well, but there is a difference between losing money of government/bank-backed fiat kind and losing decentralised BTCs, right?
In the first case, there are certain guarantees to protect you from a loss, even if that means 'let's print some more money', in the latter case, once the money is gone it is gone for good. Unless the receiving party will send it back to you. I just can't find the reason for doing so.
In the former case the banks loss is covered by increasing everyones premiums and insurances or with a bail out by governments in the form of QE monetary dilution. In the latter the company that lost all the BTC either goes bankrupt or recompenses customers loss, plus all of their contemporaries are incentivised into making stronger storage systems.
When you come down to it, the primary complaint detractors have against bitcoin is they cannot socialize their own losses, that are a result of their own incompetence, on others . The prospect that they will directly bear the consequences of their own bad decisions, and not be able to force their loses on others, scares them to death.
Those of us who are sick and tired of have other people's losses forced on us (as uki promotes), look at bitcoin as a salvation.
