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

Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 641 posts

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#311

Post by earlyresort »

tshaddox wrote: post #289
earlyresort wrote: post #214

Hard drugs are one of those things that have different consequences for different types of people. An intelligent, wealthy, employable person can dabble with them, have a good time, and usually get away with it. Should they get addicted and screw up their lives, they can usually get help and bounce back without permanent consequences. People who're a little less well-off intellectually and economically aren't so resi…

This isn't just about the effects of addictive drugs. I think most people agree they can be devastating to people and families. The trouble is that you seem to be suggesting that US drug policy in any way helps people and families affected by addictive drugs. I can't look at the war on drugs and see any remotely feasible interpretation where it's helping people affected by addictive drugs.

For me, it doesn't seem like a massive logical leap to suggest that shutting down a particularly convenient and unique part of the supply chain will have an effect on consumption and therefore the negative effects of consumption. Shutting down The Silk Road isn't quite the same thing as arresting the corner dealer.

Aside from that - let's posit that Ross Ulbricht's arrest and punishment and the shutdown of The Silk Road doesn't impact consumption and the consequent negative effects at all. I've still got no real moral qualms about punishing someone who enriches themselves off so much harm to others. Yes, there are many people in this world who do equivalent harm that we don't punish, and that's unfortunate, but that doesn't change the rightness of Ross's punishment one bit.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#312

Post by omegaham »

mckoss wrote: post #140
BoardsOfCanada wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was no such thing introduced for the trial. It was in the original press release, then it was withdrawn. Maybe it was because of Mark Force's transgressions, or maybe it was just for effect. Regardless, he never got the chance to defend himself against those particular allegations.

Agreed. From the FBI press release on his conviction[1] no mention of the murder-for-hire charge. This conviction and sentencing all stem from the drug-selling business enterprise. Our war-on-drugs sentencing is quite disproportional, IMHO; imputing societal harms that are unfounded. After all, Mr. Ulbright simply provided a safer way for consenting individuals to enter personal financial transactions. Silk Road is a…

Er, you're drawing a completely ridiculous parallel.

If AT&T made a Text 81841 For Guns and created an anonymous infrastructure for arms dealers to sell guns to gangsters, yes, they would be in trouble.

Here's another example - I'm sure that some people have used Reddit for illegal transactions, but no one is going after Reddit for facilitating drug trafficking because it's a small part of their customer base.

In contrast, the Silk Road was wholly dedicated to selling illegal goods. That's why it was created, and that's why it made money.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#313

Post by thucydides »

hebdo wrote: post #234
PopsiclePete wrote: post #5

Murderers get less than that. We are truly an interesting society, aren't we - somehow kids doing LSD, a mostly harmless substance, is causing us more harm, as a society, than, say, violence?

How do you know LSD is mostly harmless?

A few years ago, David Nutt and other drug experts rated the relative harms of drugs and found LSD was among the least harmful.

These were the evaluation criteria: drug-specific and drug-related mortality, drug-specific and drug-related damage, dependence, drug-specific and drug-related impairment of mental functioning, loss of tangibles, loss of relationships, injury, crime, environmental damage, family adversities, international damage, economic cost, and community harm.

Infographic: http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/or...

Original study: Drug harms in the UK: a multicriteria decision analysis http://www.sg.unimaas.nl/_old/oudelezingen/dddsd.pdf

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#314

Post by pera »

pakled_engineer wrote: post #279
pera wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. This is an exemplary jail sentence: in theory it should be possible to create a perfect dark market, and there is nothing that the FBI can do about it, so they have to implant fear to try to reduce the amount of people who are willing to create the next SR...

I would say that theory would only stand if you lived in Russia, were politically connected, never left Russian territories, and never allowed any sales to CIS/Russian territories. Note the part about being politically connected because the Russian militsia (or w/e they are called these days) will simply be tipped off by the FBI to your whereabouts and go shake you down for hefty taxes. Even if two countries official…

I don't see how your location could be relevant here: you are not selling/shipping products from your home, you are only operating an online marketplace. To make things easier: you aren't even making any profit from it, you are just doing it because you support the idea of a drug market or whatever, so there is no laundering.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#315

Post by psykovsky »

hebdo wrote: post #234
PopsiclePete wrote: post #5

Murderers get less than that. We are truly an interesting society, aren't we - somehow kids doing LSD, a mostly harmless substance, is causing us more harm, as a society, than, say, violence?

How do you know LSD is mostly harmless?

I could tell you a story... that at least corroborates that statement... but you wouldn't believe me anyway.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#316

Post by hebdo »

pcpolice wrote: post #293
hebdo wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of rationalizations may ruin your entire life one day. You cannot and do not know where will any experimentation with drugs bring you to. Remember that the first step of the twelve steps is "admitting that one cannot control one's alcoholism, addiction or compulsion". Finding reasons why you are more privileged than others makes this step even harder.

One thing that should be kept in mind is that not all drugs are the same thing. The "drugs are bad" or "drugs are good" discourse breaks down fast, simply because they are gross generalisations. For example: nicotine is much more addictive (has to do with the speed with which tolerance for a substance is increased) than, say, THC. Which is yet again different from LSD. There are a whole host of factors, and a spectru…

You are right about the addictiveness of nicotine. Also, alcohol is a really nasty one - withdrawal can be lethal in some cases. Even heroin does not do that.

I recommend you reading about the delta FOSB protein. There is promising research towards unifying all, or almost all, addictions with a single, coherent theory. In this light, drugs are really beginning to look very similar to one another.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#317

Post by itistoday2 »

tzs wrote: post #285
zanny wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the key point. He is going to spend the rest of his life in prison, pretty much, for running a website. Not for hurting anyone, not for even threatening to kill anyone - those charges weren't a part of his conviction - but simply by enabling the exchange of drugs he apparently should be locked away forever. Go Team 'Murica....

Are you implying drugs don't hurt anyone? Even the most ardent proponent of full legalization usually acknowledges that many drugs are very harmful--they just believe the people should be free to do things even if they are harmful to themselves. I generally support decriminalization or even legalization, but I would be reluctant to allow internet sales. I'd require sales to be through licensed dealers and in person,…

> Are you implying drugs don't hurt anyone?

Drugs, like spoons, hurt people. Some other items that kill people include:

Cars. Motorcycles. Trees. Water. Too much air. Too little air. People. Dogs. Sticks. Bath tubs. Guns.

In the end, drugs are no more inherently harmful than any of the items listed above.

What usually kills people, however, is not drugs, but things associated with drugs that exist only because we have decided they should exist:

- Drug gangs and cartels and the violence associated with them are the product of US government policy, not drugs.

- Drug overdoses are the product of US government policy, not drugs (in most cases), because especially with illegal drugs people don't know what they're getting or how much of it or how to use it.

It is primarily we that kill people. Look around you. If you see a face that supports the drug war, that person is partially guilty in all drug related deaths.

The irony of this case is that Judge Katherine Forrest is now much more responsible for the drug-related deaths she is trying to prevent.

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#318

Post by omegaham »

pakled_engineer wrote: post #279
pera wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. This is an exemplary jail sentence: in theory it should be possible to create a perfect dark market, and there is nothing that the FBI can do about it, so they have to implant fear to try to reduce the amount of people who are willing to create the next SR...

I would say that theory would only stand if you lived in Russia, were politically connected, never left Russian territories, and never allowed any sales to CIS/Russian territories. Note the part about being politically connected because the Russian militsia (or w/e they are called these days) will simply be tipped off by the FBI to your whereabouts and go shake you down for hefty taxes. Even if two countries official…

I think that it might be possible to set up a dark market (and even then, it's unlikely). The problem is making money off of it. You have to spend the money somewhere, after all. And unlike cash, which is very difficult to trace, spending Bitcoins can be tracked. "Gee, the wallet that everyone pays money to is spending it on X, Y, and Z! I wonder whom that's for!"

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#319

Post by [deleted] »

serve_yay wrote: post #11

> But prosecutors, in their memo, argued that praising Silk Road for “harm reduction measures” was “akin to applauding a heroin dealer for handing out a clean needle with every dime bag: The point is that he has no business dealing drugs in the first place.” Lovely.

[deleted]

Re: Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison

#320

Post by Nadya »

Rhapshe wrote: post #150
jjcm wrote: post #24

It's interesting. On one hand, if a leader of a traditional drug distribution network landed a life in prison sentence, I wouldn't have thought twice about it. With Silkroad though, I'm actually convinced by the defendants argument: that it provided safer, more trustworthy drugs to users. I've had friends who've died from purchasing bad drugs at raves from people who were looking to make money and run. In one situati…

Well, I'm glad you're convinced, because I'm certainly not nor does it appear that the judge was either. "Forrest rejected arguments that Silk Road had reduced harm among drug users by taking illegal activities off the street. “No drug dealer from the Bronx has ever made this argument to the court. It’s a privileged argument and it’s an argument made by one of the privileged,” she said"

No drug dealer from the Bronx was reviewed by buyers for all to see before making a deal with them. Arguably, a dealer from the Bronx would be on the streets so couldn't make that defense in the first place... so the comparison doesn't hold up.

>It’s a privileged argument and it’s an argument made by one of the privileged

I'm unsure what this is even supposed to mean. I tried searching for a definition of "privileged argument" and found nothing. My search phrase was:

"privileged argument" -white -race -racial -feminist

If someone can explain what was meant by this statement, that would be nice and I'd appreciate it.

Post reply on HN