This helps in two ways: Firstly by weeding out an illegitimate exchange, this situation only serves to make the ecosystem around crypto currencies more secure. Second, this situation undermines confidence in bitcoin, both for reasons due to security and price instability, ultimately making more attractive the alternatives that serve to rectify bitcoin's failings. In concept bitshares is the greatest of these alternatives.
I'd agree that relative to other cryptocurrencies, it is probably a good thing for bitshares; however, against regular currencies, it's probably a net negative due to the "flight to safety" effect that negative economic shocks have.
Also, nobody wants bitcoin to fail. It wouldn't exactly be hyperbole to assert that all future cryptocurrency success are tied to the fate of bitcoin, since it enjoys a hefty infrastructural advantage compared to other coins.
I don't want bitcoin to fail, but I think it is ludicrous to think that it would not. It does not have any advantages over the traditional banking systems in developed nations. This is irrefutable. In order for cryptocurrencies to become viable they must provide the services that banks do at a lower cost. The bitcoin network as a company operates at a loss, is highly inflationary and cannot retain stable prices.
The blockchain is the central innovation that bitcoin has created. We can now come to a public concensus on ownership that is not derived from government oversight. That is truly special and the implications of this technological advancement will serve to reconstruct our traditional economic and governing systems.
As more advanced DAC's come into existence they will render bitcoin obsolete. Such is the nature of technology.
The banking system in the developed world has ridiculous fees for everything. Just keeping your money in a bank means a fee. What about the predatory overdraft fees? Remittances?
And if you want to invest or get credit you'll have an easier time using Bitcoin. It's just at this time most of the developed world isn't actually doing a good job marketing the power of cryptocurrencies to the people who have a lot of debt, bad credit, student loans, or any of the problems associated with banking in developed countries.
Look at European nations for example or the United States and you will find that most people who have bank accounts don't really like their bank account services or the bank. Customer satisfaction is at an all time low and it's not just the fees either.
Why are banks only open during hours most people are at work? Why does it take 5 days for a cheque to clear?
In response to your "flight to safety" comment, it is important to understand that bitcoin has not been adopted as a currency, but rather as a speculative investment. Bitshares will be the first truly viable application of blockchain technology for the purpose of currencies. When you we begin to see crypto currency networks boasting more than the meager 1 tps of the bitcoin network then we can say that they have truly been used as a currency. I suspect bitshares will be the first network to do so.
For a currency I don't think people care what coin is used. That could be done under the hood as long as people can send money back and forth.
But as a store of value that is where Bitcoin fails most people because it's seen as volatile. Bitshares is a better store of value while at the same time it can use BitUSD to act as a currency.
Bitcoin can already do the BitUSD thing using Colored Coin, Mastercoin or Counterparty.
But Colored Coin and Counterparty are like non profit entities. Mastercoin I'm not sure what it will become. The problem with non profit entities is that while it's good because fees can be as cheap as possible, if you don't profit you cannot grow the economy around you to continue to innovate. Non profits aren't sustainable.
So for that reason alone I think Bitshares and Mastercoin have the greatest advantages. I don't think any non profit structure will beat a for profit structure in developing technology over the long term. The error most people make is they say look at Linux, look at the Open Source movement and Free Software movement. What those people fail to realize is that Redhat, Suse, IBM, Google, Oracle, and a bunch of companies actually hired the developers behind the scenes and it only looks like they are doing it all on a volunteer basis.
Mozilla is actually sponsored development. The code is open source, the developers are still paid. So you need to profit somewhere in the ecosystem to keep paying developers and if you don't do this you won't have anything but college students to make your software.
College students are fine but they eventually finish school and then they go to work for whoever is paying. The Mastercoin foundation has figured out that you have to pay for quality software. The Counterparty team is going the donation route which is the same route that Litecoin and Bitcoin went and look at the result. Bitcoin is very important but only maybe 5 people in the whole world know how it works well enough to make significant changes to it.