> built his empire, in large part, by profiting off people's suffering. LOL. Wow. You clearly have no sense for nuance whatsoever. https://www.wired.com/2014/

> built his empire, in large part, by profiting off people's suffering. LOL. Wow. You clearly have no sense for nuance whatsoever. https://www.wired.com/2014/06/silk-road-study/ https://www.wired.com/2014/06/silk-road-study/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/did-shutting-down-silk-road-make-the-world-a-more-dangerous-place/280270/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/did-s... Silk Road reduced deaths in a black market that was always there and would always continue to be there regardless of the presence of Silk Road. Period. Given that black markets are going to continue to exist, since anti-drug laws are dumb (just like Prohibition was; regulation of an irrepressible market is always superior to "illegalization" in a vain attempt to suppress it), it is at least less bad if there are fewer killings. Entrapment is unethical precisely because you can use it to enforce a law regardless of the ethical justification of the law. If it was a capital offense to have sex before marriage in 2040 in the United Christian Dictatorship of America, and another Ross Ulbricht type came along and made it possible for teens to seek and meet in secret online, and a christo-fascist cop pretended to be a hot girl on said system while pretending to threaten to take the whole thing down unless a ransom was paid, and ANOTHER christo-fascist cop (or the same one pretending to be someone else) offered a "solution" to this by "getting rid of" the "problem"... Do you see where I'm going with this? Future Ross Ulbricht just wanted people to be able to find physical love before committing to wed!! Certainly not guilty enough to do life in prison, because no actual murders ever actually occurred.