> “There are so many questions I would have liked to ask him,” said Wesley Gillespie, a Secret Service agent who chased Johnson for a year. “How did he learn to make these so well? Who taught him? Where is the bitcoin?”
Is it, though? Do you have first hand knowledge of this? Every time I try to look at things on "the dark web", I read through hidden wiki, see a few completely empty forums, laugh, then turn tor back off.
That's because hidden wiki was seized and doesn't exist anymore. What you saw was a mirror of now severely outdated information + with more unsavory links deleted.
Exactly the same experience as GP. Please educate how to find better sites/forums/discussions. Once I saw one ad for 'r* *e videos' in some onion site while exploring and I immediately closed tor.
There exists at least one website or user that is available only as a hidden service on that network which has better information than sites on clearnet
So maybe you are asking the wrong question?
> Every time I try to look at things on "the dark web", I read through hidden wiki, see a few completely empty forums, laugh, then turn tor back off.
Your search techniques aren't useful. All the information is bought from vendors, and they likely will only send you a file over a peer-2-peer encrypted chat, or in a message with their pgp encryption.
Vendors do not talk on forums much to avoid analysis.
Maybe we're talking about different things. I don't mean "looking for things" as in: "looking for things to purchase". I mean that I'm looking for the weird hackery message boards of my youth.
It doesn't matter, information is disseminated in encrypted peer 2 peer chats, and nobody will talk to you or give you a username to message them unless you paid them
It is not indexed. The only thing that is indexed are reviews, which you can only use the reviews and the escrow systems to have a better chance of not being duped or scammed
I wonder if we're confusing some terms here. When you are saying "the dark net", are you specifically talking about darknet markets?
So, for instance: there aren't hosted forums, or other repositories of information? How does somebody get an index of the people to even talk to in these chats?
It is accurate that you would find these people on dark net marketplaces, and those places frequently also host forums
when I say "the dark web", I'm referring to things I know are hosted on TOR.
what are you having trouble with here? I told you how to use them, you won't be able to recreate your childhood. The most useful hidden services are the dark net marketplaces, and they do harbor an extremely efficient level of tools, exploits, and more. now that there is a monetization model, and still privacy concerns, you won't have hackers posting stuff just for bragging rights, so there are a variety of reasons why there is nothing to be indexed.
You're the one who mentioned education. It's sort of odd to call people out for misinterpreting your own statement in a certain way when they didn't note anything about that that aspect of your statement.
I think you're trying too hard to justify your original comment. At a minimum, you should address the point in question, not just throw a random non-sequitur back.
(I would respond to other posts, but Hackernews mutes users for 2 hours after getting downvotes. They believe this is a helpful system, even though responses often shed light on perspectives and the poster's actual intent, flipping the direction of how people perceive a thread)
Sure lets dissect that
I responded to a non-sequitur, I originally said the Dark Web is an educational place, and it is likely where the person learned how to make the high quality counterfeits. A coherent response to the article. Better hacking techniques are discussed on at least one website that is only accessible on that form of the internet.
I said it was educational, because you can read about the latest techniques. Only criminal actions make a criminal, which the dark web does not do. So to reply as if it does is a non sequitur.
I am also aware of an antiquated use of the word hacker that some people on this site want to defend and disassociate with unauthorized entry into system, even when that antiquated use isn't mutually exclusive from the colloquial direction that word went 30 years ago. There is a time and place for semantics, and there is no improvement to the conversation for that place to be here and now.
Nobody made any claim it wasn't educational, just that they took issue with the terminology for who it targets. That wasn't a non-sequitur.
You ignoring that aspect entirely and focusing on it being about its educational aspects. That's the non-sequitur.
As to the terminology in question, there is a time an place for semantics, and to a greater or lesser degree, it's always. Sometimes you can get away with being very loose, sometimes you should be more specific. In dealing with a community which identifies with a specific aspect of a term, ignoring that identification or contradicting it is at best tone deaf, and at worst needlessly confrontational.
Semantics improve communication by signalling a common agreement on the meaning or terms in a conversation. In that respect, they improve conversation. Just because you place little value on something (even if in a specific situation) does not mean it actually has little value, or that others do not benefit from its presence.
To be clear, I didn't care about your first comment one way or another. I didn't think it added much, but it wasn't worth me downvoting. Your followup which was at best confusing but possibly entirely unrelated to the point it was responding to (thus the non-sequitur designation) that then went on to denigrate the entire community of this site to suggest in an off-hand way that we are all falling for propaganda was definitely not advancing the conversation usefully. If you had presented it in a more coherent and supported manner, as you attempted in your reply to me, I would have considered it a useful and welcome addition to the conversation, even if the subject matter was to call me out as subject to the whims of propaganda presented here (a topic related somewhat to ones I touch on often here, such as contextual interpretation and state of mind).
I find this conversation interesting and worth participating in and contributes something, even if not on the original topic entirely, I just didn't think your original rebuttal remotely met that bar.
The Dark Web is very educational
Its the real HackerNews