Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

The Ethereum community has expressed widely differing opinions on whether implementing reversible transactions is a step forward.

An important aspect of cryptocurrency is the irreversibility of transactions. While proponents of reversible transactions point to improved security, critics argue that under this proposition, Ethereum mirrors the banking system it claims to oppose.

Stanford University researchers introduce reversible Ethereum transactions

On September 24, @kalli_jennera researcher from Standford Blockchain, tweeted about the benefits of reversible Ethereum transactions, saying the concept could mitigate the damage caused by theft.

She spoke of a “quorum of judges” to oversee and approve cancellation requests, which she believes would make the ecosystem much safer.

In this system, victims report stolen funds and request that they be frozen. The freeze means that the funds cannot be transferred from the address where they currently reside.

Based on preliminary evidence, judges decide whether or not to freeze the funds. For the former, the next step involves a trial where both parties submit evidence to support their respective cases.

At the heart of this proposal are the new ERC-20R and ERC-721R token standards, which work with a governance contract to achieve the majority will of the judges.

@kalli_jenner mentioned that the above is an initial working model, and she invites the community to submit comments to improve the proposal.

The ETH community is divided

In support of reversible transactions, the co-founder of Azra Games, @tjboudreaux, said the concept makes sense in terms of promoting insurance to blockchain users. However, he called for further exploration of the governance model to ensure the most appropriate is used.

However, many people have expressed concerns, especially since Ethereum’s centralization and censorship issues have come to light with the recent move to proof-of-stake and the Tornado Cash debacle.

@MonetSupply implicit reversible transactions would blur the lines between cryptocurrency and the banking system, adding that the process “essentially breaks” DeFi’s benefits, such as fast settlement and features like atomic swaps.

hammering the point of centralization/control, @griffds linked Ethereum to the World Economic Forum, insinuating a clandestine connection between the two.

On more tangible subjects, @FatManTerra expressed concern over the “decentralized judiciary” model, saying it is susceptible to corruption and manipulation by founders and early adopters.

Posted in: , Technology

Source link


Leave a comment