3 ms·

> Your bitcoin payment is only as safe as your ability to reliably bind a bitcoin address to an intended recipient. If you get it wrong, there's no recourse. M

> Your bitcoin payment is only as safe as your ability to reliably bind a bitcoin address to an intended recipient. If you get it wrong, there's no recourse. Maybe im being totally naive.. but how about a second blockchain called the "rollback" blockchain.. Suppose you put a "timer" in the bitcoin blockchain for a period lets say 48 hrs.. So when the timer expires, the first blockchain(the coin blockchain), would check for a "rollback transaction" in the second one.. if its not there, the transaction on the first blockchain would be confirmed, and the funds would go to te right account, in a completely automated way, with all the trust garantee that the blockchain tech can give. Is this a stupid idea? (i just gave a quick tought about this) OBS: of course, say goodbye to instant payment.. but with double check security sugar on top of it.

TylerE 10y ago
Yes, frankly a stupid idea. The current 30 minutesish confirmation time already kneecaps bitcoin. You want to make it 48 hours? Might as well mail a bloody check!
- oscargrouch 10y ago
  Ok, the time period was just arbitrary.. the most important part of the idea, being a second blockchain to have programmable parameters specifying certain conditions to the first blockchain.. So i dont know what parameters would be the best giving a certain context..
sowbug 10y ago
The concept you're describing is called a "smart contract." There isn't a second blockchain, but the transaction itself specifies conditions that must arise before the funds move. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_contract https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_contract And for a cryptocurrency-specific implementation, see http://nashx.com/HowItWorks http://nashx.com/HowItWorks
- oscargrouch 10y ago
  Yes, i think a "smart-contract" would do the trick.. with the plus you could define more arbitrary parameters, to model some context that fits your need. But the coin blockchain would at least to have a little context about the second one, the "smart contract" one.. binding/linking the transactions in the second blockchain to itself.

TylerE 10y ago

Yes, frankly a stupid idea. The current 30 minutesish confirmation time already kneecaps bitcoin. You want to make it 48 hours? Might as well mail a bloody check!

oscargrouch 10y ago
Ok, the time period was just arbitrary.. the most important part of the idea, being a second blockchain to have programmable parameters specifying certain conditions to the first blockchain.. So i dont know what parameters would be the best giving a certain context..

sowbug 10y ago

The concept you're describing is called a "smart contract." There isn't a second blockchain, but the transaction itself specifies conditions that must arise before the funds move. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_contract https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_contract And for a cryptocurrency-specific implementation, see http://nashx.com/HowItWorks http://nashx.com/HowItWorks

oscargrouch 10y ago
Yes, i think a "smart-contract" would do the trick.. with the plus you could define more arbitrary parameters, to model some context that fits your need. But the coin blockchain would at least to have a little context about the second one, the "smart contract" one.. binding/linking the transactions in the second blockchain to itself.