The Future of the Markets

.


Comments


[17 Points] None:

Due to the nature of the DNMs one should should be putting trust into as few things as possible

So much this. Trustless technology is the way to go, and multisig is a step in that direction. I am on board, OP.


[12 Points] None:

Nigga you used some big ass words lmao


[9 Points] TheRealDealMarket:

"If you don't control the private keys, you don't control yourself."

That's quite interesting, we (TheRealDeal market) are actually working on our market's code to allow viewing of the WIF key associated with the deposit address and the coding process just started today, do you think, that besides our multisig option that many people are too lazy to learn, this is a good solution?

Would love to hear your input.


[3 Points] multiplicity_smith:

Appreciate the post, OP. This seems to be one of the more level-headed discussions concerning the future of DNMs. I'm a long-time lurker on this sub, but I'd like to actually contribute for once and give my two cents.

I'm a programmer by discipline, and am a huge supporter (and user) of the DNM concept, as well as the general idea that the government has almost no (if not, absolutely no) say in individual rights. I've been thinking about these issues for a while, and possible solutions.

I agree that there absolutely should not be a monolithic market that is owned and moderated by a select few. I also agree that multisig is the next big step in proper escrow, and must be adopted one way or another. However, I do not think that the market service itself should exist in any one place. Rather, the market should exist in a peer-to-peer fashion.

When I say peer-to-peer, I do not mean OpenBazaar, wherein vendors host their own store node. (As an aside, I've looked through the OpenBazaar code, and holy shit is it awful. I am not surprised how they have had to consistently move back deadlines--their code is absolute spaghetti and must be a nightmare to maintain and extend. Personally, I have no hope for OB.)

So, what I figure could work is a peer-to-peer distributed application where those who wish to support the market may do so by hosting a node that helps run the entire market, rather than a single vendor's store. This would require a database that can be distributed over peers, and I think that bitcoin's blockchain technology (as well as IPFS) may help make this possible.

With a market distributed in this fashion, donations given to the market can be dispersed among the nodes. Moreover, vendors can choose to pay small fees to the network to keep it sustained; and, if they do so, they are afforded small perks like preference in searches, or badges next to their name indicating their market philanthropy.

Transactions on the market would be strictly 2-of-3 multisig, wherein the entire market gets one of the signatures, and this signature may sign the transaction according to how the nodes of the market vote, where each node gets a single vote (if they so choose to use it). If the market is sufficiently distributed, vendors (or coalitions of vendors) will not be able to strongarm the market when transactions must be arbitrated. (Remember that vendors could easily set up their own nodes to gain votes on the network).

Such a market could not exit scam, since coins are not held anywhere. Rather, the market exists as a distributed database+application for listings and fair vendor reviews, where users of the market can own part of the market by hosting a node.

Some questions remain, such as how fees are set (though the voting construct could help here). In any case, I feel that this would be a far more sustainable and trustless model for a market than what is currently used. Comments and counterpoints are highly encouraged.

TL;DR. OpenBazaar is not the answer; rather, completely distributed market "cooperatives" where node hosts vote in arbitration and other measures. Also, strict 2-3 multisig between vendors and customers, with arbitration handled by a vote from the cooperative.


[3 Points] Bars4daze:

This all appears like a sound plan. Just getting people to buy in would be hard work. Old habits die hard and the mass of people using these centralized markets won't be as receptive to change as most people who frequent this sub because they don't care to learn.


[3 Points] None:

multisig raises the issue of what if you are in a transaction with LE, they now have a wallet address that is certianly yours


[3 Points] None:

A simple yet sophisticated search engine that will easily allow buyers to find exactly what they're looking for

yeah, easier said than done. coding search algorithms are a pain in the ass, something where people can and do PhDs on the subject, and way less important than keeping the actual market secure.

you cant use google nor any open source alternative out there because they most likely have backdoors that could filter out IPs.


[1 Points] JesusChristalMeth:

A great part of security relies on the inability of authorities to monitor everyone. I think DNM made exposure of online markets - which have existed for at least the decade before SR1 - public, and really vendor-on-vendor competition became the norm over either a wholesale system or a vendor-online-v-vendor-IRL system. Sure, more exposure is good, but frankly DNM price are atrocious, the quality is not necessarily better and certainly not for the price, and essentially all the problems with cartelization can be seen online - you just need to be better than the next guy. When you had to compete with your customer's local guy you really needed to up your game, the product needed to be better, rarer, higher quality, but that can only be achieved if you only have a few customers.

I think markets should really have more exclusivity. You need some sort of actual vouch system. I don't personally think the democratization (or rather the Amazonization) of drugs is really helping anyone. I think it attracts more attention, the product is generally dull, and prices are stale. Maybe it's different because I've always either lived in big cities with large networks or had access one way or another with these small hidden networks - but I find that when you limit your exposure your reputation becomes actually important and you put more focus on the product.

Maybe the DNMs now should only be small sales. The real wholesalers do already do direct deals and that requires far more OPSEC and trust. DNMs don't necessarily foster that, so let them say, limit order sizes, make them compete with street vendors, and generally make them smaller, either via caps, vouches, whatever. This really in't an environment where you can make a true open market work yet.

How do you actually fragment the market? Real invites. Do the private tracker model. People have existing connections on DNM now, start there.

Personally I liked wholesaling more, you deal with far less people and I felt like that was the way buying and selling anything illegal online really needed to be. Real IRL dealers make a lot less money but can offer really low prices, it's hard to compete without volume, but customer volume I think will always attract the wrong kind of attention.


[1 Points] XinruLiu:

Whats wrong with HANSA's forced 2-2 and optional 2-3? Step in the right direction no?


[1 Points] None:

Good post, and yeah that would probably work but why? Right now, if you follow basic opsec and common sense you are incredibly safe as it is- the only way a sensible person can lose cash is by market exitscam at the wrong time.

The near term future will be people using markets and people scamming, because while its not perfect, it works.


[1 Points] mutterfucker:

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy. It was created to help protect users from doxing, stalking, and harassment.

If you would also like to protect yourself, add the Chrome extension TamperMonkey, or the Firefox extension GreaseMonkey and add this open source script.

Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, scroll down as far as possibe (hint:use RES), and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

Also, please consider using Voat.co as an alternative to Reddit as Voat does not censor political content.


[1 Points] isuckeddickforcoke:

Bravo.


[1 Points] None:

[deleted]


[1 Points] throwthrowbrobro:

Can someone link me a guide to multisig? I haven't been able to find it


[1 Points] imnotfrosty:

Blockchain technology could contain the entire process. Every vendor and item and purchase and address and review, a chain for all to see, infinitely traceable and anonymous, distributed in the truest sense, but only the principals applicable have the private keys necessary to see what applies to them in the chain. Enough participants "mining" and it works. Why doesn't it exist? There's no profit in it for the creators. Or is there...

Branded markets and their scams and busts will go away. Whether it will be as above or perhaps some market technology with multisig that constantly moves itself automatically -- I dunno what will replace the bullshit we have now.


[1 Points] Devoid_:

How much time did you spend on this?


[1 Points] gg4jjjj4444:

OP, youre overthinking this. The damage these admins have done to DNM's has already been done, the demand for DNM drugs has dimished drastically over the past year. Creating a market to prevent theft is noble but misguided, any of these solutions creates complexity and increases buyer requirements which for the vast majority of drug users is insurmountable, giving cash to your bro's is about as easy and riskfree as it gets. How are we supposed to compete with that?

'Higher quality' drugs dont mean shit when you risk getting a CD for it, and most people dont know the difference in quality, hell most popular drugs are cut at the source and multiple times again down the chain with pretty nasty chemicals and people could care less.

Trying to offer a dependable market isnt going to bring these people in, just the act of buying bitcoin and running torbrowser sets the bar far above their heads. For the rest of us anti-social out of the loop druggies building gigantic solutions is overkill. Peoples expectations are what need to change and that is that amazon style markets need to die and direct dealing has to become the norm, how that directory is maintained is nothing more than a simple website.

Really the killer application of DNM's was never the listings, it was half the ability for people to deal anonymously and half the ability for buyers to rate them thereby providing accountability. Since the former has already been solved by decentralized technologies the latter is really what needs a permanent decentralized solution, then simple vendor contact directories can be put up ad infinitum all over the deepweb and theft would be relegated to the occasional exit scammer which can always be mitigated by vendors offering multisig escrow at a premium.


[1 Points] EZPeeVee:

2016 makes 7 years of me using the same handle with good opsec. It's about relationships more than markets.


[1 Points] Hansbald:

Why don't you code it yourself? I'm fucking retarded.

Ahhaha I lost it Its a good idea tho, wish I was a bit better in it too lol


[0 Points] dm_noob_:

"There are numerous problems with the current model of markets that I will outline below."


[-8 Points] None:

[removed]