The best darknet hit-for-hire idea I've seen is the one that uses a prediction market. You publicly bet $500k that Joe is not going to die in 1 week. Whoever takes the other side of that bet has an interest in making Joe die.
(Assume the prediction market is completely decentralized and untraceable. Assume there is an accurate way to determine the outcomes of the events in a manner compatible with being untraceable and decentralized.)
Assuming the prediction market isn't untraceable, would this be legal?
If Joe dies and someone gets $500,000 richer I'm sure the police would be very interested to investigate the transaction, but would the bet itself actually violate any laws?
Laws aren't programs and judges and juries aren't required to interpret them like a robot. Odds are that a reasonable jury would find you had hired a hitman and just convict you and move on.
Please see people who are convicted on limited or circumstantial evidence because everyone is pretty sure they did it. Example Hans Reiser.
> Laws aren't programs and judges and juries aren't required to interpret them like a robot.
I understand that HN and Reddit like to repeat this fact, but it's really not a useful answer to the question I asked. I think you're saying "no, it's not illegal", but you've masked that opinion with trivia.
> limited or circumstantial evidence [...] Hans Reiser
Reiser plead guilty to murdering his wife and disclosed the location of her shallow grave. I'm not sure how limited or circumstantial that is.
Reiser pled not guilty and successfully eliminated all conclusive evidence of his guilt. After they convicted him anyway he disclosed the location of her shallow grave.
I don't think it's masking the issue with trivia at all. If you conspire to kill someone or indeed to commit any crime and your defense rests on a cute use of the law to remain technically on the side of the law while obviously trespassing beyond it you are only as safe as you can convince the jury you are.
If you are more interested in the actual law we could look at justice.gov
Section 1958 renders it illegal: 1) to travel or use facilities of interstate or foreign commerce; 2) with intent that a murder in violation of State or Federal law be committed;
Looking at my state WA states law
RCW 9A.32.030
Murder in the first degree.
(1) A person is guilty of murder in the first degree when:
(a) With a premeditated intent to cause the death of another person, he or she causes the death of such person or of a third person;
If you in effect arranged for someone to die by betting a large sum of money on a prediction market no judge or jury will pick nits and disregard your intent while placing such a bet.
Maybe in their mind, if they think they're very clever. But the judicial system is pretty clever in itself, I'm sure it would see right through the ruse.
It's important to remember that "beyond a reasonable doubt" means exactly that: no "reasonable" person would doubt it. (The definition of reasonable is left to the jury.)
Some people seem to think "beyond a reasonable doubt" means the same as "beyond any shadow of a doubt" - but they are very different standards!
You don't actually have to. You just have to convince 12 people that you did it. If this were so trivial to get away with people would you know actually be doing it.
It would have to use some type of "untraceable" cryptocurrency like Monero because of that way to expose the hitman. Using traceable money (e.g. dollars in bank accounts or Bitcoin), the police can just plainly see the destination of the funds from the prediction market's wallet (which, if decentralized, must be known or, if centralized, could be discovered through espionage).
The question is moot since if it wasn't, and you made such a market, it soon would be. Realistically, the FBI would find a way to get you for something even in the meantime.
I don't know why, but it never quite hit me what the point of that thought experiment was until now. I heard about it in the context of predictions markets where people wanted to know the outcome of negative events and how it could encourage someone to take matters into their own hands. I hadn't thought of it as a way of actually back-door hiring a assassin without having to know who that assassin was.
It becomes really interesting once the other side of that bet can be crowdfunded.
Someone with half a million to squander already has the means to disperse of others. Whereas an enemy of the people may have 10,000 detractors, who while otherwise wouldn’t have the means, can pool together a seven figure bounty for $100 each.
It seems like an anonymous hitman system just doesn't work.
For the hitman, it's much safer to just take the down payment / etc and not do anything. That's just way more cost effective / lower risk to do that over and over again.
For the person hiring them... no reason to think the hitman won't do the logical thing and not do the hit / walk with the up front cash.... and probably limited no incentive to pay after the deed is done if in fact everyone is anonymous.
Historically speaking hitmen seem to be tied to organizations who the hitman and the employer more or less can trust / provide some level of protection / regular work / other work or at least the promise of it. And generally the the professional hitmen eventually tend to be disposed of by the next hitman after their usefulness to their employer fades...
A system where nobody trusts anyone would seem to only attract scammers and some random idiots.
Dark web marketplaces are not exactly "a system where nobody trusts anyone". They are pseudonymous, as opposed to completely anonymous, and sellers absolutely build reputation and some degree of trust. Otherwise nothing would work - the problems you point out would prevent any business at all. It's theoretically possible for a hitman to build reputation in such an environment. However, it would have to be comparatively slow and high-stakes, which I suspect is the main problem and tips the scale towards scamming.
Except the dark net reputation system is completely broken.
It's trivially easy to create new accounts and maintain parallel alternate accounts on dark net marketplaces, even going so far as giving yourself fake reviews to pump up reputations.
This is such a common scam on dark net markets that it has a name, known as exit scamming. A vendor will build themselves up a good reputation (usually fake) and then scam everyone who transacts with them, cashing out on the reputation. Wash, rinse, repeat with new accounts.
You also run a risk when leaving a bad review. Even if you never buy from that vendor again, you could buy from one of their alternate accounts, and they'll send you fentanyl in your product as retaliation.
I think the flip side to the nobody trusts anyone is once you out yourself as a hitman with a good reputation ... I think you can assume any customers will be cops pretty dang fast.
Aye. With hitmen there are bodies, a capital crime, and no statute of limitations. Drug laws are often much more lenient, not as far reaching, and some random guys Silk Road order is a drop in the bucket compared to the serious importing and production of said drugs.
Plus you order your goods to the wrong address or use a fake name, and when the heat comes around you say "it wasn't me" and flush your drugs -- they're not going to chase you for months the way they might a murder case.
Obviously exceptions for the guys ordering kilos of coke every quarter, but as long as you put a little bit of effort into CYA no one is going to kick down your door for $80 worth of Molly.
Perhaps some multi-step smart contract that creates a prisoner's dilemma where both parties pre-commit some money. On completion of the contract if both sides submit a completion code, you get some of it back (to incentivize you to complete the transaction) and the larger part goes to the hitman (to incentivize him to do finish his job). If either side reneges the money gets burned or redistributed to random wallets.
(Assume the prediction market is completely decentralized and untraceable. Assume there is an accurate way to determine the outcomes of the events in a manner compatible with being untraceable and decentralized.)