3 ms·
The thing is, if you lost your share certificate, but could still prove to the registrar that you were the legitimate owner of those shares, there's a good chan
by astoor 5y ago
The thing is, if you lost your share certificate, but could still prove to the registrar that you were the legitimate owner of those shares, there's a good chance you would get them back. Likewise, if you accidentally burned a bunch of banknotes, but had sufficient fragments remaining to prove your ownership, your central bank is likely to be able to recompense you. That's one of the consumer-friendly features of centralised systems, which is considered a bug in consumer-hostile decentralised systems.
- plebianRube 5y ago>could still prove to the registrar Sure and if he had a multisig wallet he would still have his coins. The equivalency is that he did none of these things.
- astoor 5y agoFailing to take additional steps before a loss is conceptually very different from being able to take additional steps after a loss. You might as well list a whole bunch of additional things he could have done before throwing away the hard drive, e.g. having a recovery phrase split over multiple pieces of paper each stored in different bank vaults (like the Winkelvii), or simply keeping a back-up of the hard drive contents. If you lose the PIN to access your bank account, your bank would never say something like "sorry, can't help, you should have done X, Y or Z before you lost your PIN, but never mind [to quote Satoshi from the article] Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more."
- plebianRube 5y agoAll of your examples do is show the steps the present banking system has taken before a loss, to aid recovery in the future, after a loss. Planning ahead is rewarded in life, what can I say.