Winning is a form of novelty bias that never becomes old.
If the human race is to become extinct as other species all have, what is the point of even trying to preserve anything? Carpe diem always? Why do people care so deeply about winning “their right-now” game when it is irrelevant as soon as it is done? Does having a stack of chips to cash out, or not, after many games make it any more relevant? Winning is survival, at least for now, and that is all that counts. We sure like to win, even at solitaire.
Thoughts as remembered from a talking head on television.: let the losers lose and move on. Should it instead be the motto from the money box at the albergue in Granon: take what you need and leave what you can?
The definition of a con man is someone who obtains peoples' trust to convince them to believe something that isn't true. Why do others want my trust? How do I dispense it? Is it dispensed largely in an unconscious manner? How many con men do I know?
Novelty bias is pervasive. When I just want to play a game, especially if bored, that is novelty bias. Watching stocks is entertaining, at least to me, again it is novelty bias. It is being attracted, having one’s attention drawn to, what is novel in your environment, then trying to explain why it happened. It provides engagement with the world, and in older times, provided an increased chance of safety, reproduction and survival. A weakness is that this causes one to ignore the dangerously familiar and apparently unchanging. Like a frog slowly being boiled alive, a small change each day towards death or destruction is ignored amidst the confounding “entertainment” and extraneous environmental noise.