I appreciate that itās a horrible feeling to have things scammed or stolen from you, but I see following issues with what youāre proposing:
That would introduce centralized policing which is anathema to the decentralized nature of the project.
No one has the power to take things from other peopleās wallets and give it back to you, no matter the evidence.
If there is a dispute as to if something was stolen or not, weād be forced to engage in arbitration or other forms of pseudo-courts that would be detrimental to the project.
In order for decentralized projects to succeed, I think that we must instead learn to adapt, accept responsibility and most importantly think outside the box of expectation that central authorities will bail us out when we make mistakes.
If we do, then the solution to all these problems is simple: we must learn to protect our wallets.
Then we can enjoy the simplistic beauty in the principle of: We either own it, or we donāt.
It would be a form of decentralized policing as there wouldnāt be a central authority governing it. I donāt think arbitration is detrimental to DAOs etcā¦ I think itās beneficial to the project as it provides some assurance from members. Itās kind of a web3 conservative vs liberal/socialist abstraction right. Like conservatives want no protection and the wild west vs providing people with basic rights and some form of protection. Poor people donāt really have access to all this crypto stuff because itās so expensive to buy into it and if you arenāt a programmer there is a super high barrier to entry, so it kind of helps perpetuate a wealth gap in some extremes. If someone that is low income buys into this and loses everything they are screwed and left without resources.
Notwithstanding if there is evidence that someone stole somethign and there is a public paper trail it seems like blockchain is almost condoing theft. Thatās like if someone broke into my house and stole an expensive necklace and I know who it was, have a video tape, but they are still allowed to walk freely around and sell it. I donāt know that the response is necesarily for me to lock my house better.
Iām not very politically interested and I find it difficult to attach labels like that on cryptocurrency movements. Vitalik wrote an interesting article recently that might be a good read.
Itās more of a centralization vs decentralization distinction where we have to accept both the inherent upsides and downsides of a decentralized system thatās owned and operated by a smart contract.
And even if it was possible to have a process whereby one could reach into strangers wallets and reverse transactions, rest assured that scammers would abuse that process for profit as well.
I support users every day thatās been scammed, and I think itās quite horrible, Iāve even sent my own personal money to some of them because I felt bad for them.
But Iām of the mind that the solution is rather to improve wallet software with safety features, and perhaps in the future a āscamlistā similar to spamlists to detect prevalent scam sites/addresses than to venture down the same centralization rabbit holes that gave us fiat currencies.
I agree. Crypto wallets should be championing the use of security keys (e.g., Yubikey) for 2FA. I have it on my computers, Coinbase, and other software applications when I can, but none of my wallets.
hi i was very stupid and interacted with a smart contract on arbitrum and someone compromised my keys. they stole 2 potentially high value domains: legoland.eth and daytona.eth
is there anything I can do?
thanks