Pages:
Author

Topic: Silk Road: anonymous marketplace. Feedback requested :) - page 16. (Read 152737 times)

newbie
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
...black transactions ... black market...
Why's it gotta be "black"?

Because I'm not sure what's really going on here I don't think I'm in any position to judge what is or isn't "feasible."
I think that will a little bit of due diligence, you know, reading up on Bitcoin some more, reading the thread, perusing Silk Road, you'll find yourself in a better position to contribute to the thread with useful suggestions and debate. I write this entirely without snark in the hopes of driving the point that the people running Silk Road have no power to exclude anyone. Its operators can try to ban certain products, but they will just show up under different names. As we know (and for those who hadn't, you're welcome), in the absence of an adult services section, you need to proof-read for accidental innuendos in your Craigslist post, lest you encounter a large woman with a strap-on instead of the pegboard you expected. Furthermore, the folks at Silk Road can't stop those running a Silk Road clone from catering to people wishing to trade in whatever products the original had banned.

Quote
If it's a hoax, it's beautiful.  On the other hand if it is not a hoax...
Let's just assume that it's not a hoax.

Quote
...then I believe it becomes part of the problem. Certainly nothing like cartels and gangs, yet still operating as if it, Silk Road, were above the law.  My aim has always been to change the law and make things better for everybody, except of course those who get fat off the way the law is today.
Everyone, raise your hand if you broke the law today. Working within the bounds of the law will only get us so far, so fast. Is the thought of breaking the system, or letting it break itself, so bad? Se cayó.

Or was she pushed?

I have given it some thought, about suggestions on handling illegal drug transactions in an ethical and moral fashion sans rule of law.  I conclude that SR or anyone else for that matter, should follow standard harm-reduction principles as much as possible. 

I think the first priority should be to design and implement an age-verify system.  An unrelated 3rd party could be contracted to, given a name, date and place of birth, use public records to verify the buyer's age then return a special key to the buyer.  The seller can then request that key as needed, and use it in a query on the 3rd party's server to return an accept or reject directive.

I guess it could not be mandatory, but perhaps it could be rewarded by positive reputation points for sellers who require age-verify.  I suppose too that once age-verify has been established true, the same seller and buyer would not need to repeat the process so it would only impact the first transaction.

Sellers or SR or both should make the following absolutely clear to all buyers of hard drugs:

  • The safest drug use is no use.
  • Never take a drug you do not completely understand.
  • Do not inject or consume any narcotic alone, if possible have a non-user by your side.
  • Never mix alcohol use and narcotics.
  • Always use a new, sterile rig when injecting.
  • Follow appropriate cleaning (sterile pads) of the injection site prior to injection.
  • If you feel you need help dealing with drug addiction call this help line (research a service)

There are additional guidelines that would be more appropriate for other substances that should also be considered.  And of course any manufacturers and pharmaceutical information, instructions, pamphlets, or packing material should be included in every order of this sort.
newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 0
Oh, crap!  Betrayed by my own subconscious, again.

Fun debate guys, nice to watch.

I sense a generation gap. 

Myself, I sit right in between the two of you. 

Personally, I'd like to see some tactical thinking on how to mainstream BTC and how to get some anchors in the political/legal system to keep the wolves at bay at least for a while.  Right now, time is on our side and power is on theirs.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
Oh, crap!  Betrayed by my own subconscious, again.
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
We've got ourselves one hell of a cease-fire.

I find myself laughing even more at the meaning of your handle.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
We've got ourselves one hell of a cease-fire.
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
I beg your pardon, bold visionary.  I am humbled by your mighty condescension and now realize the error of my ways.  I should not have imagined this icky power structure to be the only lasting ideal mankind could aspire to.  In the future I will ask your permission before trying to think.  May I fetch you a cold beverage, or perhaps your favorite Isaac Asimov novel?

Sarcasm finished.  Time to throw down the gauntlet.  You're not going to live to see that glorious future, smartass.  Our nerdy imaginings aren't going to be how the average human being operates for a few more generations, barring space alien intervention.  You disagree?  Fine.  We'll reconvene in 2090 and discuss how things went.  Until then, cork it.
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
We don't have the numbers to force a military action.  They'll label us criminals, round us up for fraud, counterfeiting and what have you, and any of us dumb enough to take up arms will be labeled terrorists on fox news and, if they manage to evade being killed outright, they'll be imprisoned too.  All they'd need to use is the DEA's current infrastructure to serve up warrants for raids, and local enforcement would handle it from there.

And where would we get revolutionary numbers, when the John Q Public has either yet to hear of bitcoins, or he has heard bad things?

I have introduced the topic of revolution in some of these discussions to point out the depressing impossibility of defiant use of bitcoins in this country, at this time.  Not as a serious idea.

You don't get it.  There is no "us".  I won't be participating in any military actions, and neither will you.  The nation state is imploding by it's own weight.  It's only an idea anyway.  If a civil war begins, it will be because the powers-that-be couldn't figure out how to stop, and thus began eating each other on the way down.  This is how all empires have failed throughout history, but unlike those in the past, the Internet has enabled new forms of self-organizations so that a new nation state need not rise up from the ashes of the old one.  What comes next isn't going to be entirely unfamiliar to you, but nor is it going to be something you would have predicted.  The Internet enables not just vast, rapid and cheap communications (a necessary element to any social order on the scale of a nation-state) but also Bitcoin.  Bitcoin thus enables the phyle, an entirely novel form of civil order.  The near term is likely to be a bit scary for you, but assuming that you don't lose your mind (or your life) in the meantime; the long view will be grander than you seem capable of imagining.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
We don't have the numbers to force a military action.  They'll label us criminals, round us up for fraud, counterfeiting and what have you, and any of us dumb enough to take up arms will be labeled terrorists on fox news and, if they manage to evade being killed outright, they'll be imprisoned too.  All they'd need to use is the DEA's current infrastructure to serve up warrants for raids, and local enforcement would handle it from there.

And where would we get revolutionary numbers, when the John Q Public has either yet to hear of bitcoins, or he has heard bad things?

I have introduced the topic of revolution in some of these discussions to point out the depressing impossibility of defiant use of bitcoins in this country, at this time.  Not as a serious idea.
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
Vaster and far better armed than the bitcoin movement, my friend. 

I doubt that seriously.  A war machine on the scale of the US military is ill equipt for a occupation of it's own citizenry.  I should know, I was once part of that military machine.  I, like many of my brethren, saw the ugly truth of our nationalism writ large from the inside of that machine.  The only way to do what you expect that they will do, is to use loyal manpower willing to kill in the defense of an ideal.  Not only is this already a limited subset of the population at it is, it would rapidly decrease once the whole thing started.  One man can only carry one rifle at a time, so in the end the whole of the Us military is at a disadvantage.  And I'm sure that you would discount this as rediculous, because you believe that the public favors the government as such.  And this is probably true at present, but nothing less than a civil war is going to stop the breakdown of the status quo now; and if the government starts a civil war with it's own citizenry, it's going to have more than a crisis of confidence on it's hands.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
Cute, but totally inadequate.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
firstbits: 121vnq
Vaster and far better armed than the bitcoin movement, my friend.  And it'll stay that way without the people on our side.  How are we to leverage public opinion in the defense of bitcoins?

by letting them buy drugs hahahaha Wink

member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
Vaster and far better armed than the bitcoin movement, my friend.  And it'll stay that way without the people on our side.  How are we to leverage public opinion in the defense of bitcoins?
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
Bring it. The govt. and banksters have put them out of work and on the scrap heap so they have nothing to lose.

I think you are starting to "get it". The free market will not be denied what it needs. Right now it needs the bitcoin monetary product more than any other technology or product out there. The current monetary products are busted, legal, moral, ethical, rubber-stamped ivy-league lauded or otherwise. Or have you been off the grid for the last 10 years?

Go against the free market at your absolute peril.
What you are speaking of will require violent revolution to bring about, without the cooperation of my government.  If that is the way of things, so be it.  I got this from the very beginning.  What I don't get is the people here who believe that bitcoins can exist in the defiance of a power structure that has every reason to stop bitcoins.

You give governments too much credit.  They are, after all, simply vast organizations of people.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
Bring it. The govt. and banksters have put them out of work and on the scrap heap so they have nothing to lose.

I think you are starting to "get it". The free market will not be denied what it needs. Right now it needs the bitcoin monetary product more than any other technology or product out there. The current monetary products are busted, legal, moral, ethical, rubber-stamped ivy-league lauded or otherwise. Or have you been off the grid for the last 10 years?

Go against the free market at your absolute peril.
What you are speaking of will require violent revolution to bring about, without the cooperation of my government.  If that is the way of things, so be it.  I got this from the very beginning.  What I don't get is the people here who believe that bitcoins can exist in the defiance of a power structure that has every reason to stop bitcoins.
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
Quote
Worse still is the sheer number of users in the relatively tech-savvy USA who stand to lose a great deal when the hammer finally falls.

Bring it. The govt. and banksters have put them out of work and on the scrap heap so they have nothing to lose.

I think you are starting to "get it". The free market will not be denied what it needs. Right now it needs the bitcoin monetary product more than any other technology or product out there. The current monetary products are busted, legal, moral, ethical, rubber-stamped ivy-league lauded or otherwise. Or have you been off the grid for the last 10 years?

Go against the free market at your absolute peril.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
I didn't come up with that naming convention, and I refuse to carry that particular torch!  I'm way, way uphill in this thread as it is.
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
...black transactions ... black market...
Why's it gotta be "black"?

Because I'm not sure what's really going on here I don't think I'm in any position to judge what is or isn't "feasible."
I think that will a little bit of due diligence, you know, reading up on Bitcoin some more, reading the thread, perusing Silk Road, you'll find yourself in a better position to contribute to the thread with useful suggestions and debate. I write this entirely without snark in the hopes of driving the point that the people running Silk Road have no power to exclude anyone. Its operators can try to ban certain products, but they will just show up under different names. As we know (and for those who hadn't, you're welcome), in the absence of an adult services section, you need to proof-read for accidental innuendos in your Craigslist post, lest you encounter a large woman with a strap-on instead of the pegboard you expected. Furthermore, the folks at Silk Road can't stop those running a Silk Road clone from catering to people wishing to trade in whatever products the original had banned.

Quote
If it's a hoax, it's beautiful.  On the other hand if it is not a hoax...
Let's just assume that it's not a hoax.

Quote
...then I believe it becomes part of the problem. Certainly nothing like cartels and gangs, yet still operating as if it, Silk Road, were above the law.  My aim has always been to change the law and make things better for everybody, except of course those who get fat off the way the law is today.
Everyone, raise your hand if you broke the law today. Working within the bounds of the law will only get us so far, so fast. Is the thought of breaking the system, or letting it break itself, so bad? Se cayó.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
You are in a dream world. This is why your country, any many others like it, are damned. Welcome to an earthquake technology.

I said it was a fantasy.  Damned is such a great word for it.  The way my country is organized has it so barricaded against the emergence of Bitcoins that I'm starting to think that it would take nothing short of an armed nerd revolution to see it through.

Worse still is the sheer number of users in the relatively tech-savvy USA who stand to lose a great deal when the hammer finally falls.
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
opps sorry anisoptera. totally read your response as coming from goldenmaw which was REALLY confusing me Smiley

I am still interested both in how you think this regulation occurs goldenmaw and how in our surveillance/police state that is, as you mentioned, stuffed to the gills with people incarcerated for growing or smoking a plant, you are going to convince the powers that be that they should embrace and regulate this new emerging technology and that it is not a threat to their power.

Now, this is interesting!  Firstly, any hypotheticals I put forward here are hinged on an indefensible and indeed unlikely premise, and another one that defies one of the most obvious design goals of bitcoin - that the federal government could be tempted to abandon the banking establishments with the lure of how easy it would be for a governing body to track and control the movement of bitcoins for the purposes of maintaining a healthy and stable government, were they to be centralized.  

The next thing I lay down is that, the currency of a country's populace must be taxable for that country to survive.  Period.  We, the people, must be taxed, or we can have no government.  "Hooray!",  say the Anarchists, until their murder and pillage by some stronger and better armed Anarchists.  We need our government to be capable of protecting us from harm and to safeguard our well being.

That established, all that would be required for the taxation and regulation of bitcoin usage is to do the unthinkable and centralize it, requiring communication with federal servers to track and verify bitcoin exchanges.  What if the miners connected to these servers in one massive, publicly driven pool?  This would afford Bitcoins all of the benefits of Bitcoin usage except for the purchasing of illegal goods and services.  Banking establishments - the real enemy, here - would simply be written out of the picture, as safeguarding one's life savings is as easy as stashing an encrypted CD containing one's bitcoin wallet, freeing my country from the shackles of bondage that is rapidly annihilating our middle-class.  Inflation, thanks to the powerfully designed preventative measures inherent in Bitcoin's structure, might well still become a thing of the past under such a scenario, although some unconscious part of me suspects that the deflationary measures are in a twisted way hinged on their exchangeability with the inflating USD.  I can't put that worry to words just yet, so don't ask.

Finally, the decentralization of how bitcoins are "printed", coupled with the grotesque difficulty involved in counterfeiting, would revolutionize the stability of what I'll now call the "US-B".  Really, this situation contains all the benefits of the Bitcoin except the inherently anarchistic ones - most notably the traits that the folks I've argued with all afternoon in this thread value the most.


And that ends that fantasy.  The more I think about this, the more damned Bitcoin seems in my country.  That scenario can't happen - power structures loathe change as buildings loathe earthquakes.  The banks have my country by the balls, and Bitcoin's pseudo-anonymity can't stop it.  

You are in a dream world. This is why your country, any many others like it, are damned. Welcome to an earthquake technology.
Pages:
Jump to: