Do you see Silk Road's closure as a positive or negative?

[Paleus]

BTC

Looking to get a feel for the communty's perception on this one as it seems many people are divided.

Personally, I don't think it will make a difference in the long run. Coming down the pipe are plenty of other services that are aiming to fill the now void illegal drug marketplace. Silk Road may have been the biggest fish out there, but another will in time take its place. If anything, the events of today send a message that there is no such thing as anonymity. No, not simply because DPR was found, but because of the stories which have surfaced about how close customer's accounts and information were to being disclosed that it was necessary to hire an assassin. The FBI is sending a message that they do indeed have a strong grip on digital economies. Silk Road was one of the biggest bitcoin marketplaces and it was a business which gave the currency strength. We now have a far more limited array of options to use our bitcoin on.

I was a customer on Silk Road, and although it opened me to the option of purchasing drugs that would normally be completely out of my reach, I only ever purchased books. I also enjoyed frequenting the forums where interesting discussion not found on surface forums was the norm. Obvously there are other forums on Tor, but these readings helped deliver ideas and perspectives that were outside mainstream views, and offered a healthy dose into true developments which are happening in our lifetime. This access to hidden literature and discussion will be sorely missed.

If we have no way of exercising inalienable rights, such as using a medicinal herb with powerful healing properties, the currency itself is irrelevant. With recent exposures of the NSA, it is quite clear we have descended into an Orwellian society. Not only is EVERYTHING now monitored for the sake of "security", we have nowhere to go to speak, act, or enjoy life's most outlier experiences. How can a corporate or government entity prevent a human being from trialing DMT, a substance with massively positive life altering effects? We are being controlled. We are being held down.

"Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

Here's to the coming successor of SR.

BTC

[1715614016]

1715614016

[1715614016]

1715614016

[1715614016]

1715614016

[1715614016]

1715614016

[1715614016]

1715614016

[1715614016]

1715614016

[CorvusCorax]

I see Silk Road's closure as a good thing. Silk Road was perhaps the one Tor site known to many people and it was known for two things: facilitating drug deals and using bitcoins to do it. This is how the two became inextricably linked in many people's view just as people were starting to hear about bitcoin. Sure, there will be another site to take Silk Road's place, if there isn't one already up and running, but to be rid of the most obvious such site can only help to improve bitcoin's image.

[justusranvier]

Bad because of the people who lost bitcoins.

Good because the next generation of successor sites will be even more resilient.

In the long term the seizure serves as a form of innovation stimulus.

[LilGhost]

I see it as being a good thing. The silk road was casting a bad light on those of us who mine/trade/use bitcoins and do not have any interest in using services like the silk road or performing/purchasing illicit activities/items with bitcoins. Because of this, I view the silk road being closed as a good thing.

[cassieheart]

Very Very negative. The community will lose a great number of users if no one steps into fill the gap. BitCoin is all about Anarchy, Freedom and anonymity. I can't believe people in the Bitcoin community are saying this is a positive thing. I think Obama libtards have finally infiltrated the community. Sad sad day this is

[justusranvier]

Very Very negative.

In the long term, was the closure of Napster good or bad for P2P file sharing?

[MineForeman.com]

BitCoin is all about Anarchy, Freedom and anonymity.

To you perhaps it is, perhaps you should have appended that with "In my opinion".

In my opinion the "sex, drugs and scams" hurts bitcoin becoming a globally acknowledged legitimate form of trade and that is what I want.

Neil

[Nancarrow]

I voted positive. For one thing, it makes bitcoin more 'respectable' in the eyes of Joe "I'm sure I'd never touch drugs" Public. For another thing, it's actually good in the long term for the black market in drugs. Other sites will mushroom up (probably they already have done), with a bit of luck there'll be several, not just one, and hopefully the people running them will be smarter than DPR, more careful in their online habits, less willing to trumpet their achievements and goad the powers that be.

Aaaaand I do now realise I've signed up to this forum with my email address derived from my real name, no less.  Oh well, it's still not illegal (yet) to state one's opposition to the WoD, and moral support of those who wish to undermine it. So yeah, NSA, DEA, GCHQ and NCA, I hate you guys, blow me.

[smoothie]

Positive. Now all the myths of SR being the backbone of BTC are now debunked.

[locksley]

Definitely negative.

I'd say SR was a net-positive to society. It brought transparency to the drug-market place, which meant safer drug use.

In the coming months, I'd say that we'll also see how futile Drug Law Enforcement really is.

The market is wide open. You've got merchants who need to move product, and users who want the convenience of an online market place. Only matter a time before another entrepreneur fills this gap.

Best part of all is that the criminal complaint is in public domain[1], which means no one's going to make DPR's mistakes again.

I've already seen people talk about a 'distributed approach' rather than a centralized marketplace like SilkRoad (which is really built off the eBay model). Perhaps an "Anonymous Shopify" model will work, whereby any merchant can set up a shop and host it themselves with ease. Much harder to take down.


---

[1] www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~nweaver/UlbrichtCriminalComplaint.pdf

[aceking]

is positive in the long run

[superresistant]

It is a huge advertising for bitcoin. Positive in the mid and long run.

[cassieheart]

Its not an opinion its a fact. Bitcoin is Freedom ,Anonymity and Anarchy! Let me define Anarchy for you so you can understand. Anarchy:a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.Now lets move on. How exactly does Sex hurt Bitcoin, are you kidding me ? I can see maybe drugs and scams hurt its over all image to Bible thumpers and Libtards who like to control people but sex? let me ask you how you came to be created?  

BitCoin is all about Anarchy, Freedom and anonymity.

To you perhaps it is, perhaps you should have appended that with "In my opinion".

In my opinion the "sex, drugs and scams" hurts bitcoin becoming a globally acknowledged legitimate form of trade and that is what I want.

Neil

[matt608]

Its not an opinion its a fact. Bitcoin is Freedom ,Anonymity and Anarchy! Let me define Anarchy for you so you can understand. Anarchy:a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.Now lets move on. How exactly does Sex hurt Bitcoin, are you kidding me ? I can see maybe drugs and scams hurt its over all image to Bible thumpers and Libtards who like to control people but sex? let me ask you how you came to be created?  

No ones saying silk roads permanent closure is good for bitcoin, for all we know it could come back online and even if it doesn't there are other similar marketplaces that will grow to replace it but this 'closure event' has clearly been good for bitcoin.  The price has survived and theres been a ton of publicity.  It's probably the single biggest publicity boost bitcoin has ever received.

[Birdy]

Positive in the long term.

Its not an opinion its a fact. Bitcoin is Freedom ,Anonymity and Anarchy! Let me define Anarchy for you so you can understand. Anarchy:a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

Abscence of authority? yes, indeed. But a state of disorder? No way.
It's no chaos, the order is managed by maths (and partly by common consent) instead of an authority.

[kmtan]

i never been there before....but if doing thing bad, it should be shutdown ..

[darkmule]

BTC

Looking to get a feel for the communty's perception on this one as it seems many people are divided.

I see the prosecution of people who take out, or even try to take out hits on their "business" rivals and enemies (even when those are scum themselves) as a good thing.  So if DPR is guilty of trying to do that, I see his prosecution as generally a good thing.

As for the short-term, it's a PR black eye for Bitcoin to be associated with these kinds of shenanigans, although just like cash, people will always do illegal things with it. . .and automobiles, and cell phones, and computers, and all sorts of things that are otherwise good.

In the long term, who cares?  It's not going to have much of an impact.  I predict that the successful model for an Internet black market is closer to BitTorrent than Napster, and SR was the Napster of such enterprises.  Way out of line, way illegal, and way prosecutable.  Plus you had a dude at the top who took out $80 million as his cut of the illegal business.  Hard for him to portray himself as some kind of white knight.

Done at a peer to peer level, there is no "Dread Pirate Roberts" to bust, and everyone takes responsibility for their own actions.

[btcton]

Very Very negative. The community will lose a great number of users if no one steps into fill the gap. BitCoin is all about Anarchy, Freedom and anonymity. I can't believe people in the Bitcoin community are saying this is a positive thing. I think Obama libtards have finally infiltrated the community. Sad sad day this is

You're implying everyone who uses bitcoin is a drug addict, which I'm pretty sure is not true.

[hulk]

Good in the long run, but for now its very negative as how the news relate bitcoin to drugs.

[alpha492]

As with just about everything in life its not all good, or all bad.  I've heard the different perspectives, and I agree that public perception of bitcoin will be improved with the downfall of SR.  It's undeniable however that SR contributed in a huge way to the value of bitcoin just because the market didn't recognize this within a week of SR going down doesn't mean it won't.  I've read that as much as 75% of btc transactions were related to the SR, from a classical economics perspective that would make SR more than the backbone of btc that would make it the circulatory system.  But on the other hand, the fall of the silk road gave btc a lot of attention and as mentioned before improved public perception.  If new vendors accepting bitcoin keep cropping up with a little luck that 75% void will be filled in with a thriving marketplace.  If btc is a little less lucky a SR clone will pop up by the end of the week accepting some kind of scrypt currency and bitcoin will inevitably collapse before the replacement marketplace ever comes to fruition.

Honestly if I had the balls to run a website like SR, I'd dump all my money into something like worldcoin make a clone that only accepts worldcoin, and be rich overnight.

IMO, now is a good time to diversify.

[CrazyRabbi]

As with just about everything in life its not all good, or all bad.  I've heard the different perspectives, and I agree that public perception of bitcoin will be improved with the downfall of SR.  It's undeniable however that SR contributed in a huge way to the value of bitcoin just because the market didn't recognize this within a week of SR going down doesn't mean it won't.  I've read that as much as 75% of btc transactions were related to the SR, from a classical economics perspective that would make SR more than the backbone of btc that would make it the circulatory system.  But on the other hand, the fall of the silk road gave btc a lot of attention and as mentioned before improved public perception.  If new vendors accepting bitcoin keep cropping up with a little luck that 75% void will be filled in with a thriving marketplace.  If btc is a little less lucky a SR clone will pop up by the end of the week accepting some kind of scrypt currency and bitcoin will inevitably collapse before the replacement marketplace ever comes to fruition.

Honestly if I had the balls to run a website like SR, I'd dump all my money into something like worldcoin make a clone that only accepts worldcoin, and be rich overnight.

IMO, now is a good time to diversify.

Well this is where the media and the stories you hear are blown way out of proportion.

Yes there were over 9 million Bitcoins of trades on Silk Road but in the same sense you could send 1 bitcoin 9 million times and get the same effect.

In terms of Silk Road being the main reason Bitcoin has it's value is hugely falsified.

Bitcoins are a currency based of speculation , that's traded similar to a Stock and only holds the value that the people have in it.

To say Silk Road is the reason Bitcoin is holding it's value would be to say that every Bitcoin user uses drugs and previously bought drugs on Silk Road

The only amount of Bitcoins seized didn't even total 30,000 Bitcoins....

Bitcoins are worth what we the people believe them to be worth.

The media , The Bitcoin Community , The Shills and The Trolls need to stop spreading panic and fear for no reason what so ever...

To assume you make an ass out of u and me

Thus is the case with Silk Road

Stop assuming that the Bitcoin price is going to crash and also stop assuming that the only viable use for Bitcoins is the value it has in USD

Bitcoin is it's own currency that's sole purpose was a medium of trade , One that did not have a corrupt Federal Reserve controlling the production of it and never allowing anyone to be free of debt.

You don't own your Bitcoins just as you don't own your FIAT currency the difference is Bitcoin is worth what the people say it is not The Federal Reserve...

[alpha492]

Yes there were over 9 million Bitcoins of trades on Silk Road but in the same sense you could send 1 bitcoin 9 million times and get the same effect.

Bitcoins are a currency based of speculation , that's traded similar to a Stock and only holds the value that the people have in it.

To say Silk Road is the reason Bitcoin is holding it's value would be to say that every Bitcoin user uses drugs and previously bought drugs on Silk Road


Bitcoins are worth what we the people believe them to be worth.

To suggest 1 btc was traded on the silk road 9 million times is ridiculous but I get your point, although I still disagree with it.  In any Econ 101 class one of the first things you learn is trade is the foundations of any economy and hence currency.  Even backed currencies are limited in value when not suspended in a medium of healthy trade.  As you said btc is a currency of speculation, in fact PURE speculation.  BTC isn't limited by even a rate of production, its just code and encryption.  The value created by trade isn't a linear relationship its exponential and even if more conservative number would assign 40% of transaction on the silk road this would be the equivalent of 40% of US businesses disappearing overnight.  The crippling effects of losing the SR are compounded by the exact reason you state, btc is a speculative economy and lately speculation is largely negative.  People will believe bitcoin is worth less without a marketplace to fill the void SR left.  Not every btc user has to use drugs in order for the market to recognize the volume of trade created by SR.  That's like suggestion every American has to own a fighter jet to recognize the volume of trade created by lockhead martin.

The media , The Bitcoin Community , The Shills and The Trolls need to stop spreading panic and fear for no reason what so ever...

Stop assuming that the Bitcoin price is going to crash and also stop assuming that the only viable use for Bitcoins is the value it has in USD

Like I said, I wouldn't say 75% loss of trade volume is nothing but thats a difference of opinion.  People speculating the decline of btc doesn't necessarily have anything to do with its value next to USD.  People speculate the decline of USD but thats not because they feel like they'll be able to buy less Yen.  Comparison to other currencies is a valuable metric for determining their future ability to trade said currency for goods and services.  In this case many bitcointalk users are American and therefore use their most convenient metric, USD.

You don't own your Bitcoins just as you don't own your FIAT currency the difference is Bitcoin is worth what the people say it is not The Federal Reserve...

I never suggested USD was more stable, or I had more control over its value or really anything about USD at all.  As you said:

To assume you make an ass out of u and me

[CrazyRabbi]

Yes there were over 9 million Bitcoins of trades on Silk Road but in the same sense you could send 1 bitcoin 9 million times and get the same effect.

Bitcoins are a currency based of speculation , that's traded similar to a Stock and only holds the value that the people have in it.

To say Silk Road is the reason Bitcoin is holding it's value would be to say that every Bitcoin user uses drugs and previously bought drugs on Silk Road


Bitcoins are worth what we the people believe them to be worth.

To suggest 1 btc was traded on the silk road 9 million times is ridiculous but I get your point, although I still disagree with it.  In any Econ 101 class one of the first things you learn is trade is the foundations of any economy and hence currency.  Even backed currencies are limited in value when not suspended in a medium of healthy trade.  As you said btc is a currency of speculation, in fact PURE speculation.  BTC is limited even by it's rate of production isn't limited by even a rate of production, it's not just code and encryption.  The value created by trade isn't a linear relationship its exponential and even if more conservative number would assign 40% of transaction on the silk road this would be the equivalent of 40% of US businesses disappearing overnight.  The crippling effects of losing the SR are compounded by the exact reason you state, btc is a speculative economy and lately speculation is largely negative.  People will believe bitcoin is worth less without a marketplace to fill the void SR left.  Not every btc user has to use drugs in order for the market to recognize the volume of trade created by SR.  That's like suggestion every American has to own a fighter jet to recognize the volume of trade created by lockhead martin.

The media , The Bitcoin Community , The Shills and The Trolls need to stop spreading panic and fear for no reason what so ever...

Stop assuming that the Bitcoin price is going to crash and also stop assuming that the only viable use for Bitcoins is the value it has in USD

Like I said, I wouldn't say 75% loss of trade volume is nothing but thats a difference of opinion.  People speculating the decline of btc doesn't necessarily has everything to do with its value next to USD.  People speculate the decline of USD but thats not because they feel like they'll be able to buy less Yen.  Comparison to other currencies is a valuable metric for determining their future ability to trade said currency for goods and services.  In this case many bitcointalk users are American and therefore use their most convenient metric, USD.

You don't own your Bitcoins just as you don't own your FIAT currency the difference is Bitcoin is worth what the people say it is not The Federal Reserve...

I never suggested USD was more stable, or I had more control over its value or really anything about USD at all.  As you said:

To assume you make an ass out of u and me

I've corrected your miss information.

I apologize if you take offense to being wrong but you are...

[j68r]

BTC isn't limited by even a rate of production, its just code and encryption.

So not the same btc everyone else is mining/using then?

[cryptoanarchist]

No matter what side of casual drug use you fall on, Silk Roads closure was good for the public's perception of Bitcoin. Public interest has also increased.

http://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=Bitcoin#q=%22silk%20road%22%2C%20Bitcoin&cmpt=q

I can only roll my eyes at people who speak of "public perception". Not only are they worried about something that doesn't matter, they really don't know what the masses think anyway.

[tarmi]

To suggest 1 btc was traded on the silk road 9 million times is ridiculous but I get your point, although I still disagree with it.  In any Econ 101 class one of the first things you learn is trade is the foundations of any economy and hence currency.  Even backed currencies are limited in value when not suspended in a medium of healthy trade.  As you said btc is a currency of speculation, in fact PURE speculation.  BTC isn't limited by even a rate of production, its just code and encryption.  The value created by trade isn't a linear relationship its exponential and even if more conservative number would assign 40% of transaction on the silk road this would be the equivalent of 40% of US businesses disappearing overnight.  The crippling effects of losing the SR are compounded by the exact reason you state, btc is a speculative economy and lately speculation is largely negative.  People will believe bitcoin is worth less without a marketplace to fill the void SR left.  Not every btc user has to use drugs in order for the market to recognize the volume of trade created by SR.  That's like suggestion every American has to own a fighter jet to recognize the volume of trade created by lockhead martin.

thank you for pointing out the obvious.

no SR - > less btc trades - > btc value going down

[CrazyRabbi]

To suggest 1 btc was traded on the silk road 9 million times is ridiculous but I get your point, although I still disagree with it.  In any Econ 101 class one of the first things you learn is trade is the foundations of any economy and hence currency.  Even backed currencies are limited in value when not suspended in a medium of healthy trade.  As you said btc is a currency of speculation, in fact PURE speculation.  BTC isn't limited by even a rate of production, its just code and encryption.  The value created by trade isn't a linear relationship its exponential and even if more conservative number would assign 40% of transaction on the silk road this would be the equivalent of 40% of US businesses disappearing overnight.  The crippling effects of losing the SR are compounded by the exact reason you state, btc is a speculative economy and lately speculation is largely negative.  People will believe bitcoin is worth less without a marketplace to fill the void SR left.  Not every btc user has to use drugs in order for the market to recognize the volume of trade created by SR.  That's like suggestion every American has to own a fighter jet to recognize the volume of trade created by lockhead martin.

thank you for pointing out the obvious.

no SR - > less btc trades - > btc value going down

lulz...

So why is the Bitcoin price up by $20 then?

[alpha492]

thank you for pointing out the obvious.

no SR - > less btc trades - > btc value going down

If you read who I was responding to, pointing out the obvious seemed necessary.

[j68r]

No matter what side of casual drug use you fall on, Silk Roads closure was good for the public's perception of Bitcoin. Public interest has also increased.

http://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=Bitcoin#q=%22silk%20road%22%2C%20Bitcoin&cmpt=q

I can only roll my eyes at people who speak of "public perception". Not only are they worried about something that doesn't matter, they really don't know what the masses think anyway.

OK, but bitcoin was being tarred with that SR brush by those in the media who, for what ever reason had taken it on themselves to portray btc in that light and I think we can agree, or I would certainly hope, that public perception is very much influenced by media, particularly the lobotomising mainstream media.

That SR has been removed from the equation means that over time, the slur that was being used against btc as a legitimate currency will look increasingly ridiculous for those deriding btc in such a way. Obviously that doesn't mean btc can no longer be used to facilitate criminal exchange any less than filthy corrupt fiat can be also, but it's good that a lazy SR association used against btc has been removed in my opinion.

[boozer]

Positive. Now all the myths of SR being the backbone of BTC are now debunked.

Agreed

[CrazyRabbi]

thank you for pointing out the obvious.

no SR - > less btc trades - > btc value going down

If you read who I was responding to, pointing out the obvious seemed necessary.

Ohh I'm sorry dude good one bud (It's early )

[tarmi]

lulz...

So why is the Bitcoin price up by $20 then?

Economic value is not the same as market price.

[CrazyRabbi]

lulz...

So why is the Bitcoin price up by $20 then?

Economic value is not the same as market price.

Market price is set by We the people...

What part of the currency is based off whatever value WE put on it don't you get?

[george51]

I see Silk Road's closure as a good thing. Silk Road was perhaps the one Tor site known to many people and it was known for two things: facilitating drug deals and using bitcoins to do it. This is how the two became inextricably linked in many people's view just as people were starting to hear about bitcoin. Sure, there will be another site to take Silk Road's place, if there isn't one already up and running, but to be rid of the most obvious such site can only help to improve bitcoin's image.

I agree with this. There is a slightly greater chance of bitcoin going mainstream without the negative connotations that the SR gave it. More people will benefit in the long run from this than benefited from the SR

[tarmi]

Market price is set by We the people...

What part of the currency is based off whatever value WE put on it don't you get?

market price is set by market, obviously.

and you are obviously long on bitcoin.

[b!z]

Positive. I've seen some people who were scared of BTC because they thought it was illegal, or only used for illegal transactions.

[CrazyRabbi]

Market price is set by We the people...

What part of the currency is based off whatever value WE put on it don't you get?

market price is set by market, obviously.

and you are obviously long on bitcoin.

Umm...

A market doesn't run without people...

I think you don't understand Bitcoin at all dude...

[tarmi]

A market doesn't run without people...

what are bots for?

[CrazyRabbi]

A market doesn't run without people...

what are bots for?

Bots are just for buying and selling at the price other people are willing to pay for Bitcoins at...

When I say WE THE PEOPLE I mean more then one person

[SolidSnke]

The end result is things like this legitimize bitcoins as a currency.

Whether good or bad ... more exposure help make people aware of something they may not have seen before.

Buy a computer, rent a webserver, or buy drugs, it all helps reinforce that bitcoins is becoming a currency of the online age.

[CrazyRabbi]

Positive. I've seen some people who were scared of BTC because they thought it was illegal, or only used for illegal transactions.

I am scared because SR is down and ASIC market is oversaturated...

so, what are bitcoins used for lately? bot wars on markets?

Man I mean absolutely no offense but bitcoins have absolutely endless amounts of other things you can purchase with them.

Please stop thinking Silk Road is the only thing you can use with Bitcoins and the reason Bitcoins hold a value.

Check this Wikipedia page and keep in mind this is just a tiny fraction of the things you can do with Bitcoins

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade

[cryptasm]

Only positive I can see is that it's opened up the market for more silkroad alternatives, thus more competition and better deals for the customers. People can learn from the mistakes/sacrifice of DPR and we can mock the FBI for their epic failure in trying to control the online drug trade  

[tarmi]

Bots are just for buying and selling at the price other people are willing to pay for Bitcoins at...

When I say WE THE PEOPLE I mean more then one person

you are suggesting that we all are ready to pay 120 $ for a bitcoin.

that is not true.

[CrazyRabbi]

Only positive I can see is that it's opened up the market for more silkroad alternatives, thus more competition and better deals for the customers. People can learn from the mistakes/sacrifice of DPR and we can mock the FBI for their epic failure in trying to control the online drug trade  

Why do we need an online drug trade for Bitcoin?

Why not just have one for Novacoin...

All the druggies can buy their drugs with a dirty cryptocurrency considering they are dirty drug addicts...

[CrazyRabbi]

Bots are just for buying and selling at the price other people are willing to pay for Bitcoins at...

When I say WE THE PEOPLE I mean more then one person

you are suggesting that we all are ready to pay 120 $ for a bitcoin.

that is not true.

I am not...

I'm suggesting SOMEONE is...

[darkmule]

Check this Wikipedia page and keep in mind this is just a tiny fraction of the things you can do with Bitcoins

The real question is what can you do with cash?  While I suppose you can't roll up a Bitcoin and snort cocaine with it, you can buy the cocaine with it.  Just like cash.  I think it is actually worse than cash for illegal purposes because of its non-repudiability, and actually less anonymous than cash for the same reason.  That's partly why it's galling for it to be linked to illegal activity, tax evasion and money laundering when nothing could be further from the truth.

Some have used it for those purposes, but it is actually not particularly well-suited to them.  It is actually better for legal economic activities than many of the fiat alternatives, especially for international trade where it can bypass currency exchanges and act as a universal currency.

If a vendor in Iran wants to sell a rug to someone in France, they can set a BTC price and it can be paid by anyone anywhere.  Neither the buyer nor the vendor have to know anything about the exchange rate or even know what currency the other country uses.

[MerchantMiner]

i believe that the silkroad closure is a GOOD thing in the long run although loosing over 600k bitcoins to the feds is a really BAD thing , i would support a movement for the fbi to sell the coins back into circulation so they can help bitcoin move forward and not reduce the coins by 5% . saying that the sale of over 600k coins would drop the price massively and again we would all suffer that for a month or 2 until the price rose again , im invested in bitcoin so im here until the system is no more!!!

FBI SELL THE COINS BACK

[tarmi]

I am not...

I'm suggesting SOMEONE is...

some were eager to buy it at 266 $.

that doesnt mean anything.

[CrazyRabbi]

Check this Wikipedia page and keep in mind this is just a tiny fraction of the things you can do with Bitcoins

The real question is what can you do with cash?  While I suppose you can't roll up a Bitcoin and snort cocaine with it, you can buy the cocaine with it.  Just like cash.  I think it is actually worse than cash for illegal purposes because of its non-repudiability, and actually less anonymous than cash for the same reason.  That's partly why it's galling for it to be linked to illegal activity, tax evasion and money laundering when nothing could be further from the truth.

Some have used it for those purposes, but it is actually not particularly well-suited to them.  It is actually better for legal economic activities than many of the fiat alternatives, especially for international trade where it can bypass currency exchanges and act as a universal currency.

If a vendor in Iran wants to sell a rug to someone in France, they can set a BTC price and it can be paid by anyone anywhere.  Neither the buyer nor the vendor have to know anything about the exchange rate or even know what currency the other country uses.

I agree with you on this %100 and the possibilities with Bitcoins are endless. Bitcoin to me is just the starting stones on an endless amount of evolution. It's not IF it will evolve it's WHEN and by how much. Personally I am in it for the long run and Bitcoin has opened up the door to me for countless amounts of good things. It has a long future and has been through alot and over time it just gets stronger. At the current time I don't believe you can kill Bitcoin (Unless you have major money to waste and a planned %51 attack). Bitcoin has proven resilient to nearly every crash. What doesn't kill Bitcoin just makes it stronger and I can't wait to see what happens.

[MerchantMiner]

i would like to use bit coins for :

1) Paying Rent
2) Paying Electric & Gas
3) Paying for Grocery's
4) Paying for Games & In Game Content
5) telling the Bank to FUCK OFF with their slave paper and Credit (DEBT)

This is why i do Mining

[CrazyRabbi]

I am not...

I'm suggesting SOMEONE is...

some were eager to buy it at 266 $.

that doesnt mean anything.

I really don't get your point...

I've proven to you several times Bitcoins are what WE the people find them to be worth and saying people are buying them at $266 proves exactly that...

I'm not sure what it doesn't mean it clearly means it's worth whatever YOU/WE the people think it is...

[SolidSnke]

i would like to use bit coins for :

1) Paying Rent
2) Paying Electric & Gas
3) Paying for Grocery's
4) Paying for Games & In Game Content
5) telling the Bank to FUCK OFF with their slave paper and Credit (DEBT)

This is why i do Mining

Agreed!

[ralree]

I think it's a good thing.  Something will take its place anyway, and hopefully someone who doesn't engage in contract murder will run it.

[RodeoX]

Of course it's positive.
If you don't like the drug laws in the U.S. then get out of your mom's basement and do something about it. Bitcoin is not the nanny you have been waiting for to end social ills. It is a payment system. You are still going to have to fight for your rights one at a time. Bitcoin is also not going to be a tax free anomaly, different from all other appreciating assets. Again, if you don't like the tax laws, write your congressman and stop wasting your time posting here.
The future of bitcoin will be shaped by those who reach out to regulators and businesses, not by those who type with Caps Lock on.  

[rwfreshmore]

Very Very negative. The community will lose a great number of users if no one steps into fill the gap. BitCoin is all about Anarchy, Freedom and anonymity. I can't believe people in the Bitcoin community are saying this is a positive thing. I think Obama libtards have finally infiltrated the community. Sad sad day this is

It is sad. It's going to get much worse. Bitcoin is the basis of a one world borderless digital currency. Regulation and identity will happen in meatspace by the same people running that now on top of the US dollar. I can't even be bothered arguing this anymore. It's so completely obvious that only the delusional and misinformed would bother debating it. Greed will have people registering their coins and btc addresses in the long run.

Black markets will always exist for outliers and subversives.

[rwfreshmore]

Very Very negative. The community will lose a great number of users if no one steps into fill the gap. BitCoin is all about Anarchy, Freedom and anonymity. I can't believe people in the Bitcoin community are saying this is a positive thing. I think Obama libtards have finally infiltrated the community. Sad sad day this is

It is sad. It's going to get much worse. Bitcoin is the basis of a one world borderless digital currency. Regulation and identity will happen in meatspace by the same people running that now on top of the US dollar. I can't even be bothered arguing this anymore. It's so completely obvious that only the delusional and misinformed would bother debating it. Greed will have people registering their coins and btc addresses in the long run.

Black markets will always exist for outliers and subversives.

Apply your palm to your face you'll feel much better...

I feel great. I think anyone who doesn't accept this is the future of a widely adopted bitcoin is just prolonging the inevitable disappointment. The time of pushing the Satoshi fairytale as a means to promote adoption amongst the anti-central banking crowd is over. You can stop. Bitcoin adoption is happening because people with actual money understand what it is and why authoritarians love it. Can't be counterfeited, management offloaded to users, completely trackable once services are offered that require identity. As the "legitimate" market matures the price will rise and that rise in price will pull early adopters and developers into the legitimate market because of greed. Anonymous transactions will be left to the authorities and an ever shrinking black market.

[darkmule]

Anonymous transactions will be left to the authorities and an ever shrinking black market.

That surely hasn't happened in the real world with fiat money, and it seems unlikely to happen with Bitcoin either.  There will always be black markets in any functioning currency.

[buysellbitcoin]

Very positive.

Regards

[j68r]

Anarchy:a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.Now lets move on.

Anarchy actually means "without rulers". That's it.

Somehow the definition has been expanded to include chaos. Who would benefit from this inclusion? I can only think of one group.

Exactly, the same group that fear real democracy and real free markets, and somewhat paradoxically the same group that never stops bleating on about how they uphold those things. Of course you need to exert total power and control over everyone in order to provide them, isn't that right...

[dank]

Very Very negative. The community will lose a great number of users if no one steps into fill the gap. BitCoin is all about Anarchy, Freedom and anonymity. I can't believe people in the Bitcoin community are saying this is a positive thing. I think Obama libtards have finally infiltrated the community. Sad sad day this is

What she said.

People deserve safe access to their medicine, no matter how fucked up their laws are.  Since when is it up to somebody other than me to chose what goes in my body?  Guess that right was lost a while ago.

Silk Road is a market place of freedom and showed just how viably society can function without some dictating body in place.

[vpitcher07]

For worldwide adoption, very positive. For liberty and freedom, very negative. Bitcoin can't be viewed as the currency "to buy drugs with" even if it's not anymore true than fiat currency if you're expecting world wide adoption.

[darkmule]

Silk Road is a market place of freedom and showed just how viably society can function without some dictating body in place.

With liberty and hitmen for all who piss me off!

How dare dat eebil gummint tell me I can't administer a harmless dose of lead to whoever gets in the way of my profits?

[darkmule]

The initial aggressor is the group which outlaws mutual voluntary trade of various goods in order to line their own pockets. Everything following that initial aggression is cause and effect.

So if I somehow pissed off DPR and he had me murdered, that wouldn't be his fault.  It would be the fault of some random other guy.  Okay.  Got it.

[lucasjkr]

Question:

I know there were tumblers for moving money in and out of sr, but what about transactions within sr? Did they occur on the block chain? Or was it done by recording transfers internally until such point as a withdrawal request could be made?

If it's the first, I could imagine a detrimental impact on bitcoin, in that a sizable number of transactions are not going to be occurring any longer, and all those transactions aided in price discovery.
That can easily be made up for with more transactions elsewhere in the block chain, but it seems like dpr might have been the single largest owner of bitcoins and silkroad might have dwarfed every other site but mtgox interms of how many transactions were occurring on the block chain. Certainly that'll cause some form of impact ?

I mean, some might say that dpr's large stash can be discounted out if the market cap, considered "lost ". But we can't do that because who knows, maybe someone else has control of them already? Or maybe after trials over, he'll be able to relay a method of access so that someone can retrieve them.

[mises]

600k BTC? That's like a real life Heisenberg

[desired_username]

I find it positive because many more sites will appear. In the end even the last idiot will acknowledge that "war on drugs" is idiotic and highly illogical and all substances will be decriminalized.

When we look back, there will be a line that bitcoin helped to achieve this and ultimately better our civilization.

Do not forget that the governments create black trade and probably they profit from it the best. This profit could go to better the lives of the very people governments INTENDED to serve.

[illpoet]

i find it to be a positive thing because it did show that bitcoin doesn't need silk road to be valuable. it also shows that the fbi can shut down one site and stop very little.  the most positive thing in my opinion tho is i have some new entertainment looking at blockchain.info

[redtwitz]

Definitely not negative.

The people I've talked to about Bitcoins fit in two categories:

1. Those that never heard of Bitcoins.
2. Those that knew Bitcoins could be used to purchase drugs.

Bitcoins mean something else for every person. For anarchists, criminals and drug users, it means an anonymous (or at least pseudonymous) way of making purchases. For others (me included), it means a way to store and spend money that doesn't depend on the good will of governments, banks and services like PayPal (which just decided that I can't use my account to make eBay purchases, since I don't live in the same country as my shipping address).

So, if Silk Road's closure will have an impact depends on whether it gets replaced by a similar market. If it does, the will be no long-term impact. If it doesn't, it will be positive.

[TheButterZone]

lulz...

So why is the Bitcoin price up by $20 then?

Depends on when/where your goalpost is set.

At MtGox the day before the SR shutdown, the price was hovering just over $140 USD. The day of the shutdown, IIRC it dropped to around $110.

Today's USD low is $135.12, high $139.

"Up by $20", to me, would mean the price is just over $160 USD.

[cryptoanarchist]

No matter what side of casual drug use you fall on, Silk Roads closure was good for the public's perception of Bitcoin. Public interest has also increased.

http://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=Bitcoin#q=%22silk%20road%22%2C%20Bitcoin&cmpt=q

I can only roll my eyes at people who speak of "public perception". Not only are they worried about something that doesn't matter, they really don't know what the masses think anyway.

OK, but bitcoin was being tarred with that SR brush by those in the media who, for what ever reason had taken it on themselves to portray btc in that light and I think we can agree, or I would certainly hope, that public perception is very much influenced by media, particularly the lobotomising mainstream media.

That SR has been removed from the equation means that over time, the slur that was being used against btc as a legitimate currency will look increasingly ridiculous for those deriding btc in such a way. Obviously that doesn't mean btc can no longer be used to facilitate criminal exchange any less than filthy corrupt fiat can be also, but it's good that a lazy SR association used against btc has been removed in my opinion.

Again..caring about how the lamestream media portrays something is downright stupid. Especially something that threatens the powers that be like bitcoin does. I would be more worried if the media DIDN'T portray bitcoin in a bad light.

[galbros]

I voted negative but am impressed with how the BTC price has held up.  While I agree silk road linked BTC to drugs it was clearly a popular spot and did decent volume of BTC transactions.  IF second generation sites come to replace it then maybe not a big deal, but clearly not good.

[BitChick]

I would think highly positive.  As a person who was very hesitant to buy any BTC early on because of the concern of it being connected to nefarious purposes, this is great.  I am quite relieved, honestly.

And the fact that the price has remained relatively stable in spite of it?  I would have never guessed that could even happen.  So far it is a great thing.

[darkmule]

I think it's good in the same sense Napster going down was good.  It clears the way for a less vulnerable architecture.  While I do not approve of what DPR did, I do in general approve of anonymous marketplaces, whether or not they are used for illegal as well as legal purposes.

[bernard75]

Too lazy to write:
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/how-the-silk-road-shutdown-makes-everyone-less-safe

[LiteCoinGuy]

Too lazy to write:

Beware turning drug dealers into folk heroes

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/hugorifkind/article3889234.ece

a hero is snowden (or maybe satoshi) but no drug-dealer.

[darkmule]

Too lazy to write:

Beware turning drug dealers into folk heroes

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/hugorifkind/article3889234.ece

a hero is snowden (or maybe satoshi) but no drug-dealer.

Article hidden behind bullshit paywall.

[Carlton Banks]

Positive:

1. Parents can breathe easy now that their kids can't get LSD posted to them from Amsterdam. Drug prohibition used to have a mechanistic benefit there, as most drug dealers know little kids have to be initiated into the "keep mouth shut" culture before they'll risk selling higher scheduled drugs to them.

2. High profile "drug market busted" puts the emphasis on Russ Ulbrect and not our beloved Bitcoin.

3. Price dive was reactionary, small and inconsequential.


Neutral:

At least two new sites are already taking Silk Roads place. Kind of overrides positive no. 1.


Negative:

No negatives from any perspective, seemingly. If you want to buy drugs online, you still can. If you wanted to brush off the stink of the underworld, you now can.

[bernard75]

1. Parents can breathe easy now that their kids can't get LSD posted to them from Amsterdam. Drug prohibition used to have a mechanistic benefit there, as most drug dealers know little kids have to be initiated into the "keep mouth shut" culture before they'll risk selling higher scheduled drugs to them.

Yes Carlton, everybody who ever used drugs are innocent children, who are indoctrinated to use Heroin and Crack. Law enforcement, the saviors of the world, should also crack down on any means of preserving privacy, because its just drug dealers and pedobears out there.

[dadach]

is this question for real? dumbest question ever...

[ronimacarroni]

Bitcoins becoming a regular currency is more important than drugs.
So I voted positive.

[foggyb]

Very Very negative. The community will lose a great number of users if no one steps into fill the gap. BitCoin is all about Anarchy, Freedom and anonymity. I can't believe people in the Bitcoin community are saying this is a positive thing. I think Obama libtards have finally infiltrated the community. Sad sad day this is

Freedom is the opposite of anarchy. Freedom means everything is permitted. But not everything is beneficial. Freedom is the right and the opportunity to make correct choices.

Anarchy is the absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose. Drug abusers come to mind instantly.

[Carlton Banks]

1. Parents can breathe easy now that their kids can't get LSD posted to them from Amsterdam. Drug prohibition used to have a mechanistic benefit there, as most drug dealers know little kids have to be initiated into the "keep mouth shut" culture before they'll risk selling higher scheduled drugs to them.

Yes Carlton, everybody who ever used drugs are innocent children, who are indoctrinated to use Heroin and Crack. Law enforcement, the saviors of the world, should also crack down on any means of preserving privacy, because its just drug dealers and pedobears out there.

This isn't what I intended...

I support people who are capable of using drugs responsibly. They should not be criminalised, it's immoral. What I'm leading to is that the online agora approach takes alot of restraint away from the buyer, and that's why I used the LSD example. It's difficult to imagine a teenager saying "what the hell, may as well have a try of the top line opium", but maybe they wouldn't be so cautious as to avoid strong psychedelics, and that could turn out to be a really negative experience if they're not mindful of what the risks are.

I remember some younger kids at a party a year ago procuring amphetamines, then proceeding to ask about as to how to take it etc (it was all pasty and gluey, us older guys were as non-plussed as they were). When it didn't hit them over an hour later, they all started wanting to take more of the stuff, claiming they can't have taken enough. One of them warned the others off, saying to be patient as it was working out for him. The rest did more, and regretted it very quickly.

Some drugs just aren't responsible full stop, I don't think there's such thing as a responsible crack user, that stuff was engineered to destroy a person's will. If governments banned stuff that makes sense to ban, I'd support that. But not weed and psychedelics, they're no worse than alcohol in the damage they can do, and they're arguably more positive experiences than alcohol, too.

[Aseras]

SR going down was cutting the head off a hydra. At least 5 more have sprung up. Now they won't be lax about security. The US Govt decided to get cheap press and a easy kill, rather than mine it long term. They just fired a shot in the dark, got lucky and all the other game in the area made a run for it and knows better now.

Its like trapping pigs. you dont shoot or trap the first one you see. Otherwise they all learn they teach the kids and you never catch one again.

You setup a HUGE ASS trap. feed them all for weeks nice and fat get them comfortable and then nail the whole thing in one shot.

Sometimes the govt does this. usually they blow it.

Most of the time the idiots are the ones getting caught for obvious setups.

[xkeyscore89]

Negative.

[MagicBit15]

Positive a million times over. So happy it collapse, and bitcoin didn't. Really shows the integrity of the currency and it's use for other things POST black market. 

[darkmule]

Because established currencies like USD are never, ever used in black markets.

[skull88]

negative

Closing silk road won't stop black markets selling drugs for bitcoins, so if someone wants to link it with drugs, they will always find an example, a non-argument imo to think this is positive.
Furthermore I think all drugs should be legal, it's nobody's right to tell another person what he can use or can't use. And I actually don't sell drugs or use any besides from time to time the legal ones (alcohol, tobacco and weed). So even if it isn't useful for me, it is for others and thanks to silk road's rating system, people knew that they had something good. And not some garbage that could kill them from a shady dealer on the street.

[viboracecata]

No impact, only 26000 bitcoins frozen, in this community seems many people have bitcoins more than 20000 according to a poll result.

Even if I didn't know were they just joking on that poll.

[Timo Y]

You don't need a centralized website to do achieve what Silk Road achieved.

Apart from Bitcoin and Tor, all you need is:

1) A secure p2p messaging system
2) A p2p identity management and rating system
3) A p2p data store for storing pictures etc.
4) A distributed escrow system


All those things already exist to some extent.

1) can be achieved by Bitmessage.
2) can be achieved by a combination of Namecoin and PGP web of trust.
3) can be achieved by Freenet, Bittorrent, Rapidshare etc.
4) can be achieved by multisig transactions in combination with 2)

Now it's only a matter of packaging those building blocks into a user friendly application. Sooner or later someone is going to do it.

We have reached an age where online black markets are pretty much inevitable, so we may as well stop worrying and learn to live with them.

[justusranvier]

Now it's only a matter of packaging those building blocks into a user friendly application. Sooner or later someone is going to do it.

I think the right approach is to build protocols and software that allow anyone to create any kind of marketplace they want and link them together into a searchable distributed database.

Not every user of such a platform would make online black markets, but if it were designed properly it wouldn't be possible to stop anyone who wanted to.

[darkmule]

Not every user of such a platform would make online black markets, but if it were designed properly it wouldn't be possible to stop anyone who wanted to.

Why DPR is in trouble is not that he designed a website, but that he personally and directly facilitated illegal black market activity, publicly promoted it under his name, making it clear that this was his intention, and directly took a commission from activity he made it very clear he knew was illegal, and was illegal on purpose.

Someone who designed a p2p system that allowed the creation of online markets and either remained mum on their intentions or, for that matter, actually had no intention but to create an anonymous online market, would have much less chance of running afoul of the law.

DPR's bust (whether or not it is legit) has done one good thing, and that is to provide an example of how not to do it.  I.e. a centralized market under the control of a megalomaniacal ideologue who, moreover, directly participated in illegal activity himself and profited vastly from it.

[j68r]

Not every user of such a platform would make online black markets, but if it were designed properly it wouldn't be possible to stop anyone who wanted to.

Why DPR is in trouble is not that he designed a website, but that he personally and directly facilitated illegal black market activity, publicly promoted it under his name, making it clear that this was his intention, and directly took a commission from activity he made it very clear he knew was illegal, and was illegal on purpose.

Someone who designed a p2p system that allowed the creation of online markets and either remained mum on their intentions or, for that matter, actually had no intention but to create an anonymous online market, would have much less chance of running afoul of the law.

DPR's bust (whether or not it is legit) has done one good thing, and that is to provide an example of how not to do it.  I.e. a centralized market under the control of a megalomaniacal ideologue who, moreover, directly participated in illegal activity himself and profited vastly from it.

That's fair comment, I don't see how anyone can really dispute that unless you're in the anti establishment, all else is forgiven, folk hero camp. In the final analysis whatever happens to him is largely self inflicted.

That said I do not support the false wars on some drugs and some terror, which in truth, are really about attacking what little freedom and liberty is left. All they really achieve is a tightening and extending of the power and control the structures of the state possess over everyone's life.

What we need is someone to beat them at their own game but that game is bent and that's where they have the advantage, the crooks are in charge and free thinking people need to figure out some way to get back what has been taken away from them by the banksters on wall street and their captured government puppets.

[hayek]

It's not a black and white issue.

It's good because it shows that the bitcoin economy is not relying on SR.

It's bad because it shows that tyrants gunna tyrant. It's also bad that this had to happen for us to find out the economy doesn't rely on SR.

[Carlton Banks]

DPR's bust (whether or not it is legit) has done one good thing, and that is to provide an example of how not to do it.  I.e. a centralized market under the control of a megalomaniacal ideologue who, moreover, directly participated in illegal activity himself and profited vastly from it.

To be fair to him, he got one aspect totally right, and that was to attempt to operate as an anonymous lone wolf. I don't think anyone could successfully pull it off with other people knowing your identity, unless it was sponsored by a powerful government.

He ended up having to channel his own knowledge of what he'd achieved, precarious as it always was given his early "OpSec" mistakes. He just couldn't help talking about it all, even if it was under the guise of a latter-day pirate. Writing a stream of full blown confessions, and changing nothing but your real name is not a great way to be a cyber drug kingpin, well, long term at least.

[darkmule]

He ended up having to channel his own knowledge of what he'd achieved, precarious as it always was given his early "OpSec" mistakes. He just couldn't help talking about it all, even if it was under the guise of a latter-day pirate. Writing a stream of full blown confessions, and changing nothing but your real name is not a great way to be a cyber drug kingpin, well, long term at least.

If your sole security against capture and prosecution is anonymity, you'd best get that part of it right.  And if you're going to do that and make voluminous public statements, they'd best not be in exact accordance with things you have said under your real name.  The Unabomber got caught largely because he insisted on publishing a manifesto, which his brother recognized as being in his writing style.  Otherwise, he probably would have remained a free man indefinitely.

DPR not only made voluminous public statements on the Internet as DPR, but had made very similar statements under his real name, also to the Internet.  That combined with more blatant errors, like using an email address that actually consisted entirely of his real name and gmail, made his discovery inevitable.

[bernard75]

This might be the real DPR(or rather simply SR), but certainly not the current owner.
There have been between 2-5 owners since the Gawker article.

[tvbcof]

...
DPR not only made voluminous public statements on the Internet as DPR, but had made very similar statements under his real name, also to the Internet.  That combined with more blatant errors, like using an email address that actually consisted entirely of his real name and gmail, made his discovery inevitable.

I imagine that FBI and associates had to try fairly hard for some time to NOT catch him.  I'll wager that the calculus was that he was doing no particular harm and bringing in a lot of leads while SR was in operation.  And I suppose that the primary focus of their efforts was to get a hold of the private keys controlling his stash and figuring out who else he might be working with directly.  Probably he was making progress toward vanishing is why they eventually pulled the plug.

[cryptasm]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2013/10/09/living-with-ross-ulbricht-housemates-say-they-saw-no-clues-of-silk-road-or-the-dread-pirate-roberts/

[redtwitz]

Housemates Say They Saw No Clues Of Silk Road Or The Dread Pirate Roberts

I'm not sure what they expected. A T-Shirt?

[imrer]

It's great. Another challenge we passed. I was worried that bitcoin economy is working only due to black market but now it's ok because even if that was true, nobody can destroy it -> stable price.

[tearfereon]

It's great. Another challenge we passed. I was worried that bitcoin economy is working only due to black market but now it's ok because even if that was true, nobody can destroy it -> stable price.

This

I was nicely surprised the price recovered soooo fast

[darkmule]

Anarchy is the absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.

Anarchy actually means "without rulers". That's it.

That's not what it's meant throughout its history as a word in the English language.  In fact, the word having any positive connotations at all is a novelty.

[shuttleclock]

Should be positive in a long run.
As for now, at least more people come to realize in the existence of Bitcoin.. although they may consider Bitcoin as "currency mostly for buying drugs". Well, I hope they will eventually google it to be informed better.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2013/10/09/living-with-ross-ulbricht-housemates-say-they-saw-no-clues-of-silk-road-or-the-dread-pirate-roberts/

Lol, I guess it's not like he will brags to anyone about being a mastermind of one of the biggest drug market 

[Operatr]

I think ultimately it's a good thing. The SR closure has dispelled the notion that Bitcoin is only a thing because of the drug market, and the wide spread coverage of this story has seemed to be fairly neutral of Bitcoin. The market certainly did react with a little sell off, but historically is negligible.  Hopefully this leads to a better perception of Bitcoin as an authentic currency, and that its prominence is not driven solely by the Internet black market as was once believed. It was an important moment that Bitcoin is holding steady after Silk Road went down.

Plus, Dread Pirate Roberts was an idiot of the highest caliber and is the sole reason for Silk Roads downfall. He only got busted because he made a bunch of careless mistakes easily tracked by the FBI. The technology that drove Silk Road however works perfectly, and SRs closure was not the result of the FBI breaking TOR or Bitcoin security, but simple police work accomplished with a few warrants and basic deductive reasoning.

There are already several copycat sites in the works to replace SR, and I doubt they will be as careless as DPR. The FBI "victory" will be short lived.

[Coingrounds]

I think when people saw the price change wasn't that drastic post SR... that's a good thing. I've often heard speculators say how black market transactions contribute to the majority of the BTC ecosystem.

[darkmule]

Of course, rulers don't want you to know that you don't need them! Language is a powerful tool. Adding chaos to the definition of anarchy implies, anytime the word is used, that people need rulers. A simple change has a drastic effect. Anyone claiming to be an anarchist is a lunatic who wants to tear down civilization!

It was never "added."  It was essentially the original definition.  While all it means, literally, is "absence of government," the negative connotations have been there since at least 1539.

   1539 Taverner Erasm. Prov. (1552) 43 This unleful lyberty or lycence of the multytude is called an Anarchie.    1605 Bacon Adv. Learn. ii. xxiii. §36 (1873) 241 Pompey‥made it his design‥to cast the state into an absolute anarchy and confusion.    1664 H. More Myst. Iniq. 219 A Polity without an Head‥would not be a Polity, but Anarchy.    1796 Burke Corr. IV. 389 Except in cases of direct war, whenever government abandons law, it proclaims anarchy.    1840 Carlyle Heroes (1858) 277 Without sovereigns, true sovereigns, temporal and spiritual, I see nothing possible but an anarchy; the hatefullest of things.    1878 Lecky Eng. in 18th C. I. i. 12 William threatened at once to retire to Holland and leave the country to anarchy.

From the OED's usage list.

It is only very recently, as in the 20th Century, that the term has been appropriated and repackaged in a positive sense, with mixed success at best.

[hayek]

Of course, rulers don't want you to know that you don't need them! Language is a powerful tool. Adding chaos to the definition of anarchy implies, anytime the word is used, that people need rulers. A simple change has a drastic effect. Anyone claiming to be an anarchist is a lunatic who wants to tear down civilization!

It was never "added."  It was essentially the original definition.  While all it means, literally, is "absence of government," the negative connotations have been there since at least 1539.

  1539 Taverner Erasm. Prov. (1552) 43 This unleful lyberty or lycence of the multytude is called an Anarchie.    1605 Bacon Adv. Learn. ii. xxiii. §36 (1873) 241 Pompey‥made it his design‥to cast the state into an absolute anarchy and confusion.    1664 H. More Myst. Iniq. 219 A Polity without an Head‥would not be a Polity, but Anarchy.    1796 Burke Corr. IV. 389 Except in cases of direct war, whenever government abandons law, it proclaims anarchy.    1840 Carlyle Heroes (1858) 277 Without sovereigns, true sovereigns, temporal and spiritual, I see nothing possible but an anarchy; the hatefullest of things.    1878 Lecky Eng. in 18th C. I. i. 12 William threatened at once to retire to Holland and leave the country to anarchy.

From the OED's usage list.

It is only very recently, as in the 20th Century, that the term has been appropriated and repackaged in a positive sense, with mixed success at best.

Man do you know what etymology is?

https://www.google.com/search?q=etomology+anarchy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=fflb#channel=fflb&q=etymology+anarchy&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&spell=1

Read a book.

[Carlton Banks]

Of course, rulers don't want you to know that you don't need them! Language is a powerful tool. Adding chaos to the definition of anarchy implies, anytime the word is used, that people need rulers. A simple change has a drastic effect. Anyone claiming to be an anarchist is a lunatic who wants to tear down civilization!

It was never "added."  It was essentially the original definition.  While all it means, literally, is "absence of government," the negative connotations have been there since at least 1539.

   1539 Taverner Erasm. Prov. (1552) 43 This unleful lyberty or lycence of the multytude is called an Anarchie.    1605 Bacon Adv. Learn. ii. xxiii. §36 (1873) 241 Pompey‥made it his design‥to cast the state into an absolute anarchy and confusion.    1664 H. More Myst. Iniq. 219 A Polity without an Head‥would not be a Polity, but Anarchy.    1796 Burke Corr. IV. 389 Except in cases of direct war, whenever government abandons law, it proclaims anarchy.    1840 Carlyle Heroes (1858) 277 Without sovereigns, true sovereigns, temporal and spiritual, I see nothing possible but an anarchy; the hatefullest of things.    1878 Lecky Eng. in 18th C. I. i. 12 William threatened at once to retire to Holland and leave the country to anarchy.

From the OED's usage list.

It is only very recently, as in the 20th Century, that the term has been appropriated and repackaged in a positive sense, with mixed success at best.

Could it be possible that the early published definitions were themselves politicised? Old documents are not quite as good as the documentary evidence we can summon up from, say, the 20th century. It's not only the printing presses for money and coinage that were traditionally kept under tight control.

[darkmule]

Could it be possible that the early published definitions were themselves politicised? Old documents are not quite as good as the documentary evidence we can summon up from, say, the 20th century. It's not only the printing presses for money and coinage that were traditionally kept under tight control.

Perhaps, but the OED is generally pretty good at getting earlier usages of words, if not always at getting the very first use.  The examples from the OED generally reflect standard use of the time, not oddball uses that would have been out of the norm even then.

And to the idiot before you, of course I know what etymology is.  I also know what the ignore button is, and it's been used.  I was discussing usage, since that was being discussed, not etymology, since that wasn't.

[jbreher]

Of course, rulers don't want you to know that you don't need them! Language is a powerful tool. Adding chaos to the definition of anarchy implies, anytime the word is used, that people need rulers. A simple change has a drastic effect. Anyone claiming to be an anarchist is a lunatic who wants to tear down civilization!

It was never "added."  It was essentially the original definition.  While all it means, literally, is "absence of government," the negative connotations have been there since at least 1539.

   1539 Taverner Erasm. Prov. (1552) 43 This unleful lyberty or lycence of the multytude is called an Anarchie.    1605 Bacon Adv. Learn. ii. xxiii. §36 (1873) 241 Pompey‥made it his design‥to cast the state into an absolute anarchy and confusion.    1664 H. More Myst. Iniq. 219 A Polity without an Head‥would not be a Polity, but Anarchy.    1796 Burke Corr. IV. 389 Except in cases of direct war, whenever government abandons law, it proclaims anarchy.    1840 Carlyle Heroes (1858) 277 Without sovereigns, true sovereigns, temporal and spiritual, I see nothing possible but an anarchy; the hatefullest of things.    1878 Lecky Eng. in 18th C. I. i. 12 William threatened at once to retire to Holland and leave the country to anarchy.

From the OED's usage list.

It is only very recently, as in the 20th Century, that the term has been appropriated and repackaged in a positive sense, with mixed success at best.

I see very little in your quotes that would equate anarchy with chaos, death, doom , destruction, floods, plagues, locusts, dogs and cats sleeping together....

Let's examine them one by one, shall we?

   1539 Taverner Erasm. Prov. (1552) 43 This unleful lyberty or lycence of the multytude is called an Anarchie.

I suppose in today's vernacular, that would be 'unlawful liberty or license'. Yeah, so what? The condition of having no law that otherwise restricts it, is definitive of liberty. And as license is permission from so-called 'authority' to do something that would otherwise be unlawful, this makes sense - no 'authority', no license required. I still don't see dogs and cats sleeping together.

   1605 Bacon Adv. Learn. ii. xxiii. §36 (1873) 241 Pompey‥made it his design‥to cast the state into an absolute anarchy and confusion.   

If anarchy _was_ confusion by definition, it would not have to be called out separately, now would it? Further, as the USC runs tens of thousands of pages, and the CFR is many times that, there is no way any person could even begin to understand the totality of 'law' which might apply to them. I put forth the assertion that this is definitively confusion. I still don't see dogs and cats sleeping together.

  1664 H. More Myst. Iniq. 219 A Polity without an Head‥would not be a Polity, but Anarchy. 

Well, duh. No Head, no ruler. No ruler, an archis. Anarchy. mere definition - so what? I still don't see dogs and cats sleeping together.

    1796 Burke Corr. IV. 389 Except in cases of direct war, whenever government abandons law, it proclaims anarchy.  .

This seems a non sequitur. If there is a state of anarchy, there is no 'government', as we know the term. Or perhaps Burke is actually indicting government - merely pointing out that government uses the term 'anarchy' as a scapegoat do misdirect the public from understanding that it is the government's own actions that have brought calamity upon the populace. I still don't see dogs and cats sleeping together.

   1840 Carlyle Heroes (1858) 277 Without sovereigns, true sovereigns, temporal and spiritual, I see nothing possible but an anarchy; the hatefullest of things. 

There are two things here. The first is saying that 'the absence of true sovereigns necessitates anarchy'. There are further two replies to this first clause. The first of these replies is that this is a simple definition - assuming by 'sovereign', he means 'rulers'. The second reply to this first clause is that, under anarchy, one could consider each and every individual to be sovereign. If one adopts this definition, his statement does not make sense. To his second clause, he is merely rendering an unsupported opinion. I personally consider national socialism to be pretty damn hateful - but millions used to be adherents. Again, I still don't see dogs and cats sleeping together.

   1878 Lecky Eng. in 18th C. I. i. 12 William threatened at once to retire to Holland and leave the country to anarchy.

Again, merely the word used in its proper context. No king, no ruler, an archis, anarchy. I still don't see dogs and cats sleeping together.

While I grant that for much of my lifetime, much of the populace has equated 'anarchy' with the throwing of molotov cocktails, I see nothing in your quoted material that would indicate it was ever so.

[gnix72]

I don't care what society you live in, they all have laws and rules, the only anarchy you can have is the one you make for yourself.  Anything that facilitates commerce, freedom, and such while obeying laws and rules is good, anything that breaks laws and rules is bad.

Now...if we don't like some of those rules, well then we need to change them.  I'm no fan of over-regulation and micromanagement of our lives, but that's not bitcoin's fault, that's our fault for losing control of our governments, and we should fight hard to get that back.  But this is about bitcoin, as a long term means to that end in my view.  If we truly want bitcoin to succeed, and I think we do, then it has to be legitimate.  For it to be legitimate, it must be crime-resistant (nothing is crime proof) and must frown on exposed illegal activity.

I'm not for anarchy, but I'm certainly for a lot less government and a lot more freedom in our lives.  But again, that's not bitcoins fault that we let our government slip into a soft tyranny.  Hopefully when bitcoin becomes a mainstream currency, we will take at least two tools of government force away permanently, namely bad fiscal and bad monetary policy.

[Carlton Banks]

Could it be possible that the early published definitions were themselves politicised? Old documents are not quite as good as the documentary evidence we can summon up from, say, the 20th century. It's not only the printing presses for money and coinage that were traditionally kept under tight control.

Perhaps, but the OED is generally pretty good at getting earlier usages of words, if not always at getting the very first use.  The examples from the OED generally reflect standard use of the time, not oddball uses that would have been out of the norm even then.

Yes...... I'm not sure you've fully absorbed the point I was making. To paraphrase:

Could it be possible that the Oxford English Dictionary definitions were themselves politicised? It's not only the printing presses for money and coinage etc etc

[darkmule]

Could it be possible that the Oxford English Dictionary definitions were themselves politicised? It's not only the printing presses for money and coinage etc etc

These weren't definitions, but examples of usage, generally from well-regarded sources, i.e. people who could be expected to use words correctly.

The actual definition is neutral, as they usually are.

1. a.1.a Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder.

Of course, even here, it is defined using words which themselves generally have negative connotations, such as "lawlessness" and "disorder."  I would argue the first to attempt to carry out anarchistic political action, identifying it as such, would be certain of the French Revolutionaries, and the first serious attempt to put an intellectual foundation to it and explicitly endorse the term would be Bakunin (although other thinkers had of course contemplated the issue).

My point, and I am surprised it is even arousing any controversy whatsoever, is that through the vast majority of the history of the word, it has carried almost exclusively negative connotations, and even to this day, the majority of usage of the word is intended to refer to something negative.  The difference is that at least since Bakunin, there have always serious philosophical proponents of the concept, as distinguished from, say, teenage punk rockers using the anarchy symbol for shock value (not to say that punks have never had serious ideas).

[panck4beer]

I think when people saw the price change wasn't that drastic post SR... that's a good thing. I've often heard speculators say how black market transactions contribute to the majority of the BTC ecosystem.

Thats true, most fear Bitcoin is just for black market transactions. Feds made great service to Bitcoin adoption, so definitively positive news

[Welsh]

It's good. Even if it reduces the amount of people interested in Bitcoin. We should no longer be tainted by the market.

[darkmule]

It's good. Even if it reduces the amount of people interested in Bitcoin. We should no longer be tainted by the market.

If anything, I've seen a slight uptick in interest.  For that matter, even to get "Silk Road" as a "suggested" search term, I have to add an "s" after Bitcoin, and then it appears near the bottom.

[genjix]

Anarchy is the absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.

What? Who's going to help you survive without the daddy state to look after you? Lemme guess, you're going to run for the hills with your dog and your shotgun.

[cowandtea]

Negative, now people relate drugs to bitcoin...

[darkmule]

Negative, now people relate drugs to bitcoin...

People already did, largely because of Silk Road.  While I am by no means on the "oh noooo, drugs, horror!" bandwagon, that kind of thing is definitely an impediment to mainstream acceptance.  I think the fact that Bitcoin itself basically responded with a collective "meh" to shutting down Silk Road shows pretty clearly that Bitcoin and the drug trade are two separate things.

If the shutdown increased the perception that Bitcoin=drugs, there would have been a long-lasting decline in price as investors and users fled for the hills.  Nothing of the sort happened.

If Bitcoin being seen as related to drugs is a problem (though I think it is more neutral), then Silk Road actually being in operation contributed to that a lot more than it being shut down.

I don't think SR being shut down is a fantastic thing.  It disrupted a lot of economic activity, even if that activity was illegal.  It also, apparently, has taken about 5% of existing BTC out of circulation for the foreseeable future, and maybe forever (though this reduction in supply might have helped stabilize the price).  But it is hardly a disaster, even for the Bitcoin drug trade.

[alkaz]

personally, for me its a good thing they close it.

[FanEagle]

Positive, but I already saw online there are incoming similar markets.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Positive, but not because of closing of Silkroad itself.

The guy who was running it was an idiot, a total asshole and a hardcore criminal (he attempted to assasinate somebody). He deserved everything that came his way.

I'm only sorry for some of the poor dealers who are simply delivering goods that people want, I see nothing wrong with this.

[HDSolar]

Good thing,

Now the government will need to turn those BTC into DOLLARS so when they do let me know which exchange they plan to cash out in.  If its Mt.Gox can't wait to see how they plan to get their money wiered.  I see a new job at FBI processing transfers for years unless the fed want to change the banking regulations.

Oh what fun,

[darkmule]

Good thing,

Now the government will need to turn those BTC into DOLLARS so when they do let me know which exchange they plan to cash out in.

Not necessarily.  If they treat it as cash, they could hold it, somehow.  However, I don't think they're equipped to do that.  I think their regulations require such cash actually be kept in a bank account of some kind.

I think they are more likely to treat it as a seized asset of some other sort, like a seized cigarette boat or a seized SUV, and auction it off at some point.  Presumably, the new owner would get the private key and the passphrase, assuming they ever get that out of DPR or by some other means.  Since "other means" would involve DPR giving out his passphrase to someone else or cracking Bitcoin itself, it would probably have to be from DPR.

[leopard2]

The government does not need those few BTC, BTC are problematic for governments because they can only be generated by proof of work. They hate BTC; chances are that wallet stays permanently frozen.

Since they are the strongest criminal organization by definition, they can make the laws and "legally" counterfeit as much money as they need  

It is called quantitative easing and is currently executed by a subcontractor, the Federal Reserve, with a volume of roughly 45 billion USD per month. The federal "shutdown" was just caused by a minor code flaw, the MAXDEBT variable needed to be increased.  

The end of SR is certainly a bad thing.  Never used it myself, but found it comforting that there is a place that offers more choices than what the regime permits. Having more choices, more freedom is always a good thing. 

[leoragraves666]

I think this was more than a good thing. I know there will be 3 new websites, but when I told someone about btc, first they said was Silk Road. It will ease the burden, and on the other hand like no one ever bought drugs for USD, GBP 

[saif313]

Absolutely positive!

[btbrae]

It's possible is a person or two that believed Bitcoin was hinged on SR and that are getting in now that they saw what happened following the closure. Either way it's looking very positive so far.

[TheButterZone]

So, it's because of drugs that fiat currency is so inflated compared to BTC?