The Silk Road Is Back

Daniel_Stuckey writes "Silk Road is rising from the dead. After the FBI seized the deep web's favourite illegal drug market and arrested its alleged founder Ross Ulbricht last month (for, among other things, ordering a hit through his own website), the online-marketplace-cum-libertarian-movement has found a new home and opened for business at 16:20 GMT this afternoon. In the wake of the original Silk Road's closure, everything became a little turbulent for its users. First, they had to get used to not getting high-quality, peer-reviewed drugs delivered direct to their sofas. (Though presumably they didn't stop getting high, instead forced back to the 'mystery mix' street dealers and surly ex-Balkan war criminals who have spent years filling cities with drugs at night.) Some users were pissed off that they'd lost all the Bitcoin wealth they'd amassed, or that paid-for orders would go undelivered, while small-time dealers freaked out about how they suddenly lacked the funds to pay off debts owed to drug sellers higher up the food chain."

Comments

Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[i kan reed]

Just short-sell bitcoins when it goes away again.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[jeffmflanagan]

Bitcoins went way up shortly after Silk Road was shut down because the Chinese took interest, so that's extremely risky. Do not assume that Bitcoin value is tied to availability of politically incorrect drugs sold for bitcoins.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[MickyTheIdiot]

Bitcoin was at $130ish when Silk Road shut down. Then there was hand waiving about a "crash." It "crashed" all the way to $100.

As I write this it looks like Mt. Gox is $265.

You're whole posit is bullshit.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[MickyTheIdiot]

You're whole posit ISN'T bullshit, but my reading is.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[jeffmflanagan]

LOL

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[i kan reed]

Bitcoin value isn't attached to anything.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[compro01]

It's attached to perceived market conditions.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[i kan reed]

Like tulip bulbs then?

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, exactly like tulip bulbs, gold or US dollars.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Anonymous Coward]

The value of money isn't attached to anything either. It's a collective fiction. There's nothing that prevents bitcoin from functioning as a full-fledged currency, though it does have some flaws (such as: only a fixed number of bitcoins will ever be found).

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Anonymous Coward]

Except Gold has real world applications and the US dollar has the collective might of hundreds of millions of people behind it who have formed a government capable of enforcing that it has value and security. Bitcoins are not like gold or tulips, tulips and gold both have practical purposes, and the US dollar has the backing of a large government.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[forkazoo]

Very few currencies are, except to other currencies. I mean, I suppose you could say the value of the US Dollar is attached in some vague way to the military power of the US, and thus their ability to force people to accept the currency, but that's hardly a useful conversion for daily use.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[anubi]

I would have thought petroleum, neodymium, platinum, and other rare industrial catalysts would be a far better investment than gold. In and of itself, gold is a rather useless metal; structurally its crap. Its one saving grace is that it is very resistant to corrosion. But then, so are a lot of other far more abundant materials. We seem to have earmarked it as a "store of wealth" over the ages only because someone could not print up a pile of it on a whim.

If you were on the Titanic in its final moments, what would be worth more - a satchel filled with gold? A bag of diamond jewelery? A big old stryofoam cooler box with a broken lid?

Frankly, it surprises me other countries would hang onto a US dollar as an investment, and only accept it as a medium of exchange to quickly buy something else of real intrinsic value. I think of the dollar as more of a copper transmission line for wealth - not a battery - because the dollar as leaky as hell. Its printed on demand in reckless abandon, created from nothing, and in and of itself not worth the paper its printed on. It seems a game of musical chairs, and whoever is holding the dollar when the music stops leaves the room - broke.

When all is said and done, it seems the only investment that survives is the ability to physically intimidate and coerce people - and a people trained and intimidated enough to take it. aka "He who has the gun soon has the gold and the gun."

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[_xen]

The value of money isn't attached to anything either. It's a collective fiction.

Poppycock. The value of money* is attached to a government's ability to raise taxes.

[*money, that is, in the sense of legal tender, i.e. to only exchange technology the state accepts in satisfaction of tax liability]

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Anonymous Coward]

and i thought it was a liberterians wet dream - true market forces in action, the market self regulating itself by supply and demand.

Re: Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Anonymous Coward]

Unrelated Titanic propositions aside... gold is an extremely valuable material in electronics. No other element or alloy has such a high conductivity and low corrosion factor for the price.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[able1234au]

This story is just another PR push for bitcoins by people who have invested heavily in bitcoins. Can we stop talking about bitcoins? It is not really a tech story and is a complete scam.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

Why do you think that?

Do you think regular currencies are a scam as well?

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[able1234au]

Why do i think that? Because every few days there is a bitcoin story. Regular currencies dont need stories in slashdot to boost their value. They are based on real value and backed by governments. Bitcoin is backed by no one, has no intrinsic value and has widely swung in value. Hence these PR stories which show a pattern that they are a deliberate PR plan to promote bitcoin. It is bitcoin spam.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

You don't think it warrants attention on a nerd news site that a technology-backed currency based on peer-to-peer cryptography is still growing strongly five years after its inception? If nothing else, I find the technological aspects quite intriguing.

I'll grant you that the constant focus on the illegal aspects of bitcoin grows annoying, just like calling computer crackers, "hackers."

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[able1234au]

Do the illegal aspects worry you because you are a bitcoin backer? Do you own bitcoins? I have never met anyone who does. I have no interest in owning them. The illegal uses is the only sensible reason for something like bitcoin existing. That said it probably makes it easier for governments to squash it.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[murdocj]

Well, what else is bitcoin good for? I can either buy goods and services using a stable currency that's accepted by everyone... or I can try to hide transactions using an obscure token whose value fluctuates wildly. Hard to believe the main uses of it aren't illegal.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[fafaforza]

Don't "regular" currencies have stories written about them 6 days a week in the Wall Street Journal and the Business section of the New York Times?

Re: Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[fafaforza]

And you think that's what drives gold's price? It isn't the selling of an idea to everyone that it is precious, and should be worn around the neck?

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Decker-Mage]

Bitcoin value isn't attached to anything.

Actually, if you understand political-economy, neither do the various fiat currencies we have today. All we have is a shared psychological conditioning that attaches a value to something (pieces of artistic paper) that have no inherent value of their own. When a fiat currency goes bad, you don't see people burying it in the backyard hoping it will have value again in the future. OTOH, you do find precious metals, gems, jewelry, sometimes other works of artistic value, and the odd person with some Swiss Francs. Now I'd add a flash drive with a few bitcoins.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[able1234au]

what does that have to do with anything? my point remains. there is an active program to promote bitcoin in slashdot. It is an orchestrated campaign to make sure there is some news story every few days. Bitcoin is a scam and not a topic that slashdot should be wasting its time. I would be interested to know if each of these commentators have a vested interest. I personally do not own any bitcoins nor have i ever had.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Decker-Mage]

and i thought it was a liberterians wet dream - true market forces in action, the market self regulating itself by supply and demand.

Sort of. Libertarians (capital L) would rather see a return to something like the gold standard, near as I can tell with actual gold, silver, possibly other precious metals, in circulation. Bitcoins still fall under fiat currency as it has nothing more, or less, than a perceived (psychological) value, It's a bit more since there are only supposed to be some absolute maximum number that can be in circulation which isn't true of most (all?) fiat currencies.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Vintermann]

I'm a critic of bitcoin as well, but it's not true that illegal uses is the only thing bitcoin is good for. What it has potential for is as a decentralized and low-fee payment infrastructure, to compete with Visa and Western Union or whatever hoops people have to go through to transfer money.

Though that is not presently what it's used for. That is still 95% speculation and 5% illegal stuff. Certain of its features also sabotage its legitimate uses, most especially its inherent deflationary nature.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Vintermann]

Trying to hide transactions is illegal in itself. It's money laundering by definition, illegal over certain amounts.

Yet FBI have stated officially that bitcoin is legal.

This ought to tell people something about how effective bitcoin is at hiding transactions.

Tumblers are illegal, though. They do succeed in hiding what crime the coin was originally the proceeds of.

However, that's no good, as the coin is now associated with the crime of money laundering instead, and just as much a hot commodity.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Vintermann]

No, it's pretty rare. Articles discussing why the yen is undervalued or the Swiss franc is not do happen, but considerably more rarely than every day IME.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[jalopezp]

Collective might of what? There's nothing wrong with creating a new currency, even one that is digital. The fact that gold has real world applications has no relevance to its value as a currency, despite how people keep insisting on finding some 'intrinsic value' in the currencies they use. The intrinsic theory of value was the theory people held before Adam Smith, and the economic equivalent of the Ptolemaic system in astronomy -- the ancients thought so, but they were wrong.

We now believe that objects have subjective value, and that it is determined by the market forces of supply and demand. And we also believe that currencies exist because they facilitate transactions, so that their demand does not depend on any use they have other than as a medium of exchange for other goods (I include here being a store of value). Some important characteristics that make up a good medium of exchange are:

• Divisibility so that you can easily exchange both dear things and cheap things.
• Fungibility means that each unit of the currency is equal to the other so that all you care about is their quantity. This is why diamonds are not a good currency, or for that matter, tulips.
• Durability The reason it can be used as a store of value, with the idea of transactions in time. Also another reason tulips suck as a currency.
• Scarcity which ensures your store of value retains its value, at least from the supply side.

You see that under these conditions, bitcoin is equivalent to gold (except for the size of the market - a lot lot more gold is traded daily). This is because what makes fiat currency fiat is the fact that its scarcity is artificial. The dollar is scarce because the Federal Reserve has promised not to print too many, and we have faith (fiat) in it. Gold is scarce because if we want any more, we have to dig it out of the gound with increased difficulty, and bitcoin are scarce because it takes computing effort to find more. Practical uses for these things do not even come into consideration here.

Finally we come to the size of the market. If a currency is useful only as a medium of exchange, then the more people you can trade with in that currency, the more useful and valuable it is. This is the reason for the dollar's supremacy, as for 50 years it was the currency of the largest market in the world, and so it got established as the basis for international reserves. Because of this, the dollar maintains its primacy even now that it has been demoted to the second largest market. But this does not mean that it has intrinsic value, only that its demand as a medium of transaction is further boosted by transactions at the nation level

My point is that there is nothing wrong with bitcoin as a currency. It is as good as gold, as good as the dollar. But it just has a smaller market for now, which gives it the flaws people point out here. Any new currency would have the problems bitcoin is having. It may fail in the end, but that does not mean it was a bad idea.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

One of the big uses of bitcoin is the ability to send arbitrary amounts of wealth anywhere in the world with fees amounting to a few pennies. Need to send $10? No problem. Need to send $10,000? No problem.

For merchants, accepting bitcoins has zero fees, or if you want to use a merchant service and get the cash value deposited directly in your bank account, it's about 1 percent. Also, there is never any possibility of chargebacks. It is extremely attractive for merchants for these reasons.

These are a couple of the perfectly-legal uses of bitcoin, that do not get into the whole Austrian/Anarchy philosophical world.

Something to think about: bitcoin as a black market tender is useless unless real-world people can accept it.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

I find it interesting that one of bitcoin's greatest strengths (perhaps *the* greatest strength) is so often considered to be its greatest weakness. Bitcoin was designed in an Austrian economics school of thought, which holds quite clearly that markets should be free, inflation is bad, and so on.

We are going on 5 years now, and this upstart currency is stronger than ever. I think it lends a slightly different air to philosophical economics discussions, now that we have pure anarchic/Austrian currency to compare to "real" currencies.

What do you think?

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[sandertje]

Bitcoin is a doomed currency by definition. At around 21 million bitcoins, no more bitcoins can be created. This inevitably means the value of bitcoins will rise and rise and rise and rise and rise. Another word for this: deflation. As any economist will tell you, deflation is extremely harmful for an economy. Why: the value of money increases, but the value of real (tangible) products DECREASES. On top of that, delfationist economist run the risk of its people to hoard all the money (since it will become more worth with time), instead of spending it into the real economy.

Re: Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[AdamCollins]

Don't own a single bitcoin, but the idea that a tech based currency doesn't belong on a tech news site seems silly. a scam??? How so? I see u keep restating scam with absolutely nothing barking up your claim....if u mean the value changing, come talk to me when the fed quits printing money it can't back...theb dollar is a scam and will probably collapse in my lifetime. Bitcoin is much more honest in how it works. and articles relating to the use and storage of said tech currency have a place in tech news. and as far as illegal goes.....desiring privacy != illegal.....shame so many have been brainwashed into thinking it does.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

So what you are saying is, in order to actually sell something, you have to convince people to part with not just the money, but also its future value, right?

Doesn't that mean the end of consumerism? The end of gluttony and waste? A return to making things that last? A return to cottage industries? Is this bad?

I would like to invite you to consider something: at what point do economists' theories about bitcoin start becoming true? Now? 5 years? 20 years? 100 years? At what point does deflation end a currency? At what point does deflation even begin to weaken its appeal?

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

Bitcoin is fabulous for sending money around the world. Ever tried to send money to a relative half-way across the country? Easy if you have a shared bank account. Really fucking hard if you don't. PayPal and Dwolla have kinda-sorta mechanisms but those are recent and complex.

Bitcoin is easy and costs pennies.

That's a great reason to use Bitcoin.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

I think you are simply sour about not picking up bitcoin when it was $20/ea a few months ago. $100 worth of bitcoin then would net you $1500 now.

Ouch.

Re: Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[compro01]

Yes, and electronics and other industrial uses make up maybe 10% of gold demand.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[sandertje]

For a good example of deflation: see Japan. Recession since the 1980s.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[TheCarp]

My point is that there is nothing wrong with bitcoin as a currency. It is as good as gold, as good as the dollar. But it just has a smaller market for now, which gives it the flaws people point out here. Any new currency would have the problems bitcoin is having. It may fail in the end, but that does not mean it was a bad idea.

Or....to flip it around.... any currency looks like a worthless scam if it doesn't have such wide adoption and use as to have unquestionable value to others. All currency is...at its heart, a confidence game. Someone hands you some paper, or does some math, or delivers some shiney stuff, because he says it has value and you look at it and believe that someone else is going to take a similar deal when you offer it.

It just so happens that its a useful con game that, works if enough people play along. It doesn't matter if the reason you think it has value is that someone wants it for industrial use, or pretty fobs. As long as you believe it, and the next guy believes it....it works. It doesn't matter if the US government falls tomorow, the Dollar is still worth something today.... someday someone will get burned on that one too.

Re: Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Gen_Music]

Erm, guess what. I bet all those governments that "back" your fiat currencies wish they had nothing backing them, because the only thing backing government money atm is debt.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[aminorex]

The value of a US dollar since 1913 has gone from 1/20 oz of gold to 1/1200 oz of gold.
The value of a BTC since 2009 has gone from 1/7600 oz of gold to 1/4 oz of gold.
Which would you rather give to your children? To your medical care provider?

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[aminorex]

They are not geek interest. BTC is the quintessence of geek interest.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[aminorex]

Please understand, the value of a currency is unrelated to utility for unrelated uses. BTC is worth billions of dollars today because it is useful as a currency. This should not be surprising, because it was specifically designed to be a superior currency. It derives its value from truth. PQ=MV is a tautology, and hence true. When BTC is used to transact 4% of the wGDP, the value of 1 BTC will be equal to 27000 US dollars in 2013. When BTC is no longer used to transact, it will have 0 value.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[able1234au]

Something that is not a made up currency and is based on real world values. As there is nothing backing BTC then its effective value is $0. Sounds like a stupid investment. It is a scam like pyramid selling. So do you own or have you owned BTC? If so, you are promoting the scam.

Besides a currency or gold is not an investment. It is not something that grows in value because it produces something. It is not like a share in a company. It is just a commodity.

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[fafaforza]

What about that guy that bought $27 worth of bitcoins which now are worth $800,000. Man. But no, I don't really follow them.

Re: Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

That is not a valid example. The Yen is inflationary, and that period gave us the term stagflation, a dreary mix of both inflation and deflation.

There is no example of a deflationary currency that I know of except possibly precious metals and that is questionable. So the question is philosophical; when do you think the economists will start being right about bitcoin? They have been dreadfully wrong so far, when will tbey start being right?

Re:Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[Vintermann]

I think strength is the wrong measure. Volatility is more important. I believe, as do many bitcoin users, that it will have huge boom and bust cycles for a long time, if not forever.

That this hurts its non-speculative uses shouldn't really be a controversial assertion.

Re: Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

It does hurt its non-speculative uses. Nevertheless, it remains stronger than ever, and still growing. The fact is that these boom and bust cycles have not driven people away. If anything, the publicity attracts more attention, and therefore growth.

The question remains: at what point do the economists start being right about their predictions?

Re: Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[sandertje]

You're wrong. The net inflation of the yen over the last two decades is closer or below 0. In a nutshell: inflation no longer happens. See here for details: http://www.inflation.eu/inflation-rates/japan/historic-inflation/cpi-inflation-japan.aspx Besides that, the word "Stagflation" is a combination of inflation and stagnation. It has nothing to do with deflation. Japan did not experience stagflation. It experienced stagnation, yes, but not stagflation. Stagflation is the paradoxical situation of having (high) inflation and stagnation at the same time - something that keynesian economics deems impossible. Much of Europe is going through stagflation.

Re: Another bitcoin short-sell opportunity coming

[LF11]

You are missing the forest for the trees. The overall economy may have suffered a recession, but the Japanese government was still inflating heavily. During that period, the economy was suffering from extensive capital destruction caused by collapsing loans.

Just like the US economy is experiencing now, high rates of defaults on mortgages causes extensive capital destruction and rapidly decrease the overall size of the economy. The Federal Reserve can inject hundreds of billions of dollars into the economy and it just gets sucked up into the abyss formed by collapsing loans. It is important to observe that the overall effect of this inflation is to significantly obscure even basic market signals, making it impossible to determine where to allocate money and resources. This is why corporations are stacking up cash reserves and failing to make new investments.

Both the Yen and the Dollar are highly inflationary currencies. Just because the overall value of the currency appears to decrease does not alter the fact that the currency is inflationary, or that it suffers greatly from inflationary policies. A decreasing economy merely means that fractional reserve banking is running in reverse, destroying wealth instead of creating wealth.

Thats just like, your opinion man.

[Anonymous Coward]

I for one am excited.

Re:Thats just like, your opinion man.

[Anonymous Coward]

Is Bitcoin good or is it whack?

Re:Thats just like, your opinion man.

[Anonymous Coward]

I pity the fool that just says no to drugs.

-- B.A.rack Obama.

YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

For Evil !!

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

People have a product to sell.
Other people desire this product.
Person A sells this product to person B.

This is capitalism. it's not evil. Nobody is directly harmed in this transaction, and both parties got what they wanted. This is a good thing!

note, I said "directly harmed." it is possible somebody may have been indirectly harmed by violence perpetrated by deranged criminals who are involved in the supply chain due to the fact that this activity is currently deemed illegal. note, it's not illegal because it is run by criminals, no it is run by criminals because it is illegal. There's a big difference.

Re:YAY !!

[Russ1642]

Supposedly the transactions are safer this way. I'd rather them meet online than on the street where I live.

Re:YAY !!

[jythie]

Well, that depends on the details of what the transaction actually was. SilkRoad was involved in a lot of things besides harmless recreational drugs, including quite a few products and services that were intended to hurt people.

Just like being illegal does not automatically make something unethical, being illegal but in demand does not automatically make something ethical either.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

People have a product to sell. Other people desire this product. Person A sells this product to person B.

This is capitalism. it's not evil. Nobody is directly harmed in this transaction, and both parties got what they wanted. This is a good thing!

You should be careful how you word that, Silk Road had a (not always well policed) policy against it, but other black market Bitcoin-based market places have been selling children, women and hitman services, among other things. For real. You could still say "People have a product to sell. Other people desire this product. Person A sells this product to person B", but I would disagree on the "not evil or directly harmed".

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

...This is capitalism. it's not evil...

LOL

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is capitalism. it's not evil. Nobody is directly harmed in this transaction, and both parties got what they wanted. This is a good thing!

This is debatable, at best. Modern capitalism is theoretically founded in modern economics, which, guess what, uses utilitarian ethics for value. The utility A and B derived from the transaction may or may not offset the utility lost to everybody else. If it doesn't, then the transaction is not efficient, and rational actors should not perform it.

Of course, this is where libertarianism falls flat on its face. Your transaction incurs costs on others, and you are irrational if you do not take those costs into account.

Re:YAY !!

[jeffmflanagan]

True. The freakiest thing I saw when taking a look at SR was large amounts of cyanide from one vendor. I haven't heard about mass-poisonings, but making it that easy for a crazy to hurt a lot of people is very worrying. Other black-market sites I researched were worse, with guns available to anyone in addition to the poison and dangerous drugs.

It seems to me that we shouldn't be banning reasonably safe in-demand products because having products that mainstream people want only available though the black market, enables the terrible things that also go on there. A drug should have to be really destructive like Meth to be banned.

Re:YAY !!

[Applekid]

True. The freakiest thing I saw when taking a look at SR was large amounts of cyanide from one vendor. I haven't heard about mass-poisonings, but making it that easy for a crazy to hurt a lot of people is very worrying.

Does cyanide have no uses other than poisoning? I don't know, but I presume someone who does know and is interested in playing with the stuff would rather pick it up black market than try to procure it legally and be added to a watch list somewhere.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

Cyanides are useful in making dyes and certain metal plating processes, among other things.

Re:YAY !!

[jythie]

Drugs are always a tricky issue when it comes to legality. There is always this tricky balance between personal freedom and social good, esp when it comes to the highly addictive ones.

A while back there was a research group trying to devise a chemical cocktail that had the pleasant recreational elements of various drugs (they were working on booze specifically) but without the addiction or health issues. Now there would be a blockbuster that could change the world....

Re:YAY !!

[BradMajors]

There already exists recreational drugs without addiction or health issues... they are also all illegal.

Re:YAY !!

[circletimessquare]

there are plenty of things that a market exists for that are immoral

plutonium. child sex slaves. ricin. RPGs

just because a market exists for something does not justify it

you may say that you can't shut a market down, it will just go underground

yeah, and making rape, murder, and robbery illegal hasn't stopped them either. but we still do not legalize or accept rape, murder, or robbery

some things civilization will always be at war with. permanently

it's simply a maintenance function

you yourself are involved with a "war on trash". if you take out the trash once, do you never have to take out the trash again? no, you have to take it out every thursday, or it accumulates and your house becomes unlivable

because you can't take out the trash once and be done with it, you stop taking out the trash altogether? because you can't guarantee 100% no trash in your apartment you must accept high levels on unlivable filth?

no. you minimize it. as a constant function. trash will always be there. and a constant effort at minimization is the best you can do

and that's completely ok. and normal

and so it is with "the war on {X}"

simply because you can't stop it, that all you can do is minimize it, is no argument against the effort

for the simple reason that just because something is possible, doesn't mean we accept it

the concept you are missing in your thinking is called right and wrong

and if you form a world view without the concept of morality, your world view will fail and has no validity

Re:YAY !!

[Opportunist]

Huh? Can't you read? The FBI's efforts have been thwarted.

Re:YAY !!

[richlv]

if i suddenly got interested in cyanide, i'd be a bit worried that the seller on that site sits in some fbi office and would try to talk me into poisoning something right after that.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

You talking about LSD again?

Re:YAY !!

[ultranova]

plutonium. child sex slaves. ricin. RPGs

Why am I reminded of the people who turn the talk to child molesters when talking about homosexuality? Could it be that you're doing something similar here?

some things civilization will always be at war with. permanently

Mind-altering substances are unlikely to be amongst those. The very fact that you felt the need to provide a fallacious appeal to emotion above implies you don't believe it either and thus tried to give your argument weight it doesn't carry on its own. Some people use psychoactive substances, other people ignore it, and the moral busybodies who make it their problem don't really have any arguments besides circular reasoning ("only criminals do drugs!") or thinly veiled appeals to some vague concept of purity.

The only question is: how many victims does this particular form of puritanism demand before people like you will get off their high horse and stop trampling others underhoof? And how much human potential is wasted by making it harder to examine the workings of the mind and how it can be altered?

and if you form a world view without the concept of morality, your world view will fail and has no validity

So is it moral to decide for other people what they may and may not do to their own minds and bodies? And enforce your will through violence? Because it doesn't seem very moral to me. In fact it sounds suspiciously like you claiming ownership on them and declaring yourself their master.

Also, I find it hard to believe anyone would format their messages like you do yours unless they were under the influence of some rather potent substances, so is this just a very inefficient way of seeking rehabilitation?

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

Your transaction incurs costs on others, and you are irrational if you do not take those costs into account.

The market (insasmuch as rationality can be ascribed to a market) is perhaps irrational in failing to internalise those costs.
  The participant who fails to take those cost into account is merely selfish. And selfishness is, in the language of markets, the very definition of what is rational.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, they sell it on SilkRoad for those who want to make other people dye.

Re:YAY !!

[Narcocide]

Actually yea; believe it or not its primary industrial use is mining for gold.

Re:YAY !!

[circletimessquare]

it's moral for me to decide what people to with their bodies when i am forced to pay for their feeding and housing and healthcare when they destroy their lives with said substances

if substance abuse happened in a vacuum, it would be fine. but it does not. it has costs to society. this gives society the right to get involved

that being said, healthcare solutions are the proper approach to addiction, not jails

and nonaddictive substances like marijuana should be legal

but the people who sell the addictive substances like heroin, meth, and coke need hard jail time, for the costs their trade incurs on society

Re:YAY !!

[circletimessquare]

if everyone used psychedelics like LSD and psilocybin responsibly (get a babysitter) they would be legal

but as it is, people walk out windows when using psychedelics alone

use a babysitter when you use a psychedelic

or you are one of the reasons why these drugs are illegal

irresponsibility is the reason laws exist

in a world where everyone acted responsibly, there would be no need for laws

freedom has never meant "i can do whatever the hell i want without regard to the consequences"

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

No but if those consequences do not infringe the freedom of others then they are irrelevant to this discussion. If someone wants to use drugs and walk out a window that is their business. It is not societies place to tell them they cannot do that. If someone take drugs and their baby dies, then we have laws to deal with that already. The most fundamental precept of liberty is self ownership. Any kind of prohibition of anything infringes on that. The dirtiest word a politician can utter should be "ban" in a free society that would be political suicide. Instead we have a bunch of frightened masochists begging to be controlled.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

Libertarianism has nothing to do with capitalism. Real classical libertarianism is anti-capitalist for the very reasons you describe. You do a disservice to everyone by equating people who prefer freedom with those who wish to take others freedoms away via economics. What you are calling libertarian is actually conservative oligarchists.

Re:YAY !!

[Jane Q. Public]

"Of course, this is where libertarianism falls flat on its face. Your transaction incurs costs on others, and you are irrational if you do not take those costs into account."

I would agree with you if GP's comment were actually a reflection of "libertarianism", but it's not.

Where do you get the idea that libertarians (or an even more egregious error, Libertarians) have no ethics?

Oh, yeah... the liberal media that paints them all as anarchists. Well, I have news for you: [A] what you call "modern" economics is largely bunk (seriously... Keynes and his "interventionist" theories have been so thoroughly discredited over the last 4 decades, it's just ridiculous), but that's kind of beside the point, so on to [B] libertarians are not anarchists. If they were, there would be no need for the word "libertarian". Further, anarchists have their own party (called, appropriately enough, the Anarchist Party). They have run candidates for President.

Libertarians (small "L") and Libertarians (large "l") in America are, by and large, supporters of the Constitution. They are also supporters of free markets, but that doesn't mean "anything goes". One of the fundamental principles of libertarian philosophy is that your freedom to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose. In other words, you don't have the right to harm others.

Therefore, if trade does harm to others, it is not libertarian, by definition. You might be thinking of anarchy, but you sure as hell aren't referring to libertarians.

The Libertarian party, in particular is definitely constitutionalist, definitely supports the rule of law, and specifically denounces doing harm to or initiating force against others.

Re:YAY !!

[circletimessquare]

"If someone wants to use drugs and walk out a window that is their business."

it never is that simple, is it?

Re:YAY !!

[helobugz]

No, they would try to talk you into stating that you will poison something before selling you a false substance. Then it would be controlled delivery and they'd take you straight to court on conspiracy and whatnot...

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

but as it is, people walk out windows when using psychedelics alone

Yeah, happens all the time on LSD... all the time.
Compare LSD to alcohol. Then let's talk about harm .

Re:YAY !!

[circletimessquare]

and there are laws about alcohol's use

would you support a law saying LSD/ psilocybin/ other psychedelic use is legal, as long as you have a responsible sober babysitter?

i would

Re:YAY !!

[Michael Hunt]

The fact that you think that plutonium is somehow intrisnically immoral bothers me.

It's like if somebody in 1750 said that "crude oil will always be intrinsically immoral" because it was poisonous, smelled bad when you burned it in a lamp, and caused a stack of black, smoky pollution. There are reactor designs that exist right now which are capable of turning that plutonium into heat and short-lived decay products.

_Nothing_ is intrinsically immoral except for man perpetrating force or fraud against his fellow man.

Re:YAY !!

[circletimessquare]

there is nothing good that can come from civilian possession of plutonium, and plenty bad, whether intentionally or unintentionally

there is nothing remotely comparable to plutonium that you can do with crude oil in terms of threats to the general populace

all i can think is that perhaps you share this guy's view on tinkering with radioactive substances in civilian settings:

http://www.dangerouslaboratories.org/radscout.html

since this poor fellow is clearly insane, there is nothing more to say on the subject

Re:YAY !!

[shadowofwind]

Cocaine isn't chemically addictive. Like cocaine, marijuana is psychologically addictive. I'm not for or against legalizing marijuana, just pointing out that it is not nonaddictive. I know a couple of people that are addicted enough that they can't get through a day without it. Arguably its still not as bad for them as alcohol though.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

Where do you get the idea that libertarians (or an even more egregious error, Libertarians) have no ethics?

I didn't say that. My point was that libertarian ethics are incompatible with utilitarianism, as Ayn Rand herself pointed out.

Apparently "the greatest good" is too "collectivist" for her.

I made no mention of Keynes. Modern economic theory was founded by John Stuart Mill, and others, using the techniques of the utilitarian calculus to describe rationality and create a framework for modelling rational interactions.

Re:YAY !!

[poopdeville]

Like Ayn Rand, right?

Re:YAY !!

[circletimessquare]

Cocaine isn't chemically addictive.

i stopped reading there

you're a moron

Re:YAY !!

[Vintermann]

Pure chemical addiction is easily broken. It happens routinely at hospitals.

I knew a guy who shot himself in the foot with a shotgun accidentally on a hunting trip. He spent months in hospital, got opiates for the pain, and developed physical addiction to it (tolerance). When he was written out, he went through withdrawal symptoms like any other addict - more severe, actually, since you get more and purer morphine in a hospital (in a situation like that) than a street addict can ever hope to get.

Yet once he recovered, he had zero need for morphine. Quite the opposite, in fact, he never wanted to go through that again. This is typical. A large study of Vietnam veterans treated with morphine showed that they had no larger chances of ending up as drug abusers than any other veteran.

So it's the soft, "psychological" addiction people should care about anyway. It's not the withdrawal symptoms that keep an addict on opiates, because street addicts regularly go through that, voluntarily or not. What makes them addicts is that they start again after being through it.

Re:YAY !!

[sFurbo]

Cyanide is not really great for poisoning. It tastes horribly, so people will know if you slip it in their food. You can make HCN, which is a gas which only around 85% of people can smell, but it is 5 times less toxic than chlorine gas which is easy to produce from common household chemicals. To get to a dangerous concentration for a small room (say,t he office I am in), you need nearly 10 g, and that is assuming that all of the gas enters the room, that none of it leaves, and that you get sufficient mixing.

All in all, it isn't a great way to kill anything but rats, or people you can force to ingest things, or people you can get to stay in a non-leaking room.

Re:YAY !!

[sFurbo]

On route for the synthesis of mescaline from common chemicals includes it as a reagent.

Re:YAY !!

[wonkey_monkey]

Is that - serious question - why it's called cyanide?

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

A drug should have to be really destructive like Meth to be banned.

Ah, you were doing so well until this.

Firstly, there's the thin end of the wedge problem. Ban Meth. Then ban heroin, then crack cocaine, then regular cocaine, ... because they're all "really destructive" by at least one person's measure.

Secondly, what first-hand evidence do you have of meth? Those photos that are doing the rounds on Facebook? Stop determining your opinions of things based on entertainment you have seen.

Thirdly, if a drug is really destructive, there's an argument that says you don't need to act, as the problem is self-limiting via the Darwin Award mechanism.

Finally, and most crucially in this context, there's the problem that if you ban Meth the Meth users still prop up the black market and all the terrible things you're trying to get rid of.

If you want to suppress the black market you have to legalize all consensual/voluntary drug use by adults, and allow self-harm to occur.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

people walk out windows when using psychedelics alone

I call urban myth on this one. That's not to say it's never happened, but it's not a statistically important phenomenon. (The same cannot be said for alcohol.)

use a babysitter when you use a psychedelic or you are one of the reasons why these drugs are illegal

You're acting as if the powers that be look at the evidence of harm from a drug before banning it. Historically this has never been the case.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me make it simple:

"If someone wants to walk out a window that is their business."

You can't stop everyone walking out of windows. You wouldn't want the kind of society where not walking out of windows was policed.

But apparently the 2nd-order version of this kind of society is fine.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! I'll take a surplus NASA SNAP reactor any day. And what ever became of those Toshiba micro size Nuclear Reactors?

Re:YAY !!

[sFurbo]

if everyone used psychedelics like LSD and psilocybin responsibly (get a babysitter) they would be legal

Why would they? It seems that there are two ways for drugs to be legal: 1) They have a medical effect, allowing for FDA approval, and 2) They have traditionally seen widespread use in the western countries. Examples of this are alcohol, caffeine and tobacco. LSD used responsibly would fit into neither of these categories.

Re:YAY !!

[ArsenneLupin]

. If someone wants to use drugs and walk out a window that is their business.

What if he lands on somebody?

Re:YAY !!

[jythie]

While bad for deliberate poisoning, poor handling or disposal of it can be pretty toxic. If I recall correctly that is why it is regulated, not because people can use it for harm, but because it is too easy to harm others due to mishandlement. It is also generally only regulated in terms of large scale usage for mining or other such activities where the quantities are large enough to have significant impact, at which point it makes sense for the using entity to get the proper certification/oversight/underwriting.

Re:YAY !!

[Jane Q. Public]

I didn't say that. My point was that libertarian ethics are incompatible with utilitarianism, as Ayn Rand herself pointed out.

You implied it. But let me address this point. First, Rand is hardly an expert on Libertarians. Keep in mind that Libertarians, as a group, rejected Rand... don't confuse Objectivists with Libertarians! They are not the same at all.

But more importantly, second: you have gotten your own point wrong. Rand despised what she called Utilitarianism. Saying that Libertarianism is incompatible with it is actually a compliment.

"I made no mention of Keynes. Modern economic theory was founded by John Stuart Mill, and others, using the techniques of the utilitarian calculus to describe rationality and create a framework for modelling rational interactions."

Wrong again. Certain economic philosophy -- not to be confused with the science of economics -- was promoted by Mill. And subscribed to by few. "Most modern economists" -- especially those involved in government -- neither believe in or follow Mill's philosophy. Rather they are dyed-in-the-wool Keynesians, and most even admit it.

Much of modern mathematical economic theory on the other hand, as opposed to philosophy, was formulated by the early Austrian school. Early Austrians proposed a great deal of the math that is not a part of "mainstream" economic theory, and was "borrowed" by the proto-Keynesians (interventionists) and later Keynes himself, and made Gospel. (It should be noted that Mill's philosophy also included interventionism, but again we have to distinguish between political economic philosophy and "economics". They are not the same things.)

Later Austrians have argued that the math is only conceptual and does not actually model the real world, and that interventionism only interferes destructively with, rather than supports, free markets. That concept is still rejected by Keynesians, even though 80+ years of experience shows it to be fundamentally true.

Re:YAY !!

[Jane Q. Public]

s/that is not part of/that is NOW part of

Re:YAY !!

[ultranova]

it's moral for me to decide what people to with their bodies when i am forced to pay for their feeding and housing and healthcare when they destroy their lives with said substances

And I'm forced to pay for the enforcement of your decisions, so I have a right to veto them. Also, why limit ourselves to drugs? Bad diet and lack of exercise cause more costly health problems than all drugs combined, so do you also claim you have a right to decide what other people eat and how much they must jog weekly? For that matter, since insufficient sleep is linked to both costly accidents and illness, do you wish to also mandate bedtimes?

Also, since sites like Silk Road are apparently quite profitable despite requiring a high level of social funtionality to use, I wonder how accurate the stereotype of a dysfunctional drug user really is? Most people who use alcohol continue paying for their own expenses despite it being one of the nastier psychoactive substances in both physical harm and addiction potential according to Wikipedia, so why would, say, your average ecstasy user not accomplish that?

if substance abuse happened in a vacuum, it would be fine. but it does not. it has costs to society. this gives society the right to get involved

Nothing happens in a vacuum. Yours is an argument that lets anyone claim power over anyone else for any decision.

and nonaddictive substances like marijuana should be legal

but the people who sell the addictive substances like heroin, meth, and coke need hard jail time, for the costs their trade incurs on society

That might be a reasonable solution. However, that would first require people to stop talking about "drugs", since the concept combines such widely different substances as heroin, LSD and marijuana, yet excludes alcohol, nicotine and caffeine. Also, it would require dropping the a priori assumption that a mind-altering substance is bad when discussing whether a particular one should be banned. Even more importantly, you'd need to acknowledge that banning a substance is a serious violation of other people's autonomy and can only be done in extraordinary circumstances, not something you can do just to save yourself some money - unless, as I pointed out, you're also willing to let others dictate what you may eat and when you go to bed.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

The entertainment industry would dry up in a month if people had legal access to weed and lsd.

Re:YAY !!

[rpstrong]

IOW, if a drug is used by a niche group (Native Americans, perhaps, using psilocybin) it should be illegal?

Sounds like you're promoting the idea that we should ban anything that hasn't been specifically allowed - rather than allowing anything that hasn't been specifically banned.

I've been a Libertarian for all of my adult life - you can probably guess my opinion on that matter.

I'm reminded somewhat of the 10th amendment, which specifies that powers not specifically granted to the feds are held by the state (or the people). The feds are the ones who are constrained by enumerated powers - not the state. Similarly, substances (including drugs) offered on the market s/b legal unless specifically banned, not illegal unless specifically allowed.

Re:YAY !!

[sFurbo]

I'm not stating how it should be, I'm stating how it seems to work.

Re:YAY !!

[rpstrong]

Agreed, that's how it is. I misinterpreted your comment.

Re:YAY !!

[Procrasti]

Heroin addicts can't afford heroin (at prohibition prices) with welfare... They might spend $500+ a day on heroin.

Where does that money come from, who does it go to? How does that fit in with your concept that heroin stops people from functioning?

The MAJOR cost of those drugs to society all come from those imposed by prohibition, not the drugs themselves.

Imagine they paid retail price for it...

Re:YAY !!

[Procrasti]

He means that cocaine is not physically addictive. Cocaine is psychologically addictive, because it enhances the mood when taken, and leads to depression during withdrawal.

Cocaine withdrawal cannot kill you, the body does not physically depend on it for its continued functioning... Compare to alcohol, which is physically addictive, the changes your body undergoes to compensate for it mean that sudden withdrawal can cause death.

Neither cocaine, meth or heroin are physically addictive substances. Benzodiazepine and alcohol are though.

Re:YAY !!

[Procrasti]

You need to learn the difference between things that harm other people and things that only cause harm to the consentor.

In economics, harm to others not involved in the transaction are called negative externalities. You can see that murder, rape, theft and violence are negative externalities.

However, if someone consents to violent sex, the harm is done to one who is willingly involved in the transaction... There should be no crime. Maximisation of economic decision utility occurs when people are allowed to willingly enter into these transactions. There is not harm to others from the act of taking drugs alone.

Controlling other people's behaviour always leads to lower economic utility. There is an inevitable cost of the drug war... and mostly it's in the violence and crime of gangs that form and are empowered by being handed the black market drug trade. These same people, now wealthy (as a network) then go on to traffic in sex slaves and other things that do cause harm... they become efficient at it... because drugs are so overwhelmingly profitable. (highly demand inelastic -- use does not depend greatly on price / availability).

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as even clean meth isn't without its issues, you are aware of just how many medical complications associated with meth are due to the impure black market varieties of it, yes?

Ban impure drugs, tax and regulate clean drugs, and stop taxing things that needn't be so damn heavily taxed. And maybe with some of the extra tax money, throw together some funding to help those whose drug use is a medical problem. And, when they rob people to pay for their habit, or commit other crimes? Arrest them; their actions are already illegal under other laws in the first place.

Re:YAY !!

[Anonymous Coward]

Anarchist Party of Canada? (Groucho-Marxism)

Yea, Right!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never seen nor participated in Silk Road. But, you'd have to be an utter moron to participate in the Silk Road "Phoenix"! It is sure to be either an FBI honey pot or a scammer looking to steal BitCoin.

Go ahead, prove me wrong.

Re:Yea, Right!

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

My thoughts exactly.
I am surprised that law enforcement allowed it to be shut down in the first place. They should have taken it over, and run it for a few months, track every transaction, and then come down hard on all the dealers.
Or just sit back and bust the top seller every month. Someone else will always step up to fill the gap, and some smart cop looks like a hero to his/her superiors.

Re:Yea, Right!

[aliquis]

"God exist! Go head, prove me wrong!"

It doesn't work like that.

Re:Yea, Right!

[GameboyRMH]

They already got all the site data, I guess they didn't like the idea of using as a farm to raise easily bustable kingpins with.

Re:Yea, Right!

[JWSmythe]

"It's a trap!"
- Admiral Gial Ackbar

Re:Yea, Right!

[Applekid]

My thoughts exactly.

I am surprised that law enforcement allowed it to be shut down in the first place. They should have taken it over, and run it for a few months, track every transaction, and then come down hard on all the dealers.

Or just sit back and bust the top seller every month. Someone else will always step up to fill the gap, and some smart cop looks like a hero to his/her superiors.

The problem with those ideas, of which the police and politicians are most certainly aware, is that any extremely effective method of catching bad guys will eventually put themselves out of business right along with the criminals. They need to only be effective enough to steal enough people away into The System (of prisons, poverty, indentured servitude into perpetuity for themselves and their offspring in a cycle), but not so effective that the reaction stops breeding.

Re:Yea, Right!

[MachineShedFred]

The internet equivalent of sitting on the stash house and making cases off the mules going in and out? Unfortunately, most modern law enforcement doesn't have a view of a horizon that far away. They go for the low hanging fruit and move on, instead of taking down the whole ring.

Re:Yea, Right!

[MachineShedFred]

Like the old saying goes: You follow drugs, you get drug dealers and drug users. You start to follow the money, and you don't know where the fuck it's gonna go.

Re:Yea, Right!

[Anonymous Coward]

Having browsed SR through a web gateway, the deals being offered were mostly very small quantities. Probably not many kingpins there.

Re:Yea, Right!

[228e2]

You forgot to add the spoiler tag!

Re:Yea, Right!

[Anonymous Coward]

Particularly since the "whole ring" may well extend into high places with too much political influence for the police to touch.

Re:Yea, Right!

[Anonymous Coward]

The old Silk Road was taken down by FBI raids. Suddenly, a new Silk Road, apparently operating under the same name, just happens to emerge from the ashes! Wow. Such convenient. So amaze.

You're a fool NOT to be suspicious.

Re:Yea, Right!

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, if you arrest all the drug dealers. Whose going to sell crack to North Americas mayors???????

Re:Yea, Right!

[ultranova]

They should have taken it over, and run it for a few months, track every transaction, and then come down hard on all the dealers. Or just sit back and bust the top seller every month

How? It's not like the sellers need to leave their street adress, and if they're halfway smart, they launder their Bitcoins before cashing them in.

They could potentially catch a few buyers by pretending to be sellers, but even then it would require them to have a stash when ordering because someone send you something illegal doesn't prove you had anything to do with it.

Re:Yea, Right!

[spintriae]

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7M71wmwWRo

Re:Yea, Right!

[Anonymous Coward]

But, you'd have to be an utter moron to participate in the Silk Road "Phoenix"! It is sure to be either an FBI honey pot or a scammer looking to steal BitCoin.

Sure to be, you're 100% certain, are you? Talk about paranoid.

I'd give it 67% chance of being an FBI honey pot and about 25% of being a scammer. Which leaves some chance of it being "legit."

Re:Yea, Right!

[joshki]

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what they did.

Re:Yea, Right!

[Luke has no name]

Go ahead, prove yourself correct.

Re:Yea, Right!

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple: If people get their drugs, it's SR 2.0. If they don't, it's the feds. Wait and see which.

Re:Yea, Right!

[memnock]

Given the general intelligence level of the average criminal, "utter moron" probably isn't much of a stretch for a lot of the silk road users. Committing crimes in a medium that can conceivably record most, if not all, of your actions is crazy.

Someone will attempt to correct me with a comment about how conniving criminals are, but for the most part, they are dumber than a sack of bricks. Sure there is a genius or two, but even the smart ones can get caught if they keep at it and eventually slip up.

Re:Yea, Right!

[AlphaWolf_HK]

The government mafia is the most powerful.

Re:Yea, Right!

[Vintermann]

I am surprised that law enforcement allowed it to be shut down in the first place. They should have taken it over, and run it for a few months, track every transaction, and then come down hard on all the dealers.

They probably did something like that. We know they knew DPR's identity and kept him under surveillance for months. All it would have taken is a keylogger on one of the public terminals he used to manage his stuff, and they'd know everything he knew.

Re:Yea, Right!

[Anonymous Coward]

Knowing his first name makes it less cool, not more.

Re:Yea, Right!

[rtb61]

Obviously the first arrest and shutdown, was all about targeting the site operators, for that task force their goal had been achieved and now it was time to cash in, go for the publicity and get those promotions and they couldn't see beyond that.

Now along comes a second task forcing, eyeing the information and the assets that have been confiscated and undoubtedly with tech support from the NSA they are likely going for the mass arrest goal. Arrest, prosecute and persecute as many individuals as possible. Think of the confiscation of assets, most of the people would be logging in from their homes, so don't just confiscate their assets, confiscate their homes, they don't deserve one any how, as according ot the continuing policies of Uncle Tom Obama the Choom Gang coward they deserve to live in prison or on the streets.

So mass confiscation of assets and of course justification of mass NSA spying techniques, all based around destroying the lives of fellow citizens for daring to use drugs, banned because 'er' apparently according to conservatives, people getting high is worse than repeated homosexual rape in prison. So how many will be set up for destruction before they pull the plug this time, 100, 1,000, 10,000. Will the try to keep it secret and claim odours from people's house's lead to trigger happy raids where likely 1 in 10 will die.

Not really news

[jonbryce]

Lots of silk roads have opened up since the original one was raided. Some have taken orders, collected the money and done a runner with it. Some presumably are still operating. Some will be fronts and honeytraps set up by various law enforcement bodies around the world. Some will be real genuine marketplaces. Nobody knows for sure which ones are the genuine ones.

Re:Not really news

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

That seems to be the way it was setup.
The anonymity that protected the Silk Road now protects scammers and police.

Re:Not really news

[Em Adespoton]

Lots of silk roads have opened up since the original one was raided. Some have taken orders, collected the money and done a runner with it. Some presumably are still operating. Some will be fronts and honeytraps set up by various law enforcement bodies around the world. Some will be real genuine marketplaces. Nobody knows for sure which ones are the genuine ones.

They should have called the new one(s) "Project Spartacus"....

Re:Not really news

[Anonymous Coward]

Lots of silk roads have opened up since the original one was raided. Some have taken orders, collected the money and done a runner with it. Some presumably are still operating. Some will be fronts and honeytraps set up by various law enforcement bodies around the world. Some will be real genuine marketplaces. Nobody knows for sure which ones are the genuine ones.

Correction, no one knows for sure but Brian Krebs.

Re:Not really news

[eneville]

How does that differ from real life dealings?

Re:Not really news

[Anonymous Coward]

Some have taken orders, collected the money and done a runner with it.

Say, that's not a bad idea. Sounds way easier than actually providing the service.

Re:Not really news

[Anonymous Coward]

How is this not a real life dealing?

Re:Not really news

[Anonymous Coward]

Total disarray to fight something that was here before we learned (for it) to HANDLE FIRE AND SMOKE UNLIKE ANY OTHER ANIMAL. But Nixon is a god to be revered, right?

The Silk Road Is Dead.

[Gravis Zero]

Long Live The Silk Road.

Re:The Silk Road Is Dead.

[Gravis Zero]

to be clear, i do not support the Silk Road.

Re:The Silk Road Is Dead.

[Anonymous Coward]

To be clear, I completely support the concept of a free, anonymous marketplace. Silk Road itself? Maybe not so much, because clearly, the owner wasn't an honest businessman or operator. (I don't care about what's "legal". Much more important factors, such as what's ethical come into play, and paying for hits on your competitors is unacceptable by any moral or ethical code I know of.)

I have zero interest in recreational drugs -- but if others do? So be it. There should be a marketplace for them to buy, sell or even trade them around as they see fit. If such a thing was openly accepted, we'd see a lot less violent street crime.

Re:The Silk Road Is Dead.

[TheCarp]

> (I don't care about what's "legal". Much more important factors, such as what's ethical come into
> play, and paying for hits on your competitors is unacceptable by any moral or ethical code I know
> of.)

All things being equal I want to agree but, lets do remember the context was a blackmail situation.
He was literally being threatened with being raided and arrested, a situation that can be fatal on several points, both during arrest and while in prison. He was facing the threat of serious violent action.

Does this justify murder? Meh, I am not so sure it does or doesn't. It almost makes it a form of self defence. I, for example, think he would have a more justified case of self defence than say.... excuses for starting the was in Iraq or Afghanistan.

In a very real way, he was a victim in this case. I have a harder time blaming a victim trying to deal with the threat being made to him than someone who simply tried to kill for profit motive or for some personal grudge.

The real tragedy is the situation that created silk road and created a situation where he was a perfect target for a con artist looking to blackmail him. If not for laws against the informed transactions between consenting adults, the site would not exist and he would not have been threatened by con artists looking to take him.

Re:The Silk Road Is Dead.

[Anonymous Coward]

IIRC, blackmailer claimed to have data about some sellers and buyers lifted from one dealer's PC and blackmailed DPR on the premise of "It'd be bad for your business, wouldn't it?", not "You'll be jailed" - he didn't have DPR's data.

Let's also not forget torture and murder he ordered on an admin of his site who ran away with money.

Re:The Silk Road Is Dead.

[TheCarp]

1. While true, defence of others is just as good as defending oneself.

2. a. Torture is going to far in any case. I don't remember the torture part, that definitely isn't justified, will have to check the articles on that.
b. Yah that is a bit much for just running away with money, I thought there was blackmail involved there too

So, now that I said that.... I did some looking it up....

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/10/02/feds-allege-silk-roads-boss-paid-for-murders-of-both-a-witness-and-a-blackmailer/

âoeIâ(TM)d like him beat up, then forced to send the bitcoins he stole back. like sit him down at his computer and make him do it,â reads a message from the Roberts account, included in the complaint.

In a followup message, however, prosecutors say that Ulbricht asked to âoechange the order to execute rather than torture,â fearing that because the employee had spent time in prison, he might act as an informant against the Silk Road rather than risk being charged himself. In the messages reproduced in the complaint, Ulbricht is said to have added that âoehe had never killed a man or had one killed before, but it is the right move in this case.â

so it wasn't torture and murder together. In fact, in slightly different circumstances, such actions would even be legal in some places like Texas where a person is authorized to use force to secure the reuturn of their property (some conditions apply, IANAL: http://www.policymic.com/articles/46995/ezekiel-gilbert-texas-man-who-killed-prostitute-not-going-to-jail - though I will note I disagree with the characterization of her as a prostitute, prostitutes have sex for money, she was a con artist if all stories in the case are taken as true)

So overall they reduce to about the same. I dunno they all were engaged in illegal business and when in an illegal business you know people can't sue you so the stakes are higher. Anyone stealing large amounts and posing a threat to others in the business should really expect that sort of retaliation.

I don't see why normal social mores and norms about murder should be considered to apply in such situations, everybody knew what they were getting into from the start.

Re:The Silk Road Is Dead.

[Anonymous Coward]

Silk (polyester) is an ISLAMIC SIN. And since anything beyond dirty water, horned piss and dates is also a sin, to follow the Silk Road is to be, well, a Renascentist (European) AT LEAST. They will kill the whole species to keep their primitivisms.

Re:The Silk Road Is Dead.

[aminorex]

rumors and allegations. propaganda is always thus

The only thing that would make sense...

[eexaa]

...is that this instance is run by FBI.

I don't see other reason why anyone would take the risk without - at least - a massive security technology change.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Urza9814]

The 'massive security upgrade' could be that this one isn't run by a goddamn moron....

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[rcs1000]

According to the FBI, Ulbright pulled in $85m of commissions in about three years.

With profits like that, I suspect quite a few people will be happy to risk a little bit of jail time.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Hatta]

The technology was not what got the Silk Road raided. The technology is fine, it's user error that's the problem. Ulbricht failed to fully compartmentalize his Dread Pirate Roberts identity, and that's what got him busted.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[GameboyRMH]

This. The guy was a multi-millionaire but couldn't be assed to make fake ID cards in-house or separate his identity as Silk Road admin from one he used on the web to promote the site, among many other things. Someone smart behind the wheel would have made it unstoppable.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[stewsters]

Especially if you live in some 3rd world country where they don't care if you sell drugs as long as you can pay the Generalissimo. The location of the server makes little difference in a dark net.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Sponge Bath]

I have nothing but praise for Fabulous Bud Industries. Fast shipping, good stealth, would buy again.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[lgw]

In central Florida there's a company called "Florida Business Interiors" with vans all over the place. Those always cracked me up.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Anonymous Coward]

He wasn't a multi-millionaire; he was living in someone else's crappy apartment in Frisco.

He had "millions of dollars worth of Bitcoin", sure. The dirty secret is that large, non-hobbyist amounts of buttcoin are not easily redeemable for real money. Sorry, slipup there, I meant "filthy fiat debt-currency" or whatever.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Lord Apathy]

The 'massive security upgrade' could be that this one isn't run by a goddamn moron....

So true. I was banging my head against the table as details came out. Well figuratively, but not literally.

But lets make one thing clear, this is not THE Silk Road. This is A Silk Road. One of a number of wanna that want to step into the place of the original.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Anonymous Coward]

... is the story they've "parallel constructed".

I'm sure in 60 years when stuff gets declassified, there'll be a footnote in ancient history where the CIA sent someone up to canada and mailed this guy some fake IDs out of the blue, in a box marked for Canadian Post to open.

BTW: where's the arrest record for the guy who mailed the IDs? Surely even in Canada making fake IDs is illegal.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Anonymous Coward]

He didn't have millions of dollars. He had 600,000 buttcoins and no dollars. Now he has a public defender instead of a real-life Saul Goodman. Sucks to be him.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Zontar The Mindless]

A real-life public defender instead of a Saul Goodman?

I don't get it.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Anonymous Coward]

It wasn't fully user error. The FBI used some undisclosed method to determine the locations of the various Silk Road servers and managed to get an image of the data on one of them.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Zontar The Mindless]

Back in the day, the Merry Pranksters used to drive around SF Bay in a van marked International Cocaine Importers & Exporters SA / San Francisco - Ciudad Juárez - Lima.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[gargleblast]

Exactly. His aliases should have been completely unrelated names such as "Barterer I Spot" or "Tits Bearer Pro".

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[Vintermann]

Everyone makes mistakes. You hear about the dumb things he did. The smart things he did you don't hear about, because they worked. Of course it doesn't take many dumb things to catch you.

Especially not if the dumb things aren't needed to actually identify you, but only to make a parallel construction.

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[wonkey_monkey]

Flowers By Irene

Re:The only thing that would make sense...

[aminorex]

you appear to be confusing ubricht with DPR. that is one error.

Seems legit..

[selfabuse]

of course it's not a honeypot. What would ever make you think that?

Re:Seems legit..

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

The nsa.gov/silkroad URL?

Re:Seems legit..

[Anonymous Coward]

You took my joke, FUCKER

Well played

Re:Seems legit..

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a Tor hidden service, so the URL would be silkroad2{F81h0n3yPo7}.onion

Re:Seems legit..

[Anonymous Coward]

that's just to throw the feds off. Why would they monitor their own systems? It's brilliant.

no

[Anonymous Coward]

link ?

FBI tradition?

[zAPPzAPP]

Traditionally, domains and servers sized by the FBI become honeypots afterwards, right?
I would be disappointed if they were to break with this convenient reallocation of resources now.

Re:FBI tradition?

[Anonymous Coward]

Traditionally, slashdot users knew the difference between a .com domain and an .onion domain... Traditions change...

Re:FBI tradition?

[Zontar The Mindless]

These are the same users who supposedly knew the difference between Java and JavaScript...?

Wait---they never did... so I guess some /. traditions remain safe, eh.

Re:FBI tradition?

[Big Hairy Ian]

These are the same users who supposedly knew the difference between Java and JavaScript...?

Ones coffee right?

Re:FBI tradition?

[Zontar The Mindless]

Very good! Perhaps I should have more faith in the up-and-coming generation.

Now, about that apostrophe...

Others have already taken over

[data2]

Other have already taken over. It might not yet be as trusted as Silk Road was, but there are alternate platforms that were just waiting for the big one to go away and took over without a problem. Too much money to be gained in a fairly secure market. Just don't be from the US but from Russia or somewhere where they don't bother going after someone mostly facilitating sales in the US and Europe.

A Tragedy!

[HtR]

OMG!
For the love of god, think of the drug dealers!

Slashvertisement with free gift

[Anonymous Coward]

Now you can have free reporting bias with your Slashvertisements!
I imagine they're paying off the editors with "merchandise". It would explain a lot.

Priorities

[Anonymous Coward]

The "authorities" have plenty of resources to go after this non-sense; but have no time to investigate the $BILLIONS of fraud and laundering by the banksters... and also, found the time to go after Mark Cuban for some trumped-up BS..

The world makes perfect sense. /s

drugs are bad mkay

[Joe_Dragon]

drugs are bad mkay

Re:drugs are bad mkay

[Anonymous Coward]

drugs are bad

We need to outlaw pharmacies and retrain our health workers in the use of leeches and poultices

Re:drugs are bad mkay

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

Tell that to Pfizer and UnitedHealthcare. And the US Senate, for that matter.

Re:drugs are bad mkay

[msobkow]

Personally I don't do drugs. But I use medical cannabis to manage my migraines and arthritis.

There is nothing quite as effective as traditional herbal medication.

Re:drugs are bad mkay

[Anonymous Coward]

I misread that as "leeches and politicians" and wondered why you were being redundant.

Re:drugs are bad mkay

[game kid]

Leeches never really left the drugstore. They evolved into the strange lifeforms we now call "Health Maintenance Organizations".

Re:drugs are bad mkay

[ultranova]

drugs are bad mkay

Does that mean workaholics should be forbidden to work, since they get high from it?

Re:drugs are bad mkay

[Anonymous Coward]

Gosh! I wish I had migraine

Re:drugs are bad mkay

[david_thornley]

Drugs are bad? Hey, I thought it was a good thing that I'm still alive (and haven't had another heart attack - those stents can cause real problems without proper meds).

GMT?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

GMT is soooo last century.

Re:GMT?!?

[Zontar The Mindless]

GMT is soooo last century.

And so is Swatch Internet Time, thank goodness.

Oh, good

[Minwee]

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford is very happy to hear about that.

Re:Oh, good

[Minwee]

Waitaminute. I didn't post that.

Okay, maybe I did, but I was probably in a drunken stupor when it happened so that's okay.

Re:Oh, good

[Mashiki]

Who do you think you are? Obama?

Re:Oh, good

[Thud457]

I may have done that while in a drunken stupor

Is going to replace suspots as my go-to excuse for all and anything from now on. Since apparently it's acceptable justification for even the most unacceptable of behavior.
Hell, I see a resurgence in the three-martini lunch from here on out.

Re:Oh, good

[Anonymous Coward]

Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:Oh, good

[H0p313ss]

Who do you think you are? Obama?

Good try, but this was a little further north.

I suspect this will be looked at as one of the great political suicide speaches of all time.

Re:Oh, good

[Sir_Eptishous]

This is fascinating!

How could this guy:

But until Tuesday, Rob Ford, the mayor of multicultural, eco-conscious, politically correct Toronto, had vehemently denied a persistent report about a video that showed him smoking crack cocaine.

Get elected as mayor of Toronto?

But until this one, the episodes only seemed to reinforce Mr. Ford’s standing among his core constituency, what he calls the Ford Nation, of disenchanted, right-of-center suburbanites. Now his mayoralty is in serious doubt.

Re:Oh, good

[ultranova]

Because elections are about selecting the lesser evil, and a candidate using crack is unlikely to even register on that scale, as long as they are functional enough to run their campaign.

Re:Oh, good

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously you have been asking the wrong questions or you would have gotten the real answer.

Re:Oh, good

[Zontar The Mindless]

Does the subscription include 3 martinis daily? If so, I might also be interested.

Re:Oh, good

[Mashiki]

Good try, but this was a little further north.

I suspect this will be looked at as one of the great political suicide speaches of all time.

Missing the irony I see. As a useful protip: I normally live 103km from Toronto.

HOLY LOLI HONEYPOT EXPLOZION, BATAMAN!

[Thud457]

On teh intarwebs, no one can tell you're a FED.

A welcome relief

[Anonymous Coward]

Stockpiling all this Jenkem wasn't a shitty idea after all! I'm looking forward to a crapload of sales. I'm sure this new Silk Road will be flush with success!

Weighing the possibilities

[J'raxis]

It could be a honeypot, but since everything done through a site like Silk Road is anonymous except receipt of delivery of items, the only users of the site the FBI would catch would be the drug buyers. Sellers, provided they're not using an OS or browser with the vulnerabilities that the FBI has used to de-anonymize TOR users in the past, and provided they don't do something dumb when they mail a package like reveal their identity, are safe. And since when is the FBI interested in going after drug buyers? Typically they only bust such small-time participants in the drug trade to get them to rat on their dealers, but that obviously won't work when your dealer is anonymous.

Or am I missing something here? My understanding was that Silk Road did things entirely through TOR and Bitcoin, meaning that those ends of the transactions are (excepting user stupidity) completely anonymous.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

since everything done through a site like Silk Road is anonymous except receipt of delivery of items

What, you think you know who that tweaker was who dropped your oxycodone off last night? Yeah right. He is as good as anonymous here, don't bother with making the distinction.

Re: Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

If you net a bunch of sys admins from this slashvertisement, maybe you can turn them into assets that keep the doors open for the FBI or NSA at their respective companies.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

You are missing two major points:
1. To governments, TOR is not as anonymous as you would like to believe
2. Bitcoins are not perfectly anonymous. All transactions for all time are public and a little bit of information goes a long way toward de-anonymizing you. For instance you do business with a wallet, then someone else can do business with the same wallet and figure out all the other wallets. Then they can use time to figure out a set of probable IPs for those wallets. After you make a few transactions, your IP moves to the top of the probability pile.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's a honeypot, they may not even bother trying to snare any dealers, just buyers. Fear is like salt: sow enough of it in the field, and you can kill off that field. The buyers will go back to their friendly, neighborhood Bosnian war criminals instead, because they're less likely to get busted.

If they do, however, go for sellers, remember that Postal Inspectors were busting mail-order pornographers before you were born and before drugs were cool. They know how to find someone selling products through the mail. It's what they do for a living.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

But you forget that I'm using the infinite improbability wallet

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[steelfood]

You have to look at what they have now that they didn't have before, assuming it's a honeypot. Likely, they have detailed information of the transactions of their users, everything from the IP of the incoming TOR node to the amount and type of transactions a particular user was party to. And they can probably

I think they're still waiting for their users to slip up, reveal their real names or do some other silly thing to expose themselves. But now they don't need to set up sting operations on any potential suspects. Instead, they can simply arrest them, as the transaction logs are proof of misconduct.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[steelfood]

Whoops, never finished that thought. They can probably determine which time zone the user mostly is in from the logs alone.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[JWSmythe]

There is the glaring privacy hole.

At some point, the physical package will be shipped from Point A to Point B.

It's obvious that carriers like UPS and FedEx already track every detail of a package from pickup to delivery. You can get those details from their web site with the tracking number.

Shipping using USPS seemed "safer". It came out a few months ago that it isn't.

A private courier is more expensive, and adds the ability to track the package closer, especially if the feds are the sending party.

Even in the case of the Dread Pirate Roberts hiring a hitman, there is a real-world endpoint. They know who has the contract on their head, they'd only have to investigate why to find out who ordered it.

So even if TOR was perfectly anonymous (It's good, but...), and if bitcoins were anonymous (again, good, but...), it's still easy to catch one or both ends of the transaction.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[JWSmythe]

But I don't know any Bosnian war criminals. Where am I suppose to purchase gently used fully automatic weapons at rock bottom prices?

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

The point you are missing: Neither bitcoin nor TOR offer PFS: Bitcoin allows for looking up transactions once you have the wallet ID, TOR requires control over "some exit" nodes for correlating traffic (or just browser fingerprinting).

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

African warlord. Or the ATF if you're in the US. Just say you need them for your operation at the border.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[JWSmythe]

Well, we don't seem to have a lot of African warlords around here. ATF employees though, we have plenty. I keep calling asking to buy, but they always laugh and hang up. Should I be telling them I'm willing to spend up to 10 whole dollars? :)

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course you do. Haven't you seen Remove Kebab/Serbia Stronk? The guy on the accordion is a convicted Bosnian war criminal.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

And if the buyers don't feel safe, then who are the sellers going to sell to? It reduces the effectiveness of a channel where they can't easily identify the buyers, forcing people back to channels where they can.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[wonkey_monkey]

There is the glaring privacy hole.

I'll thank you not to look at my glaring privacy hole.

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're on the government side, not as LEA but with the intent of reducing drug trade (i.e. sincere), then it's very much in your benefit to spread FUD about the drugs trade. There are plenty of youth who'd try drugs if they weren't afraid of being (A) scammed and (B) poisoned.

Furthermore, with such FUD you can also undermine the sellers trust of such electronic black markets, forcing them back to traditional channels.

Heck, you don't even need to actually _run_ such a site. Just announce one will start in 2 months time, make very exhaustive lists of all the things you need to do to be secure on this new platform, let everyone go through all those steps, and then let everyone hang as the supposed site never starts trading. That will create a dislike of the necessary complex security procedures. "I spent $500 buying a new PC that's been never used for anything else, spent 3 days installing all the software, and now that site has gone black? Fuck it."

Re:Weighing the possibilities

[JWSmythe]

Shush Goatse, you've been showing us your privacy hole for years. :)

Drugwars

[Dishwasha]

Obligatory Drugwars link

The real Roberts has been retired 15 years...

[NoImNotNineVolt]

Good night, Westley. Good work. Sleep well. I'll most likely kill you in the morning.

Did they REALLY ever bust Silk Road?

[dresgarcia]

Anyone who was on and followed what happened when they "busted" SR, should be skeptical across the board. THe orignal takedown notice was not a real FBI one the SR site. . . it had the SR logo on it. DPR is almost certainly not one person anyway, that is even revealed in the interviews that the guy who was busted gave. I guess, however, we can all make assumptions. . . and assume the mass media has accurately reported this from the beginning.

After all, they were so accurate when the Boston bombing occured. . .right? http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/04/wrongly-accused-boston-bombing-suspects-sunil-tripathi.html

Mod parent up for ridicule.

[GodInHell]

Your point is so nuts that the only appropriate response is to hold it up to the light for people to observe exactly how deep the well of objectivism can go.

Re:Mod parent up for ridicule.

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

A lefty wrote tbis.

Most of you are akin to chimpanzees jumping at the behest of memes to strip freedoms in the support of your meme's attempt at dominance.

Grow up and leave that tens of millenia old crap on the dustheap of history where it belongs. We, who do not recognize consenting crimes, are currently twisting the dagger in the corpse of anti-gay and anti-marijuana laws.

Come on over to the winning side! "Imagine how stupid you will look in 50, 100, or 150 years."

By the way, to FBI profilers, I don't use Tor and have smoked marijuana precisely 2x in my life, once in Jamaica and once in Ann Arbor. This is inconceivable to you, of course, and to most dear readers, no doubt, who think nobody thinks this way without ulterior motives. You all are sad.

Re:Mod parent up for ridicule.

[Jane Q. Public]

A lefty wrote tbis.

Most of you are akin to chimpanzees jumping at the behest of memes to strip freedoms in the support of your meme's attempt at dominance.

And you are not? I am reminded of a newpaper cartoon I saw that was penned in the '60s. There was a whole row of young people, all wearing beads, vests, bell-bottom jeans, and long hair, saying in unison: "Look! We're non-conforming!"

Grow up and leave that tens of millenia old crap on the dustheap of history where it belongs. We, who do not recognize consenting crimes, are currently twisting the dagger in the corpse of anti-gay and anti-marijuana laws.

How about you grow up and read the philosophers who got there long before you? Like Lysander Spooner, who wrote "Vices Are Not Crimes" in 1875?

Re:Mod parent up for ridicule.

[GodInHell]

I can't tell if you're replying to my post or someone else? The post I replied to got modded down to -1, so maybe it isn't visible in your filters? I have no idea what you are even trying to say.

It's a TWAP

[RalphMichaelDeLeon]

No really..it's a trap. Obviously the NSA has "resurrected" the SR to lure you poor guppies into a giant net of "why don't you have a seat over there"....oop be right back there's a knock at my door... *Never heard from again

whats the url?

[Anonymous Coward]

whats the real url? or is it still the same?

Re:whats the url?

[rpstrong]

silkroad6ownowfk.onion

Maybe the CIA...

[swb]

...has taken it over and going to run it as a profit center to support whatever off-the-books black ops they are running, as well as provide a long-term intelligence gathering center for transnational organized crime and drug dealing.

recover gold from electronic waste

[rewindustry]

key resource in many street level recovery industries - cheap, dangerous and dirty, unfortunately.

Re:recover gold from electronic waste

[Vintermann]

Yup. It's not for deliberate poisoning - for that, you might as well go to any grocery store's cleaning product aisle. But we should worry about where the buyers dump or spill it during and after their little operation.

lost all their bitcoins

[Arancaytar]

If they kept it in wallets controlled by the Silk Road site, they have only themselves to blame. Preventing that kind of thing is what bitcoin is designed for.

With dopers?

[Ungrounded Lightning]

They can probably determine which time zone the user mostly is in from the logs alone.

With drug users working on Doper Substandard Time? That would be a stretch.

I'd never order from such a "service"

[msobkow]

I'd never order my medication from a place like "Silk Road." I don't like the idea of giving my address out to some anonymous stranger that I've never chatted with or met.

Silly me. Being paranoid like that.

Remember: Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't watching you.

silk road wasnt the problem

[nurb432]

The problem really wasn't with silk road, it was no more or less illegal than your street corner. The problem is it was being run by some guy who was violating laws, and got caught. If you do something to piss off the man, you really need to stay clean.

Its too bad the dealers lost their $, but that can happen in real life too if your supplier gets busted before he delivers.

This is stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

How can physical delivery of goods ever be anonymous. It's impossible.

Re:This is stupid

[rpstrong]

You rent a private PO box under an assumed name. I drop an envelope (or small package) in a street corner mailbox, addressed to your box. You abandon the box after receipt.

Anonymous enough.

silk road - meh

[Anonymous Coward]

BMR4lyfe

(Black Market Reloaded)

website?

[Anonymous Coward]

anyone have the address for the website? http://www ??

all I could find is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road

i just want to see how many $$$ people charge

Re:website?

[rpstrong]

That would be silkroad6ownowfk.onion (you must connect through Tor).

What's with the bias in the article?

[Anonymous Coward]

" (Though presumably they didn't stop getting high, instead forced back to the 'mystery mix' street dealers and surly ex-Balkan war criminals who have spent years filling cities with drugs at night.)"

Uh, source please for this outrageous and heavily biased statement?

What makes anyone think the drugs available through Silk Road merchants have no ties to war criminals, gangs, or drug cartels? Is this more of that wishful thinking of drug users who insist their habit harms nobody, no matter what kind of scoundrels they are funding by their habit? That is an extraordinary claim to make.

And really, if you think the drugs you get through Silk Road merchants aren't mixed, you are insane. These are drug dealers selling to drug addicts, profit is the only goal that matters.

This is yet more delusional thinking from people choosing to live in a world of delusions.

Maybe?? You should fix that...

[helobugz]

zing.

Its the other Saul...

[Anonymous Coward]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Goodman_%28Breaking_Bad%29

Re:Its the other Saul...

[Zontar The Mindless]

Some of us prefer to live in a different novel.