Bitcoin-Based Drug Market Silk Road Thriving With $2 Million In Monthly Sales

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bitcoin-Based Drug Market Silk Road Thriving With $2 Million In Monthly Sales

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday August 7, 2012 @07:20AM from the virtually-profitable dept.

Sparrowvsrevolution writes "Every day or so of the last six months, Carnegie Mellon computer security professor Nicolas Christin has crawled and scraped Silk Road, the Tor- and Bitcoin-based underground online market for illegal drug sales. Now Christin has released a paper (PDF) on his findings, which show that the site's business is booming: its number of sellers, who offer everything from cocaine to ecstasy, has jumped from around 300 in February to more than 550. Its total sales now add up to around $1.9 million a month. And its operators generate more than $6,000 a day in commissions for themselves, compared with around $2,500 in February. Most surprising, perhaps, is that buyers rate the sellers on the site as relatively trustworthy, despite the fact that no real identities are used. Close to 98% of ratings on the site are positive."

56 of 498 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

And in countries where it's legal? by crazyjj · 2012-08-07 07:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

You know, generally speaking, the underground only thrives when there is a vacuum to be filled.
I wonder how many violent drug cartels, gun-toting dealers, and drug-related shootings there are in countries where it's legal to buy from a pharmacy or dispensary.

--
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
1. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Desler · 2012-08-07 07:24 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Which country allows you to buy cocaine or ecstasy from a pharmacy?
2. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by bhagwad · 2012-08-07 07:34 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Though there aren't many countries allowing you to buy it legally, I agree that it SHOULD be legal. Let people take responsibility for their own lives and allow them to kill themselves if they wish to.
3. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Moheeheeko · 2012-08-07 07:45 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  You mean like Alchohol?
4. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by RoknrolZombie · 2012-08-07 07:47 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Well, then you criminalize the actual CRIME - driving while impaired. You can't criminalize behavior that's not criminal. It's like saying you can't buy a car because it *might* be used in the commission of a crime. There are thousands of things that are already illegal that pretty much cover the bases - everything from reckless driving to child safety...these laws are perfectly capable of punishing real criminals instead of filling our prisons with responsible users.
5. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by CanHasDIY · 2012-08-07 07:50 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Tell that to all the people on the bus that die when the bus driver wrecks the bus because he/she is high. Or the on coming car that runs into the bus because the driver of the car is high. I doubt that the person taking the drugs would necessarily be the only one to die as a result of their actions.
  That anecdote would hold far more weight if not for the immense number of people killed on the roads every year by drivers who aren't high on illegal drugs.
  
  To that end... put down the goddamn cell phone.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
6. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by h4rr4r · 2012-08-07 07:53 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Here in reality, believe it or not, the medical route is actually cheaper.
  Clean needle programs, access to cheap clean drugs and treating addiction as a medical problem not a criminal one is cheaper and actually works. I know it lacks that self righteous feeling, and that is a downside, but it actually works. Unlike your stupid and immoral plan.
7. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by cheekyjohnson · 2012-08-07 07:55 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Not that drug laws will prevent any of that.
  
  breaking into people's homes so they can steal to feed their habit
  Theft is already illegal. Punish the ones that do steal and not the ones that don't. Anything else is very similar to collective/preemptive punishment.
  
  If you're found transporting drugs, like in Singapore, that's the death sentence
  Yes, I definitely want the government to have the power to execute people merely for transporting drugs that people willingly consume. No innocent person could ever be executed, the government would never abuse this, and executing people for transporting something is worthwhile.
  
  None of this 5 years where my tax dollars are used to give them food and shelter.
  
  So sorry that your tax dollars are being used for prisoners. Better that we kill everyone who ends up in prison! Anything to save a buck.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
8. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Urza9814 · 2012-08-07 07:56 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  All the while destroying other people's lives while they're high, breaking into people's homes so they can steal to feed their habit, and a whole host of other issues, including medical as their bodies get ravaged but which I have to pay for (thanks Roberts).
  
  Nicotine is the most addictive drug known to man. But you don't generally see people breaking into homes for money to buy a pack of smokes. Why? Because it's legal, so it's cheaper and more available. You don't generally see people worrying about paying for other peoples' lung cancer either. Why? Well, partly because the people who bitch about these things tend to be smokers themselves, power of the industry lobby, etc....but there's also a big part that is IT'S LEGAL. If it's legal, you aren't going to get fired for being addicted, you aren't going to avoid seeking help for your addiction due to fear of criminal prosecution, so you're more likely to have a job and be able to take care of your own medical needs.
  The problems that you cite as reasons why drugs must remain illegal are not problems caused by drugs, but problems caused by _drug prohibition_.
9. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by h4rr4r · 2012-08-07 07:57 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  DUI laws stop people from drinking and driving. It used to be pretty common until it became a serious offense with serious punishments.
  Making drugs illegal does not prevent their use. Nothing will do that, even in nations with a death penalty for drug crimes drugs are still sold.
10. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by CanHasDIY · 2012-08-07 07:59 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  and allow them to kill themselves if they wish to. All the while destroying other people's lives while they're high, breaking into people's homes so they can steal to feed their habit, and a whole host of other issues, including medical as their bodies get ravaged but which I have to pay for (thanks Roberts).
  Right, because A) all drug users are violent criminals who steal for a living, and B) forcing otherwise law abiding citizens to deal with career criminals in order to enjoy a mind-altering substance the government has decided, in a fair and just manner of course, ist verboten, is totally the right way to deal with it.
  
  That, or you're spouting hyperbole based on your limited understanding of the topic.
  
  I'll get modded down but don't care. What we need is to be more brutal. If you're found transporting drugs, like in Singapore, that's the death sentence. None of this 5 years where my tax dollars are used to give them food and shelter. Whack 'em.
  Aah, how quintessentially un-American. You deserve to be modded into oblivion.
  
  "These other people engage in an activity I know nothing about other than the fact that it's a minor inconvenience to me, and so they should be executed by the State!"
  
  Kinda makes a person wonder what subjectively unacceptable activity you're into... Especially considering that, statistically, users of the legal drugs alcohol and tobacco kill exponentially more "innocent" people, than users of all other drugs combined.
  
  You get rid of enough mules and the supply dries up.
  Where there is demand, there will always, ALWAYS be supply. To claim otherwise is to expound an utter lack of understanding in regard to the topic of economics.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
11. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by onyxruby · 2012-08-07 07:59 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Drug cartels have long moved into using violence for crimes outside drugs. Mexico, Columbia, Somalia, Italy and on and on. Drug cartels expand to fill other vacuums they perceive as needing met. Extortion and kidnapping are two of their favorite vacuums and result in the murders of so many people that armored vehicles are routinely more popular in places like Columbia than Iraq.
  The idea that legalizing drugs would somehow get rid of the violence from the drug cartels runs smack into the reality of a lot of very violent non-drug related crime. Look at places like Mexico and you will see that people are routinely murdered in large quantities by drug cartels for things that have nothing to do with drugs. The cartels have learned a life of crime and violence and will continue that life until a significant outside change forces them to change.
12. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by cheekyjohnson · 2012-08-07 08:00 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  When has criminalizing something actually stopped it from happening?
  It doesn't. Drug laws have never stopped any of these things.
  Attitudes like this remind me of the TSA. "Anyone could be a terrorist. The solution is clearly to infringe upon everyone's rights by molesting them at airports!" That drug user might commit a crime while on drugs. Futilely attempt to ban all drugs for everyone while wasting countless amounts of taxpayer dollars in the process!
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
13. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by DarkOx · 2012-08-07 08:00 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  breaking into people's homes so they can steal to feed their habit
  They do that because drugs are artificially expensive due to the legal BS around them.
  If the risk of jail was removed the cost of manufacturing, transporting, and distributing things like Cocaine would fall thru the floor. Only the most hopelessly strung out junkie would be unable to support their habit, if by no other means than panhandling.
  
  --
  Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
14. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by dkleinsc · 2012-08-07 08:03 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  What we need is to be more brutal.
  We've tried that. We've spent billions attempting to stop drug dealers and traffickers. We've changed the laws to allow cops to break into suspected dealer's homes without knocking at 3 AM (occasionally killing innocent people who think they're being attacked by criminals and start fighting back). We've tried 3-strikes provisions so that repeat offenders are in jail forever. We've tried going to the countries where this stuff is grown and shooting people. We've tried all sorts of attempts at brutality, and none of it has led to the slightest drop in drug use or the potency of available drugs.
  It's done nothing to reduce drug abuse.
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
15. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Fast+Thick+Pants · 2012-08-07 08:14 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Futilely attempt to ban all drugs for everyone while wasting countless amounts of taxpayer dollars in the process!
  Oh, those dollars aren't being wasted... they're being very meticulously transferred by the dumpsterfull into the private prison and homeland security industries.
16. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by pclminion · 2012-08-07 08:15 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  All the while destroying other people's lives while they're high
  Point conceded here. Some drugs do cause people to behave monstrously. And alcohol even more so.
  breaking into people's homes so they can steal to feed their habit
  Point NOT conceded. A great number of people are alcoholics. However, there is no great wave of crime due to alcoholics breaking into people's homes to steal their liquor and/or money to buy more alcohol. Why is this? Two reasons. First, it is legal and therefore, moderately cheap. If you can hold down a job, you can afford to be a drunk. Second, alcohol use is socially accepted, for the most part, and thus a boozer is more likely to be able to hold a job as long as he's not falling down drunk at work. This ability to hold a job, due to social acceptance, is what enables the drunk to continue to purchase alcohol without robbing people.
  You are allowing you anger to dictate possible solutions, instead of thinking about the actual outcomes. Would a death penalty on all drug traffickers actually cause a decrease in the amount of drugs consumed? That's nothing but a hypothesis. A mountain of evidence is available which suggests that the death penalty does nothing to deter criminals. They don't think they're going to get caught in the first place, so what matter is it what the punishment is? The death penalty gives you an adrenaline rush: "Justice, fuck yeah!" But that's all it does.
  You are obviously uninterested in actually solving the problem, and more interested in watching people die.
17. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-08-07 08:22 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Sorry but diabetes and liver-failure is not a quick kill-all for alcohol addicts. They just get transplants or waste medical dollars.
  An alcoholic is highly unlikely to receive a liver transplant. They screwed up that organ of their own free will, therefore, we reserve these precious resources for people who suffer organ failure through no fault of their own. You are simply making shit up.
18. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-08-07 08:24 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  You mean like Alchohol?
  I see you are typing under influence.
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
19. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Hatta · 2012-08-07 08:30 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I'll get modded down but don't care. What we need is to be more brutal.
  Have you ever heard of the concept of proportional justice? People like you are more dangerous than the drug users you seek to destroy.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
20. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by mcgrew · 2012-08-07 08:35 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  When I was in Thailand in 1974 there were only four drugs you couldn't buy in a pharmacy, and they were marijuana, cocaine, LSD and heroin. LSD and cocaine were completely unavailable, the place was awash with heroin and pot, and you needed no prescription for any other drug. Ecstasy might not have been invented then, but they had some amphetamines that one pill would keep you awake for two days straight. There was a salve available that was used for terminating pregnancies if the woman rubbed it on their belly button, or induce an out of body experience if you rubbed it on your temples. Quaaludes were available in pharmacies without a prescription as well.
  Oddly, although the country was awash with heroin, the only heroin addicts I ran across were all GIs.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
21. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Sponge+Bath · 2012-08-07 08:44 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Pipe down Clippy!
22. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by causality · 2012-08-07 08:44 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Some drugs do cause people to behave monstrously. And alcohol even more so.
  No drug, not even alcohol, can bring out of a person something that was not already in that person. A lot of people have unresolved emotional baggage, insecurities, and unhealthy tendencies that they barely keep in check, mostly through fear of consequence. This is not real character or real strength and the dissolution of inhibition can cause it to break down.
  
  What drugs can do is break down the illusion of being normal that many fucked-up people try so hard to project. There are a lot of fucked up people trying hard to appear normal "like everybody else".
  
  The real tragedy is that we live in such a shallow and unenlightened society that a) people blame the drug for this, b) we generally like to blame drugs, guns, and other inanimate objects for what people do, and c) the shallow, exclusive focus on external behavior and appearances means that many people don't know what real character actually is.
  
  People who have real character don't become "a different person" when drunk or high. They don't do things while intoxicated that they wouldn't do while sober. They weren't faking it while sober. They don't need inhibitions and they don't need fear of consequence to stop them from doing stupid and harmful things. They simply have no such desires. They can get very drunk and the only observable changes are that their speech slurs, they are wobbly or stumble while walking, and they become more loquacious.
  
  I'll reiterate, we live in a truly shallow and unenlightened society where the most ignorant and emotionally immature are the most comfortable. I sincerely believe that future historians will regard this as a Dark Age, technology notwithstanding. Drugs are simply one of those things where stupidity has a price and cannot simply be glossed over or made into a burden that someone else must bear. That's the only reason they've become such a big deal.
  
  --
  It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
23. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Sloppy · 2012-08-07 09:04 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  what countries where it's legal? there are VERY few.
  Break it down further and you'll figure it out. Instead of country, try country+drug. Then you can look at situations like alcohol in the United States. Maybe compare that to alcohol in Saudi Arabia, or cocaine in the United States, or even (country+drug+year) alcohol in 1927 United States.
  To my layman's eye (I'm not a statistician) there appears to be a correlation, where the more strenously the government insists that the public use black markets for a commodity, the more violent the trade in that commodity is.
  
  --
  As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
24. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Tokolosh · 2012-08-07 09:12 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  A famous study you never heard of - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/background_briefings/smoking/86599.stm
  This kind of result is quickly covered up.
  We do know that smoking is the greatest single cause of statistics. But if you want your study funded you better be prepared to come down on the side of conventional wisdom.
  
  --
  Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
25. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by h4rr4r · 2012-08-07 09:15 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Even that is not going to make an addict. Where does this free drug myth come from? No dealer is giving away free drugs, it does not happen.
  Nicotine is far more addictive, and still requires multiple uses to be addictive.
26. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by TheCarp · 2012-08-07 09:20 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  > Do you really believe that? it's driven up costs, and as someone that believes in economics it
  > has therefore lowered abuse.
  How fucking scientific. Maybe I believe in pink unicorns.
  You are wrong, not because economics is wrong, but because you are applying it in a simplistic manner, looking at only one part of a much larger issue. Its not just a matter of cost or cost going up. These are not apples to apples comparisons by any stretch of the imagination.
  Whats gone up? well cost yes, but so has potency and purity. Do you ever hear of opium smokers doing anything?
  Partially its because you can't get opium. You can certainly get heroin. And the price of heroin has gone up, but, its far more potent, its in a pure form (not counting any cut) and often injected. Its very strong, much stronger than the smoked opium that has been all but removed from the market.
  Crystal meth. Similar. All other, safer, less potent stimulents are relegated to obscurity, shut out of the market. What remains is very potent and pure...and I don't mean pure in the "FDA regulations make sure everything on the label is actually whats in there" pure... I mean "Holy crap that stuff is over 90% methamphetamine, you better be careful".
  Not to mention.... Ive known a few users of a few drugs.... most people don't just "do anything". I know more than a few people who only ever smoked pot a handful of times because they didn't like how it made them feel or otherwise didn't enjoy it (which is how I have come to feel about alcohol actually... I don't refuse to drink as a rule, but its been a while since I even accepted a beer offered)
  A rather common model, amongst those who look at these issues, is the "Self medication" model, which looks at a large amount of drug use as little more than habbits that self medicate for other conditions (normally with the assumption that this is a bad thing, I tend to question whether its not often more effective than most think, I know people who have eliminated prescription drugs with some nasty side effects in favor of a little pot before bed.... and several others with other conditions).
  I think part of the issue here is that you are forgetting that peoples behavior isn't dictated by what you think is rational for them. You are not taking their real motivations into account. You are just assuming that changing one motivating factor must have the effect that you would predict, without actually looking deeper at whats really happening.
  
  --
  "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
27. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by xaxa · 2012-08-07 09:20 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I'm too young to know whether the punishment and fines changed, but in the 1980s and 1990s the British government successfully reduced the rate of drink driving by making it socially unacceptable. They ran horrific ads:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5ma_Xv7rGM
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyzTFdCEXWk
  These are more recent:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsY_Co-p8Bw
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtJqw--DGl8
  The stats: http://www.drinkdriving.org/drink_driving_statistics_uk.php
  And the penalties; in case you want to compare: http://www.drinkdrivingfacts.com/drinkdriving/drink_driving_facts.aspx
28. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by wisdom_brewing · 2012-08-07 09:25 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  There was once this fantastic little tea shop in a small village in Switzerland, did amazing business
  
  They specialized in Green Teas, had varieties from all over the world, extremely good quality and extremely expensive.
  
  You bought your tea and they gave you the choice of giving your address with a perculiar little tick box.
  
  You don't tick the box or don't give your address and you get a lovely little bag with nicely packed green tea.
  
  You do and a few hours later a courier delivers an Amazon package to your door (still don't know where they sourced THAT) containing a specific quantity of something else that was green.
  
  Great little business, too bad it's gone now... Owner apparently retired a very wealthy man.
  
  --
  I am very sucseptible to "let's have another drink"
29. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Red+Flayer · 2012-08-07 09:25 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  No drug, not even alcohol, can bring out of a person something that was not already in that person. A lot of people have unresolved emotional baggage, insecurities, and unhealthy tendencies that they barely keep in check, mostly through fear of consequence. This is not real character or real strength and the dissolution of inhibition can cause it to break down.
  
  Please stop spouting armchair psychology.
  
  The relationship between drugs and psychosis is complex and not completely understood... but your point-of-view is hopelessly outdated. Drug-related psychosis has little to do with the "dissolution of inhibition".
  
  People who have real character don't become "a different person" when drunk or high.
  
  "No true Scotsman..."
  
  --
  "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
30. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by GameboyRMH · 2012-08-07 09:29 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Most addictive naturally-occuring drug, of all drugs it's #3 IIRC behind a couple of anti-psychotics.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
31. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by DeadCatX2 · 2012-08-07 09:33 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  It's pretty easy to find plenty of evidence that h4rr4r's post is spot on. Google "Portugal decriminalization".
  https://www.google.com/search?q=portugal+decriminalization
  h4rr4r speaks truth, whether or not you want to hear it.
  
  --
  :(){ :|:& };:
32. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Hatta · 2012-08-07 09:43 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Ecstasy might not have been invented then
  MDMA was actually invented by Merck in 1912, but didn't find its way into recreational use until the 80s.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
33. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-08-07 10:08 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I hate when people put "private" in front of prison in this context. Like public prisons aren't in the same boat. Just say "special interests". Instead you choose to make an apparent attack on capitalism, when it is really about big government and crony capitalism.
  There are certain things that should not be handled by capitalism. Prisons are one of them. So, it's not an attack on capitalism per se, but yes, it's a specific attack against private prisons.
34. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by downhole · 2012-08-07 10:19 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  It's ultimately about the money. Yes, there's dirty people and organizations in the drug trade, and they aren't going to become saints overnight when you legalize it. But legalizing it, and doing a decent job of defending the legal trade in it, would deprive these gangs of something like 90% of their money (yes I just made that number up). In what world is it not worthwhile to eliminate the majority of your opponent's funding? With the loss of their only really highly profitable operation, the larger organizations will probably dissolve into a bunch of smallish bands that don't coordinate their operations. The violence may get worse for a short time as the smaller chunks that manage to retain some sort of group cohesion may try to get into kidnapping and whatnot, but that's much less profitable and much easier for law enforcement to root out. Long-term, it can only be a good thing.
  
  --
  I don't reply to ACs
35. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by downhole · 2012-08-07 10:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Decriminalization is nice for the end users, but it doesn't make a difference as far as large-scale organized crime. To destroy the cartels, you have to legalize the entire supply chain. They aren't really legal if you can't point to legit corporations who grow, process, and ship the stuff by the ton, with full legal protection against theft, fraud, etc. From the perspective of the organization doing the production and distribution, taxes and legal compliance are a pain in the butt, but it beats having to maintain a private security force to protect your interests and operating in a highly unpredictable environment where your product could be stolen at any time, and your only recourse is to figure out who probably did it yourself and send your own private army after them.
  
  --
  I don't reply to ACs
36. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by Fast+Thick+Pants · 2012-08-07 10:40 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The penal system is not suitable turf for free-market competition. The market forces push in the direction of maximizing the numbers of incarcerated through lobbying for "tougher" laws with mandatory minimum sentences, and prison conditions that maximize recidivism. Pushing back in the other direction are compassion, basic human decency, and the 8th amendment -- all of which will cut into profits, so anyone who runs a prison decently will be underbid by the more ruthless. And when they cut corners and people suffer and die, heck, that's prison life, don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
37. Re:And in countries where it's legal? by TFAFalcon · 2012-08-07 11:07 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  My guess is that many more cops would also start dying. Why not shoot the cop that's about to search you, when you're going to die anyway for the drugs you're carrying.
For now. by Hatta · 2012-08-07 07:24 · Score: 3, Informative

This thing has got to be loaded with narcs.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
1. Re:For now. by Urza9814 · 2012-08-07 07:31 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Perhaps. But why? The war on drugs is largely about publicity and money. Making big, quick busts to show off on the evening news, and confiscating cash to use to buy police equipment (in some southern US states, there are MASSIVE police departments with practically ZERO public funding -- they fund themselves with confiscated drug cash.) You can't really confiscate bitcoin easily, and going after the buyers is going to be a lot of police effort for very little PR win and no real cash win (particularly since the buyers are located all over the globe)
  Compared to the ease of snapping up kids selling drugs on the street corner, I don't think it's worth their time to go after this kind of traffic. At least not yet.
2. Re:For now. by SomePgmr · 2012-08-07 07:45 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I bet sending all your buyers to jail would totally jack-up your seller rating.
3. Re:For now. by harks · 2012-08-07 08:18 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  With Bitcoin, the owner encrypts his wallet so the police can't use it, and the owner has a backup copy somewhere else where he can retrieve it whenever he's free. Or his trusted friend retrieves it.
4. Re:For now. by SpeedBump0619 · 2012-08-07 08:28 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  So in theory I could acquire a good number of anonymous bitcoin and have my shiny new drugs drop shipped to an ex, or maybe some poor politician I disagree with. Or, I could just ship it directly to me and claim I was being targeted. Just, you know, *theoretically*.
Nice Ad Placement or DEA Honeypot by Lashat · 2012-08-07 07:26 · Score: 5, Interesting

You decide.

--
For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
1. Re:Nice Ad Placement or DEA Honeypot by Urza9814 · 2012-08-07 08:04 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Why? They bust a big dealer they get cash, they get great PR, and if you have any faith in the war on drugs (which most Americans don't, but assuming the DEA agents do...) you get to keep some product out of the hands of a whole bunch of kids.
  Bust the kid, you get no cash, you get terrible PR from his friends and family for ruining the rest of his life (I've got a friend, smartest person I've ever known, who went from aiming for a PhD in Chemistry to flipping burgers at McDonalds over ONE drug charge.)...the only upside is you MAY have stopped a single kid from using drugs.
2. Re:Nice Ad Placement or DEA Honeypot by CanHasDIY · 2012-08-07 08:19 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  How exactly would your theoretical honeypot work? Only buyers need to provide anything remotely identifiable (e.g., shipping address). Do you think the DEA cares about going after kids who buy $100 worth of LSD?
  Considering that arresting end users is pretty much the DEA's bread-and-butter, I'd say yes, yes they do.
  
  From above link:
  
  (2010 - crime - drug manufacturing arrests) Of the 1,638,846 arrests for drug law violations in 2010, 81.9% (1,342,215) were for possession of a controlled substance. Only 18.1% (296,631) were for the sale or manufacture of a drug.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Most drug dealer are trustworthy by aepervius · 2012-08-07 07:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

Drug war between opposite drug clan are relatively rare , and when they do happen they usually only impact seller, not buyer. This is a business you can only advertise by "mouth to ear" so most seller understand that if they screw up, their business will drop. That's why you get so many positive rating. In fact, you get a more likely good relation ship with your dealer to which you are a known face and source of money, than for an anonymous corporation for which you are a blimp in a statistic.

--
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
98% by MRe_nl · 2012-08-07 07:39 · Score: 3, Funny

Drug dealers are the resistance in The War on Drugs.
If you can't trust the resistance who can you trust?

--
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
1. Re:98% by jemenake · 2012-08-07 08:31 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Drug dealers are the resistance in The War on Drugs.
  Actually, drug dealers are the ones hoping that the war on drugs continues, or they'll be out of work.
2. Re:98% by smellsofbikes · 2012-08-07 09:11 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Drug dealers are the resistance in The War on Drugs.
  Actually, drug dealers are the ones hoping that the war on drugs continues, or they'll be out of work.
  This is seriously on-topic. I know a pot dealer/grower who is spending a good chunk of his income fighting against continued/expanded legalization and medical marijuana initiatives because the ones already in place in this state are financially crippling him. Suddenly he's no longer the long-haired hippie: he has a suit, short hair, and shows up at every local public meeting on zoning to argue that allowing marijuana dispensaries is immoral and a danger to our children. It's sort of funny to watch, although I'm also fairly pissed at him because I am personally in favor of medical marijuana being easily available.
  
  --
  Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
Good! by sjames · 2012-08-07 07:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

Every transaction there avoids a transaction on the street that potentially includes gun violence and harm to bystanders.
Re:Why is the feedback system surprising? by h4rr4r · 2012-08-07 08:07 · Score: 4, Informative

I am betting you have never been part of a typical drug deal.
Think less what you see on TV and in movies and more mundane real life. People are doing this to make money, killing the buyers does not help with that.
Re:Fishy by grnbrg · 2012-08-07 08:09 · Score: 3, Informative

Well, except for the fact that Mt. Gox's current 30 day volume is a little over 2 million *coins* valued at between US$7 and $10 (Average value of $8.77.).

So $2 million per month through Silk Road is not unreasonable if Gox is doing $17 million per month in transactions....

grnbrg.
Re:$2 Million is Hardly "Thriving" by jemenake · 2012-08-07 08:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

$2 million doesn't even register.
Well, I think it is thriving when you consider how they're doing it. This isn't some dude in the projects on a street corner. This is a website that anybody can go browse, select from a variety of things which you're not supposed to be able to get, and then pay for in a way which is untraceable. It's basically a "Yeah, see if you can stop us", kinda deal. The fact that they're able to flip their middle finger to any and all drug prohibition laws and sit there and rake in a non-trivial amount of money in the process... that strikes me as a major shift in how prohibition laws will need to be enforced (or if they'll even try to) in the future.
Drugs are illegal because... by gestalt_n_pepper · 2012-08-07 08:51 · Score: 4, Interesting

1) Illegal drugs fund the CIA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_and_Contras_cocaine_trafficking_in_the_US). No possibility of corruption there, of course.
2) Illegal drugs finance the banks (http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/06/29/us-banks-laundered-mexican-drug-money/), even helps them weather financial crises (http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/dec/13/drug-money-banks-saved-un-cfief-claims).
3) Last, but not at ALL least, illegal drug money finances congressional campaigns (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/10/18/gordon-duff-how-drug-money-is-buying-our-new-congress/).
Illegal drugs! They feel good, taste good and they're so good for you! ...if you happen to be part of the world's money/power elite. This is why they'll never go away, and they'll never be legal.

--
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Re:Actually, no. by Intrepid+imaginaut · 2012-08-07 09:20 · Score: 4, Interesting

The main question here is whether or not crime rates are lower in these countries, and they are not, to my knowledge. The Netherlands with its much laxer narcotics regime however is taking in prisoners from other countries because they haven't enough to fill their own.