People losing their life savings because they kept it under their mattress is basically the reason that banks were invented. So I suppose this has all come full circle now.
So hackable, you're saying?
The discussion is turning in circles. People lose coins. Have a backup. Too difficult. Put them in a bank. Banks are hackable. Manage the coins yourself. But then I might lose them.
(you can replace bank with 'trusted third-party', doesn't change the outcome)
Consider the two options: self-managed, or in a trusted third-party. Whichever has the smaller (perceived) risk, that's where you store your coins. Not everybody asses risk equally, and that's fine. My preferred solution may not be the same as your preferred solution. That's fine, still.
I mean, the wallet software is obviously open source, and you can change it however you want of course, but allowing for transactions to be undone would basically require rewriting the entire protocol and everything which interacts with the bitcoin network - and that's if it's even possible in the first place, without removing vital parts of bitcoin like the decentralization or being able to trust the entire network without trusting any one entity.
https://glacierprotocol.org/releases/Glacier%20Protocol%20Do...