On 30 August 2017 at 15:19, Ben Tasker <b...@bentasker.co.uk> wrote: > > Meanwhile, the drug-markets and other "vile" things he want to block will > carry on unabated because a subset of their users will put the effort in to > update a central resource weekly to note what the new address is. If that > user is an administrator, they could even sign the updates with a > predisclosed key to minimise the likelihood of you being lead to a fake by > a bad actor. So everyone else gets shot in the foot, while what he wants to > block only blinks briefly. >
I entirely agree, but I feel that perhaps you missed one twist: that with the churn which comes with "dark" markets changing their addresses (and thus their reputational anchors) on a weekly basis, comes greater opportunity for their inevitable customers to be fleeced by sites (say) passing-off drugs cut with drain-cleaner as product, leading to a net of greater misery (and probably death) by trying to drive the matter underground. This is "war on drugs"-type thinking. Speaking as someone who to-date has never even smoked pot, this seems like an intensely dumb idea. - alec -- http://dropsafe.crypticide.com/aboutalecm -- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org To unsubscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk