Is it possible to design a friction-less cryptocurrency?

[xiaohang07]

As far as I know, if one sends bitcoin to a void address, the bitcoin is gone. So the total amount of available bitcoin is decreasing (in a relatively slow manner, lol). Is it possible to design a cryptocurrency that will be automatically sent back (or can not be sent a void address) if it is sent to a void address?

[1714835167]

1714835167

[1714835167]

1714835167

[1714835167]

1714835167

[ttookk]

As far as I know, if one sends bitcoin to a void address, the bitcoin is gone. So the total amount of available bitcoin is decreasing (in a relatively slow manner, lol). Is it possible to design a cryptocurrency that will be automatically sent back (or can not be sent a void address) if it is sent to a void address?

You might set up a system, in which an address needs to be validated. The holder of the private key to an address would basically set a "Someone holds the private key" flag.

With the ability to sign Bitcoin addresses, you could actually implement this right now for Bitcoin and similar coins, using a plugin for a wallet which checks addresses for special flag messages. The problem is, that it doesn't work well as long as no one or only few people are using it.

Still, this might be an interesting idea.

[xiaohang07]

As far as I know, if one sends bitcoin to a void address, the bitcoin is gone. So the total amount of available bitcoin is decreasing (in a relatively slow manner, lol). Is it possible to design a cryptocurrency that will be automatically sent back (or can not be sent a void address) if it is sent to a void address?

You might set up a system, in which an address needs to be validated. The holder of the private key to an address would basically set a "Someone holds the private key" flag.

With the ability to sign Bitcoin addresses, you could actually implement this right now for Bitcoin and similar coins, using a plugin for a wallet which checks addresses for special flag messages. The problem is, that it doesn't work well as long as no one or only few people are using it.

Still, this might be an interesting idea.

Thank you for your reply. It seems that people tend to ignore this minor "defect" of cryptocurrency.

[ttookk]

As far as I know, if one sends bitcoin to a void address, the bitcoin is gone. So the total amount of available bitcoin is decreasing (in a relatively slow manner, lol). Is it possible to design a cryptocurrency that will be automatically sent back (or can not be sent a void address) if it is sent to a void address?

You might set up a system, in which an address needs to be validated. The holder of the private key to an address would basically set a "Someone holds the private key" flag.

With the ability to sign Bitcoin addresses, you could actually implement this right now for Bitcoin and similar coins, using a plugin for a wallet which checks addresses for special flag messages. The problem is, that it doesn't work well as long as no one or only few people are using it.

Still, this might be an interesting idea.

Thank you for your reply. It seems that people tend to ignore this minor "defect" of cryptocurrency.

Well, Bitcoin addresses have checksums to prevent mistyping an address. I don't know how high the probability is to mistype an address and still hit the right checksum, but this significantly decreases the risk of sending BTC to a void address.

Additionally, having a validation system in place wouldn't prevent users from losing privkeys.


I was actually thinking about a very radical solution to this "problem" (which, frankly, I don't consider a problem for the ecosystem as a whole – as much as it hurts the individual):

Imagine a PoS cryptocurrency with negative interest in case of inactivity. Basically, this is what it could look like:

- The amount of coins is fixed from the beginning, let's say the magic 21 000 000.
- The network is secured through Proof of Stake, with rewards being transaction fees only.
- A wallet, that is not active, as in staking or sending (not just receiving) loses a percentage of its holdings every n blocks.
- Coins that are lost this way are paid out to the address forging the block, giving the stakers an incentive to find those addresses.

This would bring any lost coin back in circulation at some point. On the other hand, the ramifications are huge. Obviously, using this currency as a long term value storage is pointless, unless you actively contribute to the network.

As an experiment, or maybe as a Blockchain as a service platform, this might actually be quite interesting.

[xiaohang07]

As far as I know, if one sends bitcoin to a void address, the bitcoin is gone. So the total amount of available bitcoin is decreasing (in a relatively slow manner, lol). Is it possible to design a cryptocurrency that will be automatically sent back (or can not be sent a void address) if it is sent to a void address?

You might set up a system, in which an address needs to be validated. The holder of the private key to an address would basically set a "Someone holds the private key" flag.

With the ability to sign Bitcoin addresses, you could actually implement this right now for Bitcoin and similar coins, using a plugin for a wallet which checks addresses for special flag messages. The problem is, that it doesn't work well as long as no one or only few people are using it.

Still, this might be an interesting idea.

Thank you for your reply. It seems that people tend to ignore this minor "defect" of cryptocurrency.

Well, Bitcoin addresses have checksums to prevent mistyping an address. I don't know how high the probability is to mistype an address and still hit the right checksum, but this significantly decreases the risk of sending BTC to a void address.

Additionally, having a validation system in place wouldn't prevent users from losing privkeys.


I was actually thinking about a very radical solution to this "problem" (which, frankly, I don't consider a problem for the ecosystem as a whole – as much as it hurts the individual):

Imagine a PoS cryptocurrency with negative interest in case of inactivity. Basically, this is what it could look like:

- The amount of coins is fixed from the beginning, let's say the magic 21 000 000.
- The network is secured through Proof of Stake, with rewards being transaction fees only.
- A wallet, that is not active, as in staking or sending (not just receiving) loses a percentage of its holdings every n blocks.
- Coins that are lost this way are paid out to the address forging the block, giving the stakers an incentive to find those addresses.

This would bring any lost coin back in circulation at some point. On the other hand, the ramifications are huge. Obviously, using this currency as a long term value storage is pointless, unless you actively contribute to the network.

As an experiment, or maybe as a Blockchain as a service platform, this might actually be quite interesting.

I didn't know bitcoin has adopted a basic approach (checksums) to prevent this type of loss. Thank you for your insight.

Right, I would say the majority of the loss are due to lost private key.

It is indeed not a problem for the ecosystem, since bitcoin can be divided down to 8 decimal places. A loss, say, 20% won't hurt in principle.

Your experimental idea is very intriguing. It not only solves the lost private key problem (for the ecosystem, lol), but keeps the blockchain healthy (ample computational power leads to fast transaction?). I would say if you start a project that implements this feature and do a some kind of airdrop (fair distribution?), it could be popular, lol.

[bathrobehero]

As far as I know, if one sends bitcoin to a void address, the bitcoin is gone. So the total amount of available bitcoin is decreasing (in a relatively slow manner, lol). Is it possible to design a cryptocurrency that will be automatically sent back (or can not be sent a void address) if it is sent to a void address?

You might set up a system, in which an address needs to be validated. The holder of the private key to an address would basically set a "Someone holds the private key" flag.

With the ability to sign Bitcoin addresses, you could actually implement this right now for Bitcoin and similar coins, using a plugin for a wallet which checks addresses for special flag messages. The problem is, that it doesn't work well as long as no one or only few people are using it.

Still, this might be an interesting idea.

Thank you for your reply. It seems that people tend to ignore this minor "defect" of cryptocurrency.

It's not much of a defect. You just as well can burn, lose, destroy paper money.

You should just triple confirm what address you're sending funds to.

You could have a sytem in which when you send coins the receiver would have to confirm to actually receive them (the system would be sort of an esrow) but even that would be pretty useless and just an annoyance.

Most of the coins lost are due to people not having backups to encrypted addresses.

If anything, people should just be more careful about handling money, simple as that.

[redmonski]

You can have a look at the Pascal Coin tech. They have the same checksum to validate address and they also have a solution to lost coins. Basically they assume coin is lost if they haven't moved for 4 years, then they will go back to the ecosystem to be mined on the next block.

[xiaohang07]

As far as I know, if one sends bitcoin to a void address, the bitcoin is gone. So the total amount of available bitcoin is decreasing (in a relatively slow manner, lol). Is it possible to design a cryptocurrency that will be automatically sent back (or can not be sent a void address) if it is sent to a void address?

You might set up a system, in which an address needs to be validated. The holder of the private key to an address would basically set a "Someone holds the private key" flag.

With the ability to sign Bitcoin addresses, you could actually implement this right now for Bitcoin and similar coins, using a plugin for a wallet which checks addresses for special flag messages. The problem is, that it doesn't work well as long as no one or only few people are using it.

Still, this might be an interesting idea.

Thank you for your reply. It seems that people tend to ignore this minor "defect" of cryptocurrency.

It's not much of a defect. You just as well can burn, lose, destroy paper money.

You should just triple confirm what address you're sending funds to.

You could have a sytem in which when you send coins the receiver would have to confirm to actually receive them (the system would be sort of an esrow) but even that would be pretty useless and just an annoyance.

Most of the coins lost are due to people not having backups to encrypted addresses.

If anything, people should just be more careful about handling money, simple as that.

Make sense. As the price of bitcoin goes up, it definitely encourages people to backup their private keys more carefully.

[Zadicar]

As far as I know, if one sends bitcoin to a void address, the bitcoin is gone. So the total amount of available bitcoin is decreasing (in a relatively slow manner, lol). Is it possible to design a cryptocurrency that will be automatically sent back (or can not be sent a void address) if it is sent to a void address?

Sad to accept but that concept or idea is really absent on bitcoin therefore we should really be careful on sending our bitcoins on other wallet because one mistake then it would lost forever or just floating throughout the network and cant be accessed by anybody.I cant see any alts do have this functionality or feature.If theres one then it might interest others but not generally switch specially on bitcoin users thats why transfer with your own risk.

[xiaohang07]

You can have a look at the Pascal Coin tech. They have the same checksum to validate address and they also have a solution to lost coins. Basically they assume coin is lost if they haven't moved for 4 years, then they will go back to the ecosystem to be mined on the next block.

Wow, you are right, Pascal Coin does have a solution for lost keys. Thank you for the info!

[xiaohang07]

As far as I know, if one sends bitcoin to a void address, the bitcoin is gone. So the total amount of available bitcoin is decreasing (in a relatively slow manner, lol). Is it possible to design a cryptocurrency that will be automatically sent back (or can not be sent a void address) if it is sent to a void address?

Sad to accept but that concept or idea is really absent on bitcoin therefore we should really be careful on sending our bitcoins on other wallet because one mistake then it would lost forever or just floating throughout the network and cant be accessed by anybody.I cant see any alts do have this functionality or feature.If theres one then it might interest others but not generally switch specially on bitcoin users thats why transfer with your own risk.

Check out Pascal Coin, it does include a lost coin solution, as mentioned by redmonski.