In recent history, and recent I say in the last 150 years, few accidents have as many historical records and raise as many emotions, as many technical and ethical debates as the large helium balloons (commonly called zeppelins) and the sinking of the Titanic. At the beginning of the 20th century, before and after the first world war, until mid-1936, transport saw a technological leap, both in propulsion and in manufacturing and in transport capacity, which allowed human beings to dream big in relation to the volume of loads and people crossing the world. In the case of air transport, in addition to transport based on support by Bernolli (motor impulse, through wings), the idea of transport by balloon, using helium gas, by the Germans, in 1920, revolutionized and amazed the world by its capacity, speed and consistency. The human arrogance in this technology demonstrated the danger and the risks, killing many passengers between 1929 and 1934, when the use of zeppellins was definitively banned as passenger transport: the risk of explosion and the lack of safety and means of escaping an accident collaborated to such decision making. Although, I think, if an airplane loses its engines and pressurization, there won't be any parachutes for everyone! But, of course, death is not certain as in the zeppellins' box. And here comes the question, so expensive in modern engineering and, before World War II, not always present: safety! Before the Second World War and before the general regulation, the safety of a passenger was thought of as a causality, in case of an accident, however, again, due to arrogance, it was something like: if it happens, it may be that you save yourself. Today, by comparison, if only one person can die, the project does not take place until all or nearly all of the risks are mitigated. And even in risk analysis, it will only be released if, on average, a normal citizen can use and can save himself with countermeasures, if a problem occurs. All based on statistics and probability! For everything today, it is like this: is it safe, is there no risk to life? Can cast. At that time the safety margin was wider. The ocean liners of the beginning of the 20th century were marvels of modern technology, of construction engineering: lots and lots of ocean liners were built......thousands of people, who never crossed the seas, started to travel like someone in the market! For different tastes, for different prices! The true tragic tale of the Titanic has been told and retold since 1920. Nazi Germany itself made a tale within the tragedy, where there would be a German foreman who warned the English captain, but not being heard and imprisoned for mutiny, he wrongfully drowned. Shure, Nazi propaganda, praising Germans in times of war. Goebels spent a fortune on this film. So, every time you throw the Titanici's hand, it's not about the tragedy itself, it's going to tell a story inside the titanic. The titanic has sunk, so the story told inside it will end, whether it is true or not (in the case of the German, it was a fantasy piece!). In the case of Leonarod's version of Caprio too. What remains is the true lesson of corporate greed at the expense of the safety of the majority: to leverage costs, they will put e-classes in the basements. These holds, which were ballast if there was a hull breach, were turned into cabins. In this way, reducing the ship's structural strength. Arrogance, greed and disregard for statistics and odds caused an accident that killed 4/5 of everyone on that ship. Not only because of the structure, but because, to save costs, there were neither lifeboats nor life jackets for everyone, just 1000 of the 6000 people on the ship! Many cities around the world do not have 5000 inhabitants! In other words, the promise of a robust structure is useless!!! Not even the corporate guarantee that you'll be safe from chaos will come wreck: because the captain who guaranteed it is on the same ship as you and, like you, at the end of tragedy, he can't do much more than you! The real bosses are not on the ship and the people have not been able to reach them because they will either die in shipwreck or because the bosses are gone. Looking at this whole atmosphere, here is the lesson that applies like a glove to cryptocurrencies: - the structure being robust, is it adequate for what is proposed? Are algorithms, miners, return plans clear? - Is the information about the trips, about the brokers solid? Does it really exist, what is the volume of capital? Who leverages and negotiates? - What guarantees that if, overnight, the broker is no longer online, that you will be able to get your money back? (Yes, because whoever is at the top may have already withdrawn their money and left the class D es in their hands. When these classes turn on they are sinking, in fact they are already drowned and have nowhere to run! - Are there buoys or lifeboats? In other words, are there Walllets on which currency swaps can be made instantly and quickly, to reduce losses? Note, no cryptocurrency or even brokers offer insurance against losses!!! Unlike the traditional system that has the obligation to keep an amount in case of bankruptcy. The question, when entering a new cryptocurrency, or defi or token: are you sure you haven't entered a new Titanic? Before entering any vessel, I always try to find out where there are boats, where there are buoys, how old they have been sailing and if they have the necessary instruments to navigate! Does the dear reader do the same, similarly, to cryptocurrencies? Here's a tip: if you don't want to see the gem sinking, like the old lady did on Cameron's Titanic, check if what you're buying entitles you to a life raft, or buoys, or responsible people qualified to navigate. Because despite being digital, cryptocurrencies are captained by people behind computers! Good safe navigation for you people!!!
