Silk Road forums
Support => Feature requests => Topic started by: BuddyRoyale on February 07, 2012, 02:16 am
-
Just curious, would anyone here be interested in a possible chemistry forum being added? Does that fall under the OVDB topic? Surely there has to be a good chunk of people from The Hive finding their way into the deepnet. We can stimulate the drug economy but it can only continue if someone is making them. Rhodium is a good place to start but there is no replacement for someone more experienced helping.
-
A chemistry board on the forum would be a good idea for question threads and comments if there are knowledgeable people around.
+1 for the idea of redirecting these kinds of threads.
-
I think that's a good idea. 8)
-
This would be a GREAT addition.
-
I too would be interested, especially if it included topics along the line of neurochemistry and psychopharmacology.
-
Well hopefully a mod sees this thread and passes the idea up the chain, not much else we can do ATM. I think neurochemistry and psychopharmacology are equally as important but not exactly what I had in mind. This maybe just me but I am more likely to take advice on here about chemistry synth but less likely to take advice when I could just a medical professional knowing it will be kept between us.
-
A chemistry section would be useful. I'm amazed that in nearly 10 years there hasn't been a worthy successor to the hive (synthetikal was ok but didn't last too long). There's already a number of chemists on this forum so maybe it's time we have our own little apiary? :)
-
Yea, I think that would be really awesome, too. I've been hoping to find more information not only about the chemistry behind their creation, but also the chemistry of testing the final product.
-
+1
-
A chemistry section would be useful. I'm amazed that in nearly 10 years there hasn't been a worthy successor to the hive (synthetikal was ok but didn't last too long). There's already a number of chemists on this forum so maybe it's time we have our own little apiary? :)
Some of the old bees now gather at the vespiary, the collective, and wet dreams forums, but the Hive was indeed the shit back in late 90s and early 00s. I wonder if any of them have found their way here?
I think a chem forum would be a a fine addition.
-
really awesome idea! +1
-
+1
-
+1 :D
-
+1 - Moving this to feature request. I'll see if we can get a chemistry forum : )
Peace,
DigitalAlch
-
Right on! Thanks for taking a look.
-
if your sure it wont start a trend of youngones blowing themselves up because some one thought they make a funny, there are places and ways to find this stuff already and i believe it should be kept that way>>>>> IS NOTHING SACRED ANY MORE , maybe a very basic chemistry thread , but REALLY SR is for those whove made it and those who want it.. the ones who want to be the makers need to take that slow long process to get there . A QUIK FIX HOW TO DO IT WILL ENDAGER THE QUALITY OF PRODUCTS ON HERE ALREADY imagine all the dreamers trying to make something they'll never really understand , then trying to sell it world wide , i think this idea sux ..... we come here to buy or sell ......... Good dealers will hate that soon every one will think they know how they made it . it'll turn out how it has with food , like everyone thinks there a FOOD CRITIC just from stupid reality show's that apparently"show how its done.... there is a time and a place for ILLEGAL CHEMISTRY .... and it aint SILK ROAD ....... I STRONGLY SAY NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO to a chemistry thread. just look at any other site that has them and its alll crap
-
:o
-
No one is going to give full synths obviously. It is for area specific questions. At least that is how I imagine it.
-
No one is going to give full synths obviously. It is for area specific questions. At least that is how I imagine it.
Full synths are already out there for every popular drug. The only close-guarded secrets are novel ways to synthesize them without needing highly-watched chemicals.
-
I think a board for our resident agronomists would be a good idea too (agronomists = weed fiends ;-) ) , there is probably a lot of them about.
-
Definitely would love a chem forum.
-
speaking of, if anyone knows Jimferd from AkiraHCL, I would LOVE to get back into contact with him.
I don't know where he went to :(
-
I'd also like to get Dr.Deepwood on here as a service. Ok LaughingMan, you are right. Then I guess that will be a focus. Just because you discuss how to derive precursors from unwatched substances doesn't mean anyone will try and ban that substance... they can only go so far... I'm not saying anyone should pull a "strike" and advocated for certain companies.
-
I'd also like to get Dr.Deepwood on here as a service. Ok LaughingMan, you are right. Then I guess that will be a focus. Just because you discuss how to derive precursors from unwatched substances doesn't mean anyone will try and ban that substance... they can only go so far... I'm not saying anyone should pull a "strike" and advocated for certain companies.
Whatever happened to that Deepwood dude?! I was looking forward to using his services.. (LSD past 100%--electolysis to combat degradation-- blah, blah)
-
I'd also like to get Dr.Deepwood on here as a service. Ok LaughingMan, you are right. Then I guess that will be a focus. Just because you discuss how to derive precursors from unwatched substances doesn't mean anyone will try and ban that substance... they can only go so far... I'm not saying anyone should pull a "strike" and advocated for certain companies.
Whatever happened to that Deepwood dude?! I was looking forward to using his services.. (LSD past 100%--electolysis to combat degradation-- blah, blah)
Apparently something spooked him so he completely disappeared.
-
I'd also like to get Dr.Deepwood on here as a service. Ok LaughingMan, you are right. Then I guess that will be a focus. Just because you discuss how to derive precursors from unwatched substances doesn't mean anyone will try and ban that substance... they can only go so far... I'm not saying anyone should pull a "strike" and advocated for certain companies.
Whatever happened to that Deepwood dude?! I was looking forward to using his services.. (LSD past 100%--electolysis to combat degradation-- blah, blah)
Apparently something spooked him so he completely disappeared.
Lol! What the hell was there to get spooked about right!? Not like he was shipping controlled substances... That really is too bad. Does that thread still exist somewhere.. I've tried in the past to find it.. to no avail?
-
I think a board for our resident agronomists would be a good idea too (agronomists = weed fiends ;-) ) , there is probably a lot of them about.
teehee...
-
A chemistry forum would be very interesting, but at the same time, I wouldn't want people to start posting novel ways to synth LSD, for example, and then LE start banning precursors that currently aren't watched. Idk maybe I'm way off here, but I do know that there are many ways to synth acid, and there are many ways to go about getting precursors, and I think it's best that we keep LE in the dark regarding the details there.
Even though demonkleaner's post is really messy and unorganized, and he's kind of ranting, I have to admit that he's kind of right. If you wanna be a chemist, that's a long, hard road of studying university level O-chem. Although, I guess the chemistry forum could be a place for people who do have that formal training and education to discuss their art, because if you don't know what you're doing, it's extremely intimidating to even attempt to synth anything. Other than meth of course.
I imagine sensitive information would go through PM's.. and the forum itself would just be a starting point & meeting place for information..
-
A chemistry forum would be very interesting, but at the same time, I wouldn't want people to start posting novel ways to synth LSD, for example, and then LE start banning precursors that currently aren't watched. Idk maybe I'm way off here, but I do know that there are many ways to synth acid, and there are many ways to go about getting precursors, and I think it's best that we keep LE in the dark regarding the details there.
Even though demonkleaner's post is really messy and unorganized, and he's kind of ranting, I have to admit that he's kind of right. If you wanna be a chemist, that's a long, hard road of studying university level O-chem. Although, I guess the chemistry forum could be a place for people who do have that formal training and education to discuss their art, because if you don't know what you're doing, it's extremely intimidating to even attempt to synth anything. Other than meth of course.
I imagine sensitive information would go through PM's.. and the forum itself would just be a starting point & meeting place for information..
In that case, a chemistry forum would be awesome. Haha, you can bet LE would be on that forum like white on rice, trying to get those clandestine chemists. Right? Or maybe not. Was LE all over the hive? Back in the days of the hive, I was like 11 years old, lol, so I'm not exactly familiar with it.
I have no idea what the hive even is/was?? Would love more information myself :)
-
A chemistry forum would be very interesting, but at the same time, I wouldn't want people to start posting novel ways to synth LSD, for example, and then LE start banning precursors that currently aren't watched. Idk maybe I'm way off here, but I do know that there are many ways to synth acid, and there are many ways to go about getting precursors, and I think it's best that we keep LE in the dark regarding the details there.
Even though demonkleaner's post is really messy and unorganized, and he's kind of ranting, I have to admit that he's kind of right. If you wanna be a chemist, that's a long, hard road of studying university level O-chem. Although, I guess the chemistry forum could be a place for people who do have that formal training and education to discuss their art, because if you don't know what you're doing, it's extremely intimidating to even attempt to synth anything. Other than meth of course.
I imagine sensitive information would go through PM's.. and the forum itself would just be a starting point & meeting place for information..
In that case, a chemistry forum would be awesome. Haha, you can bet LE would be on that forum like white on rice, trying to get those clandestine chemists. Right? Or maybe not. Was LE all over the hive? Back in the days of the hive, I was like 11 years old, lol, so I'm not exactly familiar with it.
I have no idea what the hive even is/was?? Would love more information myself :)
The hive was an internet forum that was all about clandestine drug chemistry, as far as I know, and operated from the 90's-00's. Some of the admins were legit chemists, and would give advice to people on how to synthesize stuff. This wasn't the type of shit you find when you google 'LSD synthesis' or some shit, this was really advanced, technical, intelligent discussions on routes and methods of synthesis. I've browsed the hive archives that are saved in the tor library, and there's a wealth of information regarding the synthesis of basically any drug. A lot of people there really knew their shit and it wasn't just people with no chemistry knowledge trying to make drugs. I think that the gov't/feds/DEA took the hive out, because it was seriously undermining the war on drugs, haha, but idk for sure.
People who were members there are/were referred to as 'bees'. Get it? The hive, bees?
It would be nice if an actual bee could shed some more light on this topic, because everything that I know about it is hearsay really.
Strike was the uber-guru of them all:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobart_Huson
I recommend his books, he knows what he's talking about. He also got six years in prison, the charges they bought against him seem quite sketchy. I think they basically wanted to put him away, so they just did it. The mistake he made was giving that interview to NBC's Dateline show. Anonymity is God, and don't you forget it. This is a war that can only be fought subversively, direct action is a no-no in the same way it was for the Vietcong fighting against the US.
LE better hope they never catch up to some of us, we're not all flower power peace loving types.
-
A chemistry forum would be very interesting, but at the same time, I wouldn't want people to start posting novel ways to synth LSD, for example, and then LE start banning precursors that currently aren't watched. Idk maybe I'm way off here, but I do know that there are many ways to synth acid, and there are many ways to go about getting precursors, and I think it's best that we keep LE in the dark regarding the details there.
Even though demonkleaner's post is really messy and unorganized, and he's kind of ranting, I have to admit that he's kind of right. If you wanna be a chemist, that's a long, hard road of studying university level O-chem. Although, I guess the chemistry forum could be a place for people who do have that formal training and education to discuss their art, because if you don't know what you're doing, it's extremely intimidating to even attempt to synth anything. Other than meth of course.
I imagine sensitive information would go through PM's.. and the forum itself would just be a starting point & meeting place for information..
In that case, a chemistry forum would be awesome. Haha, you can bet LE would be on that forum like white on rice, trying to get those clandestine chemists. Right? Or maybe not. Was LE all over the hive? Back in the days of the hive, I was like 11 years old, lol, so I'm not exactly familiar with it.
I have no idea what the hive even is/was?? Would love more information myself :)
The hive was an internet forum that was all about clandestine drug chemistry, as far as I know, and operated from the 90's-00's. Some of the admins were legit chemists, and would give advice to people on how to synthesize stuff. This wasn't the type of shit you find when you google 'LSD synthesis' or some shit, this was really advanced, technical, intelligent discussions on routes and methods of synthesis. I've browsed the hive archives that are saved in the tor library, and there's a wealth of information regarding the synthesis of basically any drug. A lot of people there really knew their shit and it wasn't just people with no chemistry knowledge trying to make drugs. I think that the gov't/feds/DEA took the hive out, because it was seriously undermining the war on drugs, haha, but idk for sure.
People who were members there are/were referred to as 'bees'. Get it? The hive, bees?
It would be nice if an actual bee could shed some more light on this topic, because everything that I know about it is hearsay really.
Do you have a link of some sort to an archive like this?? I would love to do some reading today..
-
Here's some Hive rips, lots of juicy info was removed when the hive went down but there's still some fairly interesting stuff in there (1500kg Leukart being one of my favourites :D )
http://y47ylcppnh3afqk4.onion/hive.lycaeum.org.1998-2000/The%20Hive.html
http://y47ylcppnh3afqk4.onion/the-hive.ws/index.html
The hive was good but a large proportion of contributors were really pseudo intellectuals, a lot of the chemistry + speculated chemistry was pure bullshit or completely unfeasible from either a practical or economic perspective. There was a core of about 15-20 people who were clearly shit hot active clandestine chemists and they contributed some amazingly useful stuff, most of which is archived on Rhodium.
The one doc I'd love to find was a very colourful illustrated tryptamine synthesis, I only saw it once but it never ended up on Rhodium.
Hobart Huson had a good thing going on and fucked it. It's unbelievable that the Hive, Science Alliance, Strike and an active MDMA lab were so openly entangled.
Did anyone watch that NBC Dateline on the Hive? It's worth watching if you want to learn how NOT to get busted for manufacture...
-
You guys do realize strike taught himself chemistry right? You would be surprised how many of your drugs probably come from "novice chemists". Who do you think processes your cocaine and H, college educated chemists? All you need is a starting point, a textbook, a class and a fascination with the processes and not just the money.
-
Strike is a genius chemist. I've read his work and that much is patently obvious. He's also a great guy, everybody loves him. And that might be a problem because he is also a dreadful criminal, he could only have imagined the DEA would play by the book if he were thinking like a civilian.
He got put away for six years for being in the way, the charges against him were pretty sketch it seems to me. But if the DEA and judge agree you should be put away, then you will be put away and there's not a line in the law book that will save you.
Strike's imprisonment set me off on a train of thought I can't displace although the destination is not a rosy one. Here is the thing.
I agree with DPR about open free markets etc. I would say that either Trade will cross borders, or Soldiers will. But there is a problem...
On one hand I believe that free trade increases the propensity to violence. There's a lot of statistical evidence for this, I don't think there's a serious economist who disputes it. There is a sort of continuum where bullets are exchanged at one end of the scale and capital at the other end.
But on the other hand, I think coercion is sometimes necessary for a market to remain open. I am not a flower power peace loving type one little bit. I get the sense that the idea of violence is considered amoral from the perspective of Agorism. I could be wrong here, as I haven't done much research into this subset of market based philosophy, but I think it's correct to say that (shout out if that's wrong!).
Capitalism is fundamentally a passive force, it is the essence of the West's "soft power". 99% of "hard power" is exercised by the State. It is quite fair that violence should be associated with the State, since they are statistically the cause of most of it.
However, this does not mean that we are looking at a contradiction, at least not necessarily. It cannot be a coincidence that Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations was written after Hobbe's Leviathan. The development, in theory and practice, of free markets occurred in tandem with the development of the nation state and its social contract with the people.
That is, a strong central government was necessary to provide enough 'cover' for the possibility of a genuine open and free market. I don't just mean having a police force and a military, I also mean things such as having a central land registry office to prevent fraudsters from pretending they own a property when they don't (an ancient analog version of back-up, haha).
To put it another way, you need the 'threat' of coercion to make a peaceful society in which voluntary exchange is possible. Seeing as nuclear weapons have paradoxically created the longest period of peace in the West for centuries, this is unremarkable. If you look on a graph of the size of government + the GDP of a country, you see a clear and strong relationship between the two forms of growth, they are like parallel lines. In the case of some countries, especially in Africa, the governments are far too large for the size of their economies, and this is what fundamentally prevents progress in many parts of Africa today. It must also be the case that the opposite is true. A government that is too small with a large market will spiral out of control.
I am not saying that government should be large. I am not a statist, nor am I implying governments use their powers wisely. I think that there is some Laffer curve (happy medium changing over time) for the size of governments and markets. I also think that governments use their powers of coercion far too frequently and they should adopt a more passive role, their misadventures are a great burden on the market.
So where am I going with this discussion?
Well, it leads me to 3 points that I think are important to the issue of violence and markets.
1. We need methods to move 'work' indirectly done by the government. e.g. The side affects of having a Land Registry, and decentralize them.
By 'moving' the work, I don't mean giving it to local government or some distributed network of entrepreneurs, I mean we need a way for that information to be programmed into the infrastructure of society in such a way that central government is simply unnecessary.
That sounds a bit abstract, so let me give an example. You could adopt a model similar to Freenet, where all data on the network is on every single computer part of the network. Removing a couple of computers doesn't affect the network since multiple redundancy and regeneration algorithms can put all the pieces back together again. Imagine doing that, with all publicly available information like the Land Registry. Right now, you could kill all the Land Registry employees, delete their backups, destroy their computers and then kill lots of people in order to steal their land (this has been done in the past incidentally). With the model I described, that would be impossible without destroying the entire network.
Bitcoin is actually a perfect example of this. It takes the power of inflation away from central government completely. That is a rather important and powerful idea.
2. The role of government appears to have serious amounts of "feature creep" as software engineers call it. The size and power of governments simply doesn't scale downwards in the same way as a market does. Solving the problem from within is pointless, it'd be like taking cake away from yourself. There's no motive. It's the principal agent problem. We need something that counter balances government growth that isn't under the control of any particular entity and is highly scalable. It's no good me saying Market rises or falls by X% and then Government should get bigger or smaller by X%, because I can't prove that my ratio of Market to Government is correct at any point. I could easily be a paranoid conspiracy theorist with no evidence for my worldview without realizing it. So I have to reluctantly admit I don't have a non-biased peaceful solution for this one. Seems that civil war is the most common solution in practice throughout history though.
What is perfectly clear is that democracy has completely failed to reduce the size of government at any point, that is why we are having this problem. It's not doing it's job, which was supposed to be to alternate between different forms of government, expansion and contraction. Metaphorically the accelerator works but the brake doesn't. You increase the government's employees by 1, well, it stays there. Take the English NHS for example. 1 out of every 17 employees in that country work for it. In terms of workforce numbers it's just behind the Chinese Army. That's completely crazy. Yet the English are content with this. So they are either nuts or asleep. Just recently they shelved a software system that cost them 50 billion pounds to build, because it didn't do a goddamn thing. It is the biggest software project failure in world history. Nobody even got fired for it. I mean. Fuck.
3. I don't think government should have a complete monopoly on violence. I think that it should have a monopoly when it's operating in the interests of the market. However, if it isn't then serious questions need to be raised about it's role in society. That is when the 'equation' needs to be resolved by violence. Thing is, this shouldn't be up to one person, since they could be mistaken. Democracy doesn't seem like a great idea either, since the majority of people are frequently wrong on certain subjects when they develop group-think.
Example: It appears to be possible to become communist through the democratic process, what Hayek called the Road to Serfdom. What then? It's a one way street if you believe in peace, since you can't all just suddenly change your mind a few years later, you're stuck with it.
tldr; Actually killing people is totally legit in certain circumstances. Were I Strike, I'd have left a trail of bodies a mile wide. The meek do not inherit the earth. Turns out geeks with guns do. If you think governments can't be brought to heel, take another look at Mexico.
-
Strike is a genius chemist. I've read his work and that much is patently obvious. He's also a great guy, everybody loves him. And that might be a problem because he is also a dreadful criminal, he could only have imagined the DEA would play by the book if he were thinking like a civilian.
He got put away for six years for being in the way, the charges against him were pretty sketch it seems to me. But if the DEA and judge agree you should be put away, then you will be put away and there's not a line in the law book that will save you.
Strike's imprisonment set me off on a train of thought I can't displace although the destination is not a rosy one. Here is the thing.
I agree with DPR about open free markets etc. I would say that either Trade will cross borders, or Soldiers will. But there is a problem...
On one hand I believe that free trade increases the propensity to violence. There's a lot of statistical evidence for this, I don't think there's a serious economist who disputes it. There is a sort of continuum where bullets are exchanged at one end of the scale and capital at the other end.
But on the other hand, I think coercion is sometimes necessary for a market to remain open. I am not a flower power peace loving type one little bit. I get the sense that the idea of violence is considered amoral from the perspective of Agorism. I could be wrong here, as I haven't done much research into this subset of market based philosophy, but I think it's correct to say that (shout out if that's wrong!).
Capitalism is fundamentally a passive force, it is the essence of the West's "soft power". 99% of "hard power" is exercised by the State. It is quite fair that violence should be associated with the State, since they are statistically the cause of most of it.
However, this does not mean that we are looking at a contradiction, at least not necessarily. It cannot be a coincidence that Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations was written after Hobbe's Leviathan. The development, in theory and practice, of free markets occurred in tandem with the development of the nation state and its social contract with the people.
That is, a strong central government was necessary to provide enough 'cover' for the possibility of a genuine open and free market. I don't just mean having a police force and a military, I also mean things such as having a central land registry office to prevent fraudsters from pretending they own a property when they don't (an ancient analog version of back-up, haha).
To put it another way, you need the 'threat' of coercion to make a peaceful society in which voluntary exchange is possible. Seeing as nuclear weapons have paradoxically created the longest period of peace in the West for centuries, this is unremarkable. If you look on a graph of the size of government + the GDP of a country, you see a clear and strong relationship between the two forms of growth, they are like parallel lines. In the case of some countries, especially in Africa, the governments are far too large for the size of their economies, and this is what fundamentally prevents progress in many parts of Africa today. It must also be the case that the opposite is true. A government that is too small with a large market will spiral out of control.
I am not saying that government should be large. I am not a statist, nor am I implying governments use their powers wisely. I think that there is some Laffer curve (happy medium changing over time) for the size of governments and markets. I also think that governments use their powers of coercion far too frequently and they should adopt a more passive role, their misadventures are a great burden on the market.
So where am I going with this discussion?
Well, it leads me to 3 points that I think are important to the issue of violence and markets.
1. We need methods to move 'work' indirectly done by the government. e.g. The side affects of having a Land Registry, and decentralize them.
By 'moving' the work, I don't mean giving it to local government or some distributed network of entrepreneurs, I mean we need a way for that information to be programmed into the infrastructure of society in such a way that central government is simply unnecessary.
That sounds a bit abstract, so let me give an example. You could adopt a model similar to Freenet, where all data on the network is on every single computer part of the network. Removing a couple of computers doesn't affect the network since multiple redundancy and regeneration algorithms can put all the pieces back together again. Imagine doing that, with all publicly available information like the Land Registry. Right now, you could kill all the Land Registry employees, delete their backups, destroy their computers and then kill lots of people in order to steal their land (this has been done in the past incidentally). With the model I described, that would be impossible without destroying the entire network.
Bitcoin is actually a perfect example of this. It takes the power of inflation away from central government completely. That is a rather important and powerful idea.
2. The role of government appears to have serious amounts of "feature creep" as software engineers call it. The size and power of governments simply doesn't scale downwards in the same way as a market does. Solving the problem from within is pointless, it'd be like taking cake away from yourself. There's no motive. It's the principal agent problem. We need something that counter balances government growth that isn't under the control of any particular entity and is highly scalable. It's no good me saying Market rises or falls by X% and then Government should get bigger or smaller by X%, because I can't prove that my ratio of Market to Government is correct at any point. I could easily be a paranoid conspiracy theorist with no evidence for my worldview without realizing it. So I have to reluctantly admit I don't have a non-biased peaceful solution for this one. Seems that civil war is the most common solution in practice throughout history though.
What is perfectly clear is that democracy has completely failed to reduce the size of government at any point, that is why we are having this problem. It's not doing it's job, which was supposed to be to alternate between different forms of government, expansion and contraction. Metaphorically the accelerator works but the brake doesn't. You increase the government's employees by 1, well, it stays there. Take the English NHS for example. 1 out of every 17 employees in that country work for it. In terms of workforce numbers it's just behind the Chinese Army. That's completely crazy. Yet the English are content with this. So they are either nuts or asleep. Just recently they shelved a software system that cost them 50 billion pounds to build, because it didn't do a goddamn thing. It is the biggest software project failure in world history. Nobody even got fired for it. I mean. Fuck.
3. I don't think government should have a complete monopoly on violence. I think that it should have a monopoly when it's operating in the interests of the market. However, if it isn't then serious questions need to be raised about it's role in society. That is when the 'equation' needs to be resolved by violence. Thing is, this shouldn't be up to one person, since they could be mistaken. Democracy doesn't seem like a great idea either, since the majority of people are frequently wrong on certain subjects when they develop group-think.
Example: It appears to be possible to become communist through the democratic process, what Hayek called the Road to Serfdom. What then? It's a one way street if you believe in peace, since you can't all just suddenly change your mind a few years later, you're stuck with it.
tldr; Actually killing people is totally legit in certain circumstances. Were I Strike, I'd have left a trail of bodies a mile wide. The meek do not inherit the earth. Turns out geeks with guns do. If you think governments can't be brought to heel, take another look at Mexico.
+1 for effort and time but wtf does that have to do with a chemistry forum aside from mentioning strike? Still and interesting read.
-
...
tldr; Actually killing people is totally legit in certain circumstances. Were I Strike, I'd have left a trail of bodies a mile wide. The meek do not inherit the earth. Turns out geeks with guns do. If you think governments can't be brought to heel, take another look at Mexico.
+1 for effort and time but wtf does that have to do with a chemistry forum aside from mentioning strike? Still and interesting read.
My mind is meandering somewhat randomly today, haven't slept in two days. Crazed mammal is crazed. Need the restorative powers of sleep to restore mental state. Ugh. Sleep is for the weak. Boo sleep. ._.
-
+1
...and so the show Breaking Bad ushered in an entire new generation of cooks.
-
Yeah iv been looking for amphetamine/meth/mdma etc open synthesis discussion but couldn't find a nice one on the www, would love to have one here on silkroad
-
This section is needed imo. Also would be good to see more reagents/precursors offered for sale. Surprised to not see MDP2P/LSA and others all over the marketplace.
-
This section is needed imo. Also would be good to see more reagents/precursors offered for sale. Surprised to not see MDP2P/LSA and others all over the marketplace.
If you have access to MDP2P/LSA/ergotamine you're likely just going to finish the synth yourself and make more money that way.
-
Some people prefer to just supply precursors. Especially if they don't have lab access or are under surveillance.
-
Is any way to do a heroin base purification fast, like you can do from cocaine powder to base with ammonia. Anyone?
chino
-
No one is going to give full synths obviously. It is for area specific questions. At least that is how I imagine it.
PIHKAL and TIHKAL
-
+1
-
There already is a chemistry forum in onion-land. Why not just use that?
-
mrsy what is the address?
-
mrsy what is the address?
sbforumaz7v3v6my.onion
It's still in it's infancy. As far as I know the idea is for it to be molded by community through
suggestions and critique to become exactly what scientifically curious community needs.
Very early to tell if it will succeed or not because there are already very good forums with very smart and helpful people, like
vespiary or Russian hyperlab, and even more agricultural forums. But probably there are people who want to post something
on the deep web. We'll see how it evolves.
-
I like this idea too. In fact, I PM'd admin earlier today regarding an enormous mediawiki compatible SQL database I have of over 4089 active molecules (I have it in xls format too). It contains just about every molecular property you could imagine as well as lots of biological info. I've just been dying to put it to good use somewhere.
I disagree with the guy above who said this was a bad idea, putting drugs in the context of chemistry can only ever be a good thing, and by that I mean at least awareness raising. For example, you probably won't find kids dying because they snorted 2C-E like it was cocaine where they come to a compound like 2C-E through an elevated context like organic chemistry. Shulgin, Strike, et al. represent the very very best of drug-culture IMHO. What I wouldn't give to be a part of a circle like the one Shulgin had at Berkeley!
-
I like this idea too. In fact, I PM'd admin earlier today regarding an enormous mediawiki compatible SQL database I have of over 4089 active molecules (I have it in xls format too). It contains just about every molecular property you could imagine as well as lots of biological info. I've just been dying to put it to good use somewhere.
I disagree with the guy above who said this was a bad idea, putting drugs in the context of chemistry can only ever be a good thing, and by that I mean at least awareness raising. For example, you probably won't find kids dying because they snorted 2C-E like it was cocaine where they come to a compound like 2C-E through an elevated context like organic chemistry. Shulgin, Strike, et al. represent the very very best of drug-culture IMHO. What I wouldn't give to be a part of a circle like the one Shulgin had at Berkeley!
Could you please share it? I am willing to put it as a extension of scibayforum and would appreciate if I can get my hands of active compound database and create some kind of web interface and api for it. Public compound databases are just too big to parse and select only compounds of interest.
-
@umshiniman... Yeah, tell me about it, but that is largely what I did (parse the chem dbs)... In fact, the way the wiki is set up, it uses pngs ripped from these databases as the molecular image. However, most of the data was predicted using various high-end chem engineering software. I'm definitely interested, but handing it over to SR would better assure that the info would be at the hands of many as opposed to handing it over to your budding sciform... Maybe the sci-forum could have an attached wiki? I don't know... I'm definitely interested but only on the condition that I might have a little involvement in helping the crew at the new sciforum shape the thing. I hope you understand this. As a trade off for very few people immediately having the info at there disposal, or seeing as how it is something new you're trying to get off the ground, I'd like to be as involved as I could possibly be. Sound fair? If so, PM so we can figure it all out!
EDIT: And anyways, the thing will only be as cool as the amount of WOWZERS types we could get using it... I just really think those organchem buffs are cool, and I'd like to learn as much as I can from them!
-
Just putting in my vote for a chemistry forum... I'd love to learn and discuss more methods and theory with the type of people who are on this forum. It would be superior in many ways to more popular forums like bluelight or shroomery.