
Wow, again with the misunderstanding of greed.
tv preachers
If you think God wants you to give your money away, you can find somebody to take it. You got exactly what you wanted, this is a service, not a con. If you believe a tv preacher when he promises you worldly happiness or health if you give him money, then you are greedy (and stupid) and this is a con.
Lemon car
If the dealer lied about the car, it's just fraud. Maybe you are too trusting, but again, this ain't David Mamet here. If he says that the owner priced it too low and didn't understand how awesome the car really is, but will probably figure it out soon, BUY NOW, then he's appealing to your greed and it's a con.
Fugly date
Are you kidding me? Hey I know this hot chick that's just shy... she's yours for the taking, just show up! I don't know why she doesn't have a boyfriend... lucky you! This is greed. If it isn't, then for fucks sake, go enjoy yourself with the fugly girl! You can't be seen with an unattractive girl? Then why are you going out on blind dates?
The honest wingman here either goes out to help his buddy (doesn't matter what she looks like) or has his own stable of hotties. I know this is /., but you've seen it on tv or something, I'm sure.
Or am I missing something fundamental about human nature? Or are you?
I think his point was that a "confidence trick" involves gaining the mark's (or taking the mark into) the confidence of the trickster, as opposed to merely getting the mark to feel "confident" that the trickster is not lying.
If you watch the linked video, you'll see the guy explaining about "inner circles" and "outer circles" and the con relies upon the mark thinking he's in the inner circle. Using the term "confidence trick" to describe a car salesmen who sells you a lemon renders the term meaningless. That kind of thinking eventually waters down our language to the point where every word is a synonym for "good" or "bad."
Cons are cons. Frauds are frauds. Lies are lies.
If your friend says, "hey man can I borrow $20 I'll pay you back later" and never does... well, you can call that a "con" if you want. I don't.
I don't think the "Christian Children's Fund" or "UNICEF" or the "Red Cross" are exactly what we mean when we use the word "confidence scheme."
But you can, if you want.
'The key to a con is not that you trust the con man, but that he shows he trusts you. Con men ply their trade by appearing fragile or needing help, by seeming vulnerable,' writes Zak. 'Because of THOMAS, the human brain makes us feel good when we help others -- this is the basis for attachment to family and friends and cooperation with strangers.'
We all experience greed, but knowing that everybody else does too, we are naturally suspicious of "something for nothing," especially if offered by another human. Plants and animals we expect to be able to eat. Thus, the survival advantage of action based on reciprocal trust. Social conventions complex enough to turn this mechanism to any individual's disadvantage are relatively recent in homo sapiens' time on Earth, thus the yet-unsolved problem of con people.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
But I don't. --It doesn't stop me from endeavoring to be honest, but there are certain types of cons which honest people fall for, perhaps more easily than the corrupt.
Like this whole sham economy we have running around us. Ideas like, paying back the bank interest feels natural because an honest man doesn't want something for nothing. And yet it's arguably one of the biggest, most willfully destructive scams currently going.
Just a thought.
-FL
I don't see how your definition of being a mark to a con-man because of greed and just being kind to a liar is any different.
The action(s) performed are done in both cases are generally under your own free will.
The perceived harm is in the eye of the beholder (it's either charity or the sting of being conned).
If the only difference is in the "heart" of the mark before it happens, perhaps there is something objective. But that isn't something you can be always sure you know about you need to just trust sometimes. If the only difference is in your heart after it happens, then it is only subjective distinction.
Think for example, about a case where someone running an opensource project asks you to donate some time coding for a project and later parts of that project are fed into some closed source project. Basically, you are being charitable and the people running the project are cons.
However, if you never find out about the later action, and you made the donation of your effort being kind under your own free will, are you a mark? Or are you greedy for wanting your donation of time and effort to go to opensource only? Are you stupid for trusting the people running the project or are you stupid for thinking it's impossible for your donation to ever fall into a closed source project? Is it stupid to fully trust anyone? Are you really con-ned even though you aren't aware of the later action? Why would it change if found out much later?
Or maybe perhaps someone is playing on your sense of charity (and not greed) and your trust that they are what they appear to represent to con you (even if you didn't know it)?
That is why it's called a con (short for confidence). People running "cons" gain your con-fidence, then take advantage when you aren't expecting it. Greed isn't always required. But some level of trust is required for a con and we (as a species) appear to be trusting perhaps more than we should be in some circumstances.
You can call it being kind liars if it allows you to sleep at night, though ;^)
Con rely on various aspects to be sucessful. One important aspect is time constraint.
Most con will not let you take the time to think carefully. Con that rely on greed, will make it such that the free lunch will disappear if you don't bite it soon. Con that rely on trusting people, will make it such that the other people can't be helped if you don't act soon. Con that rely on simpathy, will make you overwhelmed with guilty feeling if you don't act soon.
Whenever someone press you to decide on something ASAP while overwhelming you with information and showing you the rapidity of changes/development, step back and be cautious.
* I deal with a lot of con artists in my line of business.
If you delay pleasure infinitely, the pleasure will be infinite. (YM)
Yeah, this would have been a big story if it would have said that Government and Religion use these techniques to enslave the populace. But then the authors would have been thrown in a dungeon or burned at the stake and, worse, not gotten any grant money.
Someone tried to con me over the chat (initially via OKStupid) a while back. It wasn't the usual brand of 419 scam (email full of hilarious malapropisms, bizarrely pompous status claims, heavily reliance on affiliation with God, et cetera).
It was personal.
The person put time into it. I'll use 'she' because she presented as a woman, a Dutch woman in her mid 50s. I can usually tell when a guy is trying to pass as a woman in chat as the conversation devolves to sex within about two minutes and thirty seconds; there's zero emotional content.
She was dying of cancer. She was straight. I'm not, but in any case, and in all truth, she wasn't the kind of person I'd choose as a partner. No matter, she seemed like a sweet and decent person. Not overly smart, not stupid. Good at connecting; she liked talking about emotions and the people in her life. So do I. She told me about her husband and how much she'd loved and missed him (he'd died not long before). We talked about all sorts of inconsequential trivia. She talked, off and on, for about three months. She told me about her faith. How sweet - I'm an atheist, but I honestly find the nicer Christians to be good and sincere company (not *you*, you dribbling neocon fuckwits). About half-way through the three months, she said she wanted to arrange a will, and that she had no-one left that she could trust to act as executor. She wanted *me* to play that role. I was surprised and flattered, and not so certain of my own moral compass (I was really down on cash and a student at the time) that I felt comfortable with the idea. I told her I was an atheist (I hadn't brought it up until then - I don't tend to preach). She said it didn't matter; she said that she trusted me. I told her I'd think about it.
She didn't press the issue, until about six weeks later. This time ostensibly from her hospital bed in London (she'd been mobile and functional up until that point).
She underlined her desperation. She talked about practical mechanisms by means of which I could accomplish my role. She made one mistake: she asked for my bank account details. I asked her why she couldn't open a new account on which I would have signing powers. After all, it would keep the finances clean and separate and allow for proof that I'd fulfilled my duties correctly, should need arise. She didn't give a satisfactory answer, and at *that* point, the penny dropped. I felt hurt and stupid. I voiced my feelings. I stopped talking to her.
There was still the nagging doubt that she might have been for-real, so I did nothing beyond this. I continued to feel guilty about the possibility that her story was true until time, and continual analysis of the event, satisfied me that she was full of shit.
Why, though, did she target *me*? I was a *poor* physics student at the time. And why did she spend so much time on it? We probably chatted a total of maybe 16-20 hours. In that time she could have made more money working at McDonalds than she'd have made out of *my* account...
Unless there are other identity-theft related uses for a genuine bank account belonging to a real human. With history.
It was around the end of the month and I was going from bank to bank (on the same street) in the financial district, making tranfers among various accounts I had. I was dressed in a business suit and was carrying a briefcase.
After finishing, I sat down at a bus shelter bench (with glass at my back) and my left hand on my briefcase. I hear a knock on the glasss behind me and to the right and turn my head just in time to see a hand pointing at a pile of bills on the sidewalk behind me.
I look around, and seeing nobody there, I turn around and bend down to reach for the cash, releasing my hold on my briefcase. After collecting the bills, I put my hand back on my briefcase and then I look at it... it had been switched.
Luckily, my briefcase contained only a pen and some pieces of ID. In exchange I got around 100 bucks and a new briefcase.
I admit I've been tempted to intentionally replicate this reverse pigeon drop.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
We would much rather you refer to us as "Consultants". This way we can keep working hard for you, because if you cant trust your consultants, who can you trust really?
If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
Where is....Altruism:
5) Is this your wallet?
And greedy altruism is the key here (evidenced by Nigerian scams):
6) Hi, I need you to help me find the owner of this wallet. It says 50% finder's reward we can split, if only you could borrow me some money....
As Always, this just reveals the true nature of the scientists who conducted the study, and not Reality.
I think the whole thing about honest people never getting conned until they turn greedy is totally true.
My ex-landlord was conned with a Nigerian scam. I even explained how it all worked to him, while he was going through it. I told him he would get a series of fat checks and the scammer would ask him to send off some of it to a third party. The checks of course bounced after two weeks. Meanwhile the landlord (a PhD at a local college), was in the hole -$300,000.
I begged him not to fall for it. He went for it anyway, even after many many conversations about exactly how the scam operates.
The goal of computer science is to build something that will last at least until we've finished building it.
That financial "bailout" has been a pretty effective scam so far.
Hey, I'll change everything, it will be better, I promise. Trust me.
There was something so earnest and guileless in the way in which all this was said, and such a complete disregard of all conventional restraints and coldnesses, that Nicholas could not resist it. Among men who have any sound and sterling qualities, there is nothing so contagious as pure openness of heart. Nicholas took the infection instantly, and ran over the main points of his little history without reserve...
Actually, the spectrum referred to people's intelligence. Black and white applied to the attitude of the person who assumes it's always smart people who con dumb ones. They're talking about two different things.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
End of story. Protect yourself. Critical thinking takes practice.