For example, the "796 Exchange" account would have a hash "1271", but the "xchange796" account would have the hash "4252". If the hash is required to transfer, it would be very unlikely that someone could transfer to the wrong account by mistake because the hashes wouldn't match. It would also be very difficult for someone to spoof an account using a misspelling .
Just some brainstorming on this idea (still not sure if the idea itself needs to be done):
- Every user has a second identificator (4 char hash for example)
- Sender starts transfer to username as usual
- btct.co asks for confirmation and displays username and second identifier
This would eliminate the need of entering the second identifier with almost the same outcome.
The current two times input + pin is much more than we get from a Bitcoin tx though. I tried to send a share to a non existing username and all it shows is "invalid user", so this case is covered already and they don't get lost in limbo.
xubingde: I don't understand the loophole you mentioned and I feel sorry for your loss. What would you like to happen to "solve" your problem?