Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Shedding light on the dark web

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 196 posts

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#91

Post by stcredzero »

delazeur wrote: post #59
skylark wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it hard to believe that there's some sort of conspiracy to keep police, lawyers, and prisons funded via laws against selling drugs. Have you considered that these laws are still in place simply because it's the status quo? Politicians voting on laws and drafting new ones must ultimately answer to their constituents. While the vast majority of things fly under the radar, "pro-drug" support is enough of a charge…

It's not a smoky room conspiracy. A quick google search turned up many articles about private prison companies funding lobbying[1], and I expect you will find similar results if you search for police union donations. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/28/...

It's not a smoky room conspiracy

It's a marble halls & suits non-conspiracy lobbying thing.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#92

Post by pzone »

Havoc wrote: post #46

This is one of those topics where I've made a conscious decision to not check it out. I have no desire to find out how deep that rabbit-hole goes...

There's not really much more to it than what you see in this article. You log onto one of a few crappy ebay-looking sites, and sellers list items for sale basically using the same list of categories in the graphic. No hit men or anything like that - and Craigslist works fine for prostitutes. Sometimes site managers don't even allow the sale of guns. It's mostly just people buying and selling drugs. And 15% of users of illegal drugs have obtained them through these sources.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#93

Post by at-fates-hands »

bduerst wrote: post #81
kelvin0 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never underestimate greed. In plain sight: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/10/11/as... http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/st... http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2014/03/12/c... http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken

How is that proof of conspiracy? Civil asset forfeiture laws could fall subject to the same "status quo" problem as drug laws. Even then there are states who are taking steps to change them (e.g. CA SB 443 revote in Aug 2016), which could also be said about marijuana decriminalization.

>>> Civil asset forfeiture laws

Remember there are CAF laws for much more than just drug dealers. Most states have CAF laws for drunk drivers, drag racing, animal fighting (cock fighting and dog fighting), gambling, and wildlife (fish and game) poachers.

To totally focus on drug dealers for CAF laws is pretty myopic. Most people support CAF for a myriad of things. Do you think it was right to seize Michael Vick's dogs and then rehabilitate them and find them homes instead of putting them down? Should a guy who's poaching deer lose his guns and license and face stiff fines?

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#94

Post by squeaky-clean »

acctid4325 wrote: post #77
dopamean wrote: post #11

Any time I read anything about the illegal drug trade I am struck by how much the industry would change if all drugs were legalized everywhere. So much effort is expended to keep things hidden from law enforcement and other criminals that it adds an incredible amount of friction to the purchasing process for the purchaser and the seller. From the buyer's perspective you now have to go into business with some often un…

To what extend it is society's job to protect people from themselves? So let's assume that we legalize 'drugs' for everyone: can I now buy pot and meth and acid and heroine and what not complete with shooting accessories from 7-Eleven? Are we seriously proposing that people in masses would be able to responsibly consume these newly available substances. If there is doubt, maybe we add, similar to obtaining a drivers…

> So let's assume that we legalize 'drugs' for everyone: can I now buy pot and meth and acid and heroine and what not complete with shooting accessories from 7-Eleven?

If I visit nearly any 7-Eleven after 10pm, I could buy any of these substances, it would just be in the parking lot instead of inside the store. And I wouldn't be able to tell if it was fake or cut with something.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#95

Post by joesmo »

The "Alprazolam" and "Xanax" bubbles that shoot out of the "Prescription Drugs" bubble should be combined into one bubble with a total of 2.1 as they are generic and brand name respectively for the same drug.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#96

Post by andrewpi »

dnm_hn_thread wrote: post #5
eatbitseveryday wrote: post #2

Couldn't reverse tracing work? A fed poses as a customer, and uses a PO Box to receive goods, but also registers this in the Fedex, USPS, UPS databases, such that if this address appears anywhere on a package, it is traced to determine the origin. Build a network over time, repeat.

The FBI cannot legally trace USPS mail without a warrant, but can with Fedex, UPS, et. al. Almost all US darknet shipments go through USPS for this reason.

They only need a warrant to open the mail. They can freely use the information printed on the outside of the envelope for their investigations.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#97

Post by squeaky-clean »

Torgo wrote: post #71
liquidise wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment illustrates just how little a drug being illegal does to keep it from being abused. I've never seen someone arguing that people should do more heroin, instead that drugs being illegal is a failed experiment. While it feels like the easy way out, do not confuse drug legalization as supporting the abuse of hard drugs.

You are underestimating the number of libertarians on this site that just see the destructive effects of an incredibly addictive dangerous drug as a problem you could solve using the free market.

> You are underestimating the number of libertarians on this site that just see the destructive effects of an incredibly addictive dangerous drug as a problem you could solve using the free market.

Nobody has said that here. So until one of those libertarians comes in and comments, let's keep the discussion to what has actually been said?

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#98

Post by mindcrime »

Torgo wrote: post #71
liquidise wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment illustrates just how little a drug being illegal does to keep it from being abused. I've never seen someone arguing that people should do more heroin, instead that drugs being illegal is a failed experiment. While it feels like the easy way out, do not confuse drug legalization as supporting the abuse of hard drugs.

You are underestimating the number of libertarians on this site that just see the destructive effects of an incredibly addictive dangerous drug as a problem you could solve using the free market.

You are underestimating the number of libertarians on this site

There's two or three of us left, yeah.

that just see the destructive effects of an incredibly addictive dangerous drug as a problem you could solve using the free market.

That's not really an accurate view of what (most) libertarians believe. I don't feel like writing a huge monologue here, but I'll say this:

1. Libertarians are, in general, opposed to the initiation of force to achieve social/political/whatever ends, because we consider initiation of force/violence to be immoral.

2. Within that framework, most libertarians also support a free market approach to economic issues for a variety of reasons, both moral and consequentialist.

3. The goal of libertarian approaches isn't to "solve problems" like drug addiction using free market techniques, or anything else. The goal is to eliminate the use of initiation of violence. Whatever else happens as a result of removing initiation of violence from the equation is seen as being either a. acceptable, and/or b. a problem that needs solving through whatever means can solve it without initiating force/violence.

Now, libertarians will argue, quite rightly, that the free market does provide the best solutions to many issues. But we don't actually claim that the free market is the be-all end-all that magically solves all problems. We just think a world based strictly on voluntary cooperation, despite whatever other problems might endure, is a better world than world predicated on use of force/violence.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#99

Post by MichaelGG »

Torgo wrote: post #54
dopamean wrote: post #11

Any time I read anything about the illegal drug trade I am struck by how much the industry would change if all drugs were legalized everywhere. So much effort is expended to keep things hidden from law enforcement and other criminals that it adds an incredible amount of friction to the purchasing process for the purchaser and the seller. From the buyer's perspective you now have to go into business with some often un…

Any time I read anything about legalizing all drugs I am struck by how that opinion would change if they tried to function with a heroin addiction.

It's not that hard to function if you have legal access. Opiates are stupidly cheap. With clean equipment, no illegality, no difficulty buying -- it simply would not be that big of an issue for many people. Remember that many (millions) of people are on opiate therapy and manage to function. The heroin junky stereotype is usually for people prevented from obtaining medicine via legal channels.

Indeed, even the hygiene part could use some open innovation. Right now IV users mostly have to repurpose insulin needles (interchangeable thin needles (like 30G)) are rare. Long-term IV use is geared towards hospital use.

Removing the medical industry gatekeeping of who gets to use opiates would blow open the marketplace.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#100

Post by fucking_tragedy »

Torgo wrote: post #54
dopamean wrote: post #11

Any time I read anything about the illegal drug trade I am struck by how much the industry would change if all drugs were legalized everywhere. So much effort is expended to keep things hidden from law enforcement and other criminals that it adds an incredible amount of friction to the purchasing process for the purchaser and the seller. From the buyer's perspective you now have to go into business with some often un…

Any time I read anything about legalizing all drugs I am struck by how that opinion would change if they tried to function with a heroin addiction.

Typically when I see a "decriminalize it all" opinion espoused it's followed up with contingency that drug & safety education, exchanges, therapy, detoxification and rehabilitation are also sufficiently funded to address current issues and any other that may arise from decriminalization.
Post reply on HN