If the guy ended up with a double hemispherectomy on account of 'fair play' meaning different things to different people from different parts of the world, I would have pretty much the same amount of sympathy as I do for those who lost money in his scam. Once again, one should understand what they are getting into and stay out of the kitchen if they cannot stand the heat.
Thank you for that clarification!
I was a little miffed at some of your earlier statements as well. Make no mistake that a large portion of the user base agrees that we don't want big brother to come wipe our asses. Sadly, unless we would like for Bitcoin to forever remain the domain of anonymous geeks, we will find some necessity to 'trust' third parties. Meaning that the majority of mainstream people are going to want as much familiarity in services, like banks, as they have now. I believe Mybitcoin was in the rare position then of having been around for a while already and having the 'trust' given to them because of that. I would think, or atleast hope that now people will demand more transparency from those they entrust with their funds. Some good has come, as others have pointed out, in the newer services that allow the end user control of their priv keys, etc. People are also much more cautious about who they are dealing with.
I agree that a significant amount of good has come out of the situation and have stated it. I just hope that the people don't forget the lessons or that the lessons escape new users.
There are a variety of ways to cut 'trust' out of the equation, and that is the direction I'd like to see things move. I will be attracted to any solution which ensures that dishonesty harms both parties.
The amount of engineering required for an on-line wallet service to provide receipts for incoming and outgoing funds would not be huge, and they could be structured to provide legal cover under most jurisdictions. The fact that Bitcoin is the underlying asset becomes irrelevant since our legal systems are supposed to protect anything which is appropriately structured. I pay my taxes to enjoy this service. If an on-line wallet service is unwilling to provide all of the tools which could protect their customers, the customer should satisfy themselves over why this might be the case.
I hasten to add that I vastly prefer a solution where I am my own wallet service for my own personal use (by running a full client) and when that becomes untenable, Bitcoin becomes a much less compelling solution to me.
That said, LE is obvisouly not what the majoirty of people want who were defrauded here. There is no reason however that we should discourage them seeking alternative means of recourse.... On that same note, you can bet your sweet ass, that the perps are reading here. And any information given publicly will be used to better hide themselves and their actions.
A bounty for investigation is an excellent idea. Though not a victim to Mybitcoin, I will gladly donate some bticoins, time, travel, etc to aiding that cause. Just pick yourselves a few trusted people to consolidate information with and move on from there....
I personally have no interest in being involved in any vigilante actions. Foremost because I was not directly harmed, but secondly because it would put myself at significant risk under ordinary laws in the society in which I live. Chicken-shit? You betcha!
I've no idea how much 'Tom Williams' took from whom, but if Bitcoin continues to rise in value, I suspect that those who were robbed will remember the theft ever more acutely. If I were 'Tom Williams' (who's identity is pretty well established as I recall), I'd be scrambling to amass enough coins to pay off the counter-parties plus a little extra should they demand it for their troubles. The guy probably has many years of worry about everything which 'goes bump in the night'.
