Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum • Hacker News Board

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#61

Post by sliverstorm » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:05 PM UTC

crazypyro wrote: post #60

sliverstorm wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The definition of crime is based on a law which isn't necessarily morally right. So what is the correct action for the Fed? To ignore the law and not enforce it?

Seems to be exactly what the president has ordered w.r.t. Colorado/Washington legalization of marijuana, which is a schedule 1 drug...

Ok, similar, yes. But isn't that still a bit of a different issue? To my knowledge that had nothing to do with moral judgements and everything to do with conflicting laws at the federal & state levels, and the open debate over states' rights.

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#62

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:06 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #44

nickysielicki wrote: post #3

We (speaking as a netizen) need Usenet 2.0; eg: something that can fulfill the role of reddit that is decentralized/distributed. Perhaps reddit can even transition into being a reader (a la google reader) for people that don't want to set up their own node. I'm not saying that drug discussion is the quintessential act that deserves to be protected, but I am worried that the government has such an easy avenue to get t…

Well, Usenet 1.0 was decentralised, and people need to think about the disadvantages. In the early 2000s well over 50% of the traffic was spam cancels. An forum without an "owner" who can delete posts and effectively ban spammers and "abuse" will promptly be filled with spam and abuse. The issue of "abuse" which is harmful to people other than users of the forum should also be considered carefully.

I remember usenet becoming basically unreadable from the spam and abuse (both commercial and otherwise, everybody's favorite nazi weev did a lot to kill usenet back in the day)

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#63

Post by TillE » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:08 PM UTC

trhway wrote: post #59

sliverstorm wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The definition of crime is based on a law which isn't necessarily morally right. So what is the correct action for the Fed? To ignore the law and not enforce it?

my understanding of the US legal system is that Feds really get to choose which laws they are going or not going to enforce. At the top level it is what is called executive action and power of pardon. For example, Obama has followed moral instead of laws in his immigration actions.

In two hours, the marijuana situation in Berlin is going to change significantly because two senators decided to amend the enforcement policy. Basically, German law allows for declining to prosecute the possession of small quantities. But the exact policy is set by each state, and is not actually a law.

So as of March 31st, there will be a zero tolerance policy in one specific park. It's one of the weirder and more short-sighted drug policies I've ever encountered, and a good example of this kind of move: from officially enshrined non-enforcement of a law to strict enforcement.

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#64

Post by teraflop » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:11 PM UTC

im2w1l wrote: post #55

pjc50 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Usenet 1.0 was decentralised, and people need to think about the disadvantages. In the early 2000s well over 50% of the traffic was spam cancels. An forum without an "owner" who can delete posts and effectively ban spammers and "abuse" will promptly be filled with spam and abuse. The issue of "abuse" which is harmful to people other than users of the forum should also be considered carefully.

Web of trust-based spam filtering takes some effort to use, but is a workable solution.

That's a nice theory, but has it been demonstrated to work in any real systems? Is it known to be a workable solution at the scale of Usenet/Reddit?

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#65

Post by tedunangst » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:12 PM UTC

pyre wrote: post #52

sliverstorm wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favorite legal defense, moral relativism. "One day, this heinous crime I have committed might not be illegal. Knowing that, how can you possibly convict me!?"

The general stance that "you broke the law, now you're a criminal" may be technically correct, but most people issuing such statements group "criminals" into a singular group and feel that the serial murderer and the child rapist are no different than the guy that forgot he had an orange in his car when crossing the border. "You've broken the rules of society, you are no better than a vagabond!" In light of this, how…

Welcome to life in a democracy. Stupid people voting for stupid laws. Why can't we just put the smart people in charge?

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#66

Post by paulhauggis » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:13 PM UTC

dublinben wrote: post #29

ianstallings wrote: post #15

Warning: this opinion probably won't fit into the HN zeitgeist. If you commit a crime online don't be surprised when they seek to gain evidence against you. This isn't a liberty issue. This is a you're probably a criminal issue and law enforcement is coming after you. I don't protect drug dealers in my neighborhood because of their right to free speech and personal liberty so why would I protect these guys? It just a…

>they are criminals They likely disagree that their "crimes" ought to be illegal, and do not accept the legitimacy of any punishment for such behavior. Why should they have to "make a choice" and make "better decisions" when they don't believe what they've done is wrong?

Bernie Madoff didn't think he was doing anything wrong either. Why should he have to make a choice?

The only reason you are making this comment is because you don't believe drugs (and drug dealing) should be illegal.

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#67

Post by dataker » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:15 PM UTC

sliverstorm wrote: post #53

dataker wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This matter is beyond using or selling drugs. The definition of crime is based on a law which isn't necessarily morally right. For example, in my country, discussing LGBT or even marijuana would get you into serious trouble. Hence, as internet users, we should look beyond our time and space, ensuring freedom of speech.

The definition of crime is based on a law which isn't necessarily morally right. So what is the correct action for the Fed? To ignore the law and not enforce it?

I don't know a lot about US law, but I'll try my best as an internet user.

As far as I know, the Fed is part of the government and, obviously, enforce its laws. If there's a war on drugs, the Fed will try to control these networks in the internet.

Similarly, in other countries, their 'Fed' will try to control LGBT, feminist and religious online communities. Although a different case, the Internet is still the same.

If one is American and doesn't have issues, he/she should at least recognize it is not the same in other places and times.

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#68

Post by javajosh » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:15 PM UTC

dataker wrote: post #39

ianstallings wrote: post #15

Warning: this opinion probably won't fit into the HN zeitgeist. If you commit a crime online don't be surprised when they seek to gain evidence against you. This isn't a liberty issue. This is a you're probably a criminal issue and law enforcement is coming after you. I don't protect drug dealers in my neighborhood because of their right to free speech and personal liberty so why would I protect these guys? It just a…

This matter is beyond using or selling drugs. The definition of crime is based on a law which isn't necessarily morally right. For example, in my country, discussing LGBT or even marijuana would get you into serious trouble. Hence, as internet users, we should look beyond our time and space, ensuring freedom of speech.

>Hence, as internet users, we should look beyond our time and space, ensuring freedom of speech.

What do you think drives the impulse to suppress free speech? And do you really think this is a free speech issue?

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#69

Post by technofiend » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:18 PM UTC

im2w1l wrote: post #55

pjc50 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Usenet 1.0 was decentralised, and people need to think about the disadvantages. In the early 2000s well over 50% of the traffic was spam cancels. An forum without an "owner" who can delete posts and effectively ban spammers and "abuse" will promptly be filled with spam and abuse. The issue of "abuse" which is harmful to people other than users of the forum should also be considered carefully.

Web of trust-based spam filtering takes some effort to use, but is a workable solution.

WoT is pointless when people can manufacture identities that trust each other and build a fake trust score for an id used to spam or whatever.

Re: Feds Demand Reddit Identify Users of a Dark-Web Drug Forum

#70

Post by JoshTriplett » Mon, Mar 30, 2015, 8:22 PM UTC

kohanz wrote: post #36

dublinben wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>they are criminals They likely disagree that their "crimes" ought to be illegal, and do not accept the legitimacy of any punishment for such behavior. Why should they have to "make a choice" and make "better decisions" when they don't believe what they've done is wrong?

... and how well does a society function if everyone gets to decide for themselves what rules they follow?

As long as interactions between people are governed by the consent of all parties rather than unilaterally by the rules of one: pretty darn well. If what you're doing only affects you, only you ought to have jurisdiction.