Open Bazaar – decentralized Bitcoin marketplace | Hacker News Reader

Open Bazaar – decentralized Bitcoin marketplace

openbazaar.org

403 pointsamingilani244 comments

I work on OpenBazaar and I'm happy to answer questions.

This website links to the current version of OpenBazaar, but we're just about to launch a completely new version, which you can read about here:

https://medium.com/openbazaarproject/openbazaar-2-0-p2p-trad...

The 2.0 is built with Go and uses IPFS. It's open source and we welcome any developers into the project:

https://github.com/OpenBazaar/openbazaar-go

Since you have merged PRs allowing use via Tor, you seem to be tacitly encouraging Open Bazaar to be used by those who want to hide their identity. In the wake of the recent darknet market closures, people have been saying that the drug trade might move to decentralized markets like this. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14828864

As facilitators of this technology, do you have an opinion on how it should be used? Are you concerned that the primary use case might be to acquire drugs? And are there any controls in place to encourage or discourage certain types of items from being bought and sold on this platform, or is it a complete free-for-all?

Keep in mind that OpenBazaar has been used for over a year now, and only a small minority of the trade has been illicit. Most people just want a platform where they can buy / sell in crypto and avoid marketplace fees.

We built OpenBazaar to be an agnostic protocol for trade online. It's like any other protocol in that it's neutral, and people can use it how they please. I don't like the idea of people using it for immoral things, but that's their decision.

I know linking to a reddit thread might be heresy here, but I talked about the more on our subreddit (I'm CC_EF_JTF):

https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/6oi2k0/rules_of...

After digging into some Reddit comments, this reply appears to downplay the extent to which you're directly facilitating the darknet market migration.

https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/6oifak/is_it_po...

"Well if the devs want massive adoption and 2.0 is functional then getting it to work on tails in the next 3 months will get them that."

"If someone would post an eli18 walkthrough on how to config tails so that OB 2.0 will work when that comes out that'd be great."

https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/6opqii/i_read_s...

"It's actually about to enter the alpha testing phase. Tor is working with some manual steps. You can test out a week-old build here."

The situation appears to be that OpenBazaar has been used for a year for mostly legal trade due to the technical hurdles of using Open Bazaar with identity-hiding software like Tor and Tails. In fact, OpenBazaar does not work at all on Tails, though work is ongoing to promote this use case (https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/6oifak/is_it_po...) and a release with Tor support is scheduled for August.

In fact, most of the recent activity on the OpenBazaar subreddit has been questions about exactly that: sale of illegal substances. https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/6oigt2/so_i_hea...

It feels like Open Bazaar is poised to become the next Silk Road. The keystone to achieve that is Tor support plus a Tails walkthrough guide. Both of these seem to be on the verge of being released.

I just wanted to clarify for onlookers that the Open Bazaar team seems to be going into this with both eyes open.

Developing a protocol is one thing. Going out of your way to enable anonymity as a means of acquiring users is a very interesting tactic. It's doubly interesting to repeatedly claim that Open Bazaar was not developed as a darknet market and "may not work for that use case" while also accepting merge requests for Tor support and eventually providing binaries that will work on Tails.

According to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14829076 OB has taken $4M of investment. Perhaps investors are pushing you to acquire users. The DarkNet market crowd is certainly a large target market. Or perhaps all of your intentions are as transparent as you claim, and you're innocently laying the foundation to become the next Silk Road -- an unstoppable decentralized market accountable to no one.

You're wrong that they are supporting illegal dark type uses. The team has background in the American intelligence community. Some people are saying their aim is to push toward a backdoored or monitorable supposed darknet.

The team has background in the American intelligence community.

For what it's worth, there is a Forbes article that supports this claim: https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2016/03/16/openb...

"Brian Hoffman, a former lead associate for cybersecurity at Edward Snowden's old employer Booz Allen Hamilton"

were there only some way we could examine the software for such a backdoor. alas

tor was developed by the US military initially, as well

Another american who has this baffling belief that things that aren't given permission by the government are illegal. Which, in a country full of guns, is kind of interesting. By the rationale you just espoused, the gun manufacturers should be held accountable for the actions of their users.

How about you start focusing on what THEY are doing that is supposedly 'illegal', instead of relying upon insinuation and surveillance.

The parent doesn't mention anything about the devs doing anything "illegal" or that they should be "held accountable" for it by the state, so I'm not sure why you argue as if they do.

Yep. Once Tor is integrated and people start using it for darknet-type activities, it won't be possible to hold anyone accountable or to shut it down. It's decentralized. Personally I find the implications pretty fascinating.

That's the plan. The key aspects are anonymity, privacy and decentralization. What we get is democratization of freedom.

So things are illegal unless you can prove they aren't?

As far as I can tell, nobody here has made any claim like that, so I have no idea what you are trying to argue, sorry.

He was saying he would be facilitating illegal drug trade. I think he was implying that he would be at least partially responsible.

At the end of the day, the law/Constitution doesn't hold Tor developers accountable for what happens over Tor (nor should it), and I see the OpenBazaar developers being in exactly the same position. I don't think this discussion is even worth having. The case is settled from my point of view and such discussions only serve to cause FUD around the product.

> It feels like Open Bazaar is poised to become the next Silk Road.

It might be a decentralized replacement for Silk Road. But there won't be central servers to take down, or owners of such to arrest. I mean, Tor devs don't get busted, do they? So rather, I'd say that it could replace centralized dark markets.

Interestingly, a comment below pointed out that the team has roots in the American intelligence community, and the founders live in Virginia (http://samuelrpatterson.com/about-me and https://twitter.com/brianchoffman) within a 20min drive of Langley.

I'm not sure what to make of that, but it seemed worth mentioning.

It sure is worth mentioning! But then, Snowden has similar roots. So ???

But yes, I'm sure that the code will be reviewed carefully.

So it's a legitimate concern that this software will be some sort of honeypot to hack and monitor those who have the technical skills to evade typical monitoring, who have a moral code that doesn't align with the federal government, and who probably have a general distrust in the federal government in the first place. It's not a secret at this point that the US government has an incredibly powerful intelligence gathering and spying apparatus, and there have been many signs that they are very willing to spy on those with questionable morals, regardless of whether or not there's any proof they're doing anything wrong.

For sure. Some have the same concerns about Tor. I mean, Paul Syverson does work for the US Navy. But of course, he's an ornery idealist who would never stand for Tor being backdoored. At least, that's the story. I'm ~90% convinced, but how would one be sure? Except that the code is open-source, anyway.

> So it's a legitimate concern that this software will be some sort of honeypot to hack and monitor those ... who have a moral code that doesn't align with the federal government ...

Yes. And it's not just about the US. The US government is a serious threat for many non-Americans, and does pretty much whatever it likes on the Internet. There are effectively no rules, and no justice. Only the raw exercise of power.

> ... regardless of whether or not there's any proof they're doing anything wrong.

Well, who gets to decide what's wrong?

Absolutely worth mentioning - because it implies similar roots as Tor: a project that provides a platform for plausible denials communication for the intelligence community in the case of Tor - for a "dénivelé" marketplace in the case of Open Bazaar.

Things like iran-contras would probably be easier today (under many Panopticon watchers) with such tech available.

Eh, fr/en autocorrect, too late to edit:

plausibly deniable communication

"deniable" marketplace

Sure, unconstitutional military actions like Iran-Contra would be easier. But the key point is that suitably educated and skilled individuals can also do such stuff. Without nation-scale (or even corporate-scale) resources. That's what I meant about democratization of freedom.

Yeah, the point I was trying to make, is that having a real, anonymous digital marketplace might be very useful to intelligence agencies, so it might make sense for them to help build one. Without looking to build in back doors - just like naval intelligence might want an onion router system that works, and has enough traffic going through it that picking out the (smallish) sub-set that is intelligence traffic isn't trivial (eg: a traditional, secure, encrypted (overlay) network that is only used by a single/handful of intelligence agencies isn't very robust/useful for hiding communication).

OK, got it. And indeed, that is the Tor Project argument.

> the extent to which you're directly facilitating the darknet market migration

Since it's other people speculating and discussing how to integrate OB with Tails etc, shouldn't that more accurately be "indirectly facilitating (...)"?

You can question the ethics just the same, but it sounds like you're not, and already made up your mind.

Dear Vint Cerf, since you have created TCP-IP, and another contemporary of yours - HTTP, you seem to be tacitly encouraging a decentralized worldwide exchange of information used by billions around the globe to facilitate exchange of ideas, pleasure, and commerce, free from government censor...

I thinks it totally different. At the end of the day, the law could reach the original Internet. It really wasn't much different than telephone lines. Encryption is where everything changes. I think everyone should be at least a little bit nervous about where these crypto technologies are taking us. Once criminals learn how to use this technology, there's probably no going back.

Drug purchasing sites have actually helped reduce violence and crime associated with prohibited items/activities. I'm more nervous about where authoritarian government is taking us.

* citation needed.

Well, there are some that I know. The original is here:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2436643

Then there is Neil Franklin a Maryland police officer and director of the organization "Law Enforcement Against Prohibition"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc29nw4Si3Y

And his interview in the Deep Web documentary at minute 60 (it is in Netflix).

This paper doesn't directly support what you said. In the abstract it says: "With Silk Road functioning to considerable degree at the wholesale/broker market level, its virtual location should reduce violence, intimidation and territorialism."

There are 3 mentions of the word "violence", one says that the typical internet drug dealer is typically less violent than their offline counterparts but this doesn't meant that gangs will just let others take away their income because the new dealer is dealing out of a living room instead of on the street. Silk Road was B2B, as the paper mentions. But those businesses still need to get their drugs to the end user which seemingly happens on the street.

So it's an assumption, not a proven fact.

Harm reduction (IRL, safe injection sites) reduces violence.

That way, a registered nurse/healthcare official who has a job/career to lose if someone overdoses. Nothing is stopping a random dealer using a DNM from cutting a batch with fentanyl, and anonymity means they can fake reviews and hide it

Why does everything have to be subject to govt control?

Because gov't tends to control everything over time, as it becomes more and more powerful. Rewind that back to the American Revolution and you'd see the federal gov't being less autocratic and states being more autonomous. The Civil War was a turning point. This is not a case with the UK however, because they did not have an equivalent of the French Revolution.

This looks incredibly interesting, thank you! I have one question: how do you handle updates using IPFS? Say a seller updates the price of item X, then a user places an order while the seller is offline based on the older price (which is presumably cached in IPFS still)?

I'm not one of the developers, who would be able to answer this definitively (you can join our slack if you like to ask). But I believe it's accomplished by using IPNS for some of the calls instead of IPFS, to ensure that the data is up to date.

It does mean that one of the benefits of using IPFS - the seeding of data - only works when there aren't frequent changes to a store. The idea is setting a store up and being able to go offline for a few days while others seed, then when you come back online and make changes, the new changes need to get re-seeded again.

IPFS is smart enough to handle changes per-object (maybe per-block even?), so you don't need to change everything, unchanged things still get seeded by the people who already had them.

All the store data is kept inside a directory, the hash of which is mapped to your peer ID using IPNS. This enables all store data to be downloaded and authenticated using the peer ID.

Any change to the contents of your directory causes the root hash to change and the IPNS mapping is republished.

Mappings a numbered so when looking up a store via it's ID nodes will always use the most recent mapping they can find.

Republishing the IPNS root breaks the caching that accumulated on the root, but all objects inside the directory that haven't changed retain their caching.

How stable is 2.0? Could I start playing with it now if I'm only taking a look around?

The development pace is pretty feverish, so no guarantees, but you should be able to play around with these week-old test builds:

https://github.com/OpenBazaar/openbazaar-desktop/releases/ta...

Edit: Note that this uses Testnet Bitcoin, not real bitcoin yet. Also, purchasing might not work since we're still making breaking changes somewhat often.

We're about to enter the alpha testing phase so if people want an invite let me know.

It won't let me buy anything from any of the vendors I've tried

It says: "The vendor's server has rejected the purchase request. This may be due to a connection issue. Check your purchase data, such as quantity and Bitcoin refund address, to make sure it is valid. If it is valid, try again in a few seconds. Reason: vendor rejected contract". I've also gotten " Reason: unable to reach vendor"

Has anyone successfully bought anything recently?

I run the main OB store, and I haven't noted problems selling. One of the difficulties of running a p2p network is that you cannot control how up to date the software is from other peers. We try to keep as much compatibility as possible when making changes, but the network has been live over a year now and never everyone stays updated.

Many of the problems we had with the current version are also alleviated with the 2.0 we are releasing soon.

I get this error when trying to buy stuff from the main OB store (just tried with a t shirt)

I got an error too

OpenBazaar never worked for me either. The only time I actually bought something, the seller laughed me off and didn't post anything. Messages to "moderator" were ignored.

Since using the software is painful (it's an Electron app after all), I gave up.

I think that has been the experience of everyone that actually tried it more than once

Same problem here, with different products from different vendors and several retries. My guess would be some packets blocked by my firewall, but I haven't tried to verify this.

Hello, I looked at OpenBazaar and it looks to be organized around physical goods (which is great, great job on the tool).

Is there a marketplace I can use to sell digital goods and receive BTC for automatically?

there is no reason you can't do that with OB. there is a REST API so you can make your own tools that send the digital good once payment is received.

We support digital goods and services as well, physical goods have just been the most popular so far.

We don't have the automation nailed down quite yet so for now you still need to manually process orders.

"quite yet".. does this mean you're working on it? That's exciting!

I want to run a store like www.itch.io (DRM free games) that accepts BTC. I'm also interested in automating microtransactions for games.

what is the plan if people start selling goods typically associated with the dark net markets?

It is up to individual sellers what they sell on OB. OB is just the platform.

Are you concerned at all about legal ramifications of OpenBazaar? It seems like if you guys succeed, you're going to have to deal with lots of illegal transactions. Are you able or willing to work with law enforcement in these cases?

One would expect that devs would be unable to assist law enforcement. Except to say that it's hopeless. That's pretty much what Tor Project says. Maybe that's just BS, of course. But one can hope.

An official statement from OpenBazaar devs would be good.

Yeah, one would hope that cooperation with law enforcement would be hopeless. Otherwise the decentralised nature of OB, and its impartiality, would be called into question.

They have to tread very, very carefully here. I seem to remember early demo screenshots with weed as a sample product. Not exactly a good call.

There's a reason all the piracy tools show things like Big Buck Bunny downloading, playing, etc. You may want the illegal uses to be present on the service - I don't blame them I like the anarchic feeling of it and the lack of regulation that is possible in the system, it's beautiful in a way - but you can't go around advertising it for law breaking purposes, condoning that kind of thing will just get you screwed too.

Yeah, the kind of person who's alerted of this tech's criminal potential by pictures of weed etc., rather than knowing about it through other means, isn't the type of person you would feel safe conducting an illegal transaction with.

Weed is actually a perfect example of the utility of this platform. The sale of recreational marijuana is legal in some US states and other parts of the world. The main hurdle for online retailers of controversial industries is the lack of support from financial institutions. The same problem can manifest itself indirectly with any service a business relies on.

If you build a commerce platform on top of old infrastructure, you will be subject to old social and moral constraints. To build a truly free commerce platform you have to start from scratch.

" The sale of recreational marijuana is legal in some US states and other parts of the world. The main hurdle for online retailers of controversial industries is the lack of support from financial institutions."

The reason why many financial institutions don't accept Marijuana related clients is not because they don't want to its because they can't by law. In the USA, Marijuana is still illegal at a federal level. This is the same reason why you can't ship weed products in the post. State lines.

I have a client who's in the medical Marijuana industry so I have to deal with some issues relating to all of this.

Banks that don't cross state lines often do accept such customers (i.e credit unions).

Right. The current solution is to trust local services will continue to support your business's activities. That trust represents a risk that can be avoided by building on top of a decentralized infrastructure for payments and hosting.

Seems to be some confusion...

To clarify OpenBazaar's "No Transaction Fees", it means there are no marketplace platform fees.

To compare with ebay, to sell an item for $500 and charge $20 for shipping ($520):

- eBay fee: ~10% of final bid value + 10% of any shipping charge added on = $52

- PayPal fee: 2.9% of payment = $15.08

The bitcoin network would eliminate the PayPal fees. (The bitcoin fees would still exist but presumably would be lower than 2.9%)

The OpenBazaar platform would eliminate the eBay platform fees.

It is a good idea to pay someone for escrow services.

IIRC OpenBazaar still has paid escrow- it's just cheaper than eBay's fees.

The escrow fees are only charged if there is a dispute too.

Only in the case of a disputed between the buyer and seller where arbitrage is needed.

Good point! By the way the term is arbitration- arbitrage is a different thing

arbitration

This is what sounds to me the reason smart contracts exist. But maybe that's just a different method for accomplishing the same thing?

Anybody have any idea what the main distinction [if any] would be here?

Well, smart contracts can't tell if the seller sent you your plushie.

Why not consult UPS tracking as an oracle for that case?

Because UPS tracking is limited to determining whether UPS delivered a package. It can't say who the package was sent from, who it was delivered to, or what was inside.

This is what Dr Sanchez on our team calls the "box of rocks" problem. You _could_ potentially use a lack of delivery to automatically refund the buyer or something but automatic payout to the vendor is harder.

yes but this is also a problem in the real world right? I could order anything, sign the package once it arrived, and then complain that the box was empty. With or without a smart contract, it is hard/impossible to prove I'm lying or not.

So I assume this case is mostly taken care of by insurance, not the platform fee? Or I guess that's what the platform fee is for?

Oh yeah, I understand that limitation. But if that's those are the terms you want to use: the receiver must register that they received their item then a smart contract just automates the processing of the agreement/escrow payments?

I mean, less action is required in order to respond, and less work required in generating the agreement? Otherwise a new program, or a program built on a framework (eg. how smart contracts theoretically work) utilizing bitcoin would be required each time a sale agreement is made.

I'm probably confounding this, so I'll try again: a smart contract would offer a format to build upon for such a market and escrow agreements with less work than writing something from scratch?

I feel like I'm missing something, but it's late. I've been thinking about this concept for a little while and can't find holes besides what you've described, or engineering errors like the Parity exploit... but it still feels like I'm blind to something.

Actually there are still transaction fees in the bitcoin network.

which goes to the miners, yes?

Yes

Yes, that's why I wrote "(The bitcoin fees would still exist...)"

Are you talking about something else?

> The bitcoin fees would still exist but presumably would be lower than 2.9%

Potentially, but Bitcoin mining fees are currently sky high. I made a couple of purchases recently for about $60 worth of Bitcoin, and the mining fees ended up being about 3.5%. Of course, mining fees are pretty much unrelated to the size of the transfer, so for high dollar amounts the fee is negligible, but ends up being a huge amount for small $5-10-$20 purchases. Hopefully mining fees will go way down after "the great Bitcoin split" in a week or so.

That was the case when the network was clogged, which should be much better now. For a 250-byte (avg) transaction you should be fine with 0.0006 BTC ($1.68, 2.8% of $60).

https://bitcoinfees.21.co/

You're right, bitcoin became expensive for small purchases, which is what the whole recent debacle was about. Hopefully Segwit2X fixes this, at least for a while.

Do you know when this UASF stuff is happening, or if it has already happened, who won, or what looks like it's going to win? It's been a confusing few days...

> It's been a confusing few days...

It certainly has. Not sure what your knowledge is, but the main discussion re scalability in bitcoin recently has been about the activation of segregated witness (i.e. segwit)

There's still one hurdle to get over over the next few days called UESF (User Enforced Soft Fork) that miners have SAID they agree to. The method for this is a thing called BIP91, and it will orphan off blocks from other miners that don't signal they are ready for segwit. Segwit itself (BIP141) requires 95% of miners over the space of ~2000 blocks to signal segwit activation. BIP91 only builds on blocks that signal BIP141, which is how they get to 95%. Almost 100% of miners have already indicated that they will do this. It should start in a few hours?

The problem right now is that lots of people have said they're going to do something, but the question is whether the nodes that define and police consensus in bitcoin are capable of enforcing the BIP91 orphaning. It SHOULD go off without a hitch, but given bitcoin over the last six months, there are no guarantees. If all goes well, bip91 will start orphaning non bip141 blocks, the new ~2000 period of BIP141 activation testing will start, >95% of blocks will be BIP141, and segwit will activate in about three weeks. That will essentially allow bitcoin to double the transaction throughput.

2nd layer solutions and hard-forks sheduled for three months (that are never going to happen) are a discussion for another day.

I see, thank you! Pretty confusing goings-on, but your explanation makes them clear, thanks!

Now that BIP91 (SegWit2X/NYA) is locked in, we will be getting BIP141 (original SegWit) activated in a few weeks, so the BIP148 (UASF) fork should not happen.

People are talking about drugs or questioning that it is not exactly for free. But my big question, from the point of view of someone who has owned a small online store, is security for the buyer. In a completely p2p transaction, the biggest difficulty lies in the assurances that the two parties are completely satisfied with the deal. The first purchase is the most important move in any market, paying a premium so that everything goes well is not so bad.

There is a built-in escrow, which uses Bitcoin 2-of-3 multisignature. This means that if both buyer and seller are happy, they are the only two of three parties needed to release funds, but if either of the parties is unhappy they can bring in the escrow party.

Escrow is provided on a marketplace as well, anyone can act as an escrow agent.

Sounds cool, I just read the explanation, it's on the Features tab. But in the gif it is showing that you will have to pay for it, and it will be a % of the total business. Similar to what already occurs in other markets. But, as it will depend on a person, not a company, what is the legal responsibility of that third person in the deal? Will these people have a profile or decision history so you can decide who to trust? And are they responsible for the quality of the product or just to ensure that people will receive their product?

> But in the gif it is showing that you will have to pay for it

Only if the escrow resolves a dispute. The escrow agent doesn't actually learn of the transaction if all goes well.

As to the rest of the questions, the arbitration is a bit ad hoc at the moment.

The vendor selects the escrow agent he's willing to use and offers that as part of a "bundle" with product.

If the buyer doesn't know the escrow agent or doesn't trust him then he should not buy.

Obviously, having reputable escrow agents will be critical and there currently isn't any good in-app way of evaluating the reputation of the escrow.

Currently people tend to bring their reputations in from other platforms and use other platforms to recommend trusted escrows.

don't forget the seller who may also need protection. Traditionally companies like PayPal would offer some level of protection to both the buyer and the seller. However I imagine transaction insurance would just become another business on the network.

Chris

If I understood the docs correctly, openbazaar 1.0 server is written in Python but since it's release the team has worked on V2 in Go.

I'd really appreciate learning the motivation for the migration to Go and think others may as well. Go programs are faster than Python programs but lo and behold is a viable v1 - a server whose performance may have been good enough?

Please, enlighten!

1.0 is a bit of an MVP. While there's tons of room for optimization, Go is still much faster.

That plus the fact that the main IPFS codebase is written in Go were the main considerations.

Thanks for the response! So the choice wasn't driven as much by actual performance issues, that might have been solved with refactoring, re-engineering, or simply running through pypy. The catalyst was the adoption of an IPFS library written in Go.

Installed. Run. First screen: Select your language. English already selected. Hit "Next". Nothing happens. No apparent way of actually selecting a language or proceeding. Uninstalled.

Ran into this same issue. Peeked into the developer tools window. Looks like a bug in:

onboardingModal.js:177 Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property 'css' of undefined

Had to change line 177 to this so I can move forward:

var oldPos = 0//parseInt(this.accWin.css('left').replace("px", "")),

I got this weird error too in my mac

Sorry about that, we're looking into it now.

same issue here

Give it the time to connect to the network...

Look at the bar at the bottom

Didn't see a bar at the bottom, but this seems to have been it. I opened it, wandered off for an hour, and it worked afterwards.

> How are there no fees and restrictions?

_Someone_ is paying the TX fees. Who? It can't be a single party, especially the developers, without betraying the decentralization.

> Pay with 50+ cryptocurrencies on OpenBazaar: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Zcash, Dash, etc. Seller receives payment in Bitcoin

How does this work without a middleman or central party?

TX fees are paid to miners.

Currency conversions are probably done using ShapeShift https://shapeshift.io/

Hm, if that's indeed the case then this is free, feeless and decentralized only to the depth of its landing page.

What part of it do you think is not decentralised?

And how would you propose they implement the system in such a way that Bitcoin miners are incentivised to include fee-less transactions?

In terms of fee structure, it is quite clearly an improvement over centralised marketplaces. OpenBazaar is not charging any fees.

If e.g. Shapeshift can walk away with my money when they feel like it, that's not decentralized. If the law can kill off Shapeshift for shady transactions and not following sufficient KYC protocol, that's not decentralized.

I'm not sure how to solve the problem of Bitcoin transaction fees. Much, much smarter people than me haven't. But I'm also not promoting a Bitcoin service with "no transaction fees".

And I'm not sure I agree that this is an improvement over centralized markets. With those I can buy escrow and some amount of assurance I'm not being swindled by the platform itself, which the platform is on the hook for legally.

OK, using ShapeShift isn't decentralised, but you don't have to use ShapeShift unless you want to pay in a currency that the merchat doesn't want to accept. (And even then, you don't have to use ShapeShift. You can use any currency exchange).

You can buy escrow on OpenBazaar too.

You can't really be swindled by the OpenBazaar platform. It's just open source code that you run yourself. There's no way for anybody to jump in and change the rules from underneath you.

> Scammers try to take advantage of both buyers and sellers online, but OpenBazaar uses a unique feature of Bitcoin that helps prevent fraud: Multisignature escrow. In this unique e-commerce marketplace buyers and sellers agree to a mutually trusted third party before they start a trade, and then the buyer sends his bitcoin to an escrow account. Those Bitcoin can only be released when two out of the three parties agree where it will be sent. Normally the buyer and seller are the two parties in agreement, but if there is a dispute the third party will come settle the dispute. These third parties offering dispute resolution are selected on an open marketplace.

From the Features page of the linked website that this is the comment section for.

Right now it's with ShapeShift, but down the road you could use cross-chain swaps to accomplish something similar

> but down the road you could use cross-chain swaps

aka the holy grail in crypto.

Hah fair enough, though with Lightning's progress we're closer than ever

The platform itself has no fees. No cost to use the platform. There are fees associated with using Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies.

Shouldn't need to be said, this does not remove fees from BTC/Ether transactions.

The feature is that it does not ADD fees to use the platform.

It's not anonymous at all right now. I believe they're working on Tor support for the future however.

how bout this? https://github.com/OpenBazaar/openbazaar-go/pull/342

A PR for "Tor"

That's in the 2.0 version (about to launch), but the current version doesn't support Tor.

Our next major version has Tor support.

What does TOR add to this ? I would assume that all traffic between peers is encrypted, right ? Also, for physical goods, you anyway need an address. IP anonymity can be useful for digital goods and a layer of plausible deniability I guess.

Traffic is end to end encrypted, but since all nodes are self-hosted (or run on a VPS) Tor gives some privacy. It also protects against denial of service attacks.

Nothing is free, so here are my brief ideas for funding this:

- Ads

- "premium features" for sellers

- "promoted" sellers

- Fees for those that want to be "Secure Escrow and Dispute Resolution" accounts

According to https://www.openbazaar.org/about/

They founded a company, OB1, with a $1 million venture capital investment from Union Square Ventures and Andreessen Horowitz. [...] OB1 received a second round of investment for $3 million in the fall of 2016.

OK, so just to clarify, this is a for-profit project produced by a central party with no stated plan for monetization. That is IMHO dubious. Their website http://ob1.io/ includes a couple of hints as to how profits may be eventually sought: a search engine for Open Bazaar and a cloud based Open Bazaar store launching service. Then there is the fact a small cabal have probably premined all the easily obtainable coins (SYSPOOL, Give Me Coins, F2Pool), which means if the value goes up they profit handsomely.

Note that http://ob1.io/about.html lists some more investors: BlueYard Capital, Digital Currency Group and William Mougayar.

Sometimes VCs fund things they want to exist independently of whether they'll make a profit. $4M is spare change for a fund.

I'm not sure that's the case here, but "no obvious way to make money" isn't exclusionary when it comes to the VC funding model.

An added bonus is that once the software is written, it can continue to work without the involvement of OB1, even if they run out of money and disappear, and even if they turn rogue and start trying to extract fees from every transaction.

It's an open source, decentralised, peer-to-peer system. As long as the peers want to keep using it, they can keep using it.

Who's going to maintain the software? Open source projects abandoned by founding companies don't have a stellar track record.

Open source projects abandoned by founding companies have a better track record than SaaS projects abandoned by founding companies.

Anybody who is interested can maintain it. If it has a large number of people actively using it to conduct business on a daily basis, somebody will maintain it. If it's big enough that lack of maintenance would be a problem, it won't be a problem.

Most of us were working on OB for free before OB1. If OB1 were to fail I think many of us would continue to work on OB either at another OB-based company or just back on our own.

> OK, so just to clarify, this is a for-profit project produced by a central party with no stated plan for monetization. That is IMHO dubious.

For an early Bitcoin whale, a few million is negligible for a product that could bring crypto to the masses and dramatically increase the value of their crypto investment portfolio.

OpenBazaar is non-profit project built by multiple for-profit groups. Us at OB1 are just one group. https://duosear.ch and https://mubiz.com are two others.

https://duosear.ch = another search engine, no about page, domain registered to an individual, just over 1 year old.

https://mubiz.com = another search engine, very small French company

OpenBazaar itself is not a for-profit project, and it predates the formation of the OB1 company by a year.

OB1 has a plan for monetization (I'm a co-founder!) but OpenBazaar itself is designed as a neutral trade protocol and network that doesn't rely on OB1 at all, other than the majority of developer power is provided by the company at the moment.

OpenBazaar is a completely p2p network. Since there's no middleman, there's no infrastructure to pay to maintain. People buy and sell stuff directly with each other, so it really is truly free.

got the p2p scheme - but at some point investors (Andreesen Horowitz, BlueYard Capital, Union Square Ventures etc.) want to see their returns. I´ve got 3 questions:

Question a) How would you define that point, when investors want to sell their shares, regarding open bazaars development, number of users, annual turnover and market share?

Question b) How could the network generate those returns but by fees or some sort of future "Exit"?

Question c) What is your investors answer to the question "how big could it become?" (please don´t say "next amazon" - I am sure they would buy in before and close it down...)

Dont know why this is even being discuss just use syscoin with VPN,TOR and ZEC and your sorted and everything is on the blockchain no servers to be traced. This is the setup https://www.reddit.com/r/DarkNetMarkets/comments/5s63o3/guid...

Hello, I am looking for a decentralized store that lets me:

* Host digital goods (like run a server, or issue an asset ID that can be redeemed on a bittorrent style network for the file download) * Receive payment > register an asset or return a download key to the account of the user who sent it.

I want automated digital good downloading, paying & receiving BTC. (Bitpay, Stripe etc pay in BTC but seller receives $Currency)

This comment isn't relevant.

Also, dude, you're gonna get caught up by the feds so fast.

How is this not relevant? "decentralized bitcoin marketplace". I want to sell digital goods (games) for BTC and receive BTC. And where did I say anything about avoiding taxes?

You are not contributing to a discussion, you are asking for a service. Also I didn't imply you are trying to avoid taxes. You suggested that yourself.

Then what was your "feds catch up" about if not avoiding taxes?

Anything. Selling drugs, for example. You are implicating yourself. Stop.

I'm trying to sell video games.

That's absolutely fine. However, this isn't the place to ask questions regarding services. This is the place to contribute to a discussion.

Digital goods can be sold but automation isn't going to make it into the first release. Hopefully later this year.

Some previous discussions: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=openbazaar%20points%3E15&sort=...

I can't find details on dispute resolution. Are they using multisig escrow transactions like Silk Road?

You can choose an escrow agent at checkout time, or alternatively pay the merchant directly and take your chances.

I bought something off OpenBazaar just to try it out, I paid the merchant directly and the item arrived promptly. It was a positive experience and I'd use it more if there was more stuff available that I wanted to buy.

I'm fairly sure Silk Road never offered multisig transactions.

Here's a (fairly old) blog post describing how escrow works in OpenBazaar:

https://blog.openbazaar.org/how-moderators-and-dispute-resol...

https://www.reddit.com/r/DarkNetMarkets/comments/5s63o3/guid...

How does the unit economics work here? To my understanding, BTC (even after SegWit) has non-negligible transaction fees. Is this site just eating into VC money to make things feeless?

I'm sure you still have to pay Bitcoin transaction fees. They should really say that there are no additional fees to use Open Bazaar since it is open source.

They should really move to Ethereum. I have regularly been paying ~$0.01 for transactions that verify in under a minute.

> They should really move to Ethereum.

The project is opensource. If you feel there are features that you would like to have in it, I'm sure they will appreciate your input to the project.

I think it just means no "eBay-like fees". There should still be Bitoin transaction fees.

> OpenBazaar costs nothing to download and use. There are no fees to list items, and no fees when an item is sold. Because the trade is p2p (peer to peer), it’s happening directly between buyers and sellers with no middleman to take a cut from each sale. It’s completely free e-commerce.

https://www.openbazaar.org/features/

OpenBazaar is a peer-to-peer marketplace. There are no fees for using the software. Of course you still have to pay BTC transaction fees.

OpenBazaar is not a site at all. People run it on the machine locally and are connected to others in a p2p network. No middleman involved, no fees paid (except BTC network fees on transactions).

Not sure if anyone used Open Bazaar on Hacker News. I tried it and forget to close it. After 24-hours, this program leaked 4GB memory. How could the developer let this happen?

Seems interesting but I couldn't get pass the language setup on Mac.

We've gotten a few reports of this now, we're looking into it.

Would like to see a sellers API / webhooks for automation.

Is there currently a plan how the OB company will make money?

In the crypto-darknet community, the word is that this is where the drug trade is going to move to after the recent busts of the past weeks.

How pleasant

Better than in the streets.

I think that's certainly debatable.

People who buy drugs "in the streets" generally aren't versed in how to acquire and manage cryptocurrency. Most people buying drugs have a personal relationship with a dealer and don't do transactions "in the streets". Additionally, actually acquiring cryptocurrency requires a bank account in good standing and a ton of invasive KYC paperwork which will raise suspicions and alienate "street buyers". Finally, in my personal opinion, a street transaction would be preferable to giving out my address to anonymous dealers on the internet, but I know some may agree on that point.

> Additionally, actually acquiring cryptocurrency requires a bank account in good standing and a ton of invasive KYC paperwork which will raise suspicions and alienate "street buyers".

This is false. You can acquire cryptocurrency just as easily as you can acquire cash: sell things for it, exchange currency with friends, exchange currency with people you find on LocalBitcoins, steal it, run a business taking payment in it, ...

There are even bitcoin ATMs that make it trivial.

Not disagreeing, but just to test this a bit. I'm in San Francisco. What's the safest and easiest way for me to go acquire Bitcoin or Ethereum right now? Note, I don't have a credit card.

Probably a LocalBitcoins in-person cash trader. In a city like SF there should be a decent number to choose from.

It gets harder if you're somewhere more rural, and many of the LocalBitcoins online traders (at least in the UK) require a lot of KYC information, but you should be able to find somebody if you look for long enough.

> You can acquire cryptocurrency just as easily as you can acquire cash:

This is obviously untrue. Cash is ubiquitous throughout every corner of society, while cryptocurrency is extremely niche to the point of practical obscurity.

> sell things for it

The overwhelming majority of potential buyers will not have even heard of crypto.

> exchange currency with friends

Very few people have friends who dabble in cryptocurrency.

> exchange currency with people you find on LocalBitcoins

Risky, time-consuming and impractical, especially for someone that's only looking to buy some weed. Additionally, localbitcoins puts you back "in the streets", you're better off just exchanging cash for drugs in the streets rather than exchanging cash for crypto in the streets so you can go back online to buy the drugs.

> steal it, run a business taking payment in it, ...

That is absurd. You're not making a very convincing case.

Bitcoin ATMs are very popular and easy. I know a guy who runs some and I know what kind of clientele use it... A lot are in rough shape to say the least. And he does very large volume that is growing fast.

Bitcoin ATMs are rare, notoriously unreliable, often require invasive KYC and always come with a gigantic markup.

What's the business model for openbazaar.org, i.e. the core team? How are you going to sustain development?

It's just like Napster->Kazaa->Gnutella all over again! In 10 years there will be iTunes.

In what sense? This is not a file sharing platform. Also, money is exchanged here.

In the sense that it's not clear how openbazaar developers will earn money.

They can add the fees later, when (if) it gets popular. If the fees are low enough, forking it would be too much hassle.

As an OB dev myself, I could and would remove any amount of built in fees. We can make money providing services to users without rent seeking from everyone.

Yes, but you probably agree that putting ethics above money means there's a higher risk of losing the long term game in a capitalist world.

Funnily enough, putting money over ethics also presents a high risk of losing the long term game... if your long term goal is to end up with something user-centric and ethical.

Not sure I'm getting the point. "end up with something user-centric and ethical" also implies the much simpler requirement of "end up with something".

Maybe if one implies that to "end up with something unethical" is as bad or worse than "end up with nothing"?

What's the point if it doesn't support Tor or some other anonymizing service?

It seems it does, as of this year: https://github.com/OpenBazaar/openbazaar-go/pull/342

I stand corrected. Wish this project the best.

The current version actually doesn't, but the 2.0 version launching soon does work with Tor.

Because there's value in a peer-to-peer marketplace even if you're not anonymous? One step at a time.

Aaaannnnndddd..... Silk Road has re-launched.

I actually think technologically this looks like quite the achievement, but it's hard for me to see this being used at all for legal commerce. It's just so much of an audience barrier to trade exclusively in cryptocurrencies.

I like the use of Multisig though. Nice touch.

Does this version still require the vendor to keep their PC online 24/7?

2.0, which is not yet released but coming soon, does not require an always-on connection anymore.

Is there a business model? Compensation for continued development?

I cannot wait for 2.0 it has been a longtime coming.

How does this work? Where is the store list stored?

It is distributed over a peer-to-peer network.

They mention ipfs. Ipfs doesn't have a method of multiple people writing to one key.

How do they tackle this problem?

Edit: thanks in advance. I reached my time cap trying to find out

When a vendor creates a listing it's created as an ipfs file. Vistors download and seed them and we've added broadcasting so when you update your store changes will be pushed out to willing nodes preemptively.

Is there an architectural diagram or a protocol flow somewhere? I would love to understand the lifecycle of a listing.

In particular, I'm curious if in effect every client has to find, download, validate, and index every listing. And how far you expect that to scale.

https://blog.openbazaar.org/decentralized-reputation-in-open...

This is huge!

Ah the good ole days when I had $5 in my wallet and paid by taking the $5 note out and handing it to the cashier.

Am I the only one here that gets a little terrified by this kind of thing? I mean I'm fine if they're just selling recreational drugs. But, we all know that there are much worse things people will be selling on these crypto markets than just plain old LSD and marijuana. Can we find a way to help law enforcement police at the very least the really, really bad stuff?

You could start OpenBauer - decentralized Bitcoin marketplace for stuff that matthewbauer approves of.

You're not the only one. These services have destroyed peoples' lives by providing them easy access to coke, meth, and heroin. Contrary to opinion, the vast majority of these people would not have found those drugs in the streets.

There are no easy solutions here, but it's false to claim that these services are inherently better than what came before. They may make it safer to acquire the drugs, but they also make it much easier to do so.

I don't think we should lock people up for possessing these drugs, but an unregulated marketplace with easy access to a Willy Wonka factory of narcotics is deeply troubling.

OpenBazaar isn't a darknet market. It's a decentralised peer-to-peer market.

If people are getting crack from it, does it matter what type of market it is? People are saying this is where the drug trade might migrate: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14828864

I think it's scary that (a) these markets are here to stay, and (b) anyone with a computer and the most basic technology skills will be able to get any hard drug they can imagine delivered right to their doorstep.

Again, there's nothing to be done, really. That's just the way the world is now. But it's unfortunate.

Firstly, there are absolutely no illegal drugs currently being sold on OpenBazaar. It's almost exclusively novelty items at the moment.

Secondly, if Alice wants to sell crack, and Bob wants to buy it, I don't see why you or I or anybody else has the right to stand in the middle and say that's not allowed.

I accept that you think it's not good for Alice and Bob to be able to transact however they like, but you must accept that lots of people do not agree.

No one is arguing that Alice and Bob should be prevented from engaging in good ol' American trade.

We're arguing that when drugs are ubiquitous -- as easy to access as pushing a button -- you'll spawn far more addicts than would have otherwise been created.

When an addict's life is destroyed by these horrific tools of pleasure we've created, are they going to take solace in the fact that they were able to use technology to enable their habit?

People become addicts for many reasons. One of the main ways is by being at a party among friends. No one expects to be addicted to this stuff, so they try a bit.

In the old days, they had one option: Get more from their friend, which may not work forever. In modern times, they can get as much as they want from the darknet markets. Bitcoin ATMs make it trivial, too. You don't even need to be vetted by Coinbase.

It's not just theoretical. People have witnessed the markets causing this.

I thought it was known today that drugs aren't a problem, but people to whom drugs are the only relieve and the criminalisation of those.

Absolutely. It's well established that drugs aren't a problem. I mean, it's only the leading death cause of young Americans. Nothing to see here folks.

Leading cause of death in a group with an ultra-low death rate? You could make the case that it's a problem, but that's not enough by itself.

Doesn't that mean we should also shut down casinos, for example?

I don't think the answer has ever been "make it so people can't buy the stuff", because that can't work. Instead, I believe that education, quality control, and help towards addicts would work much better.

Education, quality control and help towards addicts implies the need for regulation and taxation of profits. For instance, gambling and casinos tend to be permitted but tightly controlled by law in many countries, for exactly this reason. An entirely anonymous market will have trouble enabling regulation and taxation to offset the damage done.

So legalize, tightly regulate, and tax drugs? The solution seems obvious, if it works for casinos...

Does the same logic apply if Alice wants to sell Bob a human being?

That's somewhat of a strawman argument: if you think dealing crack is the same as dealing human beings, where do you even draw the line? Is it not OK to deal in anything, on the basis that it could be a human being if you changed it to a human being?

The difference when dealing a human being is it's no longer a transaction between only Alice and Bob. There's now a third person involved who has every right to object to the transaction. Decentralised marketplace or not.

Law enforcement needs the same set of tools to solve both of these problems. You are proposing that these tools should go away, right?

"Both" of these problems? The problem is dealing in human beings, right? What's the other problem?

Am I proposing that the tools to solve human trafficking go away? I wouldn't put it that way. Lots of societal progress comes with trade-offs. There will certainly be challenges for law enforcement but I'm confident they'll solve them.

The world isn't going to descend into a chaotic state of everyone buying and selling everyone else just because free-trade becomes ubiquitous.

The OP said "Can we find a way to help law enforcement police at the very least the really, really bad stuff," I think you're eliding his entire concern when you just say "I'm confident they'll solve them"

These tools will go away. You can't put that genie back in the bottle.

You can't sell something you don't own.

Does the same logic apply if Bob is your 11 YO son?

Yes. It's a parent's responsibility to teach their kids about the risks of drugs.

It's not everyone-else-in-the-world's responsibility to avoid building marketplaces where anyone can transact freely with anyone else.

Most 11yos don't have access to hard drugs. This significantly lowers the barriers to access for a tech savvy child or teenager, who is not equipped to properly evaluate the various risks in either the transaction or the drug itself. Many parents will not understand these markets and their kids will. It is obviously not directly responsible for anyone's actions but it changes the landscape considerably, and puts a finger on the scale of underage drug use.

No, what is unfortunate is that we are living in a world where you can be persecuted for handling your own body and mind as you, and not some bureaucrat, see fit. What is unfortunate is that people are put daily in jail for actions where there is no victim. What is unfortunate is that people who create safe environment for drug users to buy clean hihq quality drugs from rated sellers, are serving double life or committing suicides. What is unfortunate is that majority of society thinks like you do.

> Contrary to opinion, the vast majority of these people would not have found those drugs in the streets.

[citation needed]

If you took a look at OpenBazaar you'd find absolutely nothing illegal for sale.

I'm kind of wondering why that is. Since darknet markets are getting busted one after another, why hasn't everyone migrated to OpenBazaar? It would seem like a prime opportunity.

I think there are 2 reasons:

1.) Lack of anonymity - AFAIK it doesn't yet have integration with tor-or-similar, although this is coming soon

2.) Network effects - hardly anyone is buying or selling anything on OpenBazaar, so there's not much motivation for anyone new to move there. I hope this changes. I use eBay for almost all of my online purchases, and I would love to see the day where OpenBazaar replaces eBay for all or most of my uses.

#1 is false since February: https://github.com/OpenBazaar/openbazaar-go/pull/342

Not sure that's present in a stable release yet, but looks promising I agree.

As jstanley points out, that's our yet-to-be-released version 2. The current version 1 has no Tor support at all and never will (it uses UDP and is incompatible with Tor).

But, aren't illegal transactions at least possible under Open Bazaar? Any drug dealer could set up a store on here without any problems?

In the same way they could set up a Crack stand on the corner. It would be easy to do but wouldn't work out well for the entrepreneur.

It's also possible for you to kill someone in your house. Should we be preemptively worried about it?

> Can we find a way to help law enforcement police at the very least the really, really bad stuff?

Law enforcement was designed to protect people (or their property) from the actions of other people, not themselves.

Law enforcement is fundamentally incapable of protecting people from themselves. That is why the "war on drugs" has been so ineffective.

The most effective method to stop the drug (opioid, etc.) epidemic is treatment and education, not law enforcement.

I have never considered the failure of the war on drugs from this perspective, thanks for sharing that.

> Law enforcement was designed to protect people (or their property) from the actions of other people, not themselves.

Two points:

1. I can think of many counterexamples to this: Self-harm, suicide attempts, people doing dumb stuff like playing with fireworks. We as a society have decided that if you're a danger to yourself, it's OK to have other people stop you and lock you up until you're not. Of course, people disagree on what counts as self-endangerment.

2. Self-endangerment is not the reason most anti-drug people favor strict punishments. They're concerned about the effect drug use has on society. eg: Worrying that addicts will commit crimes to get their next fix.

I lean very libertarian, so my view is that these substances should be legal and taxed commensurate to the harm they cause. That said, I feel compelled to find flaws in arguments no matter what side they're on.

Although I mention it in the comment, drugs aren't my primary concern. What about for example: child porn, forced prostitution, contract killings, etc. These things all existed before crypto-markets, it just seems like crypto-markets make life so much easier for these types of things (if they are as effective as advertised). Sure, we can police the "meat space" part of these transactions, but at what cost?

The existence of a marketplace does not constitute the existence of criminal activity, or vice versa. Rather than focus on the monetary transaction, I believe we should focus on the crime itself.

Pushing the monetary transactions for criminal behavior toward the public consciousness is, IMHO, beneficial to law enforcement, even if there is no clear or reasonable way to prevent or even track the monetary transactions themselves. So long as people are educated about criminal behavior, we can have a culture where law enforcement is actually effective; after all, real crime happens away from keyboard.

I think that the really really bad stuff here is e.g. Human trafficking, chemical weapons, assassination services, etc...not even any drugs, and as you've pointed out, people harming other people. How do you police that here, or don't you?

All of those require physical actions apart from just a digital transaction. At some point a human is trafficked somewhere from somewhere else, they can follow that. Chemical weapons are sent somewhere from somewhere, they can follow those. An assassin shows up somewhere, they can grab them there.

All of which can be orchestrated by the police themselves. In an anonymous transaction the other party could very well be the FBI.

> Law enforcement was designed to protect people (or their property) from the actions of other people, not themselves.

Not true in countries where a very large portion of the taxes I pay go to free health care and unemployment grants.

That has nothing to do with law enforcement, let alone what it was designed for.

Sweden has very restrictive laws around alcohol, eg taxation, where, how and when it can be sold. The purpose of this is to prevent people from falling into addiction (hurting themselves), as that would eventually lead to them getting unemployable, more prone to sickness and in general be a pita for people around them and an increased cost for the whole society. Whether that works or not is another topic but that is what those laws are designed for.

Many countries, UK and Denmark for example, also have penalty tax on sugar and fat to prevent prevent from getting fat (protecting people from themselves) as it increases health care cost.

Do you have any ideas on how to prevent "really, really bad stuff" versus regular old bad stuff?

> Can we find a way to help law enforcement police at the very least the really, really bad stuff?

Much like strong end-to-end crypto has already made it extremely hard to investigate potential criminal activity via wiretapping, and will make it impossible in the future once it's ubiquitous, cryptocurrencies and decentralized markets will do the same to the ability of the governments to track crimes by following the money.

It's not really a good thing or a bad thing, it's just a thing. Regulating it is not feasible (you can ban crypto, but enforcing that ban is another matter entirely), so societies will have to adapt.

The more interesting question is, what does it do to the ability to tax. "Diamond Age" comes to mind...

Don't wanna be the partypooper but Blockmarket wins the dex marketplace niche ;-)

http://syscoin.org/

There's no reason for a p2p marketplace to be tied to certain medium of exchange or to use a blockchain for anything else but identity and reputation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com