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

491–500 of 555 posts

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#491

Post by abueesp »

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.

Polycentric Law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law

+

Wealth of the networks (instead of monopolistic centralism base upon territory, population and gov 300years old model Wealth of the Nations/States).

Move forward. Even it is not possible eventually to have a complete monopoly of the law, except in the case of a dystopian totalitarism.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#492

Post by quadlock »

arg01 wrote: post #342
quadlock wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow! That's one of the two basic things. "reject the use of force or fraud to compel others except in response to force or fraud."

Yes that's great if everyone abides by your philosophy. But if we're doing that and expecting others to abide by it why is the statement not just "reject the use of force or fraud to compel others". The whole catch 22 is there is no central authority to enforce the philosophy unless you're expecting people to be angels but then you could say something similar about communism being a better system.

Libertarians don't expect other to abide by it. Enforcing non-initiatory use of force and fraud is one of the legitimate purposes of the government.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#493

Post by abruzzi »

aegiso wrote: post #63
jfasi wrote: post #3

Given illegal nature of Silk Road 2, I can't help but be suspicious of this explanation of the hack. If someone's sufficiently willing to flaunt laws as to operate a site devoted to selling contraband, what stops them from taking advantage of their position of power and stealing from their users?

It's entirely possible to be in support of a free and peaceful drug trade, while at the same time being morally against theft. I don't know why you're lumping the two.

Very true, but at the same time, the anonymity prized by many in support of the site or currencies like BTC makes it a easy target for scammers. I'm saying this happened here, but I'm honestly surprised DPR1 had as much money in BTC, and lived in the US. i.e. Build a system, run it as legit until you're storing $100m of other people's money. Then use the anonymity the system provided you disappear with their money to a county where you broke no laws and provides no extradition to the USA. Spend the rest of your life sipping mai-tais on the beach. Anonymity can be the enemy of accountability.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#494

Post by plcancel »

drewcrawford wrote: post #443
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…

Lowercase-l libertarian checking in. I don't oppose governments. I oppose some of their laws. Most ordinary people oppose laws--half the country opposes the ACA, the other half opposes the Patriot act. Perhaps libertarians oppose more laws than the average person, but opposing laws and advocating full-on anarchy are two very different things. There is no hypocrisy inherent in calling for the repeal of some laws and c…

Thanks for this comment. It's disheartening that some will always point and yell, "Hahahaha - all those guys on the blue team. Man, they're so dumb!" like an individual's political philosophy has absolutely no nuance. It's easier when your world view is all Libertarians are Anarchists, or all Democrats are Marxists and Socialists, or all Republicans are racist Teabaggers.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#495

Post by crystaln »

jadeddrag wrote: post #372
crystaln wrote: post #288

The hatred for Mt Gox in the bitcoin community blinded them to the reality that the malleability bug is very serious. The way the bitcoin community responded was irresponsible. Regardless of whether there are workarounds, it's a tragic security flaw in the protocol and should have been treated as such.

As I understand it, this was a problem that was identified over 2 years ago, and fixed for over a year. The problem is that MtGox implemented their own wallet software, and neglected to include bug fixes from the reference client.

I don't believe that is correct. The core devs relied on people implementing workarounds.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#496

Post by dinkumthinkum »

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.

No, it's more like you use your money and you get your own police force and set of laws and I'll use my own and get the same and then we'll figure out our grievances ourselves. Sounds like a workable system. :)

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#497

Post by logicchains »

tinco wrote: post #286
aaronem wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your common or garden libertarian will construct all manner of complex arguments as to how that isn't so, but there's really nothing in the philosophy which forbids it.

.. so their answer to a single central government is a multitude of smaller governments? How is that better?

Because it's much easier to move if your government sucks?

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#498

Post by dinkumthinkum »

MrZongle2 wrote: post #282
brnstz wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

Perhaps citing a television show is not the most credible evidence one can bring to a discussion? Edit (since I cannot reply directly, apparently): why is it not credible? Can I start citing the X-Files or Star Trek? How about a broadcast of the Nancy Grace show?

You really have trouble with this kind of discussion? I'm not sure what would fix this thinking ... Maybe you should read books or learn thought experiments or just start with basic metaphors ... hrrmphh! I'm stumped!

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#499

Post by eropple »

baddox wrote: post #316
mpyne wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that "checks and balances" as designed into systems like the U.S. has worked better at mitigating this than the tribes-and-warlords systems that libertarians would want. It's one thing to complain about the government; I mean, you'd practically not be a red-blooded American if you didn't bitch and moan about the government. But providing options that are actually better should be a precondition for a switch to…

I don't advocate a "tribes-and-warlords" system. I advocate a polycentric legal system which I believe would be better (for the vast majority of people, according to their own judgement of "better") than government systems like the US. I also do not believe that checks and balances work as I presume they were intended to.

> I don't advocate a "tribes-and-warlords" system.

Please explain to me what prevents it from degenerating into such.

Re: Silk Road 2 Hacked, All Bitcoins Stolen

#500

Post by Floegipoky »

milkshakes wrote: post #479
redthrowaway wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if I were disagreeing with some substantive point he made, which I'm not (I'm not agreeing, either). The substantive issue of my comment was his tone. I'm not disagreeing with him or trying to convince others that he's wrong; I'm just calling him out for being a jackass.

> Only if I were disagreeing with some substantive point he made, which I'm not (I'm not agreeing, either). The substantive issue of my comment was his tone. I'm not disagreeing with him or trying to convince others that he's wrong FTA: So if the worst thing you can say about something is to criticize its tone, you're not saying much. Is the author flippant, but correct? Better that than grave and wrong. And if the a…

You can't (reasonably) apply the hierarchy of disagreement to someone who is not actually disagreeing. He's not saying this to contribute to the debate, he's trying to encourage the community to express itself in an appropriate manner. Zed has made it pretty clear that he has no interest in factual debate. Multiple people have tried to point out the misunderstandings expressed in his posts and have been met with accusations of hypocrisy and/or avoidance of the actual points raised. He's firmly in the range of DH0-3. I'll admit I'm pretty new here, but this seems to me like behavior that the community should try to discourage.
Post reply on HN