We need Reverse Transactions

[whyinvestinbitcoin]

One of the so-called features or benefits of bitcoin is the lack of any reverse transactions. But in many respects this is a great failing. Wouldn't it be better that if you voluntarily identify you as a legal entity holding a wallet address and that if you did not authorise a transaction (i.e. it was stolen or the goods weren't delivered) that there is a method to reverse that transaction?

What if you could submit that a transaction was illegal to the network and for a miners fee of say 10%, the transaction could be reversed by consensus? And that for addresses that are less trusted that becomes automatic but for highly trusted or fully identified addresses that goes to arbitration by one of many authorities/group of people to determine the validity?

To me, the KEY feature for bitcoin is the de-centralisation and limited quantity of units. But we need traditional services that the financial institutions currently provide for it to be useful. One feature is reverse transactions. without it is a hinderance to progress and why it exists to begin with.

Many scammers on this board I'm sure will happily protest to the idea. It doesn't work to their benefit. Is there any work being done on reverse-transactions in bitcoin?

[arkintunde]

I don't think this would work. Despite all validation and "trust" what is to stop you from reversing a legitimate transaction? This is the problem with Credit Cards. I can roll out to a any bar strip in the country and spend up a hefty bill, call my credit card company the next day and say all of these transactions were unauthorized without ever seeing any of those vendors. You can't do that with cash...you can't do that with Bitcoin. If you want your transaction reversed, it's up to You and the Receiver. That's it. Not some mediation company who will favor one or the other.

[guybrushthreepwood]

What's to stop people from claiming any transaction was fraudulent? This would essentially just turn it into PayPal. Maybe we need some two factor authentication and better security features on wallets though.

[Lauda]

No we don't need this. Stop trying to become Paypal v2. This just gives people more opportunities to scam.

[BitcoinBobbeh]

What's to stop people from claiming any transaction was fraudulent?

This.

If any transaction can be overturned by a miners' consensus what's to stop leaders of large mining pools from simply stealing all the fucking coins?

[AndOneBtc]

paypal v2 alert

[hilariousandco]

Very bad idea. If you want this sort of protection use escrow or a payment processor that offers this protection. Just look how bad Paypal is defrauded.

[kevindurant]

No, we don't need this. It's very bad idea. Go use Paypal if you want chargebacks.

[justusranvier]

Feel free to invent your own currency with this feature and leave Bitcoin alone.

[exstasie]

No we don't need this. Stop trying to become Paypal v2. This just gives people more opportunities to scam.

Yeah, we don't want to give people any more opportunities.  That is one of the biggest downfalls with PayPal in terms of fraud.  How can you every do any P2P transactions when the transaction can be reversed.

[rix5]

it's just creating a huge mess. learn to secure your shit instead of blaiming btc. reverse transactions will also lead to scam and theft. just in another way.

edit: if you are not able to care for the security of your btc then maybe you really should use paypal instead.

[Mitchell]

No. Piss off. We don't need that shit in Bitcoin.

[satosh007]

Feel free to invent your own currency with this feature and leave Bitcoin alone.

well said Yep

[BitCoinDream]

One of the so-called features or benefits of bitcoin is the lack of any reverse transactions. But in many respects this is a great failing. Wouldn't it be better that if you voluntarily identify you as a legal entity holding a wallet address and that if you did not authorise a transaction (i.e. it was stolen or the goods weren't delivered) that there is a method to reverse that transaction?

What if you could submit that a transaction was illegal to the network and for a miners fee of say 10%, the transaction could be reversed by consensus? And that for addresses that are less trusted that becomes automatic but for highly trusted or fully identified addresses that goes to arbitration by one of many authorities/group of people to determine the validity?

To me, the KEY feature for bitcoin is the de-centralisation and limited quantity of units. But we need traditional services that the financial institutions currently provide for it to be useful. One feature is reverse transactions. without it is a hinderance to progress and why it exists to begin with.

Many scammers on this board I'm sure will happily protest to the idea. It doesn't work to their benefit. Is there any work being done on reverse-transactions in bitcoin?

I dont care if u call me a SCAMMER, but I am hereby protesting your idea. Rather I am suggesting you to stay out of Bitcoin. FIAT money will work better for you. I dont really feel the necessity of explaining you the reason of protesting reversibility in the light of Satoshi's paper. Because, in your eye, he's a scammer too......

[LostDutchman]

No. Piss off. We don't need that shit in Bitcoin.

Very well put!

Thank you for your insightful post!

My $.02.

[EchoingUprise]

I agree with everyone else. It is not needed in the bitcoin world. It would also probably take a good bit of code rework to even allow this.

[vpitcher07]

No no no no no no and no. Nope absolutely not. nope. Did i get my opinion across?

[vpitcher07]

Fun thing, this is included in the protocol.
There is a reversibility option.

Um what?

[DeathAndTaxes]

Bitcoin is cash.  Is cash reversible? No.

However that doesn't mean payment systems can't be built ON TOP OF Bitcoin.

VISA isn't a currency, VISA is a payment system built on top of USD cash system.
_____ isn't a currency, ____ is a (future) payment system built on top of BTC cash system.

[retrend]

If people are involved in transactions with untrusted parties, they should pay for an escrow service.  It shouldn't be built into the system itself.