Silk Road forums

If we just have the collective nuts to fire our guns when it mattered.

Look at the occupy movements.  If about 10,000 would have shown up armed and actually killed some of these CEO's then that would have made a difference.  We have been brainwashed into the idea that marching and carrying signs, or even showing up to vote will make a difference.  These billionaires and politicians use brute force when they feel threatened, so they need to be confronted with brute force.  You think if some fuck laid off a thousand employees then gave themselves a pay raise, then had themselves or family member killed, that they would repeat it again?  I think you would have people behaving more responsibly, or ready to die for money that they didn't need anyway.

Remember, our framer of our constitution, Thomas Jefferson said that we need a revolution ever 20 years to preserve our form of democracy, yet we haven't had another.

Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither!

Thomson Reuters has teamed up with the International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children (ICMEC) to form the Digital Economy Task Force, which aims to address some of the risks surrounding digital currencies and the wider digital economy.

"This is a complex issue," said Ernie Allen, president and CEO of ICMEC. "Technology has created a new digital economy, which is being used by some to produce and sell child pornography, and for trafficking and child exploitation. This is a serious problem that requires serious solutions. Our task force will offer balanced, effective solutions for policy makers, law enforcement, regulators and the public."

The Task Force, which launched in August, is not solely focussed on child exploitation. It has developed working groups that aim to combat a range of illicit activities, to safeguard human rights and to encourage inter-agency coordination and law enforcement. It was launched off the back of a report by Thomson Reuters Fraud Prevention and Investigation unit about digital currency laundering.

The report detailed how criminal and terrorist organisations have turned to digital currency to reap profits from drug trafficking, prostitution and the dissemination of child abuse images.

Steve Rubley, managing director, Government Segment for the Legal business of Thomson Reuters points out that the digital economy provides a plethora of new opportunities and is central to how business is conducted but there are also "dark corners" where drug cartels can easily launder money and human sex traffickers operate in near obscurity.

The Task Force will include the Bitcoin Foundation, The Tor Project, Trend Micro, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Cato Institute, The Brookings Institute, the US Agency for International Development and Vital Voices. The group will educate the public and work collaboratively across stakeholder groups including government agencies, law enforcement, academia, NGOs and industry.

A statement released by Thomson Reuters and ICMEC said: "The approach will be a balanced view of both the advantages and disadvantages surrounding the digital economy -- a place where people can enjoy the convenience of digital currencies, but where there are controls in place to regulate them like any other form of money."

The Digital Economy Task Force will produce a report in February 2014 which will aim to inform lawmakers globally about the current state of the digital economy and help people understand the risks associated with it.

To understand why this is a good thing you need to study history. Humans have risen to their predominant position on this planet by being the most organised ruthless violent apes ever seen. Our history is a gigantic mound of smashed skulls and enslaved women and children.

Slowly we have brought this violence under some limited control. Every one of is still the great great great great great great...........great descendent of the people who were successful at violently out competing their fellows. But we have brought our impulses to use violence to resolve disputes under control. It is still there, for when other means fail.

The states monopoly on violence is part of this. With a strong central state offering dispute resolution (begun in England by Henry II and his concept of the Kings Peace, the birth of the common law, which judges did not decree but discover from the customs of their predecessors) it became less and less necessary for individualk to resort to violence to settle disputes.

The culture of honour, where men were socially expected to avenge any slight with violence, was usually found in areas where no central authority existed, or was weak or distant. A man had not only better be willing to use violence, but demonstrably so, if he wished his rights to be respected. Once strong central government was established in these areas, the duelling culture would dwindle, although men from these areas may still have a much quicker ear for a perceived insult.

And so we see that the threat of violence lurks behind every human interaction. It is not confined to the collection if taxes.
the model of dispute resolution libertarians often propose, where one partys defence insurance agency negotiates with the other oarty s defence agency, will only work if both defence agency maintain the threat of the use of force

Negotiation is always preferable, but the men with guns are always going to be there in the background.
Have you ever seen those you tube videos where protestors of one feather or another are filming 'police violence' shrieking with middle class outrage "they are using force against us!"  Yes my dread locked patchouli wearing friend. That is what the police are for.

Those who protest against the state monopoly on violence: do you really think a free market in violence would be better? Shall we all have to carry weapons and demonstrate our willingness to use them for our rights to be respected (oh. Yes. That sounds good to you doesn't it. Forgot who I was talking to for a second)

200 years ago all men wore swords constantly. (Obviously only gentlemen. The poor folk did as they were fucking well told, or got a quick lesson in dispute resolution). Was this a freer society?

There were plenty of techies who criticized Auernheimer and said he was getting his due. But the debate over his case was larger than anything that has ever occurred regarding internet harassment. That wasn’t lost on the women who have been threatened with rape and death while online. What it came down to for them was that a man who threatens women can generate more concern within the tech industry than female victims of abuse.

1     Introduction
The past decade has seen growing interest in techniques for protecting critical data even in the face of catastrophic
storage failure. Recently, a number of loosely-related approaches have surfaced which guarantee data availability by
massively replicating records across decentralized, potentially untrusted, “survivable” storage networks. To ensure the
continued availability of content after storage nodes fail or leave the network, survivable storage networks continuously
re-distribute replicas from machine to machine. Ideally, content redistribution is provided as a service of the network,
and should not require the active participation of content publishers.
    Recently, Srivatsa et. al. [29] showed that a number of survivable storage systems (e.g, [20, 1]) are vulnerable to
targeted denial of service attacks, as these systems make no attempt to hide the location of content replicas within the
network. An adversary can locate selected file replicas via the network’s search mechanism, or by manually examining
stored collections for identical instances of a replica. Once located, the adversary can limit access to the selected files
(and defeat survivability) by disabling the small subset of storage nodes which host the target content.
    In this work, we propose techniques for correlation-resistant storage, which protect content replicas from tar-
geted attacks while allowing for continuous re-distribution by the storage network. The approach we describe allows
untrusted nodes to dynamically re-encrypt (i.e., randomize) file replicas such that an adversary cannot link the new
replicas to others within the system. Simultaneously, we provide a flexible search mechanism which allows authorized
receivers to locate any matching replica by querying storage nodes on information such as a keyword or other identifier.
We note that maintaining correlation-resistance while achieving this remote search facility is challenging when storage
nodes are untrusted, as one must prevent malicious nodes from re-using search queries to locate matching replicas at
other locations in the network. In that regard, the primary contribution of this paper is a new form of searchable public
key encryption scheme which allows for node-targeted keyword search, i.e., queries sent by users to a specific node
cannot be re-played by that node to locate files stored elsewhere. Our keyword search scheme is related to the schemes
of [12, 34], but enables randomization of indexes and is provably secure in the standard model.

I know. You have a point there. Why not ban all digging machinery for starters so that you can employ 1000 men with shovels instead of having 1 man operate that oppressive piece of machinery instead?