large parts of the poorer urban communities didn't jump on the smartphone bandwagon until 2010. "Ballers" had Blackberries but most people were still using flip or feature phones. I remember arguing with a lot of people that the iPhone/Android was the future.
Around 2010 all of that changed. Everyone in my neighborhood in Harlem started to have smartphones. And with the rise of smartphones in poor urban neighborhoods came the rise of these same people using social media in record numbers.
The pervasiveness of social media since 2008 has been a qualitative, rather than just quantitative, change. Different things are possible when such a high percentage of people have access to the same network. Also, 6 years is not a very long time frame over which to scoff at a lack of progress, even if it were true...
I apologize for reading the word "scoff" into your comment about technology, but I think my point that the pervasiveness of social media represents another qualitative (or perhaps "fundamental", to use your terminology) change during that period stands.
I have to disagree with you on this point. I doubt Silk Road or people buying drugs online with bitcoins have affected the market for street drugs at all. Two completely different socio-economic markets.
Most who buy drugs in the inner city do not have access to bitcoin and/or Silk Road, and even if they did they would scoff at the inflated prices compared to the price on the streets.
From what I've read gangs where I live (Chicago), they don't get as involved in drug sales as one might think. It's less about drug territories and more about representing the block one grew up on. This American Life did a pretty good story about it in two episodes about a high school a couple of years ago.
Burner phones being cheap and capable of texting?