I'm not going to argue Ulbricht shouldn't be serving a serious sentence, assuming legitimacy of the evidence of his murder-by-hire attempt.<p>However, he wasn't convicted on those charges. He was convicted of 'conspiracy to traffic narcotics', money laundering, and 'computer hacking'. The 'hacking' and laundering were only necessities of the narcotics trafficking business, so it really does boil down to him being convicted to a life sentence for the drug distribution business.<p>I'd take no issue with a life sentence for procuring murder, but see it as an absolute travesty that drugs are demonized to the point where a life sentence for trafficking is even a possibility.
Is funny how so many people are trying to lowball crime simply because it's done using computer, as if computer is some pure tech with no evil possible. Bernie Madoff got 150years for a non violent crime. Also scale always matter, hacking in neighbour WiFi is not same as putting ransomware in million systems.
This makes me very sad, but it's hard to explain why. The nonviolent crime charges leading to a life sentence is part of it. The obvious inability of our modern legal system to understand technology above a basic level is part of it. Maybe I'm not separating how awful "the drug trade" might be from some kid running a darkweb network. This sentence stings in a weird way.
That's a shame, so young and entire life ahead of him. Would he have had a shorter sentence if he dealt only in narcotics? The article implies Silk Road was narcotics-only, but didn't it deal in other more immoral areas?
Interesting coincidence with this news coming out the day I finished the Nick Bilton book. I do highly recommend it for anyone interested in the Silk Road or in drugs or in e-commerce. What I found most fascinating was to hear a true "Breaking Bad" tale.
Cruel and unusual punishment. The judges kept alluding to the volume of the sales; thats just the nature of the technology, not the nature of the crime. There was also language in the original sentencing that he was "privileged" (i.e., white) and therefore deserved an absolutely absurd sentence. You can rape and murder somebody and spend less time in jail.