Free Ross.
Once upon a time, the notion of civil disobedience was intimately connected to accepting and even welcoming the punishment that came with breaking the unjust law -- after all, if people just walked away untouched from it, how unjust could it be? Only by suffering actual grievous harm at the hands of the law could someone demonstrate that the law was unjust.
Now, though, the attitude seems to be "Nope, was just protesting this law I don't like, that means you shouldn't do anything to me".
As the saying goes: that's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.
That's all I'm doing.
By making your demand the freeing of someone who may be a martyr but did little to effect actual change in the laws(is not a pivotal leader in the political portion of the movement) you consider unjust, you are not progressing the ideas you believe in. Only trying to undo a single action.
If and when the laws are changed to make the bulk of their actions legal, they will likely be freed then either for legal or political reasons.
I don't agree that this matters, but if it did, then certainly DPR is a pivotal leader in the "political portion" of the movement. I'm not sure how you can say he's not?
That was not his argument. He was basically arguing "I'm not the guy that ran that site". That's is basically admitting, whoever ran that site committed a bunch of crimes.
Are you saying that you think running Silk Road didn't constitute "narcotics conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy, and engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise"? Or are you saying that you don't like that those laws prevent running a site like Silk Road?
As for the charges, I'm saying that yes, those are not proper crimes in a free society, and none pass common sense constitutional muster. He didn't violate anyone's rights, defraud anyone, or engage anyone with violence. Who is the victim?
All of the correspondence about murdering people doesn't look innocent to me.
Unfortunately there is a huge distance between what libertarian philosophy argues for and what is actually legal. To me, Silk Road is a no-shit-it's-completely-illegal enterprise given the current war on drugs. Plus, it's a major thumb right into the drug enforcers eyes. Not smart if you care about staying out of jail.
Should we change the laws? Absolutely. But this guy was not doing anything to change those laws. He was just profiting from the situation because he was willing to take the risk (or dumb enough to take the risk). I don't find him especially sympathetic. If he was out there saying 'I run Silk Road, and we are not responsible for what people are doing on it', or even better 'I run Silk Road, and we are eliminating violence from the drug trade, it's a net benefit to society by eliminating gangs', he would be someone worth defending. It would be a lot harder for the state to come down on him. Maybe some people would rally behind him and demand change because he is right. Instead, I'm just seeing a guy that made a lot of money by violating laws, and wants to dodge the consequences right up until he is thrown in jail.
I disagree strongly. One of his primary objectives appears to have been to show that widespread use of drugs does not require violent criminal gangs, which is one of the main justifications for the drug war. In that regard, I think he succeeded. Simply demonstrating this and undermining that argument has done more to delegitimize the drug war than any vote or petition.
His goal was anarchy, nothing more. In particular he explicitly did NOT want the war on drugs to end, because he feared if it did people would lose interest in fighting the state.
So people who see Ulbricht through the prism of non-violent drug addiction (or whatever) ... need a reality check. That wasn't Ross.
I can't understand how you can say that. I never used Silk Road - I buy my weed locally. But I was definitely inspired by a lot of what DPR wrote and advocated.
“If prohibition is lifted, where will you be? Will you forget about all this revolution stuff? Will you go back to ignoring that itching feeling that something isn’t right, that men in uniforms and behind desks have just a bit too much control over your life, and are taking more and more of your sovereignty every day? Will you go back to thinking that taxes are as inevitable as death and the best you can do is to pull as hard as you can for them until you mind, body and spirit are all used up? Or will you feel the loss, as one more wild west frontier comes under the dominion of the enemy, and redouble your efforts to stop it?
I know where I’ll be. I won’t rest until children are born into a world where oppression, institutional violence and control, world war, and all the other hallmarks of the state are as ancient history as pharaohs commanding armies of slaves. The drug war merely brings to light their nature and shows us who they really are. Legalizing it won’t change that and will only make them stronger. Hold on to what you DO have, and stand for the freedom you deserve!” - Dread Pirate Roberts
I won't weigh in on whether or not he should be lobbying. Activism is hard, and it's a lot easier to get approval in an internet community dedicated to your fringe views than to spend time trying to convince people to register to vote with maybe 1 success per 2 hours.
However, getting caught and prosecuted is part of civil disobedience and your activism shouldn't stop when you get caught. A public trial is a platform that can be used to make your ideas known to a larger public.
As far as Ulbritch goes, it seems to me his "activism" was only an excuse.
> "Ulbricht is charged with a murder-for-hire scheme in a separate case in federal court in Baltimore."
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-09/us-says-s...
They are with a supposed Hell's Angel, who, right on the first email, opens up about his business dealings, what he does, how he does it, etc. It's waaaaaaaay to open and forthcoming for a hardened and experienced criminal to just flat out say things like:
> Also, we have kidnapped friendlychemists partner Xin already and are on the hunt for friendlychemist.
> We are all familiar with PGP as we have been using it for years via email linked to our smartphones. It’s the only way we communicate with each other aside from in person, since phone calls are not secure.
> After some “questioning” he admitted he was intending on moving to a different country and setting up a new seller account on this site. We don’t take too kindly to thieves. He’s gone.
> If you have your mind set on just finding his location, I can talk to them and get them to get it for you for a fee (not sure what amount as usually when we hunt someone, there is more involved after we find them).
> I can almost guarantee it, but I stop short of guaranteeing anything unless I am 100% certain I can get the job done. I do that so I don’t look like an idiot if I can’t accomplish something I have said I can.
It reads like a novel (or more likely a LE agent baiting him). Would also explain why none of the "victims" were ever really identified, nor any missing persons reports filed.
Doesn't excuse what DPR did, just saying this part of the prosecution's story doesn't sit well with me.
~~
Edit:
Here's the supposed conversation about the "hits" for reference
http://www.wired.com/2015/02/read-transcript-silk-roads-boss...
It clearly shows that DPR tried to have people killed, though (unless you think there's wholesale fabrication of evidence going on, which is getting into conspiracy theory land).
This was discussed in depth on HN when the story first broke -- unless I'm wrong the story goes something like this:
S1: I will disclose the silk road's confidential information unless you pay me $500k, because I owe S2 that money. DPR: Let me talk to S2. S2: Hello, this is S2. DPR: I will give you $150k to kill S1. I have paid much less for a hit, so consider yourself lucky to get this deal. S2: Done and done, have a nice day.
Paying to "have someone killed" is a good way to give them some money, but not the money they wanted, while still scaring them off.
In total it was $750,000 for 5 "hits".
I don't initially think that... but, to play devil's advocate...
After the first "murder" is carried out, there is an image of the dead FriendlyChemist supposedly stripped of XIF data and uploaded to DPR, who then confirms receipt and the job was completed satisfactorily.
Now, earlier in the case it became common knowledge that DPR required anyone who worked with him to send him a lot of personal details (name, address, etc) as well as a scan of their driver's license (as a Photo ID).
The first "murder" was of an ex-insider who had taken with him a lot of confidential information including the identities (and photos) of a huge number of SR insiders.
How would DPR of received and confirmed a "hit" on a person who was never hit and very possibly had nothing to do with this scam? He surely would have recognized the "murdered" individual, or at least seen it wasn't the correct target. Some 3rd party scammer would not of had access to that information or the original target.
Also, at a point DPR sends the supposed Hell's Angel a bunch of personal information for the first target, including full name, address, wife and kids' names, etc. None of the information was able to be traced to real-life people... they don't exist... isn't that a little weird?
Quality control? I want to make sure you're trustworthy. So perhaps as a test I'll give you all this detailed demographic information ... about someone who doesn't exist.
If you come back and say "job done. killed him." - well, I now know you're not to be trusted with the real deal.
Well, after DPR supposedly confirmed the first hit was carried out properly (via uploaded image of the supposedly dead FriendlyChemist), he ultimately went on to contract 4 more "hits". Three were simply because they lived with the main target and the supposed Hell's Angel made an argument it would be "cleaner" to hit them all at the house instead of risk something in public.
Doesn't that say to you that FriendlyChemist was sharp enough to fake his identity? Which is exactly the sort of thing you'd expect from a guy working on a black market website who later goes on to steal secrets.
Not even close. The most likely story is that DPR paid someone he knew was trying to scam him so that they would leave him in peace.
Why -wouldn't- someone feel safe discussing it there?
This is exactly what Ulbricht's lawyer tried to sell the jury on regarding Ulbricht's own actions and poor OPSEC.
Nobody believes murders were actually carried out. That's not a live issue. But what is a live issue is the question of whether Ulbricht believed he was directing two murders. And given Ulbricht's shocking naivete in every other matter concerning Silk Road, it's not hard to reach that conclusion.
Then I'd question why DPR went on to direct 4 additional murders? In the email logs an image of the supposedly dead FriendlyChemist was uploaded to DPR and he confirmed it was in fact him and was satisfied the hit was carried out... believing it enough to send an additional $500,000 for the next hits.
DPR had pictures of the real-life FriendlyChemist, as he required photo id of any insider working on SR. He also sent all of FriendlyChemists personal information (name, address, wife and kids' names, etc) to the supposed Hell's Angel during one of their email exchanges -- but none of the data is real and can't be traced to any actual people.
It's all just weird...
These are out-and-out lies, designed to impugn his public credibility. It seems to have worked with some of the comments in this thread.
If you believe that he was the violent psychopath portrayed at the bail proceeding, how do you feel about the government neglecting to charge him with those crimes?
I understand that the government will try Ulbricht for those crimes. How do you feel about being informed of the facts?
I asked you about presenting this material during the bail proceeding - and his being denied bail on that basis - without yet having charged him.
Does this not outrage you?
It does not outrage me. I'm more outraged, well maybe not outraged but concerned, by your strange and desperate claims of Ulbrict's innocence.
Okay.
Indeed, Somalia (to use that one example) is a fairly heavily Islam state, which has pretty stringent and ardent anti-drug views.
Edit: and I had the wrong link. The quote is from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-09/us-says-s...
It's almost like Reddit is a grouping of wildly disparate communities with different ideals, some for humor, some serious. How many communities does HN have? Oh, right, one.