RenUnconscious
Quantum Scribe
no, i still disagree rainman.
The foolishness of this argument is that, once you start making trades for 1 million, 5 million, etc, and you are just some guy off teh street, a LOT of people will take notice. the SEC too. if the goal were to get rich quick, the stock market isn't the way a tter would do it. i guess supposing you could grab 10,000 shares of microsoft when they were first released then go forward in time to sell them would be smarter.
if the point is that we have no laws to encompass such thievery the reason is that it has never happened to the publics knowledge. If it were then there would be laws made no doubt. i for one wouldn't care so much about how much a time traveler stole, whether or not we have laws about it, but the fact that he is a time traveler.
thus i fail to see the point of darby's argument. I think thats what we want, is to have proof of a time traveler.
The foolishness of this argument is that, once you start making trades for 1 million, 5 million, etc, and you are just some guy off teh street, a LOT of people will take notice. the SEC too. if the goal were to get rich quick, the stock market isn't the way a tter would do it. i guess supposing you could grab 10,000 shares of microsoft when they were first released then go forward in time to sell them would be smarter.
if the point is that we have no laws to encompass such thievery the reason is that it has never happened to the publics knowledge. If it were then there would be laws made no doubt. i for one wouldn't care so much about how much a time traveler stole, whether or not we have laws about it, but the fact that he is a time traveler.
thus i fail to see the point of darby's argument. I think thats what we want, is to have proof of a time traveler.