Skip to content

Building epic from the failure of the Petro

May 28, 2020

“It is not only a traitor to the truth who says the wrong instead of the true, but who does not freely say the truth that should be proclaimed or who does not freely defend the truth that defense demands.”

Venezuela experienced a unique event for cryptocurrencies: the government of Nicolás Maduro in 2017 announced the creation of Petro, a “cryptocurrency” that was initially supported by the country’s oil reserves. The stumbling block is known more about cryptoactivity than its history, yet a notorious character tries to create his own epic from details about its dark origins.

The failed project ultimately affected the poorest households and the economy of those who really need money, even though it is generated with poor technology. And nevertheless …

Building epic from the failure of the PetroBuilding epic from the failure of the Petro

The narrative started after an event in the United States where it was obvious This topic is trying to collect enough points with a new project that focuses on Venezuelans to have asylum and a “new success”. Obviously with an outsourcing approach where he can make money with the talent of Venezuelan freelancers.

In this case the character was called James Bond Venezuelan, a bombastic name that fits perfectly with this route of “justification” that seems to travel. So fIt was his first public appearance after his escape. The production started. You have to conquer your epic in the face of public opinion in order to “build” because he likes to brag about networks.

Then, and thanks to the New York Times’ reputation, a push for a wider audience and with a profile that is obviously distant from Venezuelan reality. Apparently, he sleeps on his friends’ furniture in the bay, looking for capital that faces the English-speaking public. “The developer and the dictator,” said journalist Nathaniel Popper with pomposity, for whom it was simply not interesting to inquire about sources other than “detailed” information about the deadly character. The story was published in March of this year.

From then on, the idea was to remove any connection or suspicion of corruption and replace history with that of a visionary entrepreneur, a full-fledged technocrat who tried technology to destroy the regime that had been in place since 1998. For someone who defines himself as reserved, peace-loving and really “thin”.the epic now addressed is at least suspicious. Chavismo monopolizes violence at all levels and it is important to take this into account.

The encoder?

Popper ‘s note speaks of the above as an attorney who also knew how to develop a theory that in his own statements in an interview conducted in the Podcast Scott Melker, where he said he spent an entire night hobbling, threatened by the regime’s henchmen, apparently when everything “got out of control”.

In both cases, it was found that the technical capacity of this character was sufficient to build the project, which was completely rejected. In contrast to up to 3 people who, for obvious reasons, prefer to keep their name in reserve with whom he was in contact at the time, the suggestion of the “encoder” epic is rejected.

But as if it weren’t enough, the path was continued until he washed his picture Podcast by Charlie Shrem, a well-known, long-time “OG” bitcoiner who was the last to offer him a platform for his martyr’s theater.

Apparently the respondent read the comments he made after his first appearance; the first after a long time, many accusations and too many doubts about its economic relationship to the success of the project. So instead of continuing the NYT version, this time the subject said that he was “not a developer” and avoided going into the details he was previously in abundance with; Make sure your training is simply becoming a lawyer.

Who – like me – has the stomach to listen to the two podcasts and contrast Popper’s proposed reading of the fantasy story of the Trojan horse will find out the inconsistencies. Why should there be bugs in the version of such a significant event? How is it that the version is rejected by every team member of the subject’s company? The assumption that someone is innocent is necessary, but in certain circumstances this innocence becomes too suspicious. For me, we are facing the last scenario.

It should be said that one of the elements in the construction of his narrative was the fact that they hate him in his country because they don’t understand what he did. This allows: 1. Neutralize the criticism of its version. 2. Build a victim role to better confirm his “need” to return to his country.

Skip the enterprising collaborator who Thanks to its proposal and execution, Chavismo received a new mechanism to stir up the “support” of the population or to subtly deceive the hopes of its followers.

It is naive to say that someone with the supposed intelligence of this “enthusiast” behind other failed projects amid the speculation wave and initial coin offerings (ICO) would think that they would really be able to change reality with technology. “INVOT combines the smart contracts of the Ethereum platform, neural networks, deep learning and other innovative tools used in the cryptocurrency world,” he said of one of his flagship projects.

It would even be necessary to ask about his father’s activities and the time they spent on the bank in the Dominican Republic.

In fact, to take his own words How is it that if “everything is corrupt at all levels”, someone who is completely foreign and outside the regime can participate in a project at this level without engaging in corruption?

Stop talking about Venezuela to talk

could be Charlie Shrem (Like the vast majority of those who use the “Venezuela problem” for their purposes), a person who knows Bitcoin very early on, but obviously completely ignores Venezuelan reality, can believe it; could be Scott Melkerwho was a DJ first and then became a trader, you might think, but the reality is After 20 years of systematic depravity in Venezuela, anyone who believes that these power circles can be accessed without playing the Chavista game does not understand how they have held power.

I would recommend Mr. Shrem to continue his podcast on characters from his reference horizon because if he leaves this area he will become complacent. Overly accommodating. The excuse was that this is an important fact for the ecosystem, but the interview was based on the assumption of the “good intentions” of the “creator” of the Petro, which ultimately results in its version being legitimized and exposed to the thousands of listeners that the podcast accumulates.

Another detail no less that Shrem overlooked in his lax interview: In the NYT note and in an interview with Melker, the character assured that the name Petro had been his idea and also Carlos Vargas, who at the time was the superintendent for Cryptoassets and related activities was appointed to “his project”. In his interview, however, he broke down from these statements.

Further inconsistencies within a narrative of double thinking and complacency on the part of those who simply gave him the stage for his action.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.