281–290 of 381 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>would find it weird if people tried to make people stealing candybars from Walmart out to be equal to murderers. it is pretty equal for the 3rd strike
Isn't the 3 strikes system for felonies?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every time a market has been taken down it's been due to OPSEC failure and other information leaks (e.g. Silk Road captcha IP leak, DPR's advertising of market being linked to his personal email address). AlphaBay Which got taken down first in this operation was due to a personal email being included in the header of the welcome email sent out to new users 3 years ago [1] [1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release…
These opsec failures that you're talking about are very easy to find in the process of parallel construction. So that these are the stated reasons is no indication that they are the real reasons. They are, in fact, so very, very convenient the they smell like parallel construction to me. Might not be, but they certainly aren't good evidence that parallel construction isn't going on.
On the other hand, the evidence that parallel construction is going on appears to be a belief that everything is parallel construction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would also be very helpful but hiding the ownership of a server behind a wall of LLC's and Trusts from various locations around the world is also a good idea.
Pointless, hosts don't do KYC so you can just lie to them and be whoever you please.
I honestly don't know how that would work with getting servers to an ISP for them to rack and follow the networking instructions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But where did they get the 3 year old email. 1) They were investigating AlphaBay for nearly 3 years 2) They came upon somehow control of an email address which contained 3 year old mail that contained the password reset email 3) They are capturing and storing large amounts of tor traffic much like the NSA does on clearnet see: xkeyscore This isn't really explained in the indictment
This is a really interesting question. Knowing how they got access to such an old email from an external source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Laws against inherent characteristics seem to me at least to be worse than laws which ban behavior. Conflating the two in order to make some particular law sound worse seems sort of dishonest to me.
Perhaps. But within the context of gay rights it is the government that behaved improperly. Society bundled behaviour and innate characteristics into a single thing. That was wrong, and it is important to highlight that. Of course in a post homophobic world the distinction is rather irrelevant. It makes no difference to anyone if homosexuality is innate, or just a set of chosen behaviours. Why would it matter either…
>Society bundled behaviour and innate characteristics into a single thing.
It seems like that's what you're doing here:
>...you don't have any choice about being gay, or about having gay relationships.
Being gay does not mean you have to have gay relationships. Having gay relationships is a choice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They almost certainly did. I do market research and a number of vendor keys changed on Hansa and Dream on June 23rd. Some had various comments in them claiming to be older, e.g. "EST June 2016". Dutch Police released a statement claiming as much http://politiepcvh42eav.onion/hansafaq.html
Interesting. What do you do with your market research?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems fair to lump in with the rest since it was in fact an illegal market place.
Not everything that is illegal is wrong. E.g. being gay is illegal in many places.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most drug dealers are not "big organized groups." I don't know from Hansa, but I'm betting a big organized group is not likely to use them as a single point of failure.
Of course, it wouldn't have been their only market, but it's among them. Even something ostensibly harmless as cannabis can finance quite questionable people and groups. A while ago Arte France released a series titled "Cannabis", where the plot revolves around a shipment of Morrocan hashish lost on the Mediterranean sea, with the consequences playing out all over Europe. And while it's a fictional plot, it still pai…
That's not how I was using "single point of failure." The failure I was speaking to was identification by law enforcement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most drug dealers are not "big organized groups." I don't know from Hansa, but I'm betting a big organized group is not likely to use them as a single point of failure.
> Most drug dealers are not "big organized groups." Who do you think provides them with the drugs?
Selling to end users is practically a mug's game, so there is no end to the number of people wanting to act as middlemen to avoid it.