Silk Road Founder Indicted In New York

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Silk Road Founder Indicted In New York

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday February 4, 2014 @11:41AM from the turns-out-they-have-laws-there-too dept.

An anonymous reader sends this report from Wired: "Federal authorities today announced a Grand Jury indictment against Ross Ulbricht, the alleged founder and owner of the underground drug emporium Silk Road. The indictment (PDF), in New York, includes one count for narcotics conspiracy, one count of running a criminal enterprise, one count of conspiracy to commit computer hacking and one count of money laundering, according to the indictment. It's the second indictment for the the 29-year-old, who was arrested last October in San Francisco. Ulbricht was previously charged in New York at the time of his arrest, but authorities had until December to obtain an indictment against him based on new evidence seized. They sought an extension of that time and announced the indictment today. Ulbricht had been previously indicted in Maryland on charges of conspiring to have a former administrator of Silk Road murdered in exchange for $80,000."

16 of 94 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

[OT] beta.slashdot.org by Any+Web+Loco · 2014-02-04 12:06 · Score: 4, Insightful

Seriously /. - fuck you! If I go to slashdot.org you redirect me to beta.slashdot.org. If I go to classic.slashdot.org, you redirect me to beta.slashdot.org. If I log in, you redirect me to beta.slashdot.org.

I freaking HATE beta.slashdot.org and I resent your pushing me into it! If I log in, and my preferences are set to classic, LET ME HAVE CLASSIC!
1. Re:[OT] beta.slashdot.org by ChunderDownunder · 2014-02-04 13:05 · Score: 2
  
  I dunno what you're doing wrong, I'm NEVER directed to the beta site.
2. Re:[OT] beta.slashdot.org by Frosty+Piss · 2014-02-04 14:10 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  You're only directed to the Beta site if you're not logged in.
  One would think that a Slashdot visitor with a half million ID would be smart enough to figure that out.
  
  --
  If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
3. Re:[OT] beta.slashdot.org by Anonymous Coward · 2014-02-04 14:34 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  What exactly is so hard about adding /?nobeta=1 to the url? These posts are seriously offtopic and do nothing but derail the conversation. If you aren't smart enough to figure out how to Slashdot, GTFO.
Hans Reiser's attorney? by ebno-10db · 2014-02-04 12:06 · Score: 4, Funny

Maybe Hans Reiser can give him the name of his attorney.
You're not alone. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-02-04 12:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

You're not alone. I see these anti-Slashdot-beta posts so often now. I really hope that the Slashdot brass are seeing them, too, and hopefully realizing how much just about everyone hates this beta site.
Everything about the beta site is contrary to what typical Slashdot users want and will put up with. It's like it has been specifically designed to alienate as many existing users here as it possibly could. Maybe that would make some business sense, were it not for the fact that it does absolutely nothing to attract any new users.
While it could be argued that Slashdot has been stagnating, if not declining, for several years now, the beta site going live (if it happens) will surely just accelerate that process, rather than stop or reverse it. There are many of us who will be driven away if the beta site goes live. It truly is that unusable.
I hope that those in charge at Slashdot are just giving it a two-month trial period. Maybe at the end of February they'll be able to admit that the beta project is an utter failure, and they'll put an end to it. That's really the only viable option. The beta site has no future, regardless of whether it's because it's sensibly killed off by Slashdot management, or whether it's because it goes live and drives away all of the existing users.
1. Re:You're not alone. by glavenoid · 2014-02-04 13:13 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  It's like it has been specifically designed to alienate as many existing users here as it possibly could.
  Unless the overlords at Dice are so unfathomably, unbelievably incompetent, this is the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn which poses another conundrum: without the users the slashdot.org domain has no value whatsoever. Rather than alienate the 15 years or so of slashdot users in an attempt to attract new users, Dice would have been much better off creating something new from scratch.
  It's totally mind-boggling.
  
  --
  I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable /. beta rollout fallout.
2. Re:You're not alone. by glavenoid · 2014-02-04 13:18 · Score: 2
  
  Oh yea, I forgot to mention: WTF is this shit about? Why so many "contributors" and what is their purpose for slashdot? Stumbling upon this reminds me of the Simpsons where Homer discovers a secret plot to move the Springfield Isotopes to Albuquerque and no-one would believe him.
  I'm telling y'all, something nasty is about to happen to /.
  
  --
  I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable /. beta rollout fallout.
Re:Another retarded libertarian by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-02-04 12:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

If you start with "The fascist US government is afraid of the bitcoin revolution" and work backwards from there- anything is defensible.
Re:A website by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-02-04 12:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

If you run a Nickleback fan forum, and someone posts child porn, you are not responsible for that.
If you create a web site expressly for anonymous selling, and you're well aware of people selling drugs on it, and taking a cut of those profits, then you are a conspirator to that crime.
Conspiracy to commit computer hacking? by Forrest.Dix · 2014-02-04 12:45 · Score: 2

Seriously? Conspiracy to commit computer hacking? When did hacking become illegal?
1. Re:Conspiracy to commit computer hacking? by Forrest.Dix · 2014-02-04 12:47 · Score: 2
  
  When I hear that, I picture Steve Wozniak conspiring to build the Apple II.
Re:entrapment by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-02-04 13:04 · Score: 2

In order to show entrapment you have to make a judge or jury believe that if the government had not been involved, that the crime would not have occurred. There's no way this guy can make that case.
Re:entrapment by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-02-04 13:11 · Score: 5, Insightful

The timeline does not support your theory. By the time the feds got involved, Silk Road was already a very popular marketplace. They got access to the servers, and watched the site operate for about 4 months. That's very standard in drug ring cases. It would be stupid to arrest everyone involved the moment you know about it. The goal is to collect a mountain of evidence so that they can charge people with a bunch of crimes and make rock solid cases in court.
Next up - gov. contract! by Rob_Bryerton · 2014-02-04 14:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

From the summary:

...includes one count for narcotics conspiracy, one count of running a criminal enterprise, one count of conspiracy to commit computer hacking and one count of money laundering,...
So, from that little snippet, it seems our man is qualified to work at the following government agencies:
CIA
FBI
NSA

Or, he could just run for congress. Scratch that, it seems he'd be under-qualified.
nobeta=1 does not always work. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-02-04 14:59 · Score: 2, Informative

No, it's not hard to add. But it often doesn't work! I'll add it, and yet usually still remain stuck on the beta site.
Besides, it's naive to think that it'll remain available if the beta site does go live at some point. Not that it does much good now, mind you, given how fucking broken it apparently is!