Silk Road forums
Discussion => Silk Road discussion => Topic started by: mrxempire on July 14, 2013, 07:29 am
-
found this article the other day it is about the invention of bitcoins and SR and why pseudonymous outlaws are so popular http://www.bombalatimes.com.au/story/1627613/the-outlaw-cult/?cs=5
I am going to use this article to explain to my real life friends why i am such a nerd about SR. They don't understand why i think this site is so epic haha.I hope the original D.P.R writes a book about how he created the site and reveals his true identity before he dies. I'd sure as fuck read that book
-
The outlaw cult
By Eileen Ormsby
July 10, 2013, 3 a.m.
They are fugitives with a cult following. They are libertarians who disdain capitalism. They have evaded detection by determined journalists, private investigators and law enforcement organisations. And they can be very, very rich.
Famous, yet unknown, pseudonymous outlaws are not new. Although they operate outside the law, they thrill us with daring escapades and defiance of authority - and perhaps, secretly, we don't want them to be caught.
''There have probably been outlaw heroes from the moment law was promulgated,'' says Graham Seal, professor of folklore at Curtin University. ''Their contentious and ambivalent status along the borders between right and wrong continues to fascinate us.''
In 1971, D.B. Cooper, the name used by a man flight attendants described as polite and handsome, hijacked a Boeing 727 aeroplane and parachuted from it with $200,000 ransom money, never to be heard from again. Entire societies are dedicated to finding out his true identity, dead or alive, and the FBI has an open file on him to this day.
Last year, four men in business suits ordered a drink at the bar at the top of the Rialto in Melbourne, then wedged the balcony door shut, donned the parachutes they had hidden in suitcases and jumped from the building, James Bond-style. Few people wanted to see the men - who were never caught despite saturation media coverage - prosecuted for the stunt.
These are one-off examples of high-risk escapades, but the internet has brought about a new era of pseudonymity; one in which outlaw figures can engage with followers, media and law enforcement for years while their true identities remain unknown.
What they have in common is they are (or were) wanted by the authorities, and often establish a cult following. They all claim libertarian, anti-capitalist, anti-authoritarian philosophies and have accumulated substantial wealth while maintaining anonymity.
British graffiti artist, social commentator and political activist Banksy is perhaps the best known of these. He has been active as a street artist since 1992 and over the years has moved up to pranks such as installing his own works in famous galleries and museums, or installing a life-sized mannequin dressed as a Guantanamo Bay prisoner as part of a Disneyland ride.
Although technically a vandal, it's unlikely law enforcers are searching for Banksy, whose works can command upwards of $1 million at auction. And chances are, if Wikipedia is to be believed, we probably know who he is but have decided to turn a blind eye in favour of the myth of the anonymous bad boy with a message.
Two figures who most certainly feature on law enforcement's radar are Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of crypto-currency Bitcoin, and Dread Pirate Roberts, owner of online illicit drugs emporium Silk Road.
Silk Road operates openly, in defiance of authorities, as an international marketplace bringing together buyers and sellers of everything from steroids to ecstasy, cocaine and heroin. It uses Bitcoin exclusively for transactions.
Bitcoin is a borderless digital currency that started out as a valueless computer code, but now has a market value of more than $US1 billion ($1.1billion), of which Silk Road's annual turnover probably accounts for between $20 million and $30 million. Not surprisingly, the website doesn't make its figures available.
Bitcoin was unleashed in February 2009, when a modest post appeared on an internet forum by someone calling himself Satoshi Nakamoto (male, 38, Japan): ''I've developed a new open source P2P e-cash system called Bitcoin … Give it a try.''
In the months after, Nakamoto made a series of posts on his forum, bitcointalk, describing the project in detail and revealing the motivation behind his invention as the mistrust of banks after the global financial crisis.
As experts recognised the genius in his invention, interest moved from a few early adopters in the IT sphere to the finance pages of the mainstream newspapers. And then, in early 2011, Nakamoto quietly disappeared.
Intrigue soon began to build about Nakamoto's true identity. It became apparent that no such person as Satoshi Nakamoto ever existed, nor did his website lead anywhere but dead ends. Nakamoto had stage-managed a believable persona well before launching the Bitcoin Project.
The 364 posts he made on bitcointalk, while lengthy and technical, revealed little about their author, other than he, she or they were a genius who had thought of and plugged every possible problem with, and potential attack upon, the currency.
In October 2011, The New Yorker printed a well-researched piece that identified Nakamoto as Michael Clear, a student of Trinity College, Dublin. Shortly after, Fast Company countered with equally compelling - and equally circumstantial - evidence that Nakamoto was a pseudonym for not one but three Munich-based men who had worked together to create Bitcoin.
The accused all emphatically denied it. But as Clear told The New Yorker, ''Even if I was I wouldn't tell you.'' Another accused, Neal King, told Fast Company: ''I'm cashing in on Warhol's prediction of 15 minutes of fame - albeit for something I didn't do.''
There has since been a flurry of investigation and speculation by journalists and internet sleuths. Some surmise it is those who have much to gain from the currency's success; perhaps the head of the Bitcoin Foundation or cryptocurrency exchange, Mt Gox. Others believe it is a pseudonym for a disruptive government or the CIA. American IT sociologist and philosopher Ted Nelson named maths genius Shinichi Mochizuki (male, 44, Japan) in April this year but, again, evidence was weak and he denied it.
As attempts to locate Nakamoto fail, his cult status grows. He doesn't appear to have made a single mistake yet; not in the code behind his invention, nor in covering his tracks, despite there being few people in the world who could possibly be him.
Although unclear whether he has committed any crime, an FBI report leaked on the internet last year expressed concern at the application of Bitcoin for illicit purposes, thanks to the anonymity careful users can maintain in transactions. Nakamoto could be accused of conspiracy to engage in money laundering or some form of tax evasion or a law against disrupting markets.
One of the illicit businesses named in the FBI report was Silk Road, led by the enigmatic Dread Pirate Roberts. Roberts is an active and visible member of Silk Road's large community, where he is hailed as a hero by those who believe it is their right to buy drugs without the interference of law enforcement bodies.
When asked why he was able to remain anonymous despite manhunts by authorities and journalists, Roberts said, ''Because my life, liberty and mission are more important to me than fame, convenience or comfort.'' He is the one person in this article to whom not a single name of a real person has been linked. Indeed, the only names that have been raised in speculation of Roberts' identity are other pseudonyms. One is BeHe, a bitcointalk.org user who ran a suspected ponzi scheme through the forum during 2012. Many thought it was a money laundering scheme that accepted investors' Bitcoins and returned them to Silk Road's funds.
The other is Nakamoto: according to The New Yorker, he briefly surfaced in April 2011, when he said he had ''moved on to other things''. Silk Road was born and announced on bitcointalk in February 2011 and was instrumental in the rise in the currency's value in 2011, although it no longer depends on the site for its stability.
But the evidence of either of these being true is flimsier than the circumstantial evidence linking Nakamoto to various people. Although both are prone to writing lengthy missives in their respective forums, Nakamoto's were all technical and scientific in nature, while Roberts espouses his agorist philosophy, sets reading challenges in his ''book club'' for member discussion and has even hosted a movie night, with site members around the world simultaneously watching and discussing V for Vendetta. Nakamoto uses UK English; Roberts' writing is in US English.
Although many would be appalled at the notion of drug dealer as hero, those who are against prohibition believe Silk Road offers a better, safer way for users to buy the drugs they will acquire anyway. As one member puts it, ''I came for the drugs and stayed for the revolution''.
Forbes recently published a collection of Roberts' quotes, describing him as a ''principled libertarian and cypherpunk in the same vein as WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto''.
In true cult style, his devotees keep begging to give him more money, despite the huge sums he earns in commission. They offer their services in IT or to work as moderators of the forums for free. When the site is unavailable due to malicious attacks or infrastructure failure, members offer to take up a collection to help instead of demanding it be fixed with the profits they provided. Roberts never accepts such offers, though the moderators of the forum were unpaid until early this year and some people donate money ''to the cause'' anyway.
With a curt admonishment, Roberts denied he is the object of cult-like devotion : ''don't go getting sensationalist on me now''.
Another theory is that the person now posting as Roberts may not be the founder of the site - the clue is in the name. When the marketplace started, the owner simply went by the name Silk Road. But in February 2012 he wrote: ''Silk Road has matured and I need an identity separate from the site and the enterprise of which I am now only a part. I need a name. Actually, I already have a name picked out … It is perfect on so many levels.'' He revealed this to be Dread Pirate Roberts - a character from The Princess Bride who is not one man, but a series of individuals who periodically pass the name and reputation to a chosen successor without anyone else knowing. The original owner of Silk Road may well have sold the business along with the goodwill of his name, and is now sipping cocktails in the Bahamas.
But as with many outlaws, it may be the money trail that leads to their undoing. Some of D.B. Cooper's loot was found in river lands in 1980, leading to the theory that he never survived the jump. Banksy's many commercial interests mean he must have accountants and advisers who know him.
Bitcoin has the unique feature of providing anonymity for holders, while every transaction is public. In May 2012, sleuths of bitcointalk identified Silk Road's Bitcoin ''wallet'' containing the equivalent of $55million at today's rate. The coins were subsequently moved, presumably laundered somehow, and have yet to be retraced.
Last month, blogger Sergio Lerner uncovered a hoard of about $120million in Bitcoins that are owned by a single entity, and that entity began mining right from block one. Evidence points to the stash being owned by Nakamoto. That the coins remain untouched has sparked another round of conspiracy theories, such that he is dead, that the coins are held on a corrupted hard drive, or that he can't cash out without destabilising the currency or revealing his identity.
''One constant of outlaw heroes is that they are always villains to one or more sectors of society, particularly those holding power,'' Seal says.
There is little doubt that Banksy, Nakamoto and Roberts fit that bill.
@EileenOrmsby is a Melbourne writer who blogs at allthingsvice.com
-
;)
-
Cool article.
The author of that article is an Australian journalist who is actually a member here. http://dkn255hz262ypmii.onion/index.php?action=profile;u=28086
One of the better journalists IMO.
-
Yes, OzFreelancer. :)
-
Yes, OzFreelancer. :)
:)
-
hey Oz :) huggles to you :P i havent seen you in a good bit, how've ya been?
-
hey Oz :) huggles to you :P i havent seen you in a good bit, how've ya been?
Huggles back :) I've been most excellent. I have the best job in the world - hang out here and get paid to talk about it :)
-
hell yea good article! I'll make sure it gets read by a few more people too ;)
-
hey Oz :) huggles to you :P i havent seen you in a good bit, how've ya been?
Huggles back :) I've been most excellent. I have the best job in the world - hang out here and get paid to talk about it :)
That's why I Love You Oz :) just had the most Beautiful walk with the molecule :)
-
Great read :)
-
Awww +1 to you all for all the nice comments :)
-
+1...i still think the sites been passed on recently, which does support the article
-
OzFreelancer - kudos on a good article - especially as i'm new to this virtual world, gave me some perspective
-
As attempts to locate Nakamoto fail, his cult status grows. He doesn't appear to have made a single mistake yet; not in the code behind his invention, nor in covering his tracks, despite there being few people in the world who could possibly be him.
This is really your article, OzFreelancer? Well first off I like it, don't think I don't. But may I ask quite sincerely: what made you comfortable with such a strong and... well... false statement? You don't feel that it stretches the truth past the point of interpretation and portrays reality in a way that's, er, not altogether true?
Perhaps when I read "... in the code..." I hear something that you don't mean to say? The actual mistakes aren't really what I'm getting at. I mean I love Bitcoin, I'm not trying to argue against it or anything. I'm also not trying to criticize you, I'm aware that you can't always write what you want to write and still get a paycheck. I'm just curious about your perspective on the statement and the psychology that went into making it, really.
-
Nice write up Oz! I like your blog too. :)
No idea what in the heck SelfSovereignty is trying to ask, lol!
-
brilliant article, Well done oz, some funny bits in there :)
-
very interesting article.
Whoever DPR and Satoshi are I have to thank them for changing my life!
SR rules. As long as the basic principles are not changing, i dont care if ownership passes from person to another. Yet i cant imagine what LEVEL of trust this requires..
-
nice article OzFreelancer!
I wasn't aware of the finding of, what appears to be, a SR wallet with 55 million in it at April,2012 prices. Guess I'll have to go read about that and the finding of the creator's possible wallet. This whole btc thing still fascinates me. Kinda cool that everyone can see what everyone owns, they just don't know who is the owner. But every transaction is available to be viewed by the public.
-
Lurking later...
-
Great article, even more awesome that a member here wrote it!
Kudos Oz!!
-
OZ, you are truly amazing!! seriously, i keep up on the superior authored & more informed sr articles, e.g., wired, forbes.com, economist, gawker, etc. and i gotta say i've never been sorta sad after reading one as with yours. well not so much sad, just wishing there was more is all. your article was absolutely epic, without a doubt the best piece on sr/btc ever written. man, i can't wait for you to write a book one day on some interesting topic!! in the meantime i am gonna visit your blog, hopefully that'll be enuff to feed my mind and keep it happy. i mean satoshi, dpr and db cooper all mythified and de-mythified in a single publication...so good, we want more we want more!! thanks oz, keep it up sheela!! oh, oh, sheela...
-
Great fucking article Oz! That was my favorite article that I've read in a while. It was so cool to find out that you wrote it too. Thanks for sharing.
+1
-
Thanks again all of you for the kind words. I've been +1ing all over this thread :)
As attempts to locate Nakamoto fail, his cult status grows. He doesn't appear to have made a single mistake yet; not in the code behind his invention, nor in covering his tracks, despite there being few people in the world who could possibly be him.
This is really your article, OzFreelancer? Well first off I like it, don't think I don't. But may I ask quite sincerely: what made you comfortable with such a strong and... well... false statement? You don't feel that it stretches the truth past the point of interpretation and portrays reality in a way that's, er, not altogether true?
Perhaps when I read "... in the code..." I hear something that you don't mean to say? The actual mistakes aren't really what I'm getting at. I mean I love Bitcoin, I'm not trying to argue against it or anything. I'm also not trying to criticize you, I'm aware that you can't always write what you want to write and still get a paycheck. I'm just curious about your perspective on the statement and the psychology that went into making it, really.
I'm not really sure what you're getting at here - but I assume it is where I said he doesn't seem to have made a mistake in the code. I certainly try and be as accurate as possible in my articles, but I can't be an expert on all things and often have to rely on others' expertise. There have, of course, been security flaws that have been subsequently patched, so I guess that statement was a little hyperbolic, for which I apologise. I really do try not to make errors and be as honest as possible, but I'm certainly not infallible.
(There's another error in the article - one that doesn't really matter or make a difference, but pretty glaring, made in sub-editing) ::)
-
Great Read +1. ;D
-
This was a great read! Well written!
THANK YOU ~
-
Awesome article, thanks a lot for posting! Eileen, you rule, glad to see you're getting some great opportunities, big fan, AB.
-
Very compelling read, Oz. Thank you.
However, I would prefer that we all quietly fly under the radar for the long haul.
-
Very good article - my only complaint is calling SR and its community "anti-capitalist." Really it is as close to pure free market capitalism as you can get. It's only anti-capitalist to the extent that the modern "capitalism" we see today isn't free market capitalism anymore because it is so corrupted by cronyism and government interference.
-
I'm not convinced market anarchism and capitalism are the same thing, but the argument could probably carry on forever without concord :)
I just realised the link in the OP is to some publication I never heard of. The piece originally ran in the hard copy of The Age (Melbourne) and was syndicated to all Fairfax websites.
Still a little surprised nobody picked up the glaring factual error ::)
I think I've +1'd everyone in the thread but if you think I've missed you, do let me know ;)
x Eiley
-
Thanks again all of you for the kind words. I've been +1ing all over this thread :)
As attempts to locate Nakamoto fail, his cult status grows. He doesn't appear to have made a single mistake yet; not in the code behind his invention, nor in covering his tracks, despite there being few people in the world who could possibly be him.
This is really your article, OzFreelancer? Well first off I like it, don't think I don't. But may I ask quite sincerely: what made you comfortable with such a strong and... well... false statement? You don't feel that it stretches the truth past the point of interpretation and portrays reality in a way that's, er, not altogether true?
Perhaps when I read "... in the code..." I hear something that you don't mean to say? The actual mistakes aren't really what I'm getting at. I mean I love Bitcoin, I'm not trying to argue against it or anything. I'm also not trying to criticize you, I'm aware that you can't always write what you want to write and still get a paycheck. I'm just curious about your perspective on the statement and the psychology that went into making it, really.
I'm not really sure what you're getting at here - but I assume it is where I said he doesn't seem to have made a mistake in the code. I certainly try and be as accurate as possible in my articles, but I can't be an expert on all things and often have to rely on others' expertise. There have, of course, been security flaws that have been subsequently patched, so I guess that statement was a little hyperbolic, for which I apologise. I really do try not to make errors and be as honest as possible, but I'm certainly not infallible.
(There's another error in the article - one that doesn't really matter or make a difference, but pretty glaring, made in sub-editing) ::)
Oh, no need to apologize; like I said, I wasn't criticizing. It just seemed an odd exception to me, that's all; I mean it's a much more honest piece than most things I seem to come across these days -- I was just curious what thought led you to the sentence. Thanks for sharing the perspective inside your head :)
-
Finally took the time to read. thank you for that OP