Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's clear that drugs are destroying people and communities. Take crack as an example. Do you really think making it freely available, or providing free soup kitchens and mecical aid, would alleviate the misery and destruction it causes to people and communities? Sometimes people need to be protected against themselves, this is particularly true for the less educated (which tends to coincide with the underpriviledged…
Why would anyone still be using (street) crack when the pure and safe alternative is there to use when drugs are no longer illegal? People don't need to be protected against themselves. That's exactly what makes people not being able to care for themselves. Prohibition usually means no awareness is being raised about the risks or effects of a certain drug. We get raised with the idea that drugs are bad and awful, tha…
Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
41–50 of 51 posts
Re: Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
#4210BTC says this is a DEA sting.
As long as you encrypt all your communications, you have nothing to fear, especially not as a seller. Doing it right makes you completely anonymous. Only if you're a buyer, there comes a moment when you have to give a postal address to a seller and give up your anonimity. If the seller turns out to be law enforcement, this might cause a problem. On the other hand, why would law enforcement go after the buyers? That d…
Because if you go after a seller, you have just removed a player from the market, assuming constant demand, you have just raised the margins for those who have the fixed amount of supply.
This is why after a 'big drugs bust' prices sometimes go up, which makes it more attractive for new players.
Going after the consumer is exactly the way to stop that. As it removes the demand. If you had even just a one in twenty chance of being busted for trying to buy something on these markets, it would greatly reduce the number of people willing to do so.
Or we could, you know, look again at prohibition.
Re: Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Atlantis CEO also claimed that their service is technically much more sophisticated than SilkRoad. His/Her answer when asked what Atlantis has that SR doesn't: “To put it bluntly, a well written codebase and server setup. SR claims to have suffered from ‘DDoS’ attacks, which is very unlikely due to the way Tor hidden services are designed. It’s far more likely to me and technical gurus I’ve consulted that it was a re…
> SR claims to have suffered from ‘DDoS’ attacks, which is very unlikely due to the way Tor hidden services are designed. This is wrong; Tor hidden services are quite easy to DDoS for someone familiar with Tor. In fact, the attack was described on the Tor blog [1] shortly before it was executed against Silk Road, so this is likely where the attacker got the idea. [1] https://blog.torproject.org/blog/hidden-services-n…
Re: Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not going to rehash my recently made above comment, but you should check it out. [1] Tylenol kills 500 people a year, so I guess that means we should make it illegal, huh? Drugs are mostly destroying people and communities because they are illegal. Maybe if your dad went to prison for an ounce of weed, you would have a different sentiment. When a drug can be produced in a sterile environment, you can yield greate…
Most of your argument revolves around comparing different substances, while I made a point specifically about crack, though I will allow heroin in the same category. Nobody with a little worldly experience would compare crack or heroin with tobacco or even alcohol. We don't have to be all binary about it, "if we ban one addictive substance then they should all be banned!" It's okay to look at things on a case by case…
This is because the prices for drugs are artificially inflated by prohibition. Make drugs legal, or -- at least -- make methadone replacement therapy readily available, and price problem solved.
Re: Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of your argument revolves around comparing different substances, while I made a point specifically about crack, though I will allow heroin in the same category. Nobody with a little worldly experience would compare crack or heroin with tobacco or even alcohol. We don't have to be all binary about it, "if we ban one addictive substance then they should all be banned!" It's okay to look at things on a case by case…
> I have seen some of the smartest and most sensible people turn into zombies who would and did sell themselves, their kids' toys and baby's diapers for drugs. This is because the prices for drugs are artificially inflated by prohibition. Make drugs legal, or -- at least -- make methadone replacement therapy readily available, and price problem solved.
At the same time there is no guarantee that crime would go away, addicts will still need drugs very badly every day, so unless it was extremely cheap or free (I don't know what the price target would be) they would still need to be out hustling.
Re: Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am wondering if mixing services might be illegal. As far as I know there are laws prohibiting attempts to conceal or obscure the source of money. Since almost all methods of acquiring bitcoin lead back to a bank account, it would be trivial to trace anybody putting money into the mixing service and potentially prosecute them under anti-laundering laws. Paying cash for bitcoin (i.e. localbitcoin) is not traceable in…
> it would be trivial to trace anybody putting money into the mixing service Not really; you can't tell which bitcoin addresses belong to a mixing service and which ones don't; it's all just transactions from one address to another. You may know the owner of the originating address, but not the receiver. There are also mixing service that run as Tor hidden services just like the illegal marketplaces themselves, so yo…
Re: Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I realize it's a popular sentiment here, but it's based off of a philosophy that isn't universal and that reasonable people can disagree on. When you consider that some drugs are physically addictive and that some people are more susceptible to the addiction, there's a societal incentive to protect people from the opportunity to become addicted. I get that to some people that is a "nanny state", but I also think that…
There are plenty of things that are physically addictive and still legal: caffeine, alcohol, cigarettes and a cornucopia of various pharmaceuticals (both prescription and over the counter). Also, there are an abundance of illegal drugs that aren't physically addictive such as LSD [1], psilocybin mushrooms [2], DMT [3], mescaline [4], or MDMA [5]. So that's a pretty bad argument. I've not once said I have an "every ma…
Re: Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not going to rehash my recently made above comment, but you should check it out. [1] Tylenol kills 500 people a year, so I guess that means we should make it illegal, huh? Drugs are mostly destroying people and communities because they are illegal. Maybe if your dad went to prison for an ounce of weed, you would have a different sentiment. When a drug can be produced in a sterile environment, you can yield greate…
Most of your argument revolves around comparing different substances, while I made a point specifically about crack, though I will allow heroin in the same category. Nobody with a little worldly experience would compare crack or heroin with tobacco or even alcohol. We don't have to be all binary about it, "if we ban one addictive substance then they should all be banned!" It's okay to look at things on a case by case…
You're not refuting my comment because it's irrefutable. You can't argue with a decline in overdoses and HIV outbreaks attributed to drug use, so you're trying to shift the conversation.
> "Nobody with a little worldly experience would compare crack or heroin with tobacco or even alcohol."
That's absolutely ludicrous. Alcohol has killed millions of more people than heroin has and has been just as devastating if not more. If you are saying that we should ban heroin because of it's dangerous properties and alcohol shouldn't be banned that's a mighty big contradiction on your part. I have plenty of "worldly experience", thank you very much.
> "It destroys lives, families and communities, far beyond the addicts themselves, and it happens in a very nefarious way where addicts gradually lose control, without ever intending to go that route."
If heroin was legal we could remove next to all impurities, make a cheaper product, and have treatment facilities that could both treat addicts who need help and serve as a model for other citizens as the dangers involved if you decide to do a drug such as heroin. People have less of incentive to try to get clean because if they relapse they risk going to prison.
> "It destroys lives, families and communities, far beyond the addicts themselves, and it happens in a very nefarious way where addicts gradually lose control, without ever intending to go that route."
Yep. Same thing can happen with alcohol.
> "I have seen some of the smartest and most sensible people turn into zombies who would and did sell themselves, their kids' toys and baby's diapers for drugs."
Wait, I thought making drugs illegal was supposed to keep people from doing them? I know several high-functional members of society that partake in various drugs. You're anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything to me.
> "A lot of people aren't capable of making this choice, they can't fathom the consequences, and those consequences affect many others than just themselves."
People are already making that choice, as you essentially just said in your last sentence.
> "A lot of people aren't capable of making this choice, they can't fathom the consequences, and those consequences affect many others than just themselves. That makes it a societal matter, not just about individual freedom."
If drugs were legal it doesn't mean that everyone is going to start doing them. Lowering HIV rates is a societal matter and so is lowering overdoes. So is not tearing families a apart by sending responsible parents to jail because they happen to like a specific drug that happens to be illegal.
> "The fact that underground markets exist with all their associated ills is neither here nor there, this is the case for anything illegal."
What? How is the fact that there is a multi-billion dollar underground market that is run by the cartels "neither here nor there". People are doing drugs no matter if you like it or not. It's never been easier to get drugs than it is right now. I am a responsible adult and deserve to ingest any god damn substance that I please. You want people like me to go to prison.
The drug war is hits the African-American community the hardest, police men aren't going after day traders who do blow. You should really read both the Glenn Greenwald paper I linked above and the book The New Jim Crow.
Some people are going to abuse some things and it's none of your business to tell them what they can and can't do with their own body.
Sending people to jail over drug offenses doesn't solve any thing. You're lying to yourself if you think that it does.
You're argument is full of holes.
Re: Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have seen some of the smartest and most sensible people turn into zombies who would and did sell themselves, their kids' toys and baby's diapers for drugs. This is because the prices for drugs are artificially inflated by prohibition. Make drugs legal, or -- at least -- make methadone replacement therapy readily available, and price problem solved.
Those things are just an observation about to what extent drugs take over their lives and their self control. That would not change with drugs being legal, it would still be the cause of the destruction of families and communities. A crackhead can't really be a parent or an employee. At the same time there is no guarantee that crime would go away, addicts will still need drugs very badly every day, so unless it was e…
The biggest reason why drugs tear apart communities is because they are illegal. Make them legal, give proper information, and let people decide on their own. Open up clinics to treat people and to use as a demonstration as one of the possible dangers if you do harder drugs.
Btw, do you think that cannabis, LSD, magic mushrooms, mescaline, and MDMA should be illegal? Do you think we should make Naloxone over the counter and be allowed to be sold everywhere?
> At the same time there is no guarantee that crime would go away, addicts will still need drugs very badly every day, so unless it was extremely cheap or free (I don't know what the price target would be) they would still need to be out hustling.
There is no guarantee in anything. Portugal has seen crime go down. That's data, baby. Also, when drugs are legal they are way cheaper than they are right now. The biggest reason why they can be expensive is because they are part of a black market which inflates the price artificially. Did you read my link above about how countries are experimenting with giving unadulterated heroin to heroin addicts and are helping treat them? They are seeing very successful results.
Once again: People who want to do heroin are already doing heroin. Stop parroting the false notion that people aren't doing drugs. They are.
Re: Bitcoin Black Market Competition Heats Up
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would anyone still be using (street) crack when the pure and safe alternative is there to use when drugs are no longer illegal? People don't need to be protected against themselves. That's exactly what makes people not being able to care for themselves. Prohibition usually means no awareness is being raised about the risks or effects of a certain drug. We get raised with the idea that drugs are bad and awful, tha…
I responded in the sibling comment, but I'll say that you are missing the fact that information campaigns don't reach the very people who are most at risk. Saying it's their own fault is a failure of understanding and empathy, IMHO.
We could reach everyone in the country if we spent just a fraction of the trillion dollars we've spent on fighting the unsuccessful drug war. The key is that you have to be willing to give people unbiased information. In DARE they tried to tell us that acid drips down your spine which is absolute bullshit.