[flagged]
But I see how polarized you are about the topic.
Of course you need to use a well designed network like Ethereum or Solana for that, not a random Bitcoin sidechain controlled by a committee of BTC miners and shady VCs. This is a problem with Liquid not DeFi.
But do both parties need to agree to the reversal? Then that's really trivial... and not prone to work against fraudsters.
I suspect that a legally-mandated transaction reversal supposes that an authority has got power over the system -- which is against DeFi philosophy.
Ok, but who were you quoting before? I too see how polarized your view seems to be, given you started this conversation with arguing against yourself for some reason.
How so ?
Meanwhile, what you qualified as blog spam is actually proving to be written by a human spending too much time answering your rant.
Who said any of the parts you quoted in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49594757?
It looks like you made up all of those lines.
Generally, we use quotes here for actual quotes, not quoting stuff we've read in other newspapers or on reddit or whatever, but real verbatim quotes.
I think it used to be a proper guidelines back in the day, or at least people got really up in their arms if you used quote syntax for things that weren't actually verbatim quotes.
But besides that, what's the point? Why share other's viewpoints you don't even agree with, so you can argue against them yourself? Why not wait until someone who actually has those viewpoints, share them? Or even better, why not just say nothing at all?