[CommunityDiscussion]How Darknetmarkets Work (or not)

I think there's a lot of us here who have been hanging around this circus we call darknetmarkets for long enough that we know how things work. Just like gravity in the physical world, I think there are some immutable laws of nature concerning darknetmarkets. So why are people still sitting under the apple tree same as before even though they keep getting conked on the head by the apples falling off the tree. So what do we know pretty muich for certain at this point?

First, darknet markets go away. I think we can pretty much agree that one way or another every darknet market will end up gone some day. Whether by exit scam, LE takedown, or even the rare, orderly shutdown (BMR is one of very very few examples).

Second, I think most agree that except for those rare BMR-like friendly shutdowns, market shutdowns whether by LE or exit scam inevitably leave most everyone involved with less money at the end. Sometimes a lot less money.

The exceptions to those generalizations are so rare that we might as well ignore the BMR type happy endings. So then why are hoards of people joining the latest batch of centralized escrow markets that hold money in market controlled wallets when it's really clear what's going to happen down the road. I don't get it.

Yes this is a post about multisig and why people are foolish not to demand multisig escrow at every darknetmarket. Are our brains so addled by drugs that we can't take the time to learn some pretty straightforward new ways of doing things? Do people not understand how multisig is better? Are they scared of change? Well I'm hella scared of history repeating itself which it almost guaranteed to happen at Agora, Nucleus, Middle Earth and all those other me too central escrow markets. I for one won't be going down that path again.

There are two things keeping us in this rutt. First, when events like Evo happen, most of the money is lost by vendors. Basically it comes down to the length of time money is in escrow before the product is shipped vs the time from shipping until the order is finalized. There's too many buyers who clearly don't give a rats ass about the well being of the vendors who work so hard getting them the products they want. The long term viability of darknetmarkets depends on us looking out for each other. So buyers, when you sign up at a new maket that doesn't have multisig escrow, make a point of asking the admins why they don't have multisig. If we don't ask for it, we won't get it, plain and simple. And if you're on a market that offers multisig escrow (a dwiindling pool of markets at this point), and a vendor requires multisig escrow, don't just automatically back out of the transaction. Take the time to learn multisig. It's not hard. It really isn't. If you can use bitcoins and PGP encryption, you can handle multisig. If a vendor offers both types of escrow, try selecting multisig instead of traditional escrow. You'll get good karma for doing it and feel good all day coz you made a vendor safer and less likely to lose money on your transaction.

Vendors are always saying "multisig is no good because I offer it and buyers don't use it.". Well I think we can conclude at this point that most buyers don't care about multisig because they haven't taken the brunt of the losses when markets have failed. So vendors, for a change try changing your settings to only allow multisig. There are vendors who have done that. They haven't gone out of business. You may have to be ready to help a few people through the process the first time. But that will be a customer who will come back. If you're a decent vendor, people won't choose another vendor because you require multisig. One idea that's worked for other vendors is to mention in the product listing that you're willing to help any multisig newbies to complete their first transaction. It's a great way to establish a relationship with a customer and that customer will come back.

So why are fewer and fewer markets offering multisig escrow. For one, it's more work to program for the market developers. If vendors and buyers don't ask for multisig, markets won't provide it. There have been a few markets that did piss poor implmentations of multisig that were hard to use and didn't provide protection that is the whole point of multisig escrow. Panacea is the poster child for that problem. Because of technical incompetence on the part of the developer, some customers ended up with their funds locked up in multisig escrow accounts. That should never happen in a properly designed multisig system. It's the nature of darknetmarkets that you don't know anything about the character or intentions of market admins. You can't check their references because you don't know who they are. Who IRL would hand their wallet to a guy theyve never met who says let me hold your wallet for you? The question is nuts isn't it? well that's exactly what you're doing when you use traditional escrow and a market controlled wallet. The law of gravity isn't going to change tomorrow. So it's time to use our brains and figure out a better way of doing things.


Comments


[6 Points] ukthrowdataway:

I read in one of the exit scam threads the other day that more than half of users did not use PGP to encrypt addresses. What does this tell you about the user population? Basically, these people care so little about their security they will blatantly associate their name and address with a package full of contraband. Yes, their brains are certainly drug addled. I'm pretty sure since the DNM has become popular in media recently many just saw EVO as an amazon for drugs.

Now as George Carlin said, "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." If the average DNM user isn't even using PGP to decrease the risk of LE involvement, then what are the chances people will want to shift to a more complicated escrow system?

Btw, I am all for multi-sig but just thought I'd throw that out there...


[3 Points] StillUseless:

If I was a vendor, I wouldn't touch a customer that didn't encrypt. Hell, it's the 'cloak' in 'cloak and dagger'.


[3 Points] loveisrealnfa:

Awesome post! I fully agree. Vendors need to be more open to it and even promote it. Have multisig sales, etc...and buyers need to just stop being afraid of it and do it. Ive never participated in a multisig transaction but I cant wait to start.

What about a way to practice 2 of 3 with legal, inexpensive items so folks can get familiar with it?


[3 Points] fucktits123:

a link to the best multisig tutorial would be good


[2 Points] kimchimatic:

Well, the thing is that there are two sorts of DNM users. The ones, using the forums, reading a lot of opsec and trying to stay secure. The others, and thats the majority, are simply not into it. They are charmed by the mystery of darknet markets and easy to get drugs. And that will never change.

And I think thats why multisig in the traditional way will never be popular.

There is an unbreakable cicle of users that want to buy drugs, FE and get scammed. Then request escrow and feeling save. So for buyers escrow is the way to go. For vendors however escrow is a pain in the ass.

Your income is locked by the market, potential value drop and most damage if market goes down.

So in this case, multisig would help, but mostly the vendor. The majority of buyers lose only small amounts of btc if a market goes down. (Well except resellers) And thats why there is no big need for multisig.

Just head over to dnmnoobs and see all the tails pgp help threads, where people are overwhelmed with pgp. So multisig is for them just too much.

Poor implementations of multisig are common, because it's not that easy. Even if you're a decent programmer, bitcoin transactions and multisig are hard topics. And for markets it's expensive to implement them properly and why should they if no one using it.

And I honestly don't think vendors will promote multisig. Well maybe they will offer it, too but not exclusivly. I mean if you force a more complicated system then the current, you will lose income.

The sad truth is, that the circle will continue. Market will open. People will bug drugs. Some people will get scammed and market goes down. No matter if LE takedown, exit scam or clean.


[2 Points] UDNM:

Didn't Panacea force multisig?

I never read up on their exit scam but I thought their stream-lined, easy to use multisig sounded a bit suspicious.


[2 Points] attilathehunn:

Markets should make it so vendor can set a different price for multisig or regular escrow. So buyers will research multisig if they want to save money. Vendors get compensated for their risk of exit scam.

Heroin:

Multisig $15

Normal: $20


[1 Points] IGetDankShit:

If multisig is to ever catch on, a group of well respected vendors need to come together and form an alliance where they all agree to only offer multisig listings (and maybe FE). Buyers will always choose the path of least resistance as they also have the least to lose. They won't bother learning multisig until a vendor they really want to use refuses to do business with them. I'm confident that the scene will eventually progress to this standard but it's going to take time and effort from the vendor's behalf.


[1 Points] emeraldgemini:

I am not a fan of Nulceus layout or the way it has the 2 day auto release of funds.


[1 Points] Atador:

Amen!

I whish TheMarketplace was still around. I wonder how big their user influx would have been during this last week. Man... I loved that place.

Please future marketdevelopers give us true multisig escrow (not like Evos multisig). There is such a big demand out there for it now then there never was before! Look at what TMP did and start from there!

I for one dont see any reason why I would sign up on a new market other then Agora at this point if it doesnt provide unique transaction security. No point in providing a market with features that have failed and let us down so many times before!


[-1 Points] throwahooawayyfoe:

wall of text... too long. didn't read.