Yeah, call in the regulators to get some back. Thank a US fiat tax payer. You're welcome.
It's the biggest load of hypocrisy that people who enthusiastically wanted to play in the libertarian paradise of an unregulated currency think they should be able to turn around and request the help of the regular, regulated, tax-supported economy to make them partial or whole.
First, we'll crap a bunch of processing resources into thin air, ponzi up value in the system, scream self-righteous screeds to the nay-sayers... then, when it goes to shit, call in the cops you were giving the finger to a second ago.
You took your chances. You relished in the freedom of the risk. You eat your pudding.
I know why you are annoyed, but many libertarians (of the non-anarchist variety) still believe in the court system to recover damages. If they use the courts to recover part of their losses from MtGox's assets there's nothing hypocritical there.
If they want a bailout, ie a cash injection, then I'm with you.
Given all of the rhetoric around the distributed, untraceable, unregulated nature of BitCoin, I think an initial assumption of hypocrisy is still not a bad place to start.
But you do realize that those arguments are for _bitcoin_ and not for _exchanges_? The decentralization of _bitcoin_ is supposedly an advantage precisely because _exchanges_ (like MtGox) and other central organizations like banks are prone to failure due to fraud and mismanagement.
So, they are essentially saying "We need bitcoin because we don't want to trust institutions like MtGox because they might fail" and you say "They are hypocritical because the failure that they are warning us about and that they suggest a solution to did indeed happen". You have a strange definition of hypocrisy.
OTOH, it should be also clear that there is a problem with the pro-bitcoin argument here, as bitcoin hasn't yet solved the need for instititutions like exchanges. Which shouldn't be surprising, as the thing that bitcoin directly decentralizes (transaction validation and currency issuance) aren't the functions that exchanges serve.
I'm not saying that anybody who had money in Bitcoin is a hypocrite. But anybody who had money in MtGox, lost it, and now wants help getting it back is hypocritical if they were also singing the praises of Bitcoin in those ways. And that presuming that people with money in MtGox were Bitcoin proponents is not a giant stretch.
Perhaps there is some hypocrisy, but I think your comment borders on a common fallacy.
The fallacy says that an idealist is hypocritical for using real-world resources which wouldn't exist in his ideal world.
It says a communist is hypocritical for wearing shoes made by private enterprise, and a libertarian is hypocritical for buying liquor at the state liquor store, in a state which has that system.
It ignores the issue of bootstrapping. Those who dream of the future must necessarily exist in the present and use the resources of the present.
If (and I'm not persuaded of this) some BitCoiners want a future without regulators, they presumably want some other mechanism to replace regulators, just as the communist wants a people's shoe factory to replace the capitalist shoe factory.