Topic: the function of stopping a transaction in the middle or the roll back function (Read 253 times)

Would you believe anybody - yes, anybody, this includes celebs - on a random youtube video that tells you to invest all your money somewhere, without doing fact-checking by yourself first??

It is natural for people to question whether a financial action they are doing is the correct one or not - that's why so many average people are skeptical of using bitcoin (this skepticism is actually a good thing as it means they are making a decision for themselves and not relying on someone else to do it for them).

Hell, there are even some HYIPs out there that are legit that I found - but only after extensive fact-checking and word-of-mouth from friends.

---

So, before you make any significant financial decision next time, you should

1) Pause and think about whether it's the right decision
2) think about it again, because usually your first thought is by impulse
3) think about it a third time, just to confirm whether you want to act on your previous thoughts,
4) Ask a friend or stranger that knows about this, because usually a lot of headaches can be saved by following advice of more experienced people.

---

Ranting at forum members just because they are telling you about how you got scammed, and subsequently telling you how this problem cannot be fixed in bitcoin mainnet (without a significant loss to decentralization), is not going to help you learn a lesson from this.

You should admit that you made a mistake, learn a lesson from it, and move on (and report the scam video to Youtube so that other people don't get scammed by it), otherwise you're at a greater chance of being scammed a second time with this exact same method.

Impossible as long as Bitcoin is decentralized.


Bitcoin doesn't have such protocol.


Bitcoin itself is neutral, don't judge Bitcoin by it's users or how they use it.

Then sell your bitcoins and invest in land.

If you get scammed dollars instead of Bitcoins, would you blame the dollar? All currencies are the same: you can't blame the currency for human mistakes or scams.

I hate scammers but I like Bitcoin. You can just as well blame your computer manufacturer, they facilitated the scam too.

You guys are pro for scammers. you blame and critize the victim of a scam. If bitcoin is such a currency, no thank.

The one thing that makes Bitcoin Bitcoin, is that all transactions are final. No undo, no negotiations, no mediation. No judge or government can change that.
People get scammed anywhere. If you're not familiar with Bitcoin, why did you throw $90k into it? That's not a smart move in any investment, you could just as well have fallen for any random scam in the real world.

You relied on a random scammer claiming to be someone else. Michael Saylor has nothing to do with it. Greedy people often lose all common sense when it comes to online scams. Let me put it this way: billionaires didn't become billionaires by giving away their money!

Bitcoin is open source, you're free to Fork it and be the 100th person to create his own version. I don't expect you'll get much support, but as with any Fork, I do expect people to lose their Bitcoin by downloading malware for it.

Tbh i get angry when i read your post. Yes, you should be blamed for your own stupidity and greed. Also you did not send to the "wrong address". You purposely sent btc to that address.  Bitcoin is not flawless, but we can not simplify Bitcoin just that stupid people do not make mistakes.

So sell or hodl your BTC if you have not the mental maturity to participate in this actually simple system.

If you get fooled by a YouTube video, then I really wouldn't bother with it. They target the most gullible of the population and unfortunately you're a victim of it. If it sounds too good to be true, then it is. There is no such thing as free money in the world.

Again, I need to reiterate. Bitcoin is NOT flawed. It is not Bitcoin's fault that people fall for simple scams like these. You are responsible for your own funds and no one should have the ability to reverse their transactions. You are supposed to be double checking your addresses to ensure you're not sending to the wrong address. You can't eliminate human stupidity, no matter how much you do. If you need someone to be babysitting you, then you probably shouldn't use Bitcoin and should just stick with PayPal.

Probably the same logic as a nigerian prince scam, it has been around for decades yet people still fall for it.

I don't deny what you said and I admit that and repented. But if I am not usually not greed. I don't get any gratuitous things at all. I relied on Michael Saylor, that's the most biggest mistake in my life. I paid a lot of fee on the lesson. Do I have to keep getting balmed? I am saying to make the Bitcoin ecosystem more clean and clear so that anyone regardless familar or unfamiliar with the system or something, and possible to make a mistake like mine or sending bitcoin to a wong address can use it with comfort. Do you think Bitcoin is flawless, doesn't it?

Based on your comment it doesn't look like your issue had anything to do with bitcoin and the technology. Same thing (getting scammed) could have happened to you if you were face to face and dealt with cash.

Like I have mentioned, the feature is available and standard to the Bitcoin network, it's called "rbf" (replace-by-fee) that can be utilized for double-spending those unconfirmed wrongly sent transactions.
The issue is if the client/wallet supports that "feature", that's why I've suggested you to use Electrum because if that's your client, you could've cancelled that transaction since you've already noticed that it's a scam right after clicking 'send'.

If you want your wallet to have a similar feature, you can open a "feature request" in their repository page if it's open source, contact their support if it's a closed-source wallet.
Explain that you want them to implement something similar to Electrum's "cancel (double-spend)" feature.

If you need a platform that has a mediator, you should use PayPal or just your typical fiat banks. Bitcoin leaves the decision making to their own users and they have to do their own due diligence before making any transaction. Nothing would change if we impose a mandatory delay, and nothing would change if transactions were to be reversible. People are still going to get scammed regardless.

You guys' sayings are all right. But I am not familiar with the technology in Bitcoin.
To make Bitcoin a wider use with even someone like me, I think such functions must be added in the Bitcoin.
If Interent is not easy to use, it would not spread so wide.
I admit I was too foolish and repented so much but it was too late as some of you said.
However, Bitcoin transactions should be improved and scammers are worse than victims. They must be gotten rid of to make Bitcoin ecosystem clean and clear.
Bitcoin has an agreement protocol and it can be used to screen transactions which is good or bad.
I have never imaged to be a victim of this kind of scam. Anyone can be a victim of scams, even you.

Bitcoin Core waits a few seconds before you can make the transaction final. Additional delays won't stop people from making mistakes, just like other warnings on your computer become such a habbit people click them away.
If anything, it might make people more careless. You should check everything before confirming the payment. I kinda like it this way, it's similar to the way Linux commands work: if you don't want it to happen, don't press Enter. And if you don't know what you're doing, don't do it.

Any background on what happened to you? 14LAoBMsj3L5t6boxZCrrzRFhGpVHTh1Lz is still receiving funds.

So many people have lost so many Bitcoins because of their own greed.

Cash don't have this function either. You should imagine Bitcoin as cash. You may want them to be kept by a third party, but just like any other sound money, there's no reversible feature if you're the owner.

How could a transaction be stopped in the middle? A transaction can either be confirmed (included into a block if we're talking about Bitcoin) or unconfirmed. This implies outside of Bitcoin too. When you purchase a product and pay with cash, the transaction is instantly confirmed. If you needed to send $10000 (cash) oversea via bank, the transaction would remain unconfirmed until the seller had got their money in cash.

If you'll ever hodl Bitcoin again, I'd suggest you to use Electrum (electrum.org | verify signature).
Because it has a convenient "Cancel (double-spend)" button that perfectly "solves" that statement.
With Electrum's default setting with enabled "Use RBF", you can basically cancel a mistakenly sent transaction by automatically creating a double-spend transaction with your own address as the output, that's as long as it doesn't have a confirmation yet.

BTW, I saw your other post about the details of the scam, and it's the most obvious type of scams out there.
I'd say you need to research more about all sorts of scams before going back to "investing" again.

Hmm, guess that is considered a delay, though my take is that it is no different from the user just refraining from broadcasting the transaction for a few more minutes. The intention of nlocktime is not for the user to be able to decide whether to send the transaction or not. The decision should've been made at the point of signing, not after.

I use Electrum. Electrum has Advanced Preview; I don't know what's the default for it, it can be enabled/disabled in Preferences.
As I said, I use it. It helps me double check every time the transaction before actually finalizing/broadcasting it.

It's just an extra screen/window, but it's of great help. Imho there's no need for "stop in the middle", this already does its job.

There is some built-in delay and it is called locktime. Also, if transactions should be stopped, it is possible to do on client-side, so there is nothing to change in Bitcoin protocol to make it possible if someone wants that kind of features.

The onus is on you to take proper precautions to not get scammed. Bitcoin is not a currency which has a built-in delay or any reversibility. There is no point with introducing something that affects transaction finality. People are going to get scammed and people are bound to make mistake, no matter how much delay we can insert. Reversibility is out of the question, because there is no central authority that should govern what is reversible and what isn't.