He owned a site that allowed permission less trade in goods using bitcoin and anonymous accounts.
If you think that's a "bad thing"... I have bad news about bitcoin and nostr for you.
Discussion
He was the owner. So it was a centralized market at all time. Same as twitter is from musk, Silkroad is from Ross Ulmann and therefore he is responsible for what crimes happen on the platform. It is that easy. And that has nothing to do with anonymity. You can have this anonym and still not allow illegal goods. But he accepted all that pays becaus all he cared was money. Same as Trump is only thinking about what serves him.
Sounds like you've got it all figured out, sportsfreund.
Maby. I discuss to wait for a good legitimation. Since I can not feel great when some tyran president releases criminals from their lawful punishment. I mean when it would be about that the sentence is not fair, there are normal forms to chellange this on a higher court.
rioters*
drug*
times*
because*
cared about*
legitimization*
life sentences*
law system*
fix anything*
And most importantly the legal case you are so vehemently upset over is
Ulbricht* Vs. The United States Of America. His name is not Ullman. It is Ulbricht. Pardon my corrections. Everyone here can tell how much of an expert you are on the case and ethics in general. Except in America hosting and operating a website is not the same thing as dealing drugs. Also just so you know ethics and legality are distinct and seperate things. But I'm sure you already knew that.
Thanks a lot for your help with english and his name. My bad.
So Amazon ist just a website then? Not a market. I mean when what you tell is true there are several websites like the silk road in America and the owners do not have to hide.
Can you kind of see that your argumentation is a bit far from common sense? Because most laws base in some part on ethics and morality. This is why I mention them.
You need to read some world history, the history of law, the philosophy of ethics, libertarian philosophy etc. If everyone had your attitude of following every single law no matter what then slavery would still be legal in the first world and men could beat their wives if they felt it was necessary. Pretend I am a monarch of a country. If I pass a law that no one can speak in public, that they must write down their communication on a piece of paper, does that make it unethical to speak in public? You have not spent much time thinking about these issues. And my main point was that you have such strong opinions about a legal case where you do not even know the name of the defendant. A law is a rule created by a government. Whether that is a monarchy such as a king or queen, or a republic, or democracy, it does not matter. It has no direct connection to what is right or wrong. Do a internet search for "dumbest laws that have ever existed". Just because someone wrote words down on a piece of paper to create a law does not make it just.
I feel falsely accused to not have thought about ethics philosophy and politics.
But I let you this beleave is this makes you happy. I would not be the person following any law no matter if I am in line with it or not.
I just think that having some thoughts or opinions in common with someone, does not legitimize this person to do everything.
Perhaps I consider myself doing a lot for freedom (stay away from commercially driven advertisement companies like Meta, Google and Amazon where possible, tryng to protect my privacy, pay for good journalism, vote for politicians, which fight for the weak people of society and keeping the spendings lower then my earnings). Therefore I sypatize with freedom tech as the tor project, Nostr, decentralized money and so on.
But all this ideas and knowledge does not make me forget about for whom is trump working. He is first and formost a big fascistic narcisist same as Elon Musk. And his actions are all first and formost for loyalty. Trump wrote himself, that the people who prosecuted on Ross were the same prosecuting him. So Trumps ides ar as great when he releases Ross as they are when he releases the Jan 6th rioters. These actions have no moral bases. It is about loyalty of a bananarepublic.
Man. You made claims about how what Ross did was wrong and unlawful. You have yet to tell me the American law he broke. You say you love freedom yet you believe the creators of a market are responsible for all the items sold and bought and not the individual who sold and bought them. I dont give a shit about trump. In America we split the powers of government which your own government has modeed itself after. We allow the executive branch to have this power because we acknowledge that prior administrations, the DOJ, the courts get things wrong sometimes. Based on your logic you eould have cheered for Socrates execution. You would have cheered for Jesus of Nazareth to be crucified. What Ross did was not wrong. We have no evidence of him coercing anyone to do anything against their will unlike his prosecutors. Your brain is going 1,000 miles an hour in ten different directions. You made several claims. I refuted them. I don't have time to hold your hand because you don't understand the history of law or why pardons exist. You clearly don't understand consent or property. Have a good day.
Natural law is based on ethics and derived from observing nature and using reason. The current laws of a country do not always align with natural law. These are two very different things.
That’s all irrelevant. Murders, sex offenders, and pedophiles receive less time than what Ross was given. He made a website so give him a few years and restitution but 2 consecutive life sentences + 40 yrs or whatever it was made zero sense … especially when they had to make up a murder and set him up because …freedom???
It’s not your job to judge Ross or Trump. It’s also not your job to dictate what can be considered commerce when govs are in bed with cartels at the expense of its citizens.
Yes this legitimisation I understand and think the same. But wouldn‚’t it make more sense to change the laws on which base he got these 2 lifesentence? Since the lawsystem has issues. And they would have to be fixed.
I prefer someone would do the work and fix root causes. Ross Ullman is only the symptom of the law system the US has. Liberating him did not fix nothing.
And everyone can judge about everyone. So let me too.
Liberating Ross Ulbricht fixed a tattered relationship between the straight military aged American men & the Republican Party. Good or bad it’s not nothing. Ross’s freedom also legitimizes bitcoin socially. It creates conversation and is a good introduction to bitcoin.
Changing laws can be problematic and cause more harm than good. In a perfect gov system that would work but no government is perfect … so it’s better to celebrate when they do something right.
Historically, when the US goes changing laws to stop oppression confusion, violence, and misunderstanding prevail.