Quote from: David Rabahy on March 12, 2015, 04:36:59 PM

Quote from: danielpbarron on March 12, 2015, 03:07:13 PM

Quote from: David Rabahy on March 12, 2015, 02:58:50 PM

Even if money (BTC, etc.) is stolen at gunpoint? Blacklisting stolen money is a marvelous idea.

Oh GTFO you UnSavoryGarnish.

"I know it looks like I sent money into that exchange, but I was actually held at gun point so please reverse it!"

Let's start using social security numbers as our addresses while we're at it. So stupid.

If a thief is caught and still has the money then should they be forced to give it back? If the thief gave it to their brother who still has it then should the brother be forced to give it back? If the thief "bought" lunch from their brother-in-law who happens to own a restaurant then should the brother-in-law be forced to give it back? When is the stolen money no longer rightfully the original owner's?

Bitcoin supports voluntary clawback agreements through atomic swaps and multi-sig. Those that seek to have this sort of "consumer protection" can also do so with their favorite escrow agent as a different option.

It is not the default transaction type to have every transaction facilitate clawback through each and every jurisdictional authority that might claim it, it is voluntary by the transacting parties, and supported within the protocol.

To make clawback provisions mandatory for all transactions, and include arbitrary jurisdictional counterparties in all transactions would be not be a better money. However if you are using bitcoin in complex legal arrangements, it may be useful to do so.

This is not related to the topic other than that these multiple atomic transactions take up more block space.