Topic: New Crypto 2.0 with reversible transactions and smart contracts (Read 1305 times)
This is an experimental venture many are against it,but the only way to know if it's going to succeed is to create one everything is possible although it could be a deviation from the way crypto currency works..
August 12, 2016, 02:13:12 AM
OK Ok - I was just thinking, seeing the ETH and ETC epic failure and the deep divide resulting of this hack, I was thinking reversible transactions must be a good thing for cases like that...
I guess I won't be adding this feature to my new coin lol
I guess I won't be adding this feature to my new coin lol
August 12, 2016, 01:05:28 AM
If I can reverse a transaction, just tell me.
Where the hell is my security? I don't understand this.
Bitcoin can't be reverse! This coin isn't fine..
Where the hell is my security? I don't understand this.
Bitcoin can't be reverse! This coin isn't fine..
August 11, 2016, 08:21:06 PM
Reversible transaction in crypto will definitely not going to work no matter what.
August 11, 2016, 08:08:31 PM
Hello everyone
Looking at the ETH/ETC fiasco, and since hacks are an unavoidable part of crypto life, I would like to launch a crypto 2.0 type which would allow transaction reversal, strictly restricted to large hacks of coin in general.
Would you be interested in such a Crypto with reversible transactions?
How would you implement a transaction or smart contract reversal?
Would it be recommendable to have some kind of elected human officials (by wallet token vote) to conduct such reversals?
Looking at the ETH/ETC fiasco, and since hacks are an unavoidable part of crypto life, I would like to launch a crypto 2.0 type which would allow transaction reversal, strictly restricted to large hacks of coin in general.
Would you be interested in such a Crypto with reversible transactions?
How would you implement a transaction or smart contract reversal?
Would it be recommendable to have some kind of elected human officials (by wallet token vote) to conduct such reversals?
What do you mean by "large hacks"? You mean the larger amounts hacked? That would be unfair not only for the people but for the system itself. Why would an ordinary person use it if he knows that he will not be refunded if his wallet was hacked? It would be better for him to store his money in a bank where it is insured.
True cryptocurrencies do not need reversible transactions. Settlement finality has value for a niche that crypto is created for. That is unregulated markets, dark or regular.
August 11, 2016, 06:29:33 PM
for better or worse the cornerstone of crypto is being trustless. as soon as you introduce reversibility then you gotta trust someone to decide what gets reversed and what doesn't. i don't want funds depending on someone's opinion even though it's something most regular people would want.
August 11, 2016, 05:05:44 PM
It's a gud idea but will be very hard to implement. But if successful it would encourage more of your laymen to get into crypto. Until then the whole industry is open to abuse like the ETC criminal coin.
August 11, 2016, 01:20:40 PM
Bad idea. You could go create it but I think no one will invest in your coin with reversible transactions.
That would be a big issue because there is no one who will moderate on why the sender ask for reversal,it will not be decentralized anymore,it will work just like paypal and many holders will abuse this feature,but why not create and let's see the end product..
August 11, 2016, 10:53:03 AM
Bad idea. You could go create it but I think no one will invest in your coin with reversible transactions.
August 11, 2016, 09:48:16 AM
Bitcoin was invented for making trustless transactions. If you give an authority the power to reverse any transaction they want then every user of a crypto currency has to trust that authority and his security measures that protect his key for reversing transactions. What if he says his key has been stolen by hackers, and everyone's money gets stolen?
IMO a crypto 2.0 with reversible transactions is an awful idea.
IMO a crypto 2.0 with reversible transactions is an awful idea.
August 11, 2016, 09:12:15 AM
I agree that it is against the philosophy of decentralization the reversal can be abuse and we also have a private key to keep,well it is never been implemented and might as well try it as an experiment but it should be safe from abuse..
August 11, 2016, 09:07:05 AM
..... transaction reversal, ....
short answer: why not use PayPal then?
long answer: if you read the bitcoin paper, one of the reasons for creating a technology called bitcoin was implementing a non reversible transactions.
as the paper points out, you will need trust in reversible systems and the businesses have to start asking for lots of information on their customers to provide them with services.
and always there is going to be a big dispute about whether you should accept the reversal or not and you have to judge which party is lying.
...to an elected committee ...
i smell centralization.
and again why not use paypal
A private key can't be hacked.
Trusting your crypto to a third party (exchange) is the security risk here.
Imo there was no hack, it was and is all an inside job. They we gambling on their own exchange and lost.
Trusting your crypto to a third party (exchange) is the security risk here.
Imo there was no hack, it was and is all an inside job. They we gambling on their own exchange and lost.
Well a transaction reversal, as I see it, would have to be carried out at the request of the person who got hacked, and this request would be sent to an elected committee who would evaluate the claim and have authority and keys to reverse transactions.
So what if I am a company and I claim I get hacked. I send the coins to an exchange, cash it out anonymously, and then claim that I got hacked. How do you determine that this "hack" is fraudulent? How would you know whether I was actually hacked and not just trying to double my money?
Making transaction reversible also need to make crypto centralized and moderate all transaction which is hard practically. And if you are willing to moderate manually than you should take larger fee in every transaction to pay support and moderators which will be denied instantly by community. I don't think people will be intrested in reversible transaction in crypto.
@ Agaguk24 it is a good dream but cryptos does have 8 decimal point and each point might be sold to 8 different people who might have sold it for another 8 people and the chain goes on and on unlike fiat with only 2 decimal point.
How do you define a "large hacks"? Who does this determination? Who gets to decide what to reverse and what not to reverse? Who chooses the people that decide what gets reversed?
The whole idea of transaction reversal and the inherent centralization that comes about because of it is entirely against the principles of cryptocurrency. This is a horrible idea and I don't think it will gain much support.
The whole idea of transaction reversal and the inherent centralization that comes about because of it is entirely against the principles of cryptocurrency. This is a horrible idea and I don't think it will gain much support.
Very legitimate questions indeed...
Well a transaction reversal, as I see it, would have to be carried out at the request of the person who got hacked, and this request would be sent to an elected committee who would evaluate the claim and have authority and keys to reverse transactions.
Hello everyone
Looking at the ETH/ETC fiasco, and since hacks are an unavoidable part of crypto life, I would like to launch a crypto 2.0 type which would allow transaction reversal, strictly restricted to large hacks of coin in general.
How do you define a "large hacks"? Who does this determination? Who gets to decide what to reverse and what not to reverse? Who chooses the people that decide what gets reversed?Looking at the ETH/ETC fiasco, and since hacks are an unavoidable part of crypto life, I would like to launch a crypto 2.0 type which would allow transaction reversal, strictly restricted to large hacks of coin in general.
The whole idea of transaction reversal and the inherent centralization that comes about because of it is entirely against the principles of cryptocurrency. This is a horrible idea and I don't think it will gain much support.
I know that such a feature would go against all Crypto currency philosophy; but we can't hardfork a currency everytime a hack takes place. And hacks will happen.
We need something more efficient and that everybody can agree on to resolve these cases that are jeopardising any hacked crypto's very existence.
We need something more efficient and that everybody can agree on to resolve these cases that are jeopardising any hacked crypto's very existence.
I agreed with you that the hacking of large funds is killing the crypto industry but creating a coin with reversible transactions will do the worse however i do not wish to discourage you as this is my own personal view.
Jump to: