8 ms·

I see several comments questioning the legitimate value of a peer-to-peer marketplace. Some cannot see any use other than illegal commerce (drugs, porn, etc).

by jasode 12y ago

I see several comments questioning the legitimate value of a peer-to-peer marketplace. Some cannot see any use other than illegal commerce (drugs, porn, etc). It is true that such illicit trades will take advantage of that network but is it really impossible to envision legal business as the major activity? Yes, cars can be used as getaway vehicles from bank robberies and also smash terrorist bombs into government buildings. However, cars also have tons of other legitimate uses. Consider that ebay has about 200 million users.[1] Their fees have been going up every year and they are now at 10% (which does not include the separate insertion fees.)[2] If one can sell a legal item such as a $50 book on ebay, why not sell it on a p2p marketplace and avoid paying $5 of that sale to ebay? If not OpenBazaar or similar p2p architecture, what alternatives do folks propose? Do 200 million ebay users have lawful reasons to avoid paying ebay commission fees? At this point, I believe low-volume selling is too dependent on proprietary platforms such as ebay or amazonmarketplace. As an analogy using email, I'm glad that SMTP won over closed systems such as CompuServe, AOL, and Western Union's EasyLink. Even though SMTP email has many bad uses such as phishing, malware delivery, and spam, I'm still glad it won. The good uses outweigh the bad. Can a more open platform for sellers without the stigma of illegal activity be realized? [1]https://www.google.com/search?q=ebay+"200+million+users" https://www.google.com/search?q=ebay+"200+million+users" [2]https://www.google.com/search?q=ebay+raises+fees+10%25 https://www.google.com/search?q=ebay+raises+fees+10%25

doctorfoo 12y ago
When OpenBazaar seems more mature I will definitely consider listing (my entirely legal) items on it first, at least to experiment. Lower fees + I'm happy with Bitcoin = Win.
- ams6110 12y ago
  There are absolutely legitimate uses for this kind of platform. It's the online equivalent of the local boutique retail shop, street vendor, or home yard sale.
Touche 12y ago
Why does a distributed marketplace intended for legal trade need to run on Tor? Do you need anonymity if you're selling towels?
- jasode 12y ago
  > need to run on Tor? I don't know the technical details of OpenBazaar. From the article this thread is about, it says: "OpenBazaar is open-source software that runs a peer-to-peer network that can be used with the Tor anonymizing network." I interpreted that in the literal sense that it "CAN" be used and not "MUST". If the only possible way to use the OpenBazaar client is to log into Tor, that would understandably raise skepticism about its ambitions for legal trade. A representative from OpenBazaar is in this thread and maybe he can clarify that technical detail. As for hiding my sales of legal items, maybe I don't want my friends to know that I sold that ugly shirt they got for my birthday. I'm sure there are all sorts of legitimate reasons for being an anonymous seller of legal goods.
  - narrowrail 12y ago
    Just as an aside, use of Craigslist obviously avoids these fees, with the caveat that market participants be within the same physical vicinity. I wonder if there could be a potential for some sort of integration. I bought my truck in another state using CL, and flying one-way with cash in hand.
- dionyziz 12y ago
  OpenBazaar developer here. This is the "nothing to hide" argument that we've seen used to much by the NSA and governments. The answer is that we believe people simply have the right to privacy in trade. Here's a discussion by the OpenBazaar team on the matter: https://github.com/OpenBazaar/OpenBazaar/issues/189 https://github.com/OpenBazaar/OpenBazaar/issues/189 Do you want your credit card company to know exactly where you've shopped for the past two years? Would you like your employer to know what porn movies you enjoy? Would you want your neighbourhood burglars to know exactly how much money you spent on your brand new Swiss watch this month? Is it OK if your super-market chain only offers discounts to you on the condition that you don't buy anything from other super-market chains? Should your wife be able to scrutinize what trips you went to and how much you spent on expensive chocolate and alcohol without your permission? Discover before her birthday that you bought her a ring as a present? Would you feel alright if Google used all your shopping history to show you targeted ads? As a seller of rare books, do you want the prices of all purchases to be published to potential candidate sellers instead of being treated as trade secrets? Would you want your annoying jealous nephew to know you've booked snowboarding tickets to Austria without inviting him? Is it acceptable for these things to be posted on the Internet and commented-on by Redditors? Please, I invite you to post your credit card records for the past year here. We'll be happy to look over them and leave some comments for you. After all, you've got nothing to hide, yes? Anonymity is important for people. For some people, it's more important than others. Different people have different needs. Sometimes anonymity is a matter of life and death, sometimes it's just a matter of personal privacy and the right to be left alone. Users can use the anonymity feature as they see fit, but we need to be there to protect them if they require so. And, yes, some trade can be only marginally legal or completely illegal. Sometimes illegal trade is ethical, and laws vary from country to country. At least at the trade level, we should be free and anonymous. What if your Internet provider disables the Internet in your country by secret warrant request of the government if you live in North Korea, or Turkey in the times of Twitter-censorship, or Egypt in the time of the revolt, or Iran at times of war? Is it OK to leak to your government that you purchased an antenna off of OpenBazaar to access the Internet through mesh networks? Sometimes the penalty can be death. Not everyone lives in free regimes where privacy is a matter of a warm, cozy feeling and convenience. People need privacy in trade to be free. That said, freedom comes at a cost, and the price for being free is not low :)
jeffreyrogers 12y ago
> I see several comments questioning the legitimate value of a peer-to-peer marketplace. The problem with P2P is that it requires a much more complicated architecture than if you simply use a more centralized model. There's the old joke: I had a scalability problem so I switched to a distributed system. Now I have n^2 problems. It is true that many architectures are moving towards a more decentralized model, however, they still have a central controller typically.
krapp 12y ago
>Can a more open platform for sellers without the stigma of illegal activity be realized? Probably not. Cars weren't invented to make bank robberies more difficult to stop. These networks were invented, to a degree which shouldn't be dismissed when considering their acceptance by the mainstream, to make enforcing laws against trading in anything more difficult, if not impossible. I think most people (not most people on HN, or in tech, but most people in general) would rather pay the extra few dollars than support the premise of a truly free market. While I would agree completely that there are perfectly legitimate uses for these networks, and there is nothing at all evil or malicious in the technology itself, I also think it would be disingenuous to state that their use in illegal activities is somehow orthogonal to their purpose.
- jasode 12y ago
  > , I also think it would be disingenuous to state that their use in illegal activities is somehow orthogonal to their purpose. The Haber Process[1] was a new way to manufacture ammonia in large quantities. Fritz Haber was originally motivated by Germany's war objectives to kill people via poison gas and explosives. Germany needed a lot of synthetic ammonia to do that. Now, the Haber process is mass producing fertilizer and feeding the world. It's possible to divorce the original evil uses of the technology from the later good ones. The potential 200 million ebay and whatever millions of amazonmarketplace legal sellers can outnumber the criminals. The 10% ebay fees and 15% amazon commissions are very compelling motivators to create an "open SMTP" type of marketplace for sellers. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process
  - dklsf 12y ago
    The motivation for development was actually producing fertilizer, as it says in the article you linked.
    - jasode 12y ago
      Yes, my memory was not accurate and I should have specified Haber-Bosch Process & Carl Bosch[1] instead of Haber Process & Fritz Haber. Apparently, Carl Bosch's refinements to the original Haber Process had the priority goal of ramping up Germany's war munitions instead of feeding the world. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Bosch http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Bosch
abruzzi 12y ago
While there are absolutely benefit of a system like this for legal sales, the problem is most sellers of legal goods have many existing outlets that they can use. While they might not like the fees, most accept them as the cost of doing business. Since there are few organized marketplaces online for illegal goods, the first adopters (as with Silk Road) will most likely be the black market, which will likely stigmatize the marketplace, making it far less likely to be adopted by legal sellers.
- legalbeagle 12y ago
  I think the problem for "legal" users of distributed markets is not stigma; it's cost, ease of use, and likelihood of fraud or other problems with transactions. If a distributed market arose that was inexpensive, as easy to use as eBay, and not significantly more affected by fraud, I think it could be adopted by "legal" users.
pearjuice 12y ago
Google searches aren't valid citations.
101914 12y ago
Interesting that you used the example of eBay. I remember reading about the alleged reason eBay acquired Skype. Skype is a peer to peer network. The guys behind it were the guys behind Kazaa, an earlier peer to peer network. In Skype's case, the network is used to send audio and video. In Kazaa's case the network was used to send "files". If I recall correctly the article said eBay planned to use the Skype network to allow buyers and sellers to communicate with each other, directly. It's also interesting you mentioned SMTP. I do not think I have ever seen anyone mention it online but SMTP works well over a peer to peer network. Peer to peer SMTP obviates the need for intermediary SMTP servers and third party "email providers". With peer to peer networking there is no necessity for users' data to be stored and forwarded by third parties. Not to suggest anyone would be interested in that.
- giggles_giggles 12y ago
  Microsoft owns Skype, not eBay. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_Technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_Technologies
  - legalbeagle 12y ago
    Read the wiki you cited. Before MS, eBay owned Skype and that's the transaction he's referring to.
nine_k 12y ago
A part of the problem is that something truly secure will equally be useful for legitimate and illegitimate uses. There's no way to make a safe that only keeps honestly earned money. Any solution with a backdoor added exclusively for use against bad guys is inherently unsafe, and this will bite good guys sooner or later. This article explains this in greater detail: http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/06/tools-for-treason/ http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/06/tools-for-treason/
peteretep 12y ago
> I see several comments questioning the legitimate value > of a peer-to-peer marketplace. No, you see comments questioning the legitimate value of an anonymous or pseudonymous peer-to-peer marketplace. Also, you misunderstand what eBay provides: eBay provides marketing and payment handling. That's what their margin is for. You are entirely welcome - today - to set up a webpage, list your wares, and accept Bitcoin for them. The problem is that there's little centralized reputation management there, and also, no-one is ever going to find your stuff. Unless a p2p marketplace is solving those needs, what benefit does it provide over nginx + a bitcoin wallet?

by jasode 12y ago

doctorfoo 12y ago

When OpenBazaar seems more mature I will definitely consider listing (my entirely legal) items on it first, at least to experiment. Lower fees + I'm happy with Bitcoin = Win.

ams6110 12y ago
There are absolutely legitimate uses for this kind of platform. It's the online equivalent of the local boutique retail shop, street vendor, or home yard sale.

Touche 12y ago

Why does a distributed marketplace intended for legal trade need to run on Tor? Do you need anonymity if you're selling towels?

jasode 12y ago
> need to run on Tor? I don't know the technical details of OpenBazaar. From the article this thread is about, it says: "OpenBazaar is open-source software that runs a peer-to-peer network that can be used with the Tor anonymizing network." I interpreted that in the literal sense that it "CAN" be used and not "MUST". If the only possible way to use the OpenBazaar client is to log into Tor, that would understandably raise skepticism about its ambitions for legal trade. A representative from OpenBazaar is in this thread and maybe he can clarify that technical detail. As for hiding my sales of legal items, maybe I don't want my friends to know that I sold that ugly shirt they got for my birthday. I'm sure there are all sorts of legitimate reasons for being an anonymous seller of legal goods.
- narrowrail 12y ago
  Just as an aside, use of Craigslist obviously avoids these fees, with the caveat that market participants be within the same physical vicinity. I wonder if there could be a potential for some sort of integration. I bought my truck in another state using CL, and flying one-way with cash in hand.
dionyziz 12y ago
OpenBazaar developer here. This is the "nothing to hide" argument that we've seen used to much by the NSA and governments. The answer is that we believe people simply have the right to privacy in trade. Here's a discussion by the OpenBazaar team on the matter: https://github.com/OpenBazaar/OpenBazaar/issues/189 https://github.com/OpenBazaar/OpenBazaar/issues/189 Do you want your credit card company to know exactly where you've shopped for the past two years? Would you like your employer to know what porn movies you enjoy? Would you want your neighbourhood burglars to know exactly how much money you spent on your brand new Swiss watch this month? Is it OK if your super-market chain only offers discounts to you on the condition that you don't buy anything from other super-market chains? Should your wife be able to scrutinize what trips you went to and how much you spent on expensive chocolate and alcohol without your permission? Discover before her birthday that you bought her a ring as a present? Would you feel alright if Google used all your shopping history to show you targeted ads? As a seller of rare books, do you want the prices of all purchases to be published to potential candidate sellers instead of being treated as trade secrets? Would you want your annoying jealous nephew to know you've booked snowboarding tickets to Austria without inviting him? Is it acceptable for these things to be posted on the Internet and commented-on by Redditors? Please, I invite you to post your credit card records for the past year here. We'll be happy to look over them and leave some comments for you. After all, you've got nothing to hide, yes? Anonymity is important for people. For some people, it's more important than others. Different people have different needs. Sometimes anonymity is a matter of life and death, sometimes it's just a matter of personal privacy and the right to be left alone. Users can use the anonymity feature as they see fit, but we need to be there to protect them if they require so. And, yes, some trade can be only marginally legal or completely illegal. Sometimes illegal trade is ethical, and laws vary from country to country. At least at the trade level, we should be free and anonymous. What if your Internet provider disables the Internet in your country by secret warrant request of the government if you live in North Korea, or Turkey in the times of Twitter-censorship, or Egypt in the time of the revolt, or Iran at times of war? Is it OK to leak to your government that you purchased an antenna off of OpenBazaar to access the Internet through mesh networks? Sometimes the penalty can be death. Not everyone lives in free regimes where privacy is a matter of a warm, cozy feeling and convenience. People need privacy in trade to be free. That said, freedom comes at a cost, and the price for being free is not low :)

jeffreyrogers 12y ago

> I see several comments questioning the legitimate value of a peer-to-peer marketplace. The problem with P2P is that it requires a much more complicated architecture than if you simply use a more centralized model. There's the old joke: I had a scalability problem so I switched to a distributed system. Now I have n^2 problems. It is true that many architectures are moving towards a more decentralized model, however, they still have a central controller typically.

krapp 12y ago

>Can a more open platform for sellers without the stigma of illegal activity be realized? Probably not. Cars weren't invented to make bank robberies more difficult to stop. These networks were invented, to a degree which shouldn't be dismissed when considering their acceptance by the mainstream, to make enforcing laws against trading in anything more difficult, if not impossible. I think most people (not most people on HN, or in tech, but most people in general) would rather pay the extra few dollars than support the premise of a truly free market. While I would agree completely that there are perfectly legitimate uses for these networks, and there is nothing at all evil or malicious in the technology itself, I also think it would be disingenuous to state that their use in illegal activities is somehow orthogonal to their purpose.

jasode 12y ago
> , I also think it would be disingenuous to state that their use in illegal activities is somehow orthogonal to their purpose. The Haber Process[1] was a new way to manufacture ammonia in large quantities. Fritz Haber was originally motivated by Germany's war objectives to kill people via poison gas and explosives. Germany needed a lot of synthetic ammonia to do that. Now, the Haber process is mass producing fertilizer and feeding the world. It's possible to divorce the original evil uses of the technology from the later good ones. The potential 200 million ebay and whatever millions of amazonmarketplace legal sellers can outnumber the criminals. The 10% ebay fees and 15% amazon commissions are very compelling motivators to create an "open SMTP" type of marketplace for sellers. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process
- dklsf 12y ago
  The motivation for development was actually producing fertilizer, as it says in the article you linked.
  - jasode 12y ago
    Yes, my memory was not accurate and I should have specified Haber-Bosch Process & Carl Bosch[1] instead of Haber Process & Fritz Haber. Apparently, Carl Bosch's refinements to the original Haber Process had the priority goal of ramping up Germany's war munitions instead of feeding the world. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Bosch http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Bosch

abruzzi 12y ago

While there are absolutely benefit of a system like this for legal sales, the problem is most sellers of legal goods have many existing outlets that they can use. While they might not like the fees, most accept them as the cost of doing business. Since there are few organized marketplaces online for illegal goods, the first adopters (as with Silk Road) will most likely be the black market, which will likely stigmatize the marketplace, making it far less likely to be adopted by legal sellers.

legalbeagle 12y ago
I think the problem for "legal" users of distributed markets is not stigma; it's cost, ease of use, and likelihood of fraud or other problems with transactions. If a distributed market arose that was inexpensive, as easy to use as eBay, and not significantly more affected by fraud, I think it could be adopted by "legal" users.

pearjuice 12y ago

Google searches aren't valid citations.

101914 12y ago

Interesting that you used the example of eBay. I remember reading about the alleged reason eBay acquired Skype. Skype is a peer to peer network. The guys behind it were the guys behind Kazaa, an earlier peer to peer network. In Skype's case, the network is used to send audio and video. In Kazaa's case the network was used to send "files". If I recall correctly the article said eBay planned to use the Skype network to allow buyers and sellers to communicate with each other, directly. It's also interesting you mentioned SMTP. I do not think I have ever seen anyone mention it online but SMTP works well over a peer to peer network. Peer to peer SMTP obviates the need for intermediary SMTP servers and third party "email providers". With peer to peer networking there is no necessity for users' data to be stored and forwarded by third parties. Not to suggest anyone would be interested in that.

giggles_giggles 12y ago
Microsoft owns Skype, not eBay. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_Technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_Technologies
- legalbeagle 12y ago
  Read the wiki you cited. Before MS, eBay owned Skype and that's the transaction he's referring to.

nine_k 12y ago

A part of the problem is that something truly secure will equally be useful for legitimate and illegitimate uses. There's no way to make a safe that only keeps honestly earned money. Any solution with a backdoor added exclusively for use against bad guys is inherently unsafe, and this will bite good guys sooner or later. This article explains this in greater detail: http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/06/tools-for-treason/ http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/06/tools-for-treason/

peteretep 12y ago

> I see several comments questioning the legitimate value > of a peer-to-peer marketplace. No, you see comments questioning the legitimate value of an anonymous or pseudonymous peer-to-peer marketplace. Also, you misunderstand what eBay provides: eBay provides marketing and payment handling. That's what their margin is for. You are entirely welcome - today - to set up a webpage, list your wares, and accept Bitcoin for them. The problem is that there's little centralized reputation management there, and also, no-one is ever going to find your stuff. Unless a p2p marketplace is solving those needs, what benefit does it provide over nginx + a bitcoin wallet?