Losing keys is not an issue though in a multi-sig world which actually many have already adopted.
You can have 3/5 majority multi sig in which you have 5 keys.
You can distribute those 5 keys among different entities like insurance company, Govt, your family members etc.
And only 3 out of 5 keys required to do a transaction. Losing 1 isn't a big deal.
Further thoughts: With blockchain titles, it’s impossible to transfer property without the owner’s consent (or the consent of a majority of key holders, if that’s the design).
However, there are legitimate scenarios where a property has to be transferred without the owner’s consent. (e.g. divorce judgement, mortgage default)
There are also illegitimate scenarios that governments love. (e.g. non-payment of taxes, asset forfeiture, eminent domain) If governments are going to support blockchain titles, they may insist on backdoors like a copy of the owner’s private key or a controlling interest in the title’s signing keys.
But if there’s a multisig, wouldn’t this be accomplished by persuading three of the key holders to transfer, possibly with threat of prosecution?
I guess I’m less skeptical that this stuff could actually be worked out and more skeptical that there would ever actually be demand for it. To the Arnold Kling article somebody posted earlier, is it a solution looking for a problem in this realm? Lots to think about, but your insights have been helpful!
