Why doesn't bitcoin have a "freeze" function?

[PrimeNumber7]

Ever heard of cards with chips in them?

Ever heard of credit card shimming?

See https://www.zdnet.com/article/researchers-create-magstripe-versions-of-emv-and-contactless-cards/

Card skimming, or card shimming does not affect the end-user of a credit card, beyond a fairly minor inconvenience. While the law says that consumers have no more than $50 in liability when their credit card is stolen, most credit card issuers have "$0 liability" policies, and consumers are not liable when their credit card number is used due to a data breach. This is something that was pointed out on the first page.

Minor inconvenience? I disagree since there's real concern if technology illiterate user use their credit card on physical store. At least in my country, there are few news where rouge worker perform skimming/shimming when user give their credit card to the worker. Besides, i merely mentioned about shimming to show that card with chips isn't 100% secure.

If your card information is stolen by a criminal via whatever means, the end-user is not going to pay for any unauthorized transactions. So if your card is skimmed/shimmed, you can complete some paperwork, wont be able to use your card for a number of days while the bank sends you a replacement card, and you will not be on the hook for unauthorized transactions.

What are you saying is the loss to the end-user beyond an inconvenience? If you use a card at a restaurant for example, it will be out of your possession, and the staff can do whatever they want with it, but this will not affect the end user.

[1714249679]

1714249679

[1714249679]

1714249679

[1714249679]

1714249679

[1714249679]

1714249679

[larry_vw_1955]

Then from that that inefficiency something will be invented to make barter, and trade more efficient.

You mean like bitcoin?

In the internet, there needs to be a way to make a trade with a currency that users don’t need permission to use, that can’t be censored by an authority.

Well I definitely agree with that. But the problem is you're glamorizing the process more than it deserves. Users do need permission to engage in bitcoin to be quite honest. Where are you going to get bitcoin from? Oh that's right you have to buy it from a 3rd party and they need to know who you are so the government can be satisfied. And that 3rd party could be notorious for freezing peoples bitcoin and locking their account for weeks if not months. How's that sound?

[larry_vw_1955]

I have seen other people engage in similar behavior recently. I appreciate Larry's desire to improve upon bitcoin, even if his specific proposal is not something that should be implemented. I encourage Larry and others to come up with ways to improve bitcoin. I somewhat suspect that some people propose flawed ideas with the hope of having their idea implanted, and being able to write this on their resume.

flawed ideas??

you can't be talking about me!

[larry_vw_1955]

Another possible way to implement this freezing functionality is to have special address (lets say it starts with F) that can only be used to hold funds from a normal btc address. These addresses would provide extra security since even if they were compromised the hacker would not be able to do anything with the money except to send it back to the address it corresponded to. And that would only be possible if they unfroze the address first. Because you can't send money to a frozen address.

In a sense then it boils down to how does one connect a normal btc address to one of these new address types that start with an F? And once they have made this connection, how do they go about freezing and unfreezing? In the frozen state, what happens if new funds get sent to the frozen address?

You guys rock, I mean you're so smart!