Topic: Silk Road Founder Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison - page 10. (Read 50178 times)

Here's one:....the engineers designing these remotely operated GPS programmable drones and selling them to the drug cartel in Mexico: what degree of culpability should they receive?  It is a slippery slope...the highest degree of culpability should go to the manufacturers, the transporters, and the product enforcers....not those who're niave enough to be caught in the middle.

Well, I seriously doubt there would've have been any sales had he not been escrowing them so every single transaction had his hand in it and that's the type of volume most drug dealers could only dream of.

He did cause the bad title that bitcoin has today. He is not being charged for using bitcoin as a method to fund his business he is being charged for what he was selling which was illegal.
There is no discussion whether it was right or wrong here. It was obviously wrong so the charges are sticking.
Comparing it to torrenting is a whole different story. There is different rules around the world and how policing works for everyone of those. But I know for certain that drugs that he was selling is illegal in everyone of those countries and jurisdictions.

And it's not my contention that Ulbricht shouldn't have been found culpable; it's the degree of culpability that's unjustified in my mind.

But it applies to every area of life. Car manufacturers aren't culpable if someone's using their product to deliver drugs or run people over.

If Mr Ulbricht had just designed a site that allowed vendors and sellers to meet and integrated an escrow system and set it free for anyone to use he'd be fine. It would be the actual operator of the site who was jailed. In that case it was him.

I agree that his sentence is ludicrous. I also believe he deserved to be nailed.

See, that general thought process is way to grey for me to feel comfortable acknowledging.  I mean, with all of the turing capabilities and smart contract computing....etc....it seems like the Silk Road precedence is bound to set up a slippery slope for future platforms.


And it's not my contention that Ulbricht shouldn't have been found culpable; it's the degree of culpability that's unjustified in my mind.

He was directly participating in drug deals by escrowing and actively creating and hosting a community explicitly for that purpose.

That's a long old way from just providing a neutral platform that's used for nefarious reasons. Openbazaar will no doubt have a druggy section. Its creators won't be culpable because all they're doing is providing software that they have no control over.

The creator of Bittorrent has never been charged for anything because he hasn't done anything wrong. It's the users who are breaking laws.

This is my only concern with some of the arguments here.

First off let me make clear that I believe that there are many illicit drugs that are detrimental to society's well being; however, that's not the question that needs to be argued in this case.  The question should be, were Ulbricht's actions such that he should be held accountable for the production, transportation, and consumption of those illicit products?  If so, shouldn't we also go after internet providers, phone companies, couriers...etc.  Where does the line get crossed?  Should we blame the guy who patented the postage stamp because he helped facilitate the delivery of illegal goods?  I'd have to say no....the line was crossed by holding Ulbricht to such a high degree of culpability in this case.

Justice needs to be re-thought here.

Good riddance   

Anything that facilitates drug sales feeds the violence further up the food chain. If SR had been linking drug makers directly to consumers with none of filth in between then it would be a noble endeavour. I'm sure it did in certain cases but it was still responsible for plenty of misery.

Hi

I found ulbricht's sentence far too harsh, maybe he should have got 5 years in jail as he did profit in some way.

Bye

What Ulbricht provide is a market for trading so called illegal drugs and other goods. If those goods are traded in a face to fact manner, then there will be more gun battle between drug traders and will waste a lot of police time.

yea, i agree, death and drug trafficking should stay within USG's scope of action.. ^^

Good. It was almost the kind of answer I expected. I'm sorry for you but, if it will be again the case to speak about this kind of enormous criminal, I will continue to tell my "BS" because, as for me, he is not at all the savior of humanity like you tell or pretend but a cruel payer of potential killers which is ready to kill everyone who put in risk him's illegal life and him's illegal source of dirty money which caused not only disease and distress but even death. At least according to the facts which condemned him with lifetime prison.

You can continue without any problem him's protection because there is not even the minimum problem for me (like there are my position and my thoughts about him for you) if you express anywhere and anytime your thoughts about him. I have not again any problem even if you speak and protect with your arguments, not only the spread of free pure drugs in all the world (like it is in Uruguay) but even the use of those (with the condition to be pure) by everyone.

Could you please stop spreading around this BS? How did he caused "disease and distress" to "thousands and thousands" of people? Did he personally infected thousands of people with HIV or some other deadly disease? IMO, he prevented hundreds of deaths, by providing pure drugs devoid of any toxins or additives. Also, he prevented a lot of deaths and injuries as there was no need for the drug users to go to crime infested ghettos to get their daily doze of weed or cocaine.

From your answer I see that we think very differently but yet i will give my point of view. Even I understand that it will be not accepted at all from you.

First, this links tell me other things about the legalization of drugs in Portugal. Maybe it is not updated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal

Second, remain only Uruguay. As about for me this example is not a spread of legalization of drugs but only a limitation of spread of legalization of drugs. Uruguay is only one country. But even if it would be another one or even other ten others, for me is again a limitation and not a spread. Are more than 200 the countries in the world and are not 1 or 2 or 10 of those which can serve as example.

I think that needed much more to call the example of this country (or 10 countries) about drug policies as a spread of legalization. And to tell the right, for me, Uruguay cannot be example for anything even if there can be something to take from this country. That something to take, if exist, I think that can be found much more better to be taken in some other country. If for you this country is source of inspiration we are very away from each other in understanding, interpreting and doing things.

Third, but let's discuss about another things. The fact that drugs do well or do bad. Independently from the spread of legalization or other lateral things correlated with this product, the drug do bad or do good? This is the essence of the problem with Ross Ulbricht. If we accept that the drug do bad (and the legalization may be forced to not make possible and prevent the more bad which can be made from being illegal of it) then the earnings of Ross Ulbright (even if not used) are (must be) punishable. If not used that does not mean that he had earned that money only to see the grow of the amount. One day he would spent that money (if not all, part of those). If we don't agree in this point the go forward is in vain and I will stop here.

If will agree in this point, then this activity can be enough to punish Ulbricht lifetime in prison for the amount of the bad make with him's help. Which was not a lateral but basic help. Without this help anything would be possible. He offer basic help in (repeat) the disease and distress of thousand and thousand people and for more, even earn money doing this bad. Have nothing to do here the spread of legalization of the drugs (even if it will be so). We are speaking about a fact. Repeat: He offer basic help in the disease and distress of thousand and thousand people and for more, even earn money doing this bad.

If so, what more has added on him's punishment the invention pretended by you and made from FBI? This invention has added nothing to the punishment of Ross Ulbricht to make more fear to the "all future online drug marketeers"? Lifetime prison for Ulbricht was and lifetime prison for Ulbricht remain even after the pretended invention of FBI. Where is the value of this act?

As I told in the beginning of this post I have doubt that you will find correct my reasoning because I see from your answer that we think differently. But I am curious to have your answer to my this post (if you find opportune to do this). Naturally without repeating the same things because it will be in vain to write again the same things.

Ross Ullbrich profited from his activity, to some extent. He received tens of thousands of Bitcoins as fee, but he didn't converted any of that to fiat. Yes. Trading of drugs are illegal in the United States. But drug legalization is spreading all over the world. Portugal and Uruguay have legalized all forms of recreational drugs.


The FBI want to scare away all future online drug marketeers. So they made an example out of Ross.

Bryant, I don't want to be polemic with you. This post is only to satisfy one my simple curiosity. And maybe to understand more. Maybe all you write is correct. I cannot know the right about this question. The only thing that is sure in this story (and no one from both us can deny) is that Ross Ulbricht is a person who had created and owned the most profitable platform to hold the most enormous market of illegal things (dangerous things for the people) in the USA in which were moved millions of us dollars. Him's activity helped essentially (in the meaning that without it everything was impossible to exist) this market which create disease and distress in thousand and thousand (maybe more) people. I have only a question: Why FBI can make such thing mentioned by you in your post if only the above things mentioned by me in this post are enough to condemn Ross Ulbricht lifetime in prison? Why needed such invention, such action from FBI?

They didn't pursed it because they knew that they will fail in it, as the charges and the evidence were all cooked up. It is not very difficult for the FBI to frame false evidence. They can just hack in to DPR's email account or chat account, and add whatever in the conversation history they want to add. This has happened in the past, and it will happen in the future as well.