4 ms·

4.5 million bitcoin scheme, 40 million in fines? Ridiculous. According to the article he took around 1 million for personal use and returned the rest.

by thret 12y ago

skywhopper 12y ago
If you only had to pay back what you stole, it wouldn't really be punishment.
- 4ad 12y ago
  And it has to be punishment, instead of, say, rehabilitation, because?
  - Already__Taken 12y ago
    So you don't scam twice as big and just get caught for half of it on purpose. Pretty sure that's Die Hard though.
  - valvar 12y ago
    Because retributive theory of punishment.
  - mikeash 12y ago
    How do you rehabilitate a person who does something like this such that they won't do it again? Serious question.
  - growupkids 12y ago
    Deterrent.
  - jfoster 12y ago
    Well, possibly it could be rehabilitation, but what if rehabilitation fails and they offend again? Do you just layer on more rehabilitation each time, or do you eventually decide on punishment at some point?
  - MarkMc 12y ago
    Justice
  - personZ 12y ago
    Because there are a thousand other people saying "oooh, what a good scheme. Maybe I should try that." Deterrence is a significant part of the justice system.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    Because otherwise it would be irrational not to commit crimes?
mikeyouse 12y ago
He kept 150,000 Bitcoin.. Today they'd be worth over $50M. If you stole a stack of stock certificates on a day when they were only worth $10 and were arrested on a day when they were worth $100, you couldn't just pay back $10 in cash and walk away with the stock, why should BTC be any different?
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  Failure to repay is subtly different from going out and stealing in the traditional manner. If you fail to repay stock and get super lucky with the value I think you should be able to pay cash+interest+penalties* and walk away. (And play roulette next time, less likely to end in jail.) They're not going to demand less money if the stock goes down, are they? *penalties perhaps meaning you pay $30 plus interest
- lifeformed 12y ago
  What if they were now worth $0? Should he not have to pay then?

4.5 million bitcoin scheme, 40 million in fines? Ridiculous. According to the article he took around 1 million for personal use and returned the rest.

by thret 12y ago

4.5 million bitcoin scheme, 40 million in fines? Ridiculous. According to the article he took around 1 million for personal use and returned the rest.

skywhopper 12y ago

If you only had to pay back what you stole, it wouldn't really be punishment.

4ad 12y ago
And it has to be punishment, instead of, say, rehabilitation, because?
- Already__Taken 12y ago
  So you don't scam twice as big and just get caught for half of it on purpose. Pretty sure that's Die Hard though.
- valvar 12y ago
  Because retributive theory of punishment.
- mikeash 12y ago
  How do you rehabilitate a person who does something like this such that they won't do it again? Serious question.
- growupkids 12y ago
  Deterrent.
- jfoster 12y ago
  Well, possibly it could be rehabilitation, but what if rehabilitation fails and they offend again? Do you just layer on more rehabilitation each time, or do you eventually decide on punishment at some point?
- MarkMc 12y ago
  Justice
- personZ 12y ago
  Because there are a thousand other people saying "oooh, what a good scheme. Maybe I should try that." Deterrence is a significant part of the justice system.
- tptacek 12y ago
  Because otherwise it would be irrational not to commit crimes?

mikeyouse 12y ago

He kept 150,000 Bitcoin.. Today they'd be worth over $50M. If you stole a stack of stock certificates on a day when they were only worth $10 and were arrested on a day when they were worth $100, you couldn't just pay back $10 in cash and walk away with the stock, why should BTC be any different?

Dylan16807 12y ago
Failure to repay is subtly different from going out and stealing in the traditional manner. If you fail to repay stock and get super lucky with the value I think you should be able to pay cash+interest+penalties* and walk away. (And play roulette next time, less likely to end in jail.) They're not going to demand less money if the stock goes down, are they? *penalties perhaps meaning you pay $30 plus interest
lifeformed 12y ago
What if they were now worth $0? Should he not have to pay then?