>The USA seized the only reputable news site covering darknet safety and removed its content from the open internet.
If they were 'reputable' they wouldn't have received kickbacks for linking to drug and cyber crime markets.
>>According to the Department of Justice, while DeepDotWeb was in operation a total of 23.6 percent of all orders completed on AlphaBay involved DeepDotWeb
A bit, yes. Rtings has a vested interest to not cover a product that is sold, say, direct to consumer rather than via Amazon affiliate.
I still trust Rtings and love the website, but yeah it's totally possible that at some point they leave out a product because no revenue. I think the hit to their rep would be too big so they wouldn't, but it's always possible.
To a degree, yes. And if the products they were covering were illegal, it would not be at all surprising to see them busted for reviews and affiliate links.
I think you’re truing to split hairs on what “reputable” means maybe?
Society would change a hell of a lot faster if people thought about ethics instead of inheriting their morality, as the latter just seems to mostly be "I find objectionable what my parents found objectionable".
When I had to do this, I came to some distasteful to me conclusions, eg that two adult siblings should be free to have protected sex. I just didn't see any way to justify not allowing that. Not many people do this.
Google news seems pretty reputable; of course it is more of a news aggregator so that must be kept in mind.
>Some ads even contain malware...
Yeah but what does that have to do with this though? Google isn't getting a kickback from the people running the malware like the 'news website' that was seized was. Google doesn't want malware to be delivered from ads and takes many steps to mitigate it. To compare that to the direct kickback from drug and stolen ID marketplaces is silly IMO.
The perfect anonymized platform- is a ablative platform. Hosted by bot-netted pcs world, managed by dao-contracts, this lucrative platform for illegal trades and services never comes into contact with you once its launched - except to dead-drop money and transaction-requests to you. Now as a standardized easily configurable container + virus. It even can buy its own ready-made zero-days and prolong its life - thanks to chat-gpt programing integration.
Finance your golden years - with a swarm of dark net glider guns! If one of them fails- who cares, they can spawn more of themselves as a service.
Man what a utopian dystopian nightmare..
Kind of tangential, but I wonder how sales like that take place. Presumably, none of these parties want to be identified, even to each other, since the one's a criminal enterprise, and the other's being purchased by a criminal enterprise. But acquisitions usually involve enforceable business contracts with clauses like, for example, the purchasee's owners not immediately launching a new news site called "Darknetlive2" or something. Do you just ignore the business contractual bits, set up some sort of crypto escrow service, and go forward that way?
Business becomes much more expensive without law and regulation, something that some mainstream, knee-jerk anti-government businesspeople might want to consider.
The problem with anonymity is moderation. Every community needs a source of trust to back attestations. In an anonymous forum, that trust is established with user reputation. The problem is that every user of every forum must build that reputation from scratch. Every time an anonymous forum fails, the cycle repeats.
A lot of cops would explicitly and openly rather you just die from bad drugs. There are many that openly refuse to carry Narcan, because a human life second(or twentieth) chance is apparently not worth $25 to them.
The official policy of the united states government during prohibition for example was to poison thousands of US citizens for daring to consume a prohibited substance. People died because of it.
I don't understand that level of complete lack of empathy.
Where I live we're on a "meh, decriminalize posession" kick (most recently: psilocybin & dmt) so that's probably biasing my view, but the cops I know are too lazy to care about busting people for possession. If you can synthesize/extract it without creating a public health hazard, and if you're not part of something violent, or selling to kids, then you're probably not worth their time.
Maybe I'd feel differently if I were in a different demographic.
Readit News
If they were 'reputable' they wouldn't have received kickbacks for linking to drug and cyber crime markets.
>>According to the Department of Justice, while DeepDotWeb was in operation a total of 23.6 percent of all orders completed on AlphaBay involved DeepDotWeb
Real reputable lol.
I still trust Rtings and love the website, but yeah it's totally possible that at some point they leave out a product because no revenue. I think the hit to their rep would be too big so they wouldn't, but it's always possible.
I think you’re truing to split hairs on what “reputable” means maybe?
Remove that and you will find a new world. But do not remove the "your own moral values" filter.
When I had to do this, I came to some distasteful to me conclusions, eg that two adult siblings should be free to have protected sex. I just didn't see any way to justify not allowing that. Not many people do this.
>Some ads even contain malware...
Yeah but what does that have to do with this though? Google isn't getting a kickback from the people running the malware like the 'news website' that was seized was. Google doesn't want malware to be delivered from ads and takes many steps to mitigate it. To compare that to the direct kickback from drug and stolen ID marketplaces is silly IMO.
Finance your golden years - with a swarm of dark net glider guns! If one of them fails- who cares, they can spawn more of themselves as a service. Man what a utopian dystopian nightmare..
Take away the oppression and the expense is significantly reduced
or you just take a chance, send funds and move on
Need TOR to help stop corruption.
They do.
https://darkdot.com/index.xml
Deleted Comment
What we need is decentralized moderation.
The best solution (utilizing a blockchain) we've found so far favors either electricity producers (pow) or the richest stakeholders (pos).
Ensuring 1:1 human:vote ratio is near impossible without centralization.
I mean - isn't that kinda normal war-on-drugs policy?
The cops aren't interested in helping you test your drugs for adulterants. They'd much rather arrest you, for having drugs.
We may not like it, but it's normal for cops.
The official policy of the united states government during prohibition for example was to poison thousands of US citizens for daring to consume a prohibited substance. People died because of it.
I don't understand that level of complete lack of empathy.
Maybe I'd feel differently if I were in a different demographic.
Dead Comment