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...
- Software you use for key generation uses a known random-seed.
- Compromised software that converts your seed into an address/priv key.
- Compromised transaction generation software.
- Offline wallet physically stolen
- Malware / firmware exploit on USB used to transfer transactions between online & offline computers