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

Trends in the Silk Road 2.0

lau.im

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–95 of 95 posts

Re: Trends in the Silk Road 2.0

#91

Post by tekromancr »

Evolved wrote: post #56
virmundi wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legalized weed might eat away, but if the market is anything like Colorado, it's too expensive vs dark weed. It's so bad in fact that there are projected budget shortfalls because there are few consumers in the space. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/high-times/marijuana-prices-co... http://khon2.com/2014/04/09/colorado-tax-revenue-on-recreati...

Is this fundamental attribution error? Perhaps the reason it is more expensive is because it presents much less of a risk to purchase vs. on the street? It could also be that there is not a lot of competition selling legal weed. Maybe it is because street prices have dropped considerably due to the introduction of legal weed? Furthermore, it should be noted that Colorado's laws also permit growing and gifting marijua…

I spent way too long reading this comment. What was the pun? I don't get it.

Re: Trends in the Silk Road 2.0

#92

Post by _98fj »

araes wrote: post #82
_bdog wrote: post #79

Drugs are a fascinating topic in my opinion, because they have affected humankind and it's decisions since ever and more than anyone wants to admit. It's a topic that is everywhere, and that simultaneously nobody has a clue about (a bit like climate change or high finance). People don't know which drugs there are, how they work, how dangerous they are, how much they are used etc. I talked to many people who are affec…

In general, liked the post, and generally agree that drugs have completely permeated our society, and we mostly need to accept, and deal with, the fact that they're here. Oddly though, I disagree with the summary points, although they're almost impossible to prove. For example, I think the large majority of Americans can tell you a decent amount about marijuana. Maybe not purchasing info, but general effects, and goo…

@Mostly sofa use: This probably depends on the drug, I guess it's true for cannabis, but not for cocaine.

@Knowledge: What fascinated me is that regular users I asked (at a drug-checking-station at clubs for example) also didn't know much more than the name of the stuff they're putting in their body. On the other hand most drinkers also don't know the biochemical/medical stuff, just how to handle the situation (more or less).

Re: Trends in the Silk Road 2.0

#93

Post by Havoc »

underyx wrote: post #32
Havoc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

User Agents have proven to be (somewhat) uniquely identifiable under specific conditions so it seems like a reasonable precaution regardless of Silk Road configurations.

He can specify his own User-Agent string. If he sends the user agent 'silkroadparserbot v0.0.1' with every request, that is going to provide no information at all. Even if this wasn't, did you think that after one change of UA he would be getting more 'uniquely identifiable' with each new request sent?

You're missing my point. Have a look at what the EFF has to say (with cool test too):

https://panopticlick.eff.org/

Re: Trends in the Silk Road 2.0

#94

Post by underyx »

Havoc wrote: post #93
underyx wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He can specify his own User-Agent string. If he sends the user agent 'silkroadparserbot v0.0.1' with every request, that is going to provide no information at all. Even if this wasn't, did you think that after one change of UA he would be getting more 'uniquely identifiable' with each new request sent?

You're missing my point. Have a look at what the EFF has to say (with cool test too): https://panopticlick.eff.org/

I did know about this before, and I suspected that you were referring to this earlier. None of this is applicable to a scraper.

Re: Trends in the Silk Road 2.0

#95

Post by ajcarpy2005 »

tekromancr wrote: post #91
Evolved wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this fundamental attribution error? Perhaps the reason it is more expensive is because it presents much less of a risk to purchase vs. on the street? It could also be that there is not a lot of competition selling legal weed. Maybe it is because street prices have dropped considerably due to the introduction of legal weed? Furthermore, it should be noted that Colorado's laws also permit growing and gifting marijua…

I spent way too long reading this comment. What was the pun? I don't get it.

There are 16 oz in a lb.
Post reply on HN