Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

OpenBazaar, Born of an Effort To Build the Next Silk Road, Raises $1 Million

Posted by timothy on from the please-leave-your-comments-for-the-fbi-below dept.

Patrick O'Neill writes: After the fall of Silk Road, Amir Taaki built DarkMarket in an effort to offer a decentralized and "untouchable" market alternative. That's grown into OpenBazaar, a "censorship-resistant" protocol that just raised $1 million from venture capital firms Union Square Ventures and Andreessen Horowitz, as well as angel investor William Mougayar through the company OB1, which will now do core development on the software.

74 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Untouchable? by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    Because the players here fight dirty.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Untouchable? by Canth7 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I would note that other articles on the OpenBazaar raise, do not use that word. Censorship-resistant seems to be the consensus on what the product aims to achieve.

    2. Re:Untouchable? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > Because the players here fight dirty.

      You mean the government with their unlimited access to funds and ability to declare a War on X with anything they disagree with? :-)

    3. Re:Untouchable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do you think you're special enough that you can use a monospace font? Get back in the short bus!

    4. Re:Untouchable? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      Only because someone cries "There ought to be a law" and it is so. And as long as politicians keep getting elected to make all the "there ought to be a law" laws, then we're stuck with that system.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:Untouchable? by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      That, and secret laws, ignoring your Constitutional rights, trumping up a bunch of other charges to bully you into doing what they say ... oh, and the massive bit of institutional perjury which is embodies in parallel construction to deny you a proper legal defense.

      They'll come down pretty hard on anybody they think is enabling this kind of stuff, and they'll twist and reinterpret the law any way they need to.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    6. Re:Untouchable? by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Evolution at work. The smartest ones will survive. Those that were pretty successful so far until caught did not impress as being very smart and the process is obviously in an early stage. And those on the government side, fighting the utterly useless and destructive "War on everything we do not like" will not have anybody really smart among them, because smart people do not seek government employ.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    7. Re:Untouchable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      +1 Mod up pls

    8. Re:Untouchable? by petermgreen · · Score: 1, Interesting

      When people built centralised systems for making payments while avoiding the regular government controlled banking system the government either crushed them or forced them to become part of the system.

      It was clearly within the US governments resources to crush bitcoin by gathering together enough hardware to do a 51% attack and thereby prevent unapproved transactions from entering the blockchain but they did not do so.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    9. Re:Untouchable? by mrjimorg · · Score: 2

      Yes, but the Silk Road has to win every fight. If the government employee wins 1 - just 1 then the game is over.

    10. Re:Untouchable? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      As you fail to capitalize the first letter of your first sentence... Black pots shouldn't throw glass stones at houses.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    11. Re:Untouchable? by KGIII · · Score: 2

      There ought to be a law against that.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    12. Re:Untouchable? by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 2

      > because smart people do not seek government employ.

      That's a simplification. Smart people are discouraged from government employ because the pay scale is low. The Federal general salary (GS) scale tops out at 100-130K per year. However, other factors, like job security, not having to work very hard, or power over other people's lives can compensate for the low pay. A really interesting job can also attract smart people. Civilian U.S. astronauts are on the GS scale, and thus they top out at the same salaries as other federal employees. But they have a *really* interesting job, and I think all of them are pretty smart (I've met and worked with half a dozen or so).

    13. Re:Untouchable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The government doesn't need to be very smart. those making OpenBazaar however need to be perfect at absolutely every single thing though do from social interactions online and offline, how and where they spend their money and how well they manage IT. The government only has to win one battle and the war is over and that one battle can be something as silly as a careless post on social media or someone that gets greedy and is happy to sell out to the government in exchange for turning everyone else in. OpenBazaar and those creating it need to win every single battle in a never ending war. The odds simply are against it no matter how smart they are.

    14. Re:Untouchable? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Except for some rare deviations (and astronaut is not really a common job and has some rather serious requirements with regard to the candidates), government jobs are far too dull for smart people. That the pay sucks is just a small part of the problem. The more serious issues is that you are routinely not allowed to think and that getting anything done is a glacial and painful process. Large companies are bad enough, but the Government invented tedium.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    15. Re:Untouchable? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      It actually only has to win in instances where the other side notices that something is up. Remember that the stuff they sold was sent through regular mail for a long, long time?

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    16. Re:Untouchable? by Stuarticus · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm going to guess that you think you are super smart and you don't work for the government. Am I close?

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    17. Re:Untouchable? by tehcyder · · Score: 3, Funny

      I was going to place him as a maverick private investigator who had to quit the force after hitting a superior officer/refusing to lie to protect a corrupt colleague, and is now a divorced loner with a drink problem and a fondness for some obscure type of music. The police come to him when a particularly difficult crime has them baffled, probably involving a locked room, the solution to which requires a couple of puns, and a working knowledge of Ancient Sumerian.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  2. I predict by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    that this will go well for all concerned.

    1. Re:I predict by Canth7 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It'll probably be about as a well received by authorities as PGP was back in the 1990s. Doesn't mean that it's not an important evolution of the way that ecommerce could work.

  3. e-bay & Alibaba killer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It has the potential to really hurt e-bay & Alibaba. Think about all those traders, that can sell their wares for free. It's a no-brainer to list your sites on OpenBazzar at the same time. Eventually the user-base will get to a point where e-bay is too expansive, and they will have to drop their prices.

  4. Re:Straight to jail... by binarylarry · · Score: 3, Funny

    The stupid feds will never figure this one out! - Dread Pirate Roberts

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  5. Source available by anchovy_chekov · · Score: 2

    I assume this is the same project. Written in Python, MIT licence, FWTW

    https://github.com/OpenBazaar/...

  6. Unpossible by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    This is why governments have such hard-ons for alternative currencies. At some point, in order to profit from your schemes, you have to turn your activity into currency, and that's how they can nail you. They just follow the money. It never ceases to amaze me how people who comprehend that this works in politics don't think it will work everywhere else.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Unpossible by ArcadeMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except it will stop working when the people end-to-end never convert the cryptocurrencies into regular fiat currency.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    2. Re:Unpossible by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It will stop once they realize that all crypto currencies are in fact traceable via their block chain. It will be mitigated by washing services, but you'll find governments eventually regulating those out of business.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    3. Re:Unpossible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      a BTC tumbler is not a business, it is a piece of code that can be added to any btc related transaction platform, and the silk road I even had it.

      no one was arrested to do blockchain evidence, the evidence was ordinary humint and some quasi-legal hacking exploiting TOR vulnerabilities.

    4. Re:Unpossible by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Informative

      I am not a dumbass. I speak for those that don't know certain things are even possible. Those that use SilkRoad /OpenBazzare probably already know about these things, or at least should. Your Grandma doesn't.

      Yes, you can (and should) use a new wallet every transaction, by default.

      Yes, you can wash your currency between transfers to new wallets, and probably should do that too.

      You and I are both well versed in these things, but most people are not.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:Unpossible by xororand · · Score: 1

      all crypto currencies are in fact traceable via their block chain.

      Monero has built-in mixing.
      https://getmonero.org/home
      https://www.reddit.com/r/moner...

    6. Re:Unpossible by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      Nothing is invisible and completely anonymous except ... maybe ... for professionals, and by professionals I mean people active in the crypto and surveillance fields. Your wallet is on a phone (a burner for each wallet which you haven't used for ANY other purpose); purchased where (in the same city where you live?); connected to the internet, which does what? connects to DNS, uses 4G towers? You can be traced.

      The greatness of the bitchain is not complete anonymity from a rapacious, malicious government. It doesn't protect you from that. The cure to that is limited government. The way to get that is by electing people who want to limit government and not elect people who want to make it ever-so-bigger and more intrusive.

      If we have a truly malicious government then bitcoin will not help.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    7. Re:Unpossible by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      But they will become versed in them, and new cryptocurrencies are under development all the time, and some of those will address these issues in ways that make it transparent for users. Even grandmas. Government trying to regulate them will be playing whackamole. It will be interesting.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    8. Re:Unpossible by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      But they will become versed in them,

      No, no they won't. People don't even do these things with the freely tradeable articles they have in their wallets now, and all that requires is some hand motions and a willing partner, insert jokes here.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Unpossible by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      No, they won't. Most people don't have a clue what Fiat Currency actually means. They have no idea how the FED and world banking systems work. They barely know how anything works.

      This is the problem within the IT and Engineering crowds, we simply assume people are like us, when they are clearly not anything like us. We learn about things, all the time. The other people, the "average" guy, doesn't care to learn about the same things.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    10. Re:Unpossible by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Which is why you use Wallets one time, and one time only. And then only after washed / tumbled currency is inserted into it. And for the super paranoid, you can wash / trade wallets so that a wallet is not associated with a single user.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    11. Re:Unpossible by TXG1112 · · Score: 2

      It's fishier than that. From the link:

      The $1 million investment goes specifically to OB1, the newly formed company headed by CEO Brian Hoffman, previously a cybersecurity and IT consultant at Booz Allen Hamilton,

      Some background on Booz Allen:

      Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. is an American management consulting firm headquartered in Tysons Corner, Fairfax County, Virginia in Greater Washington DC, with 80 other offices throughout the United States. Its core business is the provision of management, technology and security services, to civilian government agencies, as a security and defense contractor[5] to defense and intelligence agencies, and to civil and commercial entities.

      Former Booz Allen guy running it? I hate to be the tinfoil hat guy (Ed note: liar, he really does) but that makes me skeptical.

      --
      I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered. My life is my own.
    12. Re:Unpossible by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Washing is ultimately useless.

      It does help with the bad smell though.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    13. Re:Unpossible by Canth7 · · Score: 1

      Indeed Monero has more than just built-in mixing. With ring signatures and one time use addresses, it makes using the blockchain to trace transactions very difficult.

    14. Re:Unpossible by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      My that is interesting. My question is if everyone is anonymous and there are zero fees, then how do they expect to get their 1 million dollars back? Venture capitalists don't just give out money an expect nothing in return.

    15. Re:Unpossible by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 1

      > It will stop once they realize that all crypto currencies are in fact traceable via their block chain.

      No, they are not. There are such things as "paper wallets" (containing the private key to a bitcoin address). You can hand over such a wallet to another person, without creating a transaction on the block chain. There are also services built on top of the block chain - ChangeTip ( https://www.changetip.com/ ) is an example. People can send tips to each other, and it is internal to ChangeTip's books until you want to withdraw. Finally, there are more than one cryptocurrency. If you privately exchange bitcoins for litecoins, you break the traceability, because there is nothing to show that the two transactions, which happen about the same time, are connected. On a single chain they are, because balances explicitly are sent from one address to another.

    16. Re:Unpossible by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      You don't think that having a main wallet containing all of your real money that you tied to a sketchy "financial institution" will reveal your identity when it's the *only* wallet to ever make a transaction with the wallet that you bought your drugs with?

    17. Re:Unpossible by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      no it won't, at some stage the money gets spent, whether it is on a packet of chips or a book. Unless you only hoard the money and never spend it then eventually it is traceable. The simple fact is people have real physical presences and require real physical items to live, those interactions are tracable, amusingly crypto currencies actually make those interactions far far easier to trace than cash.

    18. Re:Unpossible by deadweight · · Score: 1

      You mean the largest economy in the history of the world can't be managed a few people making $50K/yr? What - are you some kind of SOCIALIST

    19. Re:Unpossible by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

      ... then how do they expect to get their 1 million dollars back?

      Contributing funds to special projects doesn't mean expecting ROI in specific amount of money. Rather, the virtual infrastructures that were created by those projects that often attract more resources to enable the creation of even more virtual infrastructures

      It's the snowballing effect that is the crux of those investment

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  7. Re:Straight to jail... by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    Fed1: We keep killing the Dread Pirate Roberts but he keeps coming back!
    Fed2 (from Mississippi): It's Jesus!

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  8. I do hope... by Viol8 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    .... that all the stick-it-to-the-man trustafarians and right on student types who'll no doubt funded this will eventually wise up and realise the sort of desperately unpleasent people and groups that make a profit out of places like silk road. We're not talking knock off DVDs here or a bit of pot there, this is mass market drug dealing. Just because its online doesn't make it ok.

    I wonder just how many of these idiots could send a donation to a columbian drugs gang?

    1. Re:I do hope... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That and to gain visibility and tracability into black market networks. Cutbacks must be severe.

    2. Re:I do hope... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is a way for any small-time manufacturer to start up a drug business without having a gun-toting distribution network already in place. The anonymity protects them from the cartels (who take a dim view of competition) as much as it protects them from the feds. If it took off, it could take the cartels out of business - or, at least, reform them into peaceful, mail-order businesses instead of the mass-murdering psychopaths we know and love.

      It doesn't do anything about a junkie knocking over a store to get money for their fix, but it removes at least one big chunk of the drug industry's violence.

    3. Re:I do hope... by Atrox666 · · Score: 2

      Yeah there were some really scummy people trying to get rich off Silk Road.
      http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/30/...

    4. Re:I do hope... by swb · · Score: 2

      You mean like the mass market drug dealing done by Anheuser Busch, Starbucks, and Pfizer?

      Even under the old Silk Road it seemed a lot less unpleasant than some of the inner city liquor stores I've been to.

    5. Re:I do hope... by nbauman · · Score: 1

      Since tobacco kills 400,000 Americans every year, and I forget how many millions worldwide, I don't get very upset about a drug like cocaine or heroin which kills only about 20,000 Americans a year.

    6. Re:I do hope... by Lennie · · Score: 1

      There was also a good thing about Silk Road: no violence:

      http://www.wired.com/2014/06/s...

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    7. Re:I do hope... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Sending free hard drugs home with schoolchildren in unsealed containers, with a note for their parents, would do the same good thing.

    8. Re:I do hope... by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      *sigh*

      "and that the illegal market only exists because of legislation. Thus the solution is to fix the legislation"

      Yeah, and while we're at it lets solve the murder crisis by making it legal. GTFU assuming you haven't burnt out so many braincells getting high already that its not possible for you.

    9. Re:I do hope... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      .... that all the stick-it-to-the-man trustafarians and right on student types who'll no doubt funded this will eventually wise up and realise the sort of desperately unpleasent people and groups that make a profit out of places like silk road. We're not talking knock off DVDs here or a bit of pot there, this is mass market drug dealing. Just because its online doesn't make it ok.

      I wonder just how many of these idiots could send a donation to a columbian drugs gang?

      They'd probably argue that columbian drug gangs are just hard working business men heroically refusing to behave like Statist sheeple.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  9. Re:Straight to jail... by Crashmarik · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Fed3: Job Security (high five)

  10. Getting money from venture capital firms? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    They are untrustworthy! Just another honeypot...

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  11. Freenet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    All these stories about new darknets, TOR busts, and anonymous networks raising VC funding must tickle the Freenet guy(s) in an entertaining way. How come nobody talks about the darknet that's been around and in use for 15 years.

    1. Re:Freenet by westlake · · Score: 1

      How come nobody talks about the darknet that's been around and in use for 15 years.

      Not many have been willing to have Freenet traffic resident on their systems or in transit through their networks. That the files are encrypted or fragmented doesn't seem to matter very much.

      The geek loves complication and conspiracy for its own sake. He will hang around with the drug lords and the porn kings because he thinks it makes him look cool --- and no force on earth can keep his big mouth shut online or off.

      The working spy lives quietly on a modest paycheck, never talks shop, and posts pictures of her grandma's kittens to Facebook, along with everything else that really matters.

  12. Re:Straight to jail... by bobbied · · Score: 1

    The stupid feds will never figure this one out! - Dread Pirate Roberts

    Wesley is that you, Cumberbun, or the real DPR?

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  13. Wait. How long has there been vice? by ahoffer0 · · Score: 1

    This article got me thinking about the history of vice. From Old Testament harlots to Summarian smugglers, has there ever been a time when our institutions like religion and government were not at odds with some kind of vice? How does an anonymous distributed market for illicit goods change things? It feels to me more like a footnote in history and not a game changer.

  14. Breaking Bad ? by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    Considering what types of goods were commonly exchanged on silk road, I find it amusing they used a *Breaking Bad* T-Shirt listing as an illustration.

  15. Can't win by dmaul99 · · Score: 1

    You can't win. You can't break even. You can't even get out of the game once you're in.

    The feds have unlimited resources. They will eventually, sooner than later, bust whoever is running this place. There's no profit in rotting in prison. Chances are the feds have already infiltrated the place as mods and of course as customers.

    And it's not harmless. A lot of people in Mexico are dying because of the insatiable appetite for drugs. Blame drug policy all you want, that doesn't erase the practical effects it is having RIGHT NOW. Think of that next time you light up that joint (no, it's not being grown in some hippy commune in northern California), think of that next time you do a line. But you won't (I'm talking about users here, not you, relax) because you're selfish and you don't give a fuck about other people's suffering.

    1. Re:Can't win by anagama · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Come to Washington. All the pot sold in the legal recreational marijuana shops is grown here. Smoke all you want, no Mexican kingpin was enriched, and no innocent person shot.

      The ONLY reason there is violence associated with the manufacture and distribution of pot in other places, is because it is illegal. That leaves the market only to criminals, and criminals use violence as part of their business plan. When was the last time the CEOs of Coors and Budweiser got in a shoot out with each other?

      The problem with drug gangs could be eliminated immediately by legalizing drugs.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    2. Re:Can't win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually my weed is grown in the woods behind my house. (i dont live in mexico) And really a whole lot of pot heads are waaaaay into where/who/how it was grown. Most people who are buying the mexican dirtweed are probably first worlders or idiots who suck at buying drugs.

    3. Re:Can't win by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      " A lot of people in Mexico are dying because of the legal status of drugs."

      fixed your typo.

    4. Re:Can't win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And it's not harmless. A lot of people in Mexico are dying because of the insatiable appetite for drugs. Blame drug policy all you want, that doesn't erase the practical effects it is having RIGHT NOW. Think of that next time you light up that joint

      So within your own home, growing and smoking that joint - please explain in detail how that has any effect on an entirely different country like Mexico?

      Sounds to me like you are claiming simply owning a house is what kills people, which you are just as guilty of.

      Explain. Post every last detail and fact you don't have.

      because you're selfish and you don't give a fuck about other people's suffering.

      That's far from true. I love watching hypocrites like you suffer!

    5. Re:Can't win by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The problem with drug gangs could be eliminated immediately by legalizing drugs.

      Even if that was true, and even if legalizing all drugs didn't contribute to more fucked up lives, it is still the fact that they are illegal now, and you are associating with and funding criminals now.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    6. Re:Can't win by anagama · · Score: 1

      It depends on what you mean by criminals. Do you mean regulated businesses paying taxes, wages, FICA on employees, operating under the supervision of the Washington State Liquor Control Board merely because there is conflict between State and Federal laws on the issue? The people operating farms, processing facilities and stores in Washington state are doing so in a heavily regulated environment, moreso than most businesses. Are you saying they are criminals of the same type who would shoot up a town merely because of a conflict of laws? That's a little absurd.

      Note if it is not clear, all legal pot sold in WA is grown in WA in licensed facilities. No money is going to any violent gangs.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  16. Slow learners by ClayDowling · · Score: 1

    Apparently this is being done by slow learners. If the FBI wants to stop you from doing something, they're going to stop you. If you're dumb enough to flaunt your invulnerability in their face, they're definitely gonna want to take you down. And they have a lot of smart people with a lot of experience at infiltrating organizations. Has the takedown of the last two Silk Roads taught you nothing?

    --
    Easy Online Role Playing Campaign Management
    1. Re:Slow learners by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      these types of people always believe they are smarter than everyone else and can't possibly be caught, it is usually that same attitude that gets them caught as the belief makes them make moronic mistakes (like boasting about being untouchable). They will keep believing that right up until people with badges and guns kick down their doors and then scream how they have been unjustly framed.

    2. Re:Slow learners by retchdog · · Score: 1

      yeah, but what does Andreessen care about the fall guy chumps who actually end up running the code he's chipping it to have written? they're as expendable as any other piece of hardware. it's even in the name Dread Pirate Roberts, except instead of retiring they end up dead or in jail.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    3. Re:Slow learners by linuxrocks123 · · Score: 1

      Has the takedown of the last two Silk Roads taught you nothing?

      "The FBI was successful taking down these two illegal darknet websites. Therefore, the FBI will be successful in taking down all illegal darknet websites." You fail Intro to Logic.

      I'm sure there are some competent people in the FBI, but their track record with technology isn't great. And they know it, which is the reason behind "Operation Onymous", where they took down a small number of darknet markets on the same day using a different method for each one, and not relying on any fundamental flaws in the in the Tor protocol for any of them. Meanwhile, markets like Agora that were running on the day of "Operation Onymous" are still running, because they didn't make stupid mistakes. "Operation Onymous" was a pathetic attempt to FUD the drug-buying/selling public, and the FBI obviously chose this strategy since it was impotent at shutting down the competently run darknet marketplaces.

      I'm not in favor of illegal darknet markets. Extreme libertarianism, like all extremism, has the potential to motivate and make possible atrocities. But the technology behind these markets is solid. Handwaving and saying that all criminals get caught is just wishful thinking on your part.

      --
      vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
    4. Re:Slow learners by ClayDowling · · Score: 1

      Immediately jumping to absolutes will be your downfall. The world doesn't work that way my friend.

      My point is that making a high profile website that thumbs its nose at law enforcement is a very foolish plan. It's attracting attention to a thing that you don't want to attract attention to. This is kind of predator-prey 101 here.

      Of course law enforcement doesn't catch every underground marketplace. Likewise, my cat doesn't catch every rodent that walks through my neighborhood. But the parade of small lifeless bodies that greets me when I step out the front door every morning suggests that she does catch a lot of them who are foolish enough to attract her attention.

      --
      Easy Online Role Playing Campaign Management
  17. NSA ties? by AJ_dot · · Score: 1

    This is a stretch, but from the article: "The $1 million investment goes specifically to OB1, the newly formed company headed by CEO Brian Hoffman, previously a cybersecurity and IT consultant at Booz Allen Hamilton, who has headed OpenBazaar development from the beginning. " Remember Booz Allen Hamilton consults for the NSA (Snowden).