Live data from Hacker News

Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

france24.com

151–160 of 187 posts

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#151
one thing I like about permissionless finance is that operations like these can be publicly traded, specifically for aggregate forecasts of value and price discovery

I dont like how publicly traded status is put on a pedestal and treated like a reward

everything should have price discovery

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#152

Just legalize it already. This is stupid.

Cocaine, I could maybe see the argument. But the article also said there was another submarine seized with 4.5BN worth of meth aboard. And I really hope you aren't suggesting legalising meth. I could see the argument that if other amphetamines were legal no one would use meth, but.....I don't think that's necessarily true. All the illegal meth would have to do to keep existing is to be cheaper than legal speed.

No one should do meth. But that doesn't mean people don't do meth. And many of the bad results are because it's street stuff.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know we have data that shows just how harmful the war on drugs has been, but I'm curious if we have data showing that legalization in a modern society, with global supply chains and marketing campaigns, does not result in a bunch of people who previously wouldn't have done drugs - for fear of legal consequences, or just because they're hard to obtain - suddenly doing drugs. I'm genuinely interested to know, this is…

Most places that focus on treatment rather than punishment see drops in all the relevant stats for deaths, crime, health issues, etc. related to drugs usage. And even drops in drug abuse itself. The one thing that has never really worked and continues to create endless amounts of misery is the war on drugs and all the collateral damage it causes. It never worked. Not even a little bit.

I totally believe that treatment should be the focus for drug users; the only focus, even. What I'm having trouble believing is that convenient access to drugs would not result in net-harms that are worse than those inflicted by (imperfect attempts at) holding people accountable for selling these chemicals to the vulnerable, irrespective of whether or not those people are pharmaceutical companies or cartels.

I would like to see evidence that jurisdictions in the developed world that stop prosecuting dealers for freely selling what I'd call "hard drugs", e.g. opiates and amphetamines, see their population's well-being improve, on the whole - if there has ever been such a jurisdiction.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The war on drugs has failed. Everyone agrees that no-one should do meth. But the solutions presented so far by prohibition are not just conceptually flawed - they demonstrably don’t work. We literally have 50+ years of data that shows it. We need to a) legalize drugs, b) provide proper treatment to addicts, and c) get unsafe drugs off the streets. I’m speaking as someone who lost a close family member to an overdose.…

I know we have data that shows just how harmful the war on drugs has been, but I'm curious if we have data showing that legalization in a modern society, with global supply chains and marketing campaigns, does not result in a bunch of people who previously wouldn't have done drugs - for fear of legal consequences, or just because they're hard to obtain - suddenly doing drugs. I'm genuinely interested to know, this is…

Key here: "marketing campaigns".

Legal drugs, yes. Marketing, *NO*. Nothing more than the minimum for comparison shopping.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "or just because they're hard to obtain " Are they? I have the feeling they are easier to obtain than if they were only sold at dedicated stores and teenagers had to show an ID, or similar to casinos addict trying to get out could ask to be put on ban list. Having said that, legalizing would not get rid of cartels, who are very diversified and also operate illegally on legal products by taxing producers and control…

At least in my circles I'd have a much harder time getting access to meth or heroin than I would a product that can be bought from a special store. I imagine there are many individuals like me, but I'm not sure, which is why I ask for data. There's no doubt in my mind that addicts know how to find dealers, and don't have trouble finding new dealers when their former dealer gets arrested. What I'm worried about and as…

Most people have the common sense to avoid using the stuff without very good reason. Availability isn't going to be a big factor.

And decriminalization of possession doesn't really do much. Cops don't focus on possession in the first place. It lets people be more open about possessing (which is a good thing for opiate users--much more likely to get Narcan if needed) but does nothing about the quality problems from the supply chain.

And if you get rid of the drug war you get rid of the insanity around prescribing controlled substances.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already have legal meth, it's branded Adderall® and we regularly prescribe it to children, grad students, and hedge fund managers. You just have to be rich enough to afford the 'scrip.

I do think Adderall should be available OTC to everybody. It's an open secret that rich kids with no legitimate mental issues buy prescriptions for adderall to boost their school and job performance. The popular talk of "ADHD brains" for which Adderall works differently is pseudoscience tacitly endorsed by the medical community to make people feel okay about using these drugs. They don't just boost the school perform…

Disagree--it's not that it works differently, but whether the effect is desirable.

There's always a balance between focusing on the task and dealing with the world. Adderall always turns up the focus. It's just that's a beneficial effect for those who didn't have enough focus, often an undesirable effect for those who already had enough.

Saying it works differently on ADHD brains is like saying the furnace works differently on winter weather than on summer weather.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cocaine, I could maybe see the argument. But the article also said there was another submarine seized with 4.5BN worth of meth aboard. And I really hope you aren't suggesting legalising meth. I could see the argument that if other amphetamines were legal no one would use meth, but.....I don't think that's necessarily true. All the illegal meth would have to do to keep existing is to be cheaper than legal speed.

Addicts need help, if we want to reduce drug use we can do it through education and support. That's how tobacco use has dropped in western countries, not by banning it and using violence.

And understand that use of heavy drugs is often driven by seeking to escape some aspect of life. Fix that and people can often quit on their own by slowly tapering. Don't fix that and they're very prone to falling off the wagon.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could set a 1000% tax on the coffee produced, if they can consolidate control. Latin America is 50% of the world coffee production. What will Starbucks / Nestle do? They will just pay up. They can even go against the families of the execs to make their case about the new price.

>They could set a 1000% tax on the coffee produced. No they couldn't. That'd just mint another cartel run black market that they don't control and that cartel would tax the black market coffee at substantially less. You can kind of think of the current drugs situation as a "so big the number doesn't matter, it's a non stater" percent tax.

That new cartel would invite a war against it. These disputes are not resolved through capitalistic means. You cannot just price out the big guys.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#159

Just legalize it already. This is stupid.

Cocaine, I could maybe see the argument. But the article also said there was another submarine seized with 4.5BN worth of meth aboard. And I really hope you aren't suggesting legalising meth. I could see the argument that if other amphetamines were legal no one would use meth, but.....I don't think that's necessarily true. All the illegal meth would have to do to keep existing is to be cheaper than legal speed.

Meth is legal for people with poor attention.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll probably move onto mass producing weaponry, which, depending on the sophistication and scale, could be big issues for the rest of the world. They already partner with terrorist groups and other unsavory orgs as-is. Any group worth mentioning these days interfaces with the cartels

I don’t think weapon production is in their wheelhouse. Arms dealing maybe but not manufacturing. Facilities like those are permanent locations. Permanent locations tend to get raided and attacked. I think controlling municipalities like they are is working fine for them. No need to mass produce weapons when you can just buy them.

Ehh, im not sure I agree that arms production is that difficult. Yes you need machine shop equipment, but machine equipment from any time in the last 75 years would be more than capable and there is plenty of unused equipment sitting around and new cheap chinese equipment you can buy that would be workable even if it isn't great. Even the US where guns are about as legal as they get, there are illegal gun manufacturing shops busted basically every week. Half of them are probably just making trash that is super easy to do like giggle switches and mostly publicized as pure propaganda for police departments, but that still leaves a significant number of people producing working illegal arms even in a market where guns are dirt cheap.

And now you got an entire online community dedicated to 3d printing firearms and sharing models and designs, and it is REALLY easy to go from 3d printer design into sintered or casted metal parts that require little to no actual machining to operate.

In my opinion, 99% of the barrier to obtaining firearms in this era is purely a lack of desire and them already being so cheap to get. It doesn't require a craftsman of 20 years to produce working fierarms nor even specialized or unusual equipment or materials. But even if someone did order more specialized machinery from China to produce say cold hammered barrels at a factory scale, a chinese tool making company isn't going to think twice about shipping it and taking the money, and if the producers can run it for just a few months it would have paid for itself.

Post reply on HN