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

Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

deepdotweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 555 posts

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#261

Post by st0p »

chasing wrote: post #106
MarkPNeyer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for anyone who sees bitcoin as a 'wild west' environment, this sort of thing is obvious and just moves the bitcoin economy forward. problems found now are fixed, and won't be as big of a deal later.

But this isn't a beta test. People treat Bitcoin as if it's ready for primetime and ready to replace traditional currency.

People should know better. I made a nice profit last year with bitcoins which could have been a lot more if I had sold them later, but I always saw that as an experiment. It was basically fuck you money that I could affort to lose. I truly believe that cryptocurrency will have a lasting impact in the future, but right now it's just much a gamble as playing roulette. In its current state, believing bitcoin is as stable as traditional currency is very, very naive.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#262

Post by ufmace »

aaronem wrote: post #144
zedshaw wrote: post #133

This is seriously the most hilarious thing I have read in a long time. Here we have a group of objectivist libertarians who believe that there should be effectively no laws other than the law of economics and self-interest who run an illegal website devoted to the pure greed of cashing in on contraband, and this is what they write: "I’ve included transaction logs at the bottom of this message. Review the vendor’s dis…

I don't love libertarians and their ilk any more than you do, but in fairness I have to say this doesn't read to me like a request for government intervention, so much as a "Let's you and him fight" suggestion that the users who got ripped off go after the users he claims did the ripping. The idea, I think, is that if enough jilted users get together to make life miserable for the people who supposedly did the thievi…

Which makes me think, whatever happened to the supposed commitment to non-violence/non-initiation of force, of both Libertarians and the new DPR? Yeah, guys, I'm sure the purpose of trying to rally a bunch of people together and find out the real life location of the thief has nothing to do with inflicting any physical harm on them.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#263

Post by dwaltrip »

zedshaw wrote: post #159
_Adam wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I find actually amazing isn't your ignorance, your misunderstanding of Objectivism, Libertarianism, and Silk Road denizens. Nor do I find amazing your inability to separate the individual from the collective. No, what I find actually amazing is that despite all that you still believed you could make a meaningful comment.

Swoosh! Right over your head. This is just so hilarious I can't stand it. Nothing is better than watching a true believer grasp clumsily at his beliefs as they slip from his grasp like a slimy eel.

It is somewhat disheartening to see that you are a long time member with truckloads of karma, and yet you feel free to post these brash, low quality comments. It is a shame I cannot down vote you.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#264

Post by jmagoon »

moheeb wrote: post #175
Avshalom wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How we got here is largely irrelevant to the very real fact that the drug trade is impossible to describe as victimless.

It is not impossible. Some guy grows weed in his spare room and sells to his friend. No victim there.

That's certainly not the reality of the cocaine and heroin trade.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#265

Post by big_youth »

MartinCron wrote: post #203
Crito wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are currently thousands of different sets of laws and legal systems that you can choose to subscribe/submit to. Potential victims of crimes can shop around for the legal system that they prefer, and those who intend to commit crimes can do the same. Generally this "shopping around" cannot be done retroactively; there are a few exceptions to this however. The way that you pick the one that you wish to be associa…

That doesn't do anything to answer my question about where libertarians stand on the question. I still don't get what a civilization without a "monopoly on laws and law enforcement" would look like.

The idea is called polycentric law and the best resource would be David D. Friedman (Milton Friedmans anarchist son) and his classic book The Machinery of Freedom which describes how such a system would work.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#266

Post by baddox »

ewoodrich wrote: post #259
baddox wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right now, there is one group that can decide you are a criminal by their standards. It's a group that you have virtually no control over, and it's funded via force.

Exactly. I only have to worry about being declared a criminal by one rather than [arbitrary number] of groups that I have literally no control over.

You would have much more control over a competitive market of groups. Your claim is like saying that you'd rather there only be a single restaurant available rather than a group of restaurants, because then you only have to worry about one restaurant poisoning you or otherwise providing bad service.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#267

Post by Crito »

redthrowaway wrote: post #228
zedshaw wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"they simply don't believe in a monopoly of laws and law enforcers" Ahahahahaah! That's the same as not having laws! And even then, what you're saying is they believe someone should bring this guy to justice...and then do nothing to him. Then it's not justice. You're killing me my friends. Just killing me here.

>Ahahahahaah!... You're killing me my friends. Just killing me here. You can make the same argument without being an ass about it.

If he were the sort of person that were capable of making this argument without being an ass about it, then this entire thread of discussion would not have been started in the first place. Whether you are a libertarian bitcoin drug dealer, a communist bitcoin drug dealer, or a politically apathetic cold-hard-cash drug dealer, governments don't enter the "I got ripped off, what are my options?" equation. That's just the reality of the business.

Politics is a rather uninteresting tangent here, brought up really only to start a flamewar.

Seriously, who gives a shit about the political opinions of drug dealers? I don't know where my dealer stands on economics, taxation, or civil rights, and I don't have any reason to care.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#268

Post by MartinCron »

exratione wrote: post #240
MartinCron wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly don't get this. If there isn't a monopoly on laws and law enforcement, does that mean that victims of crimes should be able to shop around to get the law enforcement agency that they want? Should the accused? Is there any historical precedent for anything like this actually working?

Iceland, in the age of the sagas, 1000-1300 or so. Here is a link to layperson's overview: http://mises.org/daily/1121

That was a good read. Thank you for sharing it.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#269

Post by bmelton »

zedshaw wrote: post #173
tolmasky wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have a deep misunderstanding of libertarianism (which is your right of course). Libertarians don't necessarily not believe in laws, they simply don't believe in a monopoly of laws and law enforcers. This is kind of the whole point. Its clear that in your world view "justice" is somehow inexorably tied to government, but there others that disagree (which leads to your confusion in thinking that because som…

"they simply don't believe in a monopoly of laws and law enforcers" Ahahahahaah! That's the same as not having laws! And even then, what you're saying is they believe someone should bring this guy to justice...and then do nothing to him. Then it's not justice. You're killing me my friends. Just killing me here.

All due respect, you're missing the point.

The 'monopoly of laws' to which the parent refers are the ones like those against home distillers -- such that you're allowed to buy a distillation device, you're allowed to buy corn, you're allowed to buy sugar, yeast, etc., but you're not allowed to put them altogether to make whiskey, despite that you're allowed to buy whiskey.

Another example is the Lacey act, which, if construed narrowly enough, might make it illegal to eat a steak, or to fish, or to hike through the woods.

Even the most staunch of minarchists wouldn't generally repeal the 'base' laws, which are those laws that, if violated, infringe upon the rights of others. Libertarians do not, for example, suggest that murder should be legal -- everyone has the right to life.

Gun control is the nearest example I can think of, so pardon me if it doesn't fit the archetype 100%, but there are literally more than 20,000 laws on the books pertaining to guns, despite the fact that each of those are just derivatives of laws already on the books. Using a gun to steal is expressly against the law, and may carry a different penalty in many jurisdictions than just 'stealing'. Why? Stealing is already illegal, and the manner in which it's done carrying a different penalty likely is just a scheme to enforce mandatory minimums to fill the prisons.

Alternately, laws which are predicated upon arbitrary distinctions, such that a person with 9 ounces of pot gets away scot free, while a guy with 10 ounces of pot must serve an obligatory 5 year prison term.

You're of course welcome to hate libertarianism as much as you like, but if you're original post was sincere, you're woefully ill-informed on the subject.

Edit: Re-reading, I completely misinterpreted the OP's use of 'monopoly of force', and ended up making an altogether unrelated argument. That said, I consider my point both salient and well-researched, so I'll let it stand.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#270

Post by brnstz »

JohnBooty wrote: post #221
zedshaw wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"they simply don't believe in a monopoly of laws and law enforcers" Ahahahahaah! That's the same as not having laws! And even then, what you're saying is they believe someone should bring this guy to justice...and then do nothing to him. Then it's not justice. You're killing me my friends. Just killing me here.

"Ahahahahaah! That's the same as not having laws!" I'm nearly as far away from libertarian as one can be, but no - it's not the same as not having laws. Example: Old (American) West-style "frontier justice" where a bunch of townspeople form a posse or a lynch mob or whatever to right some (real or perceived) wrong. (edit: I do understand that this is only one possible scenario, and not what all or even many libertari…

Mob justice is not law.

For an illustration of this, check out the very first scene of the TV series Deadwood. There's a lynch mob outside the sheriff's office, and they want to kill the person in the jail. The sheriff fends them off so he can legally hang him instead.

The creator originally wanted to do a series on ancient Rome, about the birthplace of civilization. The studio wanted a Western. He said, oh, perfect, that works, too.

Post reply on HN