Quote from: AlexMc on January 29, 2015, 08:42:01 PM

Quote from: bogglor on January 29, 2015, 07:21:55 PM

I don't see why a lack of transaction reversing in the wallet is a problem. Most reasons for people to reverse a transaction are not because of a flaw in the currency system, it's due to a flaw in human actions.

People have to think of cryptocurrency as cash, not as a credit system.

Think of how you use cash for transactions.

Is there a way to reverse a cash transaction? No, you have to ask the person for the cash back, and it's up to them to give it to you. If they don't, you are basically out of luck. This is not a flaw in the way cash works. If it was, people would have stopped using cash long ago. (Example: You hand someone $20 instead of $10. That's not the fault of the currency.)

If you want someone to provide a service and you pay them ahead of time in cash, you are trusting them to provide that service. If they don't, then you have to ask them for the cash back, or you sue them. There is no way to automatically reverse this transaction. This is a problem with a person trusting a person to do something. This is not a flaw in the way cash works. (Example: You need your car repaired and they ask for $500 before they fix it, but they never fix it. That's not a fault in the cash, that's your fault for paying ahead of time.)

You can reverse a credit card (CC) transaction, but that isn't cash. If there is a fraudulent charge on your credit card, you contact the CC company and they investigate and credit your account. They can't reverse that payment, they have to ask the fraudulent party for the money back or sue them. It's up to the CC company to resolve, or they absorb a loss like this. This is not a currency problem, it's a business problem with the CC company paying without verification. (Example: Company X double-charges your credit card. The credit card company pays Company X. That's not a problem with the currency, that's a problem with the CC company not verifying the charge, and the CC company will pay you back out of their own pocket after investigation.)

This is why people use credit cards. Think of credit cards as a 3rd party acting as a type of consumer protection. This should not be the job of the currency.

About the "Sending to the wrong address" problem - The ability to reverse a transaction is not the problem, verifying the correct address is the problem. If you need to transfer money from your bank account to someone else's bank account, do you blindly send to whatever account number they give you, or do you verify with them first that it is the correct number (you read it back to them or something). This is what crypto needs, some sort of encrypted over-the-internet digital handshake ability for verification before a payment is sent/processed.

Should address verification be part of the wallet? I don't think so. I think it should be a different application that runs in concert with the wallet and has access to your wallet's address book. To me, the wallet is simply that - a wallet in your pocket with cash in it that you can quickly use if you don't need to verify addresses.

I agree that paying someone the wrong amount or transferring to the wrong address is due to human error. However, I don't think that where it's possible to reduce or eliminate the human errors, that it shouldn't be done.

Often one payment method is chosen over another because it offers some form of protection or convenience, or complies with a regulation.

I think the important thing is to give someone an option to use a feature, not force it upon them.

I'd love to see a DigiByte wallet that offered the choice to make an ad hoc payment, as it does now, but also an option to setup a "verified address".

This "verified address" could be setup in the wallet using some sort of 2 way communication, possibly with signed messages with reference numbers and a small "dust transaction". This could then verify the identity of both parties, if they wanted or required it to transact. In addition during the setup the parties might specify whether or not they would allow transactions made to be reversed or not, and possibly the window allowed to reverse the transaction.

We could then have an additional "Verified Addresses" filter/tab perhaps with a different coloured checkmark next to each address to indicate if reversible transactions were allowed. Taking this a step further, if the data could be stored in an external database, it would then allow integration with point of sale or online payment systems.

A system like this would allow those who didn't care for it, or require it to ignore it and continue to transact anonymously. It may however get those who currently won't use cryptocurrency for transacting to consider it.

I think those are some excellent thoughts and ideas from both of you.

bogglor, I agree with everything you say except for the possibility of being able to sue since anonymity of transactions (adequate transaction documentation) would make that impossible - with cash you would ask for a receipt of some sort documenting having paid and that would not be possible with current digital currency technology.

AlexMc, your suggestion would go a very long way towards solving the problem I just mentioned above as both parties would be clearly identified and specifically tied to the transaction; moreover, if the option were given to the wallet owner to make the "verified addresses" setting a required default for all transactions, that would also go a long way towards making theft much more difficult (and whoever wants to ignore that additional security level would be free to do so . . . to each his own Wink

).