Shedding light on the dark web • Hacker News Board

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#111

Post by Torgo » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:51 PM UTC

fucking_tragedy wrote: post #107

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI, withdrawal from alcohol is among the worst of any drug. It is one of the few drugs where withdrawal can actually be lethal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delirium_tremens

It takes sustained periods of constant or binge drinking to first enter withdrawal territory with alcohol. I know people who binge on the weekends, are definitely psychologically addicted to alcohol, but experience no withdrawal symptoms. First time you do heroin, dose once everyday for 3-7 days and you've got yourself a very painful withdrawal ahead of you. Once you're no longer heroin naive, it could take only 2 do…

I had withdrawal symptoms after two times using opiates, and the experience was horrifying. I cannot imagine being a regular user, then having to cease. I would probably end my life rather than experience that.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#112

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:54 PM UTC

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…

[deleted]

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#113

Post by adrusi » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:56 PM UTC

wrong_variable wrote: post #42

Cshelton wrote: post #31

Sellers of drugs, will ALWAYS sell drugs, both illegal and legal. Buyers/Users of drugs will ALWAYS buy/use drugs, illegal or legal. It is an interaction between humans of Earth, no government or entity, no system or blocks will ever stop it. Shut down the internet, it will continue. Short of a massive purge of life, drugs will never go away. If you somehow...were able to shut down the "darkweb", it would move into s…

I think its a reflection of having govt dominated by lawyers. Economist and social scientists would see this as a failure of markets, and do some analysis to figure out a balanced approach to create some sort of Laffer curve. I think going the other direction and allowing a free for all situation with substances would be a problem too. There is a reason why its in my interest to not have my neighbor stockpile chlorin…

There is a reason why its in my interest to not have my neighbor stockpile chlorine in his basement.

What does this have to do with drugs? Maybe some extremely fringe libertarians like the idea of no substances being regulated, but a purist attitude would have to extend even to things like weapons-grade plutonium. Nobody is proposing letting people have chemicals that have to be handled very carefully without following strict procedures.

Drugs can't explode and kill everyone within half a mile, but even with drugs I don't think anyone is advocating for complete anarchy. The most radical serious approach is one where any adult is free to buy whatever drug they want, but not in some kind of "free for all". Particularly addictive drugs, like opiates and meth, might need to be sold by the state. Other drugs could be sold privately but only by professional vendors abiding by a set of regulations.

Any solution that doesn't allow people to get the drugs they want doesn't address the argument that prohibition limits people's right to manipulate their consciousness, which is epistemologically one of the most important things someone can do. The problem of drug availability attracting more users can be solved in ways that don't keep them out of reach of people who have made a well reasoned decision to use them: cigarettes are highly available, but few Americans take up smoking today.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#114

Post by soundwave106 » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:59 PM UTC

skylark wrote: post #66

delazeur wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/...

While money in politics is certainly an issue which should be fixed, I still think it's disingenuous to say that drugs are illegal simply because parties profit from it. Overall I'd argue that the current state of drug laws is the will of the American people and that corporate efforts to lobby politicians actually falls in line with popular opinion. Again, I'm not necessarily supporting this point of view, I'm only t…

From my point of view, I do think that it's very possible that many if not most drugs that we are talking about still would be illegal today irregardless of the moral panic. So in a way, you are right about the "will of the people".

However, what the moral panic (and its often racist / political dogma as mapt pointed out) created was drug policies that were overly punitive, and even from the user angle often treat rug addiction itself as a criminal problem, not a medical one. Unfortunately, too many "leaders" are too willing to exploit certain sentiments (ranging from outright racism to a mere desire to protect their kids from harm) and create reactive prohibitions that often do more harm then good.

Ironically, one of the biggest and most lethal drug addiction epidemics right now in America concerns prescription opioids (such as Oxycontin or fentanyl). Because it is a legally prescribed substance, I find media on this much more sober than the moral panic hysteria articles I remember from 1980s and 1990s media on most illegal drugs.

The "emotional bias" for illegal drugs definitely is still around though, and it unfortunately is not entirely rational. One fun example from the other angle: a few years ago, somebody created an overpriced brownie, added melatonin (the same melatonin you can buy at the herbal medicine isle for sleep, that has no LD50 that anyone has figured out yet), and marketed it with "head shop" type graphics for the "head shops" crowd. Cue moral panic here and elsewhere: http://www.nbc12.com/story/14168427/cg-3-linedangers-of-lazy...

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#115

Post by theparanoid » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 9:04 PM UTC

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…

Darknet buying is the same as Amazon. Exactly the same.

There's the sellers with suspiciously low prices and good ratings; which are always fake just like Amazon.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#116

Post by hrehhf » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 9:17 PM UTC

at-fates-hands wrote: post #110

themartorana wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A majority of Americans support marijuana legalization: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/25/suppo... The original banning of marijuana is ridiculous and riddled with racism and xenophobia: http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is... This is just marijuana. Drug legality and policy is mired in racism and money politics. It is just as conspiracy-theory as it sounds.

>> This is just marijuana. I would hasten to say this. I totally support a lot of the legalization for medicinal purposes but there's still way too much of this happening: Driving while high on marijuana causing spike in fatal accidents - http://www.today.com/health/driving-while-high-marijuana-cau... Police: Driver Was High Before Crash That Killed Massachusetts State Trooper - http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/D…

Then logically texting must also be made illegal at all times. These are not simple accidents, these are people texting, driving and killing people, and its happening a LOT more frequently.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/06/tennessee-bus-drive...

http://www.thedailyjournal.com/story/news/2016/07/11/driver-...

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/local/boone-county/2015...

https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/dangers-texting-while-d...

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#117

Post by Jemmeh » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 9:18 PM UTC

skraelingjar wrote: post #24

So when can I get my deliveries via anonymous drone?

I've seen a few articles where people are already delivering drugs with drones. So...I guess that's already now.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#118

Post by bharath28 » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 9:19 PM UTC

at-fates-hands wrote: post #110

themartorana wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A majority of Americans support marijuana legalization: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/25/suppo... The original banning of marijuana is ridiculous and riddled with racism and xenophobia: http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is... This is just marijuana. Drug legality and policy is mired in racism and money politics. It is just as conspiracy-theory as it sounds.

>> This is just marijuana. I would hasten to say this. I totally support a lot of the legalization for medicinal purposes but there's still way too much of this happening: Driving while high on marijuana causing spike in fatal accidents - http://www.today.com/health/driving-while-high-marijuana-cau... Police: Driver Was High Before Crash That Killed Massachusetts State Trooper - http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/D…

These are not simple accidents, these are people getting high, driving and killing people, and its happening a LOT more frequently.

Out of curiosity, do you have data to back this up or point to some source?

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#119

Post by adrusi » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 9:25 PM UTC

skylark wrote: post #53

mistermann wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's really a shitty experience for everyone involved. However, it creates many thousands of very well paid jobs for police, lawyers, prison employees, etc. - you know, the people that create the laws. Long ago I might have considered that there might be some justification for these laws (or anywhere there's rules really), but nowadays when you wonder why "the way something is" is, it's easier to just assume someon…

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…

I don't know if the parent was so much suggesting a conspiracy as a feedback loop. It's the status quo because those groups keep perpetuating it. And they perpetuate it partly out of selfishness, but mostly becuase in the world that they're exposed to, they only see the worst stories of drug use. Police, lawyers and prison guards see drug users and dealers when they get caught, and one very easy way to get caught is to turn to violence. They see drug criminals in the same context as other criminals and develop intuitive associations between those groups.

That doesn't mean they're off the hook though. They are biased, and unlike the general public, they have a professional responsibility to account for that before acting to influence public policy.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#120

Post by jshevek » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 9:30 PM UTC

squeaky-clean wrote: post #86

Torgo wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How is it any different than trying to function with an alcohol addiction? pretty different! Both the addiction, how easy it is to get addicted. I've got a challenge for you, start using heroin, then decide to stop, like a casual drinker. Report back your experience!

> I've got a challenge for you, start using heroin, then decide to stop, like a casual drinker. Just because it's easy for you to refrain from drinking alcohol does not mean it is easy for everybody. Some people have a serious problem to the point where the only way to guarantee they don't abuse it is to not even be in the same room or house as the stuff.

> Some people have a serious problem to the point where the only way to guarantee they don't abuse it is to not even be in the same room or house as the stuff.

His point remains: Heroin is intrinsically different from alcohol, given the ease with which a new user can become addicted after a just a few uses. We should be careful of false equivalencies when discussing how the law should treat these two substances.

Bringing up those people who've already reached the level of 'serious problem' that you describe doesn't address his point.