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

Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

darknetlive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 343 posts

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#231

Post by tchaffee »

HoveringOrb wrote: post #18
plutonorm wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What people put into their bodies is their own business.

I want to agree with this, but I've seen firsthand how meth heads bring down everyone around them.

That's called confirmation bias. The people who are living fulfilling and successful lives using meth, cocaine, wine, tea, or marijuana do not advertise it and therefor you have zero information about how many of them there are. Well people do talk about the legal and socially acceptable ones: wine, tea, and increasingly marijuana. So until meth becomes both legal and socially acceptable, your anecdotal data is heavily skewed towards those who crashed.

With that said, meth undoubtedly has a higher potential for abuse and addiction than marijuana and is worse for the health when abused. But evaluating just how much of a difference is near impossible while it remains illegal and while there is an huge and profitable government funded industry around the war on drugs.

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#232

Post by mythrwy »

bunfunton wrote: post #42
aristophenes wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can partially understand that point of view for marijuana (though I think it’s important for a functional society to obey laws, and get them changed if they aren’t working instead of just breaking them based on personal preference). But the guy had been selling methamphetamine too, which is life destroying poison. Our government provides costly services for people who are incapable of taking care of themselves, and…

Meth isn’t life destroying poison sorry to inform you. I take 10mg for ADHD a day and it’s saved my life when all other alternatives have failed. I would argue the bad cases you’ve seen are from people with no self control. Why should the government be able to tell you what you can and cannot put into your own body? Better, let people do what they want as long as they don’t hurt anybody else and educate them.

Back in the mid 90's I worked on a concrete crew for a few months. It was a big outfit building tip up buildings like box store type, maybe 50 guys on site.

Everyone (I think) did meth except me and one other guy, a Native American. It was expected. The pace was set by meth. Lunch was about 10 minutes. Often we would get to work like 3AM for pours. I lasted like 3 months and couldn't handle it any more.

After awhile guys would burn out and not show up. No big deal, replace them with another guy. I saw my supervisor later at a restaurant. He told me how he had tried at one point tried to commit suicide. The resulting impacts on the former employees lives (and the lives of their families and associates) wasn't the companies problem so long as the building went up fast.

That company is still around too. No, not going to name and shame.

While I'm generally in favor of people being allowed to put whatever they want in their bodies there is significant moral hazard and danger. Particularly with drugs like meth and heroin.

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#233

Post by lambdaba »

nip180 wrote: post #213
tchaffee wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not significantly safer. If we are comparing like to like, then we are not talking about a one time exposure, we are talking about addiction and regular exposure. Addiction to sugar will almost always result in a high BMI. "Having a high BMI during pregnancy has been linked to an increased risk of various health problems for a baby, including: Birth defects Being significantly larger than average (fetal macroso…

People addicted and regularly consuming alcohol, meth (smoked, snorted, or injected), street heroin, and cocaine all suffer from significantly worse side effects than people addicted to sugar. I’ll grant you that sugar has a higher total social cost, because more people are addicted to it.

Just noting that a lot of these addicts have awful diets (even worse than the already bad average). The common extreme tooth decay seen in meth addicts is obviously not caused by the substance itself but by negligence paired with consumption of extreme quantities of... sugar.

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#234

Post by pitaj »

nicoffeine wrote: post #110
aristophenes wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can partially understand that point of view for marijuana (though I think it’s important for a functional society to obey laws, and get them changed if they aren’t working instead of just breaking them based on personal preference). But the guy had been selling methamphetamine too, which is life destroying poison. Our government provides costly services for people who are incapable of taking care of themselves, and…

First, legality does not presuppose morality. America is the result of breaking laws based on personal preference, and taking up arms against the current government to get it done. Second, other life destroying poisons include: alcohol, nicotine, sugar, fast food, dopamine hits from social media feedback/gambling/gaming... are you ready for the government to decide your intake for those? The only thing prohibition do…

> Second, other life destroying poisons include: alcohol, nicotine, sugar, fast food, dopamine hits from social media feedback/gambling/gaming... are you ready for the government to decide your intake for those?

The government does regulate alcohol ad nicotine directly. The federal gov subsidizes sugar, various localities tax it. Various politicians have made it clear they want to regulate or ban social media. Gambling is banned, monopolized, or regulated by every state government. Ever heard "video games cause violence"?

My point is that the government has its hands in everything. People should be free to do all of the above activities. I fully support legalization of everything mentioned. But unfortunately it's not outlandish for the government to control them.

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#235

Post by refurb »

microtherion wrote: post #221
jasoneckert wrote: post #78

What I find the most interesting about this article is that someone was able to be identified using a picture of their fingerprints. Thus, any photos posted online could be scoured for identification information. And with computer vision technologies becoming more mature, it means that regular video footage of people could identify them the same way in seconds or less using a wide variety of different visual traits.…

> identified using a picture of their fingerprints It's not clear to me that they identified him that way. It might be that they arrested him due to other evidence, compared the fingerprints afterward, and told him that they could prove the fingerprints matched, whereupon he pled guilty. It's no unheard of to elicit guilty pleas using less than scientifically robust forensic methods.

Indeed. I got the impression this was one of many pieces of evidence used to put the case together.

The biggest one was the money laundering.

Porras had used a money laundering service controlled by Homeland Security Investigations. Vendors sent the money launderer a certain amount of Bitcoin and the money launderer mailed cash back to the vendor. At some point in the money launderer’s career, federal agents quietly took control of the money laundering operation and used the position to identify dozens of darkweb vendors.

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#236

Post by Camas »

mschwaig wrote: post #62

'So we have these fingerprints, and we think they belong to this guy we already have prints on file for. Can you give us a yes/no answer if they match up?' seems like a pretty low bar for evidence. Seems like the kind of thing that could heavily skew towards telling you what you want to hear. Maybe someone else knows if it actually works like that, the writeup made it sound like that to me. I'm just some guy who saw…

> Law enforcement made a number of controlled purchases during the investigation into Porras and his co-conspirators. The purchases and subsequent surveillance followed the same pattern every time: make a purchase; watch Porras drive to a storage facility where he stored product; follow Porras to the Post Office; talk to Postal Inspectors about the package Porras or his co-conspirator had dropped into a USPS Blue Box.

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#237

Post by refurb »

hunter2_ wrote: post #92
jasoneckert wrote: post #78

What I find the most interesting about this article is that someone was able to be identified using a picture of their fingerprints. Thus, any photos posted online could be scoured for identification information. And with computer vision technologies becoming more mature, it means that regular video footage of people could identify them the same way in seconds or less using a wide variety of different visual traits.…

I wouldn't be surprised if writing style could also be used. I tend to use certain constructions and vocabulary across many of my comments. Some are under a handle with little or no link to my real identity, and some are quite the opposite. I expect someone could deanonymize the former based on correlation of writing style with the latter.

That's in the indictment too. He misspelled "quality" across several different posts.

Alone it's not conclusive, but it's one more piece of evidence linking all of the activity together.

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#238

Post by refurb »

mabbo wrote: post #171

> Porras also admitted possessing a Model A uzi-style pistol; a MAK 90; and an S&W .44 caliber revolver. Although all weapons in Porras’ possession were legal firearms (the uzi-style pistol used post ban parts), a felony conviction for possession with intent precluded firearm ownership. Can someone explain this part to me. Was he previously convicted of a crime that precluded ownership? Or are the police able to take…

It mentions he had already been a convicted, or at least arrested, for a prior crime. That's why they had his fingerprints on file.

Whether that crime was a felony, I don't know.

But I believe the "felons can't possess firearms" also includes possession while committing a felony - you don't need an actual conviction (but the felony would need to be proved).

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#239

Post by redisman »

aristophenes wrote: post #16
antihero wrote: post #2

What a colossal waste of time. Prosecuting someone for selling online something that is illegal in a lot of states. Mindblowing how stupid the war on drugs is.

I can partially understand that point of view for marijuana (though I think it’s important for a functional society to obey laws, and get them changed if they aren’t working instead of just breaking them based on personal preference). But the guy had been selling methamphetamine too, which is life destroying poison. Our government provides costly services for people who are incapable of taking care of themselves, and…

The war on drugs (officially) started in the 70s. What do we have to show for it 50 years later? Are there more drugs or less drugs today? How many lives destroyed by the drugs vs the enforcement and violence caused by their legal status?

Re: Dream Vendor "Canna_Bars" Sentenced to Prison

#240

Post by sebastialonso »

sslalready wrote: post #151
jasoneckert wrote: post #78

What I find the most interesting about this article is that someone was able to be identified using a picture of their fingerprints. Thus, any photos posted online could be scoured for identification information. And with computer vision technologies becoming more mature, it means that regular video footage of people could identify them the same way in seconds or less using a wide variety of different visual traits.…

I’ve reflected on the fact that some makers on YouTube wear gloves and wondered if this is for privacy reasons. I see globes being worn even when they’re not obviously doing anything that risk getting their fingers dirty.

Which is hilarious if you're monetising their videos.
Post reply on HN