Silk Road forums

Discussion => Off topic => Topic started by: Messenger on March 30, 2012, 09:33 am

Title: The Death Lottery
Post by: Messenger on March 30, 2012, 09:33 am
For the longest time i had been fascinated by Jim Bell's Assassination Politics and its description of the "Death Lottery", yet it always seemed so far out of reach due to the complexities of implementing an anonymous digital payment system. We'll here we are, a thriving economy based on one of the very things the power elite dont want us to have, and its so far out of their control that the greatest threat should they be so inclined would be to make it inconvenient to use. So what is a Death Lottery? Well here's an example:

A financial crisis occurs, at the heart of it lies a small cabal of bankers and financiers who used their influence to over-inflate their assets deceiving many average people into committing to long term financial arrangements only to find that they were lied to about the value of their purchase. Now these average people, who work so hard to support their families that they are only allotted a few hours per day to spend with them, are left in debt to the very people who lied to them, and must now choose between seeing their kids, and seeing their kids starve. Meanwhile one of the bankers is enjoying a nice getaway at his vacation house in malibu, having just made in a year what most people will only dream of in a lifetime. The average joe who has now taken on two jobs reads the paper one morning and sees that the banker, whose golf buddies with the justice dept prosecutor overseeing his case, has just got off due to "lack of evidence". Normally the story ends here, but in this story some enterprising individual has created a hidden service called The Death Lottery, and so here's how it goes:

An average joe organizes with others who have been affected by this, lets say 0.3% of the US population join in, or 1 million individuals, and each of them log into The Death Lottery and pay $50 in Bitcoins to guess when the banker is going to die, and whoever guesses right gets to collect. For just $50 a piece, this banker, who was above the law, now has a $50,000,000 bounty on his head.

Now you might be saying, what good would it do, whats done is done. Well, lets consider the bigger picture. The government has a big hammer and it can smash any one of us and we'll never be heard from again. The financial elite have a big rope, they can pull us in any direction or string us from the highest tree. What if, the people, the 346,500,000 of us, had something even bigger? What if instead of standing in our freespeech zones screaming at the wall over some powergrab the government is once again trying to make, or standing idly by while the bank takes away our homes which we were forced to sell because of their reckless greed, that those in power stop and ask themselves, "will i survive this?".

There are some very smart and talented people out there who could put together such a site, if you arent one of them you might know someone who might know someone. Spread the word, educate yourself, not all is lost, technology provides for us all. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Bell
http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/jimbellap.htm
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: kmfkewm on March 30, 2012, 09:40 am
I think it is an interesting idea and would not complain about it. It was originally designed with the intention of creating de-facto anarchy, as anyone who attempted to gain political power over others would quickly have a massive anonymously payable bounty on their head. I have little doubt the people who made bitcoin were aware of assassination politics, it is quite a popular idea in certain cryptoanarchist circles that I imagine they are not far removed from. It wont work if it is run from a hidden service though, needs something more anonymous. If you make such a site it will attract attention from intelligence agencies.
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: Messenger on March 31, 2012, 07:35 pm
So far there are hidden services for illegal drugs, weapons, and child porn, and none of them have been taken down in all their years of operation, though the idea of directly assailing the elite through crowdfunded assassination would surely draw the entirety of the governments power against it, if anything it would be a testament to how secure tor really is.

I will be shamelessly bumping this as this is the missing element of regulation in our system and the only power people will really ever have.
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: Ktpp on March 31, 2012, 08:00 pm
I think there would be some massive issues with this. First of all, the people running it would have to be incredibly trustworthy. They could just up ship and steal the cash. And also, who nominates who gets put on there? It could easily just turn into attacking any random rich person.

Not to mention, let's say some guy bets the banker will die on 5th March 2015, and plans to kill him on that day - the bankers have the money to invest in incredible security, so first of all you'd have to get past that, and also, if the banker did get killed on that day, LE would know right where to look.

I think it would be just as successful for a group of people to go around killing bankers. If a banker was being murdered every week it would make them think twice about engaging in such malpractice, and companies would be swift to prove that they are pro-people, pro fairness and aren't in the business to scam people, as to avoid having their staff killed off.

But really what's the difference between this and terrorism?

Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: kmfkewm on March 31, 2012, 08:25 pm
I think there would be some massive issues with this. First of all, the people running it would have to be incredibly trustworthy. They could just up ship and steal the cash. And also, who nominates who gets put on there? It could easily just turn into attacking any random rich person.

Not to mention, let's say some guy bets the banker will die on 5th March 2015, and plans to kill him on that day - the bankers have the money to invest in incredible security, so first of all you'd have to get past that, and also, if the banker did get killed on that day, LE would know right where to look.

I think it would be just as successful for a group of people to go around killing bankers. If a banker was being murdered every week it would make them think twice about engaging in such malpractice, and companies would be swift to prove that they are pro-people, pro fairness and aren't in the business to scam people, as to avoid having their staff killed off.

But really what's the difference between this and terrorism?

terrorism targets innocent people this targets enemy agents

also terrorism is not real , terrorism is the propaganda word that the big forces made up to call the smaller forces to make the citizens all afraid

the number of innocent people who were killed by atom bomb makes 9-11 look like nothing, USA is the biggest terrorist force in the world
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: Ktpp on March 31, 2012, 09:14 pm
I think there would be some massive issues with this. First of all, the people running it would have to be incredibly trustworthy. They could just up ship and steal the cash. And also, who nominates who gets put on there? It could easily just turn into attacking any random rich person.

Not to mention, let's say some guy bets the banker will die on 5th March 2015, and plans to kill him on that day - the bankers have the money to invest in incredible security, so first of all you'd have to get past that, and also, if the banker did get killed on that day, LE would know right where to look.

I think it would be just as successful for a group of people to go around killing bankers. If a banker was being murdered every week it would make them think twice about engaging in such malpractice, and companies would be swift to prove that they are pro-people, pro fairness and aren't in the business to scam people, as to avoid having their staff killed off.

But really what's the difference between this and terrorism?

terrorism targets innocent people this targets enemy agents

also terrorism is not real , terrorism is the propaganda word that the big forces made up to call the smaller forces to make the citizens all afraid

the number of innocent people who were killed by atom bomb makes 9-11 look like nothing, USA is the biggest terrorist force in the world

Nonsense. Even if you kill a banker that has blatantly been stealing from the populace, killing him is going to put his innocent family through hell. So what you mean to say is that this guys life and his familys suffering is less important than the justice required by the wrongs he's committed against the people. Fair enough, but that is what you should say.

And to say the USA is the biggest terrorist force in the world is masochistic nonsense. The USA has committed many war crimes, and many atrocities, and this much is plain, and I absolutely detest the US government, but terrorism is a real thing, committed by psychopathic religious fanatics that are living with a 7th century mindset, and isn't to be shrugged off as some conspiracy.

"Oh that's just because the West wronged them in the first place." Again, this is nonsense. Masochistic nonsense I might add, and only spewed by people who are totally ignorant of what Al Qaeda and jihadist extremism actually are.

One of the chief items in Al Qaedas manifesto detailing it's problems with the west was that i) The US had reversed course on an ongoing genocide in East Timor.

So basically, if you stop genocide occuring in East Timor, they will hate you, because you have "interevened in a muslim land". And this was in fact the reason they gave for blowing up the head offices of the UN and for blowing up Australian tourists in Bali.

Not to mention the fact that Al Qaeda wants to kill all Hindus - people who have never wronged them at all! Also, that whole scandal with the cartoons of the PEDOPHILE mohammed that were drawn in a Danish newspaper. Denmark has no imperialist history with the west, has never wronged any Eastern country.. It is a multicultural society that accommodates all religions/races and does a lot of aid work in the Middle East - yet their embassies were burnt out and their citizens attacked because a single cartoonist dared to exercise his right to free speech.

So I won't have it said that these people are merely defending themselves, from the big bad USA. I would be the first to say that the US government is insane and is responsible for the untold suffering of millions, but it is to excuse these wicked, sick, religious nutcases who sincerely want to destroy all the precious gains of civilisation, by suggesting that they are merely acting in self defense, or that they were forced into it by imperialism.

These are countries where you can't openly criticise the government without being killed/tortured, if you're a woman you are practically OWNED by your husband, who is legally allowed to rape and beat you - you can't criticise the religion without being killed.. if you're a woman and dare to not wear a veil, you can have acid thrown in your face, or be beaten and raped. Although there is one upside, if you're a virgin you can't be sentenced to death. But you can be raped in the prison by the guards.. and then you're not a virgin anymore, and they can kill you.

Compare that to the US where yes, it is still corrupt, and yes, there have been atrocities, but you can say almost whatever you like, you have a lot of rights, the freedom to do with your life what you want. You can be any religion, any race. You have the right to a fair trial, etc. Sure the banks and financial institutions abuse their power.. but these aren't pictures that can be squared.

There are significant, significant enough at least, amounts of people in the middle east who think that they have God on their side when they kill people, when they tell you what to do, what to wear, who to worship, what you can say.. To compare the US to these evil scumbags just isn't comparing like with like. Don't forget, that there is currently a war going on within Islam ITSELF. In fact, most of the deaths in Iraq are from this kind of violence. Muslims attacking other muslims because they have the "wrong" version of the faith.

And by no means are all muslims extremists. But you come to the US, or the UK, or the EU, and you can be whatever religion you want, say almost anything you want (unless its inciting violence or racial hatred etc).. you can build a mosque if you have the money. Do you think the mullas in Saudi will offer you the same courtesy?



Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: RunningLion on March 31, 2012, 09:51 pm
Why does this need to be a hidden service?  It seems like an idea you could use on a clearnet site as long as you don't say your purpose is to provide incentive for someones death.  It would need to be framed in the right light.  You would need a dam good lawyer.  It seems like I'm missing something.  What could they charge you with?
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: kmfkewm on April 01, 2012, 02:32 am
Quote
Nonsense. Even if you kill a banker that has blatantly been stealing from the populace, killing him is going to put his innocent family through hell. So what you mean to say is that this guys life and his familys suffering is less important than the justice required by the wrongs he's committed against the people. Fair enough, but that is what you should say.

Well I have little problem with bankers per-se, assassination politics was originally made to target government officials but the original poster did put a bit of a far left spin on it.

Quote
And to say the USA is the biggest terrorist force in the world is masochistic nonsense.

It is nonsense to say anything is a terrorist force since the word terrorism has no agreed upon definition. It is mostly just used for propaganda. Military call what you call terrorists violent non-state actors. The only distinction between violent non state actors and violent state actors is that state actors are bigger forces (if violent non state actors were big enough they would be states). 

Quote
The USA has committed many war crimes, and many atrocities, and this much is plain, and I absolutely detest the US government, but terrorism is a real thing, committed by psychopathic religious fanatics that are living with a 7th century mindset, and isn't to be shrugged off as some conspiracy.

The people who know the most about what you call terrorism don't think that terrorism is a real thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_Generation_Warfare
Code: [Select]
The simplest definition includes any war in which one of the major participants is not a state but rather a violent non-state actor.
Quote
Fourth generation warfare is normally characterized by a violent non-state actor (VNSA) fighting a state. This fighting can be physically done, such as by modern examples Hezbollah or the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). In this realm the VNSA uses all three levels of fourth generation warfare. These are the physical (actual combat; it is considered the least important), mental (the will to fight, belief in victory, etc.) and moral (the most important, this includes cultural norms, etc.) levels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
Quote
Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition.[1][2] Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians).

If you cut to the core of the matter, terrorism is non state sanctioned violence. If a non state actor goes on a killing rampage against druggies because they think we are evil they are terrorists but if the chinese government kills its citizens for drug possession they are not terrorists simply because they are a state. The only core distinction between terrorists and government is one is big enough to be a state. There are superficial characteristics too, VNSAS are more likely to hijack a plane and fly it into a building than firebomb a city, but this stems from their size and resources: they have to use non-conventional tactics to have any chance of defeating the much larger forces they fight with. Asymmetric combatants is another good term for what you call terrorists

Quote
The terms "terrorism" and "terrorist" (someone who engages in terrorism) carry strong negative connotations.[40] These terms are often used as political labels, to condemn violence or the threat of violence by certain actors as immoral, indiscriminate, unjustified or to condemn an entire segment of a population.[41] Those labeled "terrorists" by their opponents rarely identify themselves as such, and typically use other terms or terms specific to their situation, such as separatist, freedom fighter, liberator, revolutionary, vigilante, militant, paramilitary, guerrilla, rebel, patriot, or any similar-meaning word in other languages and cultures. Jihadi, mujaheddin, and fedayeen are similar Arabic words which have entered the English lexicon. It is common for both parties in a conflict to describe each other as terrorists.[42]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism

Code: [Select]
"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".

Quote
There is neither an academic nor an international legal consensus regarding the definition of the term "terrorism".[1][2] Various legal systems and government agencies use different definitions of "terrorism". Moreover, the international community has been slow to formulate a universally agreed upon, legally binding definition of this crime. These difficulties arise from the fact that the term "terrorism" is politically and emotionally charged.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_warfare

terrorism is certainly a propaganda word that the state uses to try to illegitimize the violence of non-state actors while implicitly legitimizing the violence that they regularly engage in


Quote
"Oh that's just because the West wronged them in the first place." Again, this is nonsense. Masochistic nonsense I might add, and only spewed by people who are totally ignorant of what Al Qaeda and jihadist extremism actually are.

Everybody wrongs everyone else in the games humans play. I see firebombing a city and flying a hijacked plane into a building as being equal, the government see the first as being legitimate and the second as being terrorism (well they don't really see it this way but they want you to).

Quote
One of the chief items in Al Qaedas manifesto detailing it's problems with the west was that i) The US had reversed course on an ongoing genocide in East Timor.

So basically, if you stop genocide occuring in East Timor, they will hate you, because you have "interevened in a muslim land". And this was in fact the reason they gave for blowing up the head offices of the UN and for blowing up Australian tourists in Bali.

I don't sympathize with islamic extremists in the slightest (although I can certainly sympathize with insurgents who fight off invading armies), I just don't make the distinction between islamic and jewish and christian and nationalist and etc extremism that you do. In the end it boils down to state actors and non state actors, and flying a flag and being part of the UN doesn't give you right to murder millions of innocent people with bombs and pretend to be morally better than someone who kills a few thousand innocent people with a hijacked airplane. The world is run by extremists and they all fuck over their enemies and they are all equally bad.

Quote
Not to mention the fact that Al Qaeda wants to kill all Hindus - people who have never wronged them at all! Also, that whole scandal with the cartoons of the PEDOPHILE mohammed that were drawn in a Danish newspaper. Denmark has no imperialist history with the west, has never wronged any Eastern country.. It is a multicultural society that accommodates all religions/races and does a lot of aid work in the Middle East - yet their embassies were burnt out and their citizens attacked because a single cartoonist dared to exercise his right to free speech.

And the US wants to lock up all the drug users because they consist largely of extremist christians, and they don't run into muslim lands strapped with bombs because they have enough money for remote control bomber planes etc. People in USA are routinely locked up for exercising their right to free speech, have you not heard of CP being illegal to view ? A significant culture makes you think that is okay, to lock up those people for looking at and even drawing things in some cases.....and a significant part of their culture thinks the same about people who draw cartoons of Mohammad. People everywhere are indoctrinated and do horribly evil things to each other, it doesn't mean the largest organized group of evil doers is somehow less evil due to their numbers.   

Quote
So I won't have it said that these people are merely defending themselves, from the big bad USA. I would be the first to say that the US government is insane and is responsible for the untold suffering of millions, but it is to excuse these wicked, sick, religious nutcases who sincerely want to destroy all the precious gains of civilisation, by suggesting that they are merely acting in self defense, or that they were forced into it by imperialism.

The US is run by sick religious nutcases also and their sickness leads to just as real suffering and death

Quote
These are countries where you can't openly criticise the government without being killed/tortured, if you're a woman you are practically OWNED by your husband, who is legally allowed to rape and beat you - you can't criticise the religion without being killed.. if you're a woman and dare to not wear a veil, you can have acid thrown in your face, or be beaten and raped. Although there is one upside, if you're a virgin you can't be sentenced to death. But you can be raped in the prison by the guards.. and then you're not a virgin anymore, and they can kill you.

Compare that to the US where yes, it is still corrupt, and yes, there have been atrocities, but you can say almost whatever you like, you have a lot of rights, the freedom to do with your life what you want. You can be any religion, any race. You have the right to a fair trial, etc. Sure the banks and financial institutions abuse their power.. but these aren't pictures that can be squared.

and this makes no difference when the US government drop bombs and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people, and then they call people who kill a few thousand evil terrorists. They are both evil terrorists. But terrorism isn't real ;).

Quote
There are significant, significant enough at least, amounts of people in the middle east who think that they have God on their side when they kill people, when they tell you what to do, what to wear, who to worship, what you can say.. To compare the US to these evil scumbags just isn't comparing like with like. Don't forget, that there is currently a war going on within Islam ITSELF. In fact, most of the deaths in Iraq are from this kind of violence. Muslims attacking other muslims because they have the "wrong" version of the faith.

You think many of the American soldiers killing muslims in these wars don't think they are fighting for God?

Quote
And by no means are all muslims extremists. But you come to the US, or the UK, or the EU, and you can be whatever religion you want, say almost anything you want (unless its inciting violence or racial hatred etc).. you can build a mosque if you have the money. Do you think the mullas in Saudi will offer you the same courtesy?

I think you extremely misinterpret what I say

anyway US has killed more innocent people and imprisoned more innocent people in the past 100 years than all of the iihadists have in the same time frame....seems pretty obvious who the bigger terrorists are to me , but doesn't excuse either of them
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: Messenger on April 04, 2012, 02:41 am
Some good points! As per its allegory towards terrorism this would really be more akin to a lynch mob, as instead of random acts of violence towards innocent civilians designed to cause fear in the masses for the purpose of ideological fulfillment, it would be targeted acts of violence towards guilty persons designed to cause fear amongst their category (politicians, lenders, organizations) for the purpose of the reinforcement of natural law. So it actually carries the inverse of terrorism, as opposed to a small group causing fear in a large group, a large group would be causing fear in a small group.

Why does this need to be a hidden service?  It seems like an idea you could use on a clearnet site as long as you don't say your purpose is to provide incentive for someones death.  It would need to be framed in the right light.  You would need a dam good lawyer.  It seems like I'm missing something.  What could they charge you with?

Read up on Jim Bells wikipedia entry, all he did was write a paper explaining the idea and the government has ruined his life ever since. I think we're all well aware that nowadays the government doesn't need to charge you with anything to make you disappear. A hidden service would be a first precaution, and a freenet freesite as a last resort given its completely untraceable (though extremely slow) nature.

Quote
I think there would be some massive issues with this. First of all, the people running it would have to be incredibly trustworthy. They could just up ship and steal the cash. And also, who nominates who gets put on there? It could easily just turn into attacking any random rich person.

It would be wholly up to the operator to not only prove he has a trustworthy platform but to moderate who gets posted and make sure that no one who has a healthy presumption of innocence gets nominated, as well as provide rules for no win scenario's and so forth. It's really no different from the silk road, just look at how many sketchy drug services there are and they all have come and gone, yet this one has remained because its operator has remained trustworthy. No doubt there would be a shaky start, but eventually a reliable service would come along and become the standard. 
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: Messenger on April 12, 2012, 06:03 am
I think its important to remember that the overall effect of this will not be death, but in fact life, where less corruption through fear of the invisible fist will create a stronger economy where people who were once living on the edge can prosper.
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: kmfkewm on April 12, 2012, 07:13 am
Some good points! As per its allegory towards terrorism this would really be more akin to a lynch mob, as instead of random acts of violence towards innocent civilians designed to cause fear in the masses for the purpose of ideological fulfillment, it would be targeted acts of violence towards guilty persons designed to cause fear amongst their category (politicians, lenders, organizations) for the purpose of the reinforcement of natural law. So it actually carries the inverse of terrorism, as opposed to a small group causing fear in a large group, a large group would be causing fear in a small group.

Why does this need to be a hidden service?  It seems like an idea you could use on a clearnet site as long as you don't say your purpose is to provide incentive for someones death.  It would need to be framed in the right light.  You would need a dam good lawyer.  It seems like I'm missing something.  What could they charge you with?

Read up on Jim Bells wikipedia entry, all he did was write a paper explaining the idea and the government has ruined his life ever since. I think we're all well aware that nowadays the government doesn't need to charge you with anything to make you disappear. A hidden service would be a first precaution, and a freenet freesite as a last resort given its completely untraceable (though extremely slow) nature.

Quote
I think there would be some massive issues with this. First of all, the people running it would have to be incredibly trustworthy. They could just up ship and steal the cash. And also, who nominates who gets put on there? It could easily just turn into attacking any random rich person.

It would be wholly up to the operator to not only prove he has a trustworthy platform but to moderate who gets posted and make sure that no one who has a healthy presumption of innocence gets nominated, as well as provide rules for no win scenario's and so forth. It's really no different from the silk road, just look at how many sketchy drug services there are and they all have come and gone, yet this one has remained because its operator has remained trustworthy. No doubt there would be a shaky start, but eventually a reliable service would come along and become the standard.

Freenet is not completely untraceable, it's just really hard to tell who originally published a file to it (but not so hard to tell who republishes files, although it is hard to prove if they intended to republish or not), and really hard to prove someone requested something from it (although trivial for their neighboring nodes to tell that they got something from it, proof that they requested to get it is the more difficult part to prove). There are attacks on Freenet though. It is also much less studied than Tor is. I think it is probably a lot better in some ways and a lot worse in others, but it has a ton more 'unknowns' than Tor does, at this point. It still aims to achieve anonymity, but it does so in an almost entirely different way than Tor does. Freenet aims to make it impossible to prove who originally published a file, and attempts to make it impossible to prove who intentionally republishes files and who intentionally requests to download files (ie: Freenet aims primarily to maintain plausible deniability, 'yes I downloaded that, but can you prove that I requested it?' 'Yes, I sent that from my computer and stored it on my computer, but can you prove that I did so intentionally?', 'Yes, I sent that file, but can you prove I was the one who originally added it to the network?' ). Freenet also aims to be highly censorship resistant by storing content distributed over many servers through out the network (ie: 'you can't censor this site because even though you can identify the nodes that store it easily enough, there are hundreds of them around the world, and you can't determine if the people running the nodes are aware of what they are storing, and even after you take a few of them down the content just shifts to others)

where as with Tor it is more like 'You don't know what I downloaded because it is layer encrypted on the path back to me' (but if you follow it back to me with a timing attack, or identify it with a traffic classifier at my entry node, you can essentially prove that I intended to download it) ... 'You don't know if I uploaded this file or not because you can't trace me back through the network' (but if you manage to trace me back you can essentially prove that I uploaded the file) .... 'You can't determine who I communicate with because our layer encrypted communications are routed through lots of nodes' (but if you do manage to get in a position to do a linking attack you can confirm who is talking with who) .... 'You can't censor this website because you (allegedly) can't easily find the server to take it down' (but if you do trace the server you can take it down)

Attacks against Tor tend to try to observe a packet at multiple points as it travels through the network, in an attempt to link the sender of the packet to the receiver or vice versa (or to identify the content of the sent / received packet). Attacks against Freenet tend to use statistical formulas to come to an estimate regarding the probability of  a certain node requesting or inserting a certain file or type of content (after all, it is trivial for all neighboring Freenet nodes to determine the content that they relay on to and from their neighbors, it is just hard for them to determine if the neighbor inserted/requested the content in the first place....)

The only place Freenet is a clear winner over Tor is in censorship resistance....good luck removing popular content from Freenet.
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: wjYDPHnu on April 15, 2012, 01:58 pm
Here is a great video introduction to the Jim Bell system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iT5c8eklvZk

One of the trusted vendors on SR could easily act as the holder of the funds.

People could test it out by crowd sourcing a bounty for the first person to correctly 'predict' the date of a paintball shooting of the main politician supporting CISPA  or some other target.

I suspect the politicians would quickly get the message that more serious things could happen if they continue oppressing people.
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: Mister Dank on April 15, 2012, 05:08 pm
From what I can tell, the main hurdle of AP is who holds the money and issues the payouts. How can the assassin be sure that the site will pay him out?

One possible solution I've been pondering the details of would involve refunding anyone who donated to the hit when the hit was done, once they confirmed the kill.

For example, 10 people donate $1000 each to have a local cop "Hank Bacon" killed, making the pot $10,000. Another cop on the force "Al Porker", thinks Hank is a douche and needs the money, so he places a $500 bet that Hank will die on July 4th (the fireworks will cover up the shots to Hank's head). After Hank is killed, the 10 people who donated can get 10% back ($100) if they confirm the kill on the site. Once a certain percent confirm the kill, the money is automatically released to the closest guesser. In our example, Al would get $9000 ($900 from each of the 10 donators) plus his $500 back.

The donators wouldn't want to confirm the kill until it was done, but would want the money once it was.

Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: Messenger on April 17, 2012, 07:52 am
I'm sure there would be a plethora of ways of implementing this, but before one does one must consider the ramifications of providing a easy and anonymous way to remove ones enemy to the populace.

Lets consider our demographic, under the hypothetical situation that such a hidden service would follow silk roads path starting out as a small community site and then gain huge publicity leading to widespread (and due to its nature, much more mainstream) use. So its initial support would be garnered by those of us who are smart enough to understand encryption and security, and battleworn enough to know who our persecutors are. This combination would lead often to just killings, though whether enough funds could be accumulated to entice one to win, or whether it could reach those capable and willing to do so is a bit of a chicken and egg scenario. Needless to say at this point should someone actually pull through this would be the shot heard round the world and would lead us to stage two, public awareness.

This is where an otherwise just and effective tool may turn against us. Consider who might be drawn to such a system: lets take fundamentalist christians for example, who currently make up 30% of our national voting bloc. Through the otherwise symbolic act of voting they have wreaked havoc across our lands and supported if not created the post-911 landscape we all will have to live with the rest of our lives. They are also the ones who called for blood and in doing so created a war that cost us (and made the military industrial complex) billions, creating nothing more than an increased incentive to attack us. Now lets say they get their grimy little hands on this tool and with their vast aggregate wealth start targeting anyone the media chooses to demonize for this week. This of course is the same media controlled by none other than the very government we seek to oppose. Will our bounty possibly compare to theirs? Will we still have a voice in the system we made?

It may seem as if i am speaking against the very idea i proposed, but one must consider the implications of such a tool and if opening pandora's box on such an idea is truly wise. I think what we're seeing in the governments around us is not the scheming of a few petty tyrants but in fact the willful consent of many sheep beying in tandem. Who then is our enemy?
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: BE HERE NOW on April 17, 2012, 08:45 am
The amount of extremist muslims in contrast to the amount of muslims in the world is so fucking ridiculous that it shows the true ignorance of blindly following fox watching citizens and the level of propaganda by the us government.

The us military practices so much fucking genocide it is sickening. This you will hear from dishonorably discharged vets who refused to coldly murder innocent victims civilian and not during wars for reasons not told to any public. Everything we've ever been told is WRONG.

So yes, of course there are actual terrorist attacks. They do happen. By muslims. But far more often they are done by american boys who were "just following orders"

I can't say I'd support a death lottery. I like the idea of heartless individuals fearing retribution but I couldn't support random murder. The fact that we are talking about supporting that sort of thing doesn't really seem much better than supporting a government that will use whatever false information to gain war support (EVERY SINGLE WAR THE US HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN).

I believe social consensus MUST move beyond violence. We must collectively stop supporting military in all forms. Same as government. But of course, that won't be possible until we can actually all govern ourselves, right?
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: lilith2u on April 17, 2012, 02:38 pm
love your post...BE HERE NOW. also like this whole thread and kmfkewm is always spot on> Thanks Messenger! Between this and Occupy and Anonymous There just may be a glimmer of hope for this falling Impire. But not holding my breath:)
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: philter3 on April 18, 2012, 12:24 am
I think there would be some massive issues with this. First of all, the people running it would have to be incredibly trustworthy. They could just up ship and steal the cash. And also, who nominates who gets put on there? It could easily just turn into attacking any random rich person.
Well the best way would be to let the market take care of it.. you have MULTIPLE competing death lotteries. Make sure the administrator of the pools gets a %. The successful pools (i.e. the ones which attract the most "popular capitol") will hopefully pay enough in a % that it's more profitable that "taking the money and running".
 Additionally this also helps take care of your nomination and "random victims" idea.. because only TRULY unpopular people will be able to create enough general hate for them to bid their deaths up beyond the point where a reputable "lottery admin" would "take the wager".

Quote
Not to mention, let's say some guy bets the banker will die on 5th March 2015, and plans to kill him on that day - the bankers have the money to invest in incredible security, so first of all you'd have to get past that, and also, if the banker did get killed on that day, LE would know right where to look.
Negative Ghostrider. Again.. you do it via Bitcoin. The only human link in the pay-in/pay-out chain is the Admin. The "Escrow Agent" who verified time of death. The rest is all on the computers.. and they send OUT the bitcoins (again anonymously) to a given wallet address that was specified in the "entry wager". This way the bet pays out EVEN IF the hit was a "suicide bomber" type. That way a person who has a terminal illness or wants to "die making a difference" can let his family, heirs or assigns receive the proceeds from his "act of populist disapproval".

Quote
I think it would be just as successful for a group of people to go around killing bankers. If a banker was being murdered every week it would make them think twice about engaging in such malpractice, and companies would be swift to prove that they are pro-people, pro fairness and aren't in the business to scam people, as to avoid having their staff killed off.
I doubt it. It's much harder to imagine a scenario where the profit motive and competition is mobilized in your "group of people" example. Also a "group of people" can betray each other.. and have to commit multiple killings to get their point across. The "Death Lottery" only takes one actor per successful target elimination (and as I said.. the actor doesn't even have to survive a successful attempt).
Quote
But really what's the difference between this and terrorism?
Who cares. I think 90% of the people labeled terrorists are far better human beings than 99.99% of the cops, judges, officials, and military members "serving the public".
 When one brings up the word "terrorism" like it's a derogatory term one's intellectual credibility falls screaming into the dark pit of the abyss.

 "Terrorists" are better people than the "anti-terrorists".. who are.. basically warmongering assholes intent on using the "terrorists" as a rationale for subjugating people like you and me.
 
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: kmfkewm on April 18, 2012, 02:01 am
Terrorists are people who fight for ideological causes that go against what the people who make your propaganda believe in.
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: philter3 on April 18, 2012, 02:08 am
Terrorists are people who fight for ideological causes that go against what the people who make your propaganda believe in.

+1. Q.F.T.
Title: Re: The Death Lottery
Post by: Mister Dank on April 18, 2012, 08:11 pm
As far as the morality of AP, I don't think that matters as much because its an inevitability anyway. But my take on it is that its better to let the market dole out punishment than a government monopoly.