You apparently can't understand one even simpler thing: they had no control over eGold. One of the charges was that eGold was an unregistered transfer business and was not reporting to the feds at all. Other, more legitimate transfer businesses do report. That reporting makes transfers easier to track, and allows more thorough investigation of transfers involved in criminal activity.

Your argument is based on a terrible avoidance fallacy, namely the idea that we should abandon policing efforts because someone else will be willing to step in and break the law. Should we not fight al-Qaeda because there are other terrorist organizations to take their place? Not fight piracy and drug cartels, because gosh, they'll be replaced? On face, the idea is profoundly ridiculous.

As someone who's interested enough in security to read SecurityFocus, you should really understand the difference between loss avoidance and loss elimination, and you should also understand why absolutist logic is virtually always fallacious and unreasonable.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/articles/11462/34499#34499