Wired misses the Point of OpenBazaar

[Beliathon]

To start and stop the discussion of the peer to peer marketplace at "drugs" is negligent

https://medium.com/@Valerian/wired-misses-the-point-of-openbazaar-c1adf8752cff

Excerpt:

The originators of OpenBazaar, and its predecessor DarkMarket, see this lack of censorship as one core feature of the system’s many worthwhile attributes. But, if you read the recent Wired article about OpenBazaar, you might suspect that the only use of a peer-to-peer marketplace would be to sell drugs. The title of the article, “Creators of New Fed-Proof Bitcoin Marketplace Swear It’s Not for Drugs” immediately puts OpenBazaar in the context of illicit activity. The sensational headline paints its creators as, at best, criminally naïve and, at worst, willful lawbreakers.

Author Andy Greenberg writes, “And just what will you trade on OpenBazaar? A good first guess might be drugs.”

Actually, it’s not a good first guess at all. Last year, Alibaba saw 231 million active buyers on its China retail sites. Mr. Greenberg seems to suggest that if you remove the element of censorship in commerce then we would immediately have 231 million new drug dealers and users unleashed on the world. The article implies that the main purpose of any peer-to-peer market is for illicit activity. The logic underpinning the Wired piece relies on erroneous reasoning that, when vocalized, quickly gets reduced to unrealistic fear.

I'm very much inclined to agree. Wired's "journalism" borders on slander.

[xDan]

Yup. This could hopefully be an Ebay killer.

[BitCoinDream]

To start and stop the discussion of the peer to peer marketplace at "drugs" is negligent

https://medium.com/@Valerian/wired-misses-the-point-of-openbazaar-c1adf8752cff

Excerpt:

The originators of OpenBazaar, and its predecessor DarkMarket, see this lack of censorship as one core feature of the system’s many worthwhile attributes. But, if you read the recent Wired article about OpenBazaar, you might suspect that the only use of a peer-to-peer marketplace would be to sell drugs. The title of the article, “Creators of New Fed-Proof Bitcoin Marketplace Swear It’s Not for Drugs” immediately puts OpenBazaar in the context of illicit activity. The sensational headline paints its creators as, at best, criminally naïve and, at worst, willful lawbreakers.

Author Andy Greenberg writes, “And just what will you trade on OpenBazaar? A good first guess might be drugs.”

Actually, it’s not a good first guess at all. Last year, Alibaba saw 231 million active buyers on its China retail sites. Mr. Greenberg seems to suggest that if you remove the element of censorship in commerce then we would immediately have 231 million new drug dealers and users unleashed on the world. The article implies that the main purpose of any peer-to-peer market is for illicit activity. The logic underpinning the Wired piece relies on erroneous reasoning that, when vocalized, quickly gets reduced to unrealistic fear.

I'm very much inclined to agree. Wired's "journalism" borders on slander.

I incline to agree with Wired. OpenBazaar is gonna end up as a DarkMarket. An marketplace without centralization is nothing but a scammer's heaven and drug dealer's den. Marketplaces are NOT govt run. Multiple centralized markets in a free market economy is better than multisig escrows under a certain online marketplace.

[bornil267645]

They dont have any idea about what they are missing

[slaveforanunnak1]

That was a great read! I really can't believe Germany is hating on Uber! really Germany?? Really!¿?!!?

[Beliathon]

I incline to agree with Wired. OpenBazaar is gonna end up as a DarkMarket. A marketplace without centralization is nothing but a scammer's heaven and drug dealer's den.

Hmm, why does this sound so familiar?

Ahhh yes, it's exactly the same way the media framed the internet back in the mid 90s. Here's the first paragraph from a New York Times article on the internet from 1996:

Big Brothers Abound In Virtual New World

"Unregulated and unpoliced, the Internet resembles a Wild West frontier town without a sheriff.

Con artists have turned to the Internet, on-line services and electronic bulletin boards to promote bogus stock offerings and other dubious investment opportunities such as gold mining, gemstones and ostrich farming. The Internet also lends itself to marketing scams known as pyramid schemes, in which a few participants get rich and the vast majority get burned.

(...)

It can discover your name, E-mail address, location, the kind of computer and browser you are using and other sites you have visited — and much more detailed information besides.

"Although it may not seem like it, someone is following you through cyberspace," the center says. "Every time you retrieve a file, view an image, send an E-mail message or jump to a new web site, a record is created somewhere on the Net."

Source: New York Times archives

You know, that last part is actually true. Although I somehow doubt the author would have wrote it in such a scathing way if he knew that stranger watching you online was a government agent violating your constitutionally-protected right to privacy.

The moral of the story, kids, is that establishment sources are always afraid of the new thing, they will always demonize it. Why? Because shock and scare stories get views, they make the money.

  

[Lethn]

Same old cryptocurrencies is for drug dealers and terrorists bullshit with only a few convincted criminals to backup the claims with, move along people, no need to give them ad money.

[BitCoinDream]

I incline to agree with Wired. OpenBazaar is gonna end up as a DarkMarket. A marketplace without centralization is nothing but a scammer's heaven and drug dealer's den.

Hmm, why does this sound so familiar?

Ahhh yes, it's exactly the same way the media framed the internet back in the mid 90s. Here's the first paragraph from a New York Times article on the internet from 1996:

Big Brothers Abound In Virtual New World

"Unregulated and unpoliced, the Internet resembles a Wild West frontier town without a sheriff.

Con artists have turned to the Internet, on-line services and electronic bulletin boards to promote bogus stock offerings and other dubious investment opportunities such as gold mining, gemstones and ostrich farming. The Internet also lends itself to marketing scams known as pyramid schemes, in which a few participants get rich and the vast majority get burned.

(...)

It can discover your name, E-mail address, location, the kind of computer and browser you are using and other sites you have visited — and much more detailed information besides.

"Although it may not seem like it, someone is following you through cyberspace," the center says. "Every time you retrieve a file, view an image, send an E-mail message or jump to a new web site, a record is created somewhere on the Net."

Source: New York Times archives

You know, that last part is actually true. Although I somehow doubt the author would have wrote it in such a scathing way if he knew that stranger watching you online was a government agent violating your constitutionally-protected right to privacy.

The moral of the story, kids, is that establishment sources are always afraid of the new thing, they will always demonize it. Why? Because shock and scare stories get views, they make the money.

  

It is easier to Shock & Awe an Escrow, rather than a corporate entity.

[Beliathon]

I incline to agree with Wired. OpenBazaar is gonna end up as a DarkMarket. A marketplace without centralization is nothing but a scammer's heaven and drug dealer's den.

Hmm, why does this sound so familiar?

Ahhh yes, it's exactly the same way the media framed the internet back in the mid 90s. Here's the first paragraph from a New York Times article on the internet from 1996:

Big Brothers Abound In Virtual New World

"Unregulated and unpoliced, the Internet resembles a Wild West frontier town without a sheriff.

Con artists have turned to the Internet, on-line services and electronic bulletin boards to promote bogus stock offerings and other dubious investment opportunities such as gold mining, gemstones and ostrich farming. The Internet also lends itself to marketing scams known as pyramid schemes, in which a few participants get rich and the vast majority get burned.

(...)

It can discover your name, E-mail address, location, the kind of computer and browser you are using and other sites you have visited — and much more detailed information besides.

"Although it may not seem like it, someone is following you through cyberspace," the center says. "Every time you retrieve a file, view an image, send an E-mail message or jump to a new web site, a record is created somewhere on the Net."

Source: New York Times archives

You know, that last part is actually true. Although I somehow doubt the author would have wrote it in such a scathing way if he knew that stranger watching you online was a government agent violating your constitutionally-protected right to privacy.

The moral of the story, kids, is that establishment sources are always afraid of the new thing, they will always demonize it. Why? Because shock and scare stories get views, they make the money.

  

It is easier to Shock & Awe an Escrow, rather than a corporate entity.

Yes, sociopaths are generally immune to scare-tactics, as well as indifferent to reason.

[leannemckim46]

To start and stop the discussion of the peer to peer marketplace at "drugs" is negligent

https://medium.com/@Valerian/wired-misses-the-point-of-openbazaar-c1adf8752cff

Excerpt:

The originators of OpenBazaar, and its predecessor DarkMarket, see this lack of censorship as one core feature of the system’s many worthwhile attributes. But, if you read the recent Wired article about OpenBazaar, you might suspect that the only use of a peer-to-peer marketplace would be to sell drugs. The title of the article, “Creators of New Fed-Proof Bitcoin Marketplace Swear It’s Not for Drugs” immediately puts OpenBazaar in the context of illicit activity. The sensational headline paints its creators as, at best, criminally naïve and, at worst, willful lawbreakers.

Author Andy Greenberg writes, “And just what will you trade on OpenBazaar? A good first guess might be drugs.”

Actually, it’s not a good first guess at all. Last year, Alibaba saw 231 million active buyers on its China retail sites. Mr. Greenberg seems to suggest that if you remove the element of censorship in commerce then we would immediately have 231 million new drug dealers and users unleashed on the world. The article implies that the main purpose of any peer-to-peer market is for illicit activity. The logic underpinning the Wired piece relies on erroneous reasoning that, when vocalized, quickly gets reduced to unrealistic fear.

I'm very much inclined to agree. Wired's "journalism" borders on slander.

I incline to agree with Wired. OpenBazaar is gonna end up as a DarkMarket. An marketplace without centralization is nothing but a scammer's heaven and drug dealer's den. Marketplaces are NOT govt run. Multiple centralized markets in a free market economy is better than multisig escrows under a certain online marketplace.

I concur. Markets need to have some level of regulation or else illegal activity is bound to happen. OpenBazaar is designed to specifically prevent regulation. Although there may be some legit activity there at first, over time it will become less and less until it becomes almost exclusively illicit sales (especially once TOR access is enabled). 

[xDan]

I concur. Markets need to have some level of regulation or else illegal activity is bound to happen. OpenBazaar is designed to specifically prevent regulation. Although there may be some legit activity there at first, over time it will become less and less until it becomes almost exclusively illicit sales (especially once TOR access is enabled).  

You think the drug market is bigger than the market for legal products?

I see the opposite occurring: It starts off with some illicit use, and then eventually trickles down to mainstream and takes the place of Ebay, with "legitimate" use exploding, as usability improves and bitcoin adoption increases.

[BitCoinNutJob]

Yup. This could hopefully be an Ebay killer.

Just when we get on ebay we kill it haha. I see both working for immediate future even though i will hope for ebay death eventually.

Centralized does still have advantages and fees mean they can buy any advertising space easier.  In the poker community we always tried to build a fee free poker room but it was never successful - thats slightly different though.