In the Spring and Autumn Period of China (722 BC–481 BC), Sun Tzu, in life, did not lose battles. The book associated with it was probably written by his son Sun Piu at the time of the fighting kingdoms, or the period known as the three kingdoms.

One of the points always placed first by Sun Tzu was prior knowledge of all aspects of battle. The probability of winning is as greater or lesser as the aspects that are known. there are 5 primary points: path, weather, terrain, command and doctrine.

Of the five points, what is due to the human factor is command and doctrine. Command is not about the hierarchical chain, but how powerful and respected are the field and doctrine commanders, yes, it is the hierarchical respect and also the logistical support for the decisions made.

Allied to discipline, organization and knowledge, which are prerequisites prior to battle, doctrine and command are the human faculties that define strategies and tactics according to available human, material, logistical and geographic resources.

The intangibility of preparation, combined with the strength of mental power, wins the battle, even before it starts, as Sun Tzu said.

The inexorable force that would feed the army was always what was defined before, what was prepared before, and what was foreseen and predicted before the course of action.

A second important aspect: honor. This aspect had neither the concept nor the decadence of today. The word was preserved at that time, it was part of anyone's private treasure, and could not be pawned, or sold, or bought. Only accumulated over time, when the actions taken were trustworthy with the words spoken and with firm postures in face of the most diverse situations.

All of this was taken into account when going into battle, including the character and honesty of the other side.

The mental aspects of that time should not differ from the mental aspects of today. However, nowadays, there are many more people in order to take advantage of others, to take advantage of the attitudes of people who honor others, regardless of ideological or moral bias, or even religious.

Generally speaking, a posture of honor is right when there is ethical behavior. Ethical behavior only occurs when fair actions are taken in line with correct attitudes.

This is hard! Because, not always what is correct is the right thing to do and not always what is right is the correct thing to do. Justice has to do with the balance between forces, within the regulation, within the laws and norms of society - which differs in vision, from society to society, through local and cultural traditions.

The right attitudes, on the other hand, are only fully achieved when all available information that is not always available is retained. In other words, correct attitudes can be more or less correct depending on which side you are on and depending on how much information you have to act.

In none of the cases, correction and justice, is there to speak of good and evil. These elements, usually, are post-event points of view and carried by them to a historical mark of moral classification.

The explanation on this subject is justified: at that time, this was how the world was looked at, not only in 500 BC, by the Chinese, but by almost all ancient civilizations. In Greece, for example, Hades was not hell, it was where souls went: to elisium if they had righteousness and to the underworld if they didn't. But without the concept of good or evil, only one was beautiful and resplendent and the other was sad and dark. There were no lashes or punishments, just the abode you would choose after death.

In the different Eastern cultures, Taoists, Buddhists, Shintoists, the common point is about the return, as a cycle. Spiritual evolution depended on his honor. Your next life depended on how evolved you had been in your previous life.

So, observing these peculiar aspects, it is easy to understand the attitudes of kamicases - Japanese pilots who threw their planes against aircraft carriers: the honor for what they believed right!

History normally defines winners and losers, good and bad, according to the position of the historian - almost always that of the winner.

Some questions are necessary in this digital world of cryptocurrencies:

1) Is what you're trading legitimate? that is, do you know where it comes from?

2) the amount can be waived? That is, given the chance of total loss, are you prepared to lose?

3) Do you have full knowledge of the asset's history? Do you know the background, what influences and the swing rate?

4) Does the asset have market strength? Is the volume traded enough to reduce volatility and quick spikes?

5) Is the demand and supply relationship fair? Is the asset resistant to speculative attacks?

6) Does the cryptocurrency in question have inbound and outbound transactions with brokers? That is, if you need to withdraw the gain, will you get it? Or will you retain your earnings until you have minimal fees? And when you withdraw, does the withdrawal fee eat your profit?

7) In a historical aspect, of one year, is there perenniality? In other words, is there a consistent volume within a year? In annual graphs you can see if, on the whole, there was any annual gain. Annual earnings mean that the option tends to be minimally stable or to compete with minimum bank interest.

8) Do deposit fees exist? Certain brokers charge fees for everything and therefore your earnings are never enough for you to actually win.

These and other questions are part of mental preparation before entering an active position. In cryptocurrencies this is more important than buying stocks: Stocks depend on companies, on physical profits, on how they trade on the stock exchange. They usually have management committees. Cryptocurrencies do not have. It has no future capital and fluctuations can range from 40 to more than 100% of the original position. Tokens, in a way, are just speculation!

Anyway, in this current world of little honor, knowing all the mental peculiarities of this process is necessary to survive!

Good war to you!