Quote from: Entropy-uc on July 05, 2013, 05:06:39 PM

+100

There needs to be an absolute baseline here. If you hold bitcoin deposits and you suffer a hack, either provide rock solid proof of the event, and measures taken to resolve the issue in the justice system, or be presumed to be the thief.

If you are holding bitcoin for third parties, you are responsible for the bitcoin. There is no 'my dog ate my homework here' any loss of bitcoin should be 100% borne by the holder. If you can't manage to resolve the issue in a timely manner, everyone should abandon you and your services. And 3 months is not timely.

I appreciate your +100, but do need to voice my opinion about how the timing of the supposed reconciliation was handled. My opinion is that in this respect Bitcoin-Central did a reasonably good job. If Boussac and company are innocent of wrongdoing, the theft was an unfortunate event and it could be expected that all participants take a share of the inconvenience if not the cost. For my part I was always keenly aware of the risks I was taking by having funds in Instawallet and have no complaints about shouldering some of the inconvenience. One quarter seems appropriate to allow semi-interested users and (supposedly) law enforcement to analyze and take various actions.

One of the many hypothesis that remains completely open (thanks to Boussac's neglect) is that this was an inside job. A key to games like this is to leave oneself various options to account for future unknowns. It could have gone something like this:

- BTC values rise and Bitcoin-Central decides to 'go'. They arrange a theft and cash out which, owning several related properties in the exchange space, they are relatively well positioned to arrange. It is known that Bitcoin-Central took some action to obtain the funds (including 'mine') from Jav, but unknown whether a plan of absconding with them at some point was ever part of the reason why.

- If in three months BTC values are way up, they fold as insolvent.

- If in three months BTC values are down, they buy in to make everyone whole, then keep the excess.

If there is a legitimate investigation with the power to subpoena and audit Bitcoin-Centrals records such a thing can easily be determined. If there is not, and if one never emerges (and if the crime remains otherwise unexplained) then there will always be a question about whether this is what happened.

Again, because Boussac or anyone else says something on an e-mail or a forum is simply useless in understanding the reality of this event. Analysis of what someone said can uncover a lot. That is why smart perps say as little as possible, and why I personally am very suspicious when people avoid transparency.