Just saw a proposal about adding a theft prevention feature in Bitcoin. Sounds interesting but also kind of risky. Anyone have thoughts?
Discussion on Adding Theft Prevention Features to Bitcoin
13 replies 251 views
notyourkeysNewbie
Posts: 75 · Reputation: 12
#2Jul 3, 2019, 04:51 AM
Looks like the proposal isn't too complicated, which is cool. I’m not a coder myself, but I think I get it. If I mess something up, feel free to correct me!
Honestly, I doubt this will ever fly. The proposal is lengthy and has some sketchy tech details. Like, how many flagged transactions can one person create? And what happens with multi-sig wallets?
Right? And what if a long time passes? Can they just roll back transactions that happened weeks ago? If the funds got mixed, how do you even know whose money to freeze? Seems overly complicated.
wizard_2016Full Member
Posts: 46 · Reputation: 575
#5Jul 3, 2019, 06:16 PM
I don’t see the need for all these new features. We can already handle transfers with what's out there. Why complicate things?
gwei_blockNewbie
Posts: 76 · Reputation: 37
#6Jul 4, 2019, 02:21 AM
But Bitcoin's decentralized nature is meant to prevent any authority from interfering. Introducing this could lead to more issues than it solves.
Exactly, freezing funds isn't okay if it means hurting innocent users. They need to rethink this whole setup.
The proposal does include a decentralized way to handle things with Community Verification Nodes, which sounds like it could help. Still, the balance seems tricky.
Wait, so if UTXOs are already spent, can they still be reversed or not? This back and forth is confusing.
They clarified that once spent, you can't reverse those transactions. But tracing the funds is a different story. They can work with exchanges to recover, not actually change the blockchain.
You said that, but earlier it sounded like you could reverse some transactions. It's all very vague and leads to misunderstandings.
Yeah, and what if a lot of people didn’t get refunded even if the CVNs agree? How do you define that?
satoshi_vaultFull Member
Posts: 9 · Reputation: 687
#13Jul 5, 2019, 06:17 PM
It’s just like how reversals work with double spending. Once the transaction confirms, it’s done. This proposal kind of misses that point.
ben.matrixNewbie
Posts: 1362 · Reputation: 35
#14Jul 5, 2019, 08:02 PM
So, is the focus on preventing scams or just making the process more complicated? Feels like it could turn central very quickly.