This is unfortunate, but not unexpected. In another thread someone had sent BTC to Bitstamp just after the email was sent out and the general sentiment was that Bitstamp should honor it. I asked how long their responsibility should continue. It's completely unreasonable to expect Bitstamp to honor a deposit to a hacked address a year or more after the event, but where does that window close?
It's now been three weeks since the hack. They emailed their customers, shut down the website, posted big splash screen, posted on twitter, etc. It was not only all over Bitcointalk, reddit, etc, but it was on CNN, BBC News, CBS/NBC/Fox, etc. I had a retiree who can barely turn access his email if the mail icon gets moved on his desktop mention to me that the Bitcoin exchange got hacked for $5M because he knew I was into those Bitcoins. At this point, I would say it's probably on you if you sent a few hundred dollars in anonymous unrecoverable internet money to a company without doublechecking the address is still current after it was worldwide news that their headquarters burned down.
It's now been three weeks since the hack. They emailed their customers, shut down the website, posted big splash screen, posted on twitter, etc. It was not only all over Bitcointalk, reddit, etc, but it was on CNN, BBC News, CBS/NBC/Fox, etc. I had a retiree who can barely turn access his email if the mail icon gets moved on his desktop mention to me that the Bitcoin exchange got hacked for $5M because he knew I was into those Bitcoins. At this point, I would say it's probably on you if you sent a few hundred dollars in anonymous unrecoverable internet money to a company without doublechecking the address is still current after it was worldwide news that their headquarters burned down.
MrTeal, your comments are insensitive and moot. Obviously Jelin1984 didn't know.
Jelin - are the coins still at the address you sent to? Bitstamp only lost coins not private keys and you can't change the private keys so they still have control over those addresses (albeit shared); it's simply a matter of who is faster at moving them. Bitstamp could have easily monitored those addresses and returned any coins sent to them. Why they chose not to should be a matter of concern for anyone doing business with them.
I am also a little surprised if Bitstamp isn't trying to sweep the coins into their addresses. At this point, how much new coin is going into the old keys? You don't seen many cases on here anymore.
?.
