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

On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 150 posts

Re: On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

#31

Post by rubicon33 »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #19
TeMPOraL wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because the incentives of your drug dealer are more aligned with your well-being than the incentives of your bank or government. That's not always the case, but when it happens, even the worst criminal can be a better friend than a legit operation, for which the only reason not to screw you over completely is the potential legal fuss.

This is one argument against capitalism as a whole, and it's worth taking seriously. Capitalism is still the best tool we have, but it's not without downsides. Example: open source is the communist model, and it works very well. To each according to their need, from each according to their ability. No one owns anything, and you're free to fork or vote with your feet. Ditto for illegal drug markets. If you're unhappy…

Really? It's remarkable that we don't hear regularly how dissatisfied people are with their drug dealer? Think about that for just a second...

Re: On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

#33

Post by duozerk »

ct0 wrote: post #30
md224 wrote: post #20

I think it's a really positive thing that people are able to leave reviews for drug purchases. In the absence of FDA regulation, a public reputation system incentivizes dealers to avoid harming their customers with dangerously-adulterated products. In the midst of an opioid crisis, with people overdosing on heroin cut with fentanyl, having this accountability can save lives. There's a subreddit (whose name I won't me…

Unless trying the product becomes fatal. Wouldn't this be a selection bias?

This has happened on a few occasions (all of them opioids laced with fentanyl by vendors). The community tends to name and shame such vendors a lot when it occurs, and markets will ban them; but the very anonymity linked to the process makes that easy to circumvent, unfortunately.

In any case, the general advice to people ordering from vendors for which there hasn't been a longstanding reputation + published reagent tests is for their customers to reagent the product themselves, especially for opioids.

Re: On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

#34

Post by JonDav »

ct0 wrote: post #30
md224 wrote: post #20

I think it's a really positive thing that people are able to leave reviews for drug purchases. In the absence of FDA regulation, a public reputation system incentivizes dealers to avoid harming their customers with dangerously-adulterated products. In the midst of an opioid crisis, with people overdosing on heroin cut with fentanyl, having this accountability can save lives. There's a subreddit (whose name I won't me…

Unless trying the product becomes fatal. Wouldn't this be a selection bias?

almost a sort of survivor bias.

Re: On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

#35

Post by criloz2 »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #19
TeMPOraL wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because the incentives of your drug dealer are more aligned with your well-being than the incentives of your bank or government. That's not always the case, but when it happens, even the worst criminal can be a better friend than a legit operation, for which the only reason not to screw you over completely is the potential legal fuss.

This is one argument against capitalism as a whole, and it's worth taking seriously. Capitalism is still the best tool we have, but it's not without downsides. Example: open source is the communist model, and it works very well. To each according to their need, from each according to their ability. No one owns anything, and you're free to fork or vote with your feet. Ditto for illegal drug markets. If you're unhappy…

I don't see how open source is a communist model, nobody is coerced to publish their code, they do because they want to, even several companies are making some of their source code public for improving the trust that their client has in their product and increase their sales.

Re: On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

#36

Post by ikeboy »

Ironic how this is being published right after nautil.us suffered a large reputational loss after not paying their writers. I wonder whether the author got paid for this yet or if they will get paid. Clearly, the reputational loss wasn't enough to deter them from writing this article.

Edit: "Reproduced with permission from Hachette Book Group.". So they likely got it for free to promote the book.

Re: On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

#37

Post by ct0 »

duozerk wrote: post #33
ct0 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless trying the product becomes fatal. Wouldn't this be a selection bias?

This has happened on a few occasions (all of them opioids laced with fentanyl by vendors). The community tends to name and shame such vendors a lot when it occurs, and markets will ban them; but the very anonymity linked to the process makes that easy to circumvent, unfortunately. In any case, the general advice to people ordering from vendors for which there hasn't been a longstanding reputation + published reagent…

During the SR era I was a viewer of the network but not a participant. I didnt realize the extent these vendors went to. I had a friend who did know one vendor in person and supposedly he was very very meticulous and calculated with his actions.

Re: On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

#38

Post by TeMPOraL »

criloz2 wrote: post #35
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one argument against capitalism as a whole, and it's worth taking seriously. Capitalism is still the best tool we have, but it's not without downsides. Example: open source is the communist model, and it works very well. To each according to their need, from each according to their ability. No one owns anything, and you're free to fork or vote with your feet. Ditto for illegal drug markets. If you're unhappy…

I don't see how open source is a communist model, nobody is coerced to publish their code, they do because they want to, even several companies are making some of their source code public for improving the trust that their client has in their product and increase their sales.

It's not capitalism either, because open source developers don't sell code, or write code under pressure of earning a living. They just write it and give it away.

Not sure what the right word is, but textbook-definition communism fits - open-source code isn't really owned in practical sense.

Re: On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

#39

Post by rosser »

criloz2 wrote: post #35
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one argument against capitalism as a whole, and it's worth taking seriously. Capitalism is still the best tool we have, but it's not without downsides. Example: open source is the communist model, and it works very well. To each according to their need, from each according to their ability. No one owns anything, and you're free to fork or vote with your feet. Ditto for illegal drug markets. If you're unhappy…

I don't see how open source is a communist model, nobody is coerced to publish their code, they do because they want to, even several companies are making some of their source code public for improving the trust that their client has in their product and increase their sales.

"Communism" — the leading capital due to its being the first word in the sentence — is an economic model. "Communism", the Soviet-style phenomenon is not "communism", either in principle, or in practice.

Yet we insist on conflating them, and argue against the one whenever the other is mentioned, as if it's synonymous with both.

Re: On the Darknet, Reputation Is Everything

#40

Post by sillysaurus3 »

criloz2 wrote: post #35
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one argument against capitalism as a whole, and it's worth taking seriously. Capitalism is still the best tool we have, but it's not without downsides. Example: open source is the communist model, and it works very well. To each according to their need, from each according to their ability. No one owns anything, and you're free to fork or vote with your feet. Ditto for illegal drug markets. If you're unhappy…

I don't see how open source is a communist model, nobody is coerced to publish their code, they do because they want to, even several companies are making some of their source code public for improving the trust that their client has in their product and increase their sales.

This is wavering off topic, but since it's an intersting topic and you asked, let's do it.

Open source is inherently communistic because nobody owns anything. You have control over your own project, but that's where it stops. You cannot force open source maintainers to do something. This is unlike capitalism; at a standard company, your NDA forces you not to disclose secrets. In open source, there are no secrets to disclose, short of drama and private infighting. A non-compete prevents you from forking the business you work for. These are unenforceable in Cali, but the rest of the US is not so lucky.

You are bound to a paycheck that determines your fate. This is the essence of capitalism.

Contrast that with open source: people don't merely contribute because they want to. It increases their reputation. Ditto for a review system on darknet markets.

Both of these things are very unlike capitalism. So if not communism, then what? Not libertarianism. There's no ownership, and ownership is central to libertarian ideals.

Post reply on HN