Why Silk Road basically sells insurance and financial products, not drugs

The world's biggest online drug marketplace is more like the world's biggest service company

Forbes reporter Andy Greenberg secured the interview of the year this week, with Dread Pirate Roberts, the pseudonymous owner/CEO/"center of trust" of Silk Road, "the Web’s busiest bazaar for heroin, methamphetamines, crack, cocaine, LSD, ecstasy and enough strains of marijuana to put an Amsterdam coffee shop to shame". The interview is an insight into the political motivations behind the site, as well as the levels of paranoia you need to have to run a multimillion dollar drug empire online.

But for this blog, perhaps the most insightful quote didn't come from Roberts (who takes his pseudonym from cult 80s film The Princess Bride) at all. Instead, it's this take:

“Silk Road doesn’t really sell drugs. It sells insurance and financial products,” says Carnegie Mellon computer engineering professor Nicolas Christin. “It doesn’t really matter whether you’re selling T-shirts or cocaine. The business model is to commoditize security.”

Silk Road is a marketplace; it's far closer to the eBay of drugs than the Amazon of them. And so its main purpose is merely connecting buyers and sellers.

But even more than with eBay, there are major trust issues involved in doing so. No-one wants to actually share any information which could be used to track them down (although the buyer has to give the seller at least somewhere to post too), and if you do get scammed, you've got even less chance of using the law to get your money back, on account of what you buy being really illegal.

Some of the Silk Road's services specifically get around this problem: so, for example, the site offers escrow services to buyers, which only release their cash to the seller once they get the goods. And, famously, all purchases are made using Bitcoin, the anonymous peer-to-peer currency which increased in value by almost 20 times over the first few months of this year.

That brought its own problems, which Silk Road also helps alleviate. Dealers can price their goods in dollars, even as they get paid in Bitcoin, and Silk Road will ensure that the fluctuations don't hit them too hard. In effect, the company is running a small FX trading division, although with only one currency pair being traded, they won't make much money from it.

But as competition in the sector grows – a rival site, Atlantis, has launched and is running direct campaigns against Silk Road – the lawlessness may start being something which no amount of innovation can solve. Already, there are murmurs that an outage at Silk Road was engineered by the newcomer. Roberts estimates the value of Silk Road at "10 figures, maybe 11"; he's got a fight ahead to keep it to himself.

Drugs! Photograph: Getty Images

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

Show Hide image

Does the UK care enough about climate change to admit it is part of the problem?

The government’s energy policies make can make it hard to decipher its commitment to emissions reduction.

“People tell me it’s ridiculous to be flying for a climate change project but you have to get real with it, I mean I can’t cycle across the Southern ocean,” says Daniel Price, an environmental scientist from London. As founder of Pole-to-Paris, Price is about to complete a 17,000km bike ride from the Antarctic to the Arc de Triomphe.

Price came up with the idea in an effort to raise public awareness of COP21, the UN Climate Change Conference taking place in Paris next week. During the trip he’s faced a succession of set-backs: from the discovery that boats were prohibitively expensive, to diplomatic tensions scuppering his Russian visa plans. Yet the darkest moments were when he became overwhelmed by the magnitude of his own mission. “There were difficult times when I just thought, ‘What is the point of this’?” he says. “Cycling round the world is nowhere near enough to engage people.” 

As world leaders descend on Paris, many questions remain unanswered. Not least how much support developing nations will receive in tackling the effects of climate change. New research commissioned by Oxfam claims that such costs could rise to £1.7tn a year by 2050. But with cuts kicking in at home, the need to deliver “climate justice” abroad feels like a bigger ask than ever.

So does Britain really care enough about climate change to accept its full part in this burden? The government’s energy policies make can make it hard to decipher its commitment to emissions reduction. In September, however, it did pledge £5.8bn from the foreign aid fund to helping poorer nations combat climate change (twice that promised by China and the United States). And there’s evidence to suggest that we, as a public, may also care more than we think.

In America attitudes are much darker; in the dismissive words of Donald Trump “It’s called the weather”. Not least since, as a recent study proves, over the last twenty years corporations have systematically spread scepticism about the science. “The contrarian efforts have been so effective," says the author Justin Farrell, a Yale sociologist, "that they have made it difficult for ordinary Americans to even know who to trust.” 

And what about in China, the earth's biggest polluter? Single-party rule and the resulting lack of public discussion would seem to be favouring action on the environment. The government has recently promised to reach "peak" emissions by 2030, to quadruple solar installations, and to commit $3.1bn to help low-income countries adapt to the changing world. Christiana Figueres, the UN’s chief climate official, has even lauded the country for taking “undisputed leadership” on climate change mitigation.

Yet this surge of policy could mask the most troubling reality of all: that, when it comes to climate change, the Chinese are the least concerned citizenship in the world. Only 18 per cent of Chinese see the issue as a very serious problem, down 23 percentage points from five years ago, and 36 points behind the global median.

A new study by political economist Dr Alex Lo has concluded that the country’s reduced political debate could be to blame for the lack of concern. “In China popular environmentalism is biased towards immediate environmental threats”, such as desertification and pollution, Lo writes, “giving little impetus to a morally driven climate change movement”.

For the international community, all is well and good as long as the Chinese government continues along its current trajectory. But without an engaged public to hold it to account there’s always a chance its promises may fade into thin air.

So perhaps the UK’s tendency to moan about how hard it is to care about the (seemingly) remote impacts of climate change isn’t all bad. At least we know it is something worth moaning about. And perhaps we care more than we let on to each other.

Statistics published this summer by the Department of Energy and Climate Change reveal that three quarters of the British public support subsidies for renewable energy, despite only 10 per cent thinking that the figure is that high. “Even if the public think the consensus is not there, there are encouraging signs that it is,” says Liz Callegari, Head of Campaigns at WWF. “Concern for climate change is growing.”

As Price puts it, “You can think of climate change as this kind of marathon effort that we have to address and in Paris we just have to get people walking across the start line together”. Maybe then we will all be ready to run.

India Bourke is the New Statesman's editorial assistant.