Robert:
I like that mantra: go big or don't bother!
1. I look forward to hashing this out over the forum, once it's up and running.
2. Much of your point it seems to me is anchored on the absence of scaleable consumer protection (not in the state-regulated sense, but in a trust sense). To that end, I believe the SR has done a remarkable job at demonstrating how billions of dollars worth of product can be sold to consumers in a reliable way. Even the recent disaster at SR 2.0 has showed that nearly half of all defrauded consumers have been paid back in full... a much better deal than Gox has offered.
Furthermore, there are several proposals that the Open Transactions crew have been pioneering in terms of contracts (Riccardian contracts)... I particularly want to promote Justus Ranvier's 'Lex Cryptographia' that specifically deals with these issue (special mention to using non-reputation based systems for trustless exchanges).
For example, identities can be purchased for x bitcoins, that can act as a bond for each transaction. Arbitration or basic dispute resolution itself is a profitable service that is already built into DarkMarket, but would be a further developed and searchable service in the TradeNet.
One possible scenario:
Alice wants to buy a toaster from Bob. Alice sees a contract for a toaster in the TradeNet from Bob. The contract has already been filtered according to location, price range, etc. This contract has the price of the toaster in bitcoin, reputation of the seller, and the insurance value of the contract (includes the value of the surety bond, if any), and the merchant's preferred arbitration parties (for multisig disputes). If the merchant doesn't deliver, the user can then use the TradeNet to find available couriers instantly for the good using the same process. This whole process happens instantly as tenders can be issued to good/service providers that will automatically generate quotes for you to select... similar to choosing an airline.
If Bob doesn't deliver the toaster to the courier when they arrive to pick up the good, Bob is automatically charged for failure to fulfill a contract (the Bitcoin is transferred via 2-of-3 multsig transaction out of the escrow address), and Alice's Bitcoin is transferred back to her wallet in the same way. Remember that there is a market for rapid and fair arbitration services. If Bob delivers a defective toaster that is transported successfully to Alice via the courier, then Alice indicates that the terms of the contract were not satisfied and requests a refund. The arbitrator steps in and examines the case, with a fee for service coming out of the losing parties share and/or surety bond (contract signed by arbitrator and Alice in the former, multisig).
This isn't an exhaustive explanation or proposal, but more of a glimpse that the problems you describe can be incorporated into the TradeNet to allow for scaleable and as trustless as possible commerce.
-- drwasho
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Robert Jakob <rsjakob@???> wrote:Washington,I see what you're saying and in that case DarkMarket isn't necessarily suitable and this would be a great discussion to go into more detail once we have the forum up. However, and I'll try and keep this brief, that concept may be a bit utopian and I'll tell you why.
So, let's say hypothetically the open-source community works out all the bugs and the software is rock-solid and unhackable. The TradeNet is competing with well established companies with loyal venders and a pretty hard-core customer base. Inherently the consumer doesn't like change unless you give them a good reason. Such as, better price, superior product, convenience, better customer service, etc... So let's say you're the consumer and you want to buy a toaster, but you don't feel like going to the store and you don't need it right now. So you go online, you have several options: Ebay, Amazon, Overstock, Craigslist, BestBuy, Sears, and the TradeNet. Let's say you already have your assets in bitcoin. So we won't even factor in time to convert fiat to bitcoin. So you decide to buy your toaster using bitcoin from TradeNet. It's maybe delivered a week later. You plug it in and nothing happens. Now you have to contact the vender, but the vender get's hundreds of emails, ships thousands of products per week, they're just not able to respond to your defective toaster problem. You have very little recourse. You can post negative feedback, but you won't be able to get your money back. Ultimately, you've wasted your time and money on a defective toaster and that's not even malicious.
There are dozens of things that can go wrong in any E-commerce transaction. For small, very common, purchases an open-market isn't the place to shop, because the consumer needs to be protected. And even the big companies deal with rampant fraud, but there is recourse if something goes wrong. More and more businesses are starting to accept bitcoin. So you just have to ask, what is the advantage of using TradeNet? No taxes, anonymity, and it's unregulated. It's a market that really only makes sense for products you can't purchase anywhere else. Now, that doesn't necessarily have to be something nefarious. It could be legitimate medication that you don't have access to or you can't afford without insurance. It could be an exotic pet. It could be any number of things that are illegal, but not dangerous. The point is a TradeNet just can't compete unless the risk is worth the reward and no matter what you call it there is bound to be illicit activity. So even if it's a big market for common goods it's highly unlikely you'll get a positive story from the mainstream media, because running a positive story is equivalent to advocating it's use. The companies competing with the TradeNet are the same ones that advertise on all the major networks. So it's actually in their best interest to run a constant flow of negative stories about fraud, people buying drugs. All the typical things they said about Silk Road and worse. The media is very predictable when it comes to protecting their advertisement revenue. I could go on and on, but I just don't see the appeal for the average consumer or any legitimate vendor.
Therefore, go big or don't bother. -RobertOn Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 8:32 PM, John Hebert <johnalexhebert@???> wrote:
Excellent question. When we get forum.unsystem.net up (*sigh* we are working on it), that would be a good topic for discussion.
John
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???> wrote:

I'm asking what happens when someone uses darkmarket (or just vanilla bitcoin with tumbling for that matter, darkmarket just makes it easier) to commit the perfect crime (bruce schneier's term).



I think what will happen is there will be a backlash, and a price drop.I think this could actually be coordinated as a psy-op by people that would like to see bitcoin fail, or possibly just want to drop the price so they can buy some for cheap.



I am raising this possibility, because I think it bears some thinking about, because it is GOING to happen.
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 2:16 PM, John Hebert <johnalexhebert@???> wrote:

I'm not sure what you are asking. Are you asking what happens if someone uses Dark Market / Dark Wallet to "cheat" the bitcoin system?



John
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???> wrote:


BTW, I'm not taking a stand here.I'm literally asking, what happens. From a public relations standpoint, if for no other reason.Because it seems to me a question of when, not if.






In this case, alice could well be an agent of Circle in amir's evil conspiracy scenario, or pick your adversary.


On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???> wrote:






What happens when alice doesn't free the baby?http://friedo.szm.com/krypto/AC/ch06/06-09.html







On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 10:57 AM, John Hebert <johnalexhebert@???> wrote:







Please don't think of this as a personal attack, but using the term "public relations" in relation to an UnSystem project shows a serious misunderstanding of the basic principals of anarchism and libertarianism. Bowing to public pressure for acceptance means you have already given up the ideals behind the project.








I'll keep repeating this for those who want to rename "Dark Market" to "Free Market": fork it, rename it, maintain it.No capitulation, no compromises.








JohnOn Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:42 AM, Peter Todd <pete@???> wrote:








On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 03:25:40AM +0100, Amir Taaki wrote:
> upvote this vid plz for visibility,
>
> http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/23vo5s/petition_to_change_the_name_of_dark_market_to/ch1e6qb










Brilliant video.

That said, the suggestion to call it "Free Market" is clever enough PR
I'd seriously consider it. Unlike the bs around renaming "stealth
addresses" "reusable addresses" the PR you could generate by doing so
would probably be more than enough to make up for the confusion caused
by the name-change.

Don't make the mistake of getting too predictable.

--
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000003e4169d0cffdad1acd4a67ad9ec79786a53066511f305e72
_______________________________________________
unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem

_______________________________________________
unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem


_______________________________________________
unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem

_______________________________________________
unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem

_______________________________________________
unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem

_______________________________________________
unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem