📅 Original date posted:2014-01-15
📝 Original message:Yes. Good idea(s).
> Might I propose "reusable address".
>
> I think that describes it best to any non-programmer, and even more so
> encourages wallets to present options as 'one time use' vs 'reusable'.
>
> It definitely packs a marketing punch which could help drive adoption. The
> feature is only useful if/when broadly adopted.
>
> I think it meets all the criteria required:
>
> - Communication between parties is a single message from the payee,
> which may be public
> - Multiple payments to the same address are not publicly linkable on
> the
> blockchain
> - The payee has explicitly designated they expect to receive more than
> one payment at that address
> - Payer can publicly prove they made a payment to the reusable address
> by revealing a secret
>
> I have high hopes for this feature. The war *against* address reuse may
> soon be a distant memory.
>
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:44:17 -0800, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at bitpay.com>
> wrote:
>> "static address" seems like a reasonable attempt at describing intended
>> use/direction.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Ben Davenport
>>> <bendavenport at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> But may I suggest we consider changing the name "stealth address" to
>>>> something more neutral?
>>>
>>> ACK. Regardless of the 'political' overtones, I think stealth is a
>>> little cringe-worthy.
>>>
>>> "Private address" would be fine if not for confusion with private-keys.
>>>
>>> "Static address" is perhaps the best in my view. (also helps improve
>>> awareness that normal addresses are intended to be more
>>> one-use-ness)------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
> Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
> Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
> Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk_______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
Odinn Cyberguerrilla [ARCHIVE] /
npub18x…hg6zk
2023-06-07 15:11:44
in reply to nevent1q…c6a9
Author Public Key
npub18xqykhf26udeq2nyk98ee0a5q4w3s2f75m405a6zswpdy573lxeqmhg6zkPublished at
2023-06-07 15:11:44Event JSON
{
"id": "6a97f4bf8eea7ff033d6260bc311fe3007024b6203277d3a50509cca73e51b56",
"pubkey": "39804b5d2ad71b902a64b14f9cbfb4055d18293ea6eafa77428382d253d1f9b2",
"created_at": 1686150704,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"6b79d8c7bec3dc6952db91cc68d0510d9897c37dcf58a24d8e2f4288fe42525c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"b0c2e7ab47968ae7166e4c4c027cb54384d878ab5c64e42aa373e4017a45196e",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"30217b018a47b99ed4c20399b44b02f70ec4f58ed77a2814a563fa28322ef722"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-01-15\n📝 Original message:Yes. Good idea(s).\n\n\u003e Might I propose \"reusable address\".\n\u003e\n\u003e I think that describes it best to any non-programmer, and even more so\n\u003e encourages wallets to present options as 'one time use' vs 'reusable'.\n\u003e\n\u003e It definitely packs a marketing punch which could help drive adoption. The\n\u003e feature is only useful if/when broadly adopted.\n\u003e\n\u003e I think it meets all the criteria required:\n\u003e\n\u003e - Communication between parties is a single message from the payee,\n\u003e which may be public\n\u003e - Multiple payments to the same address are not publicly linkable on\n\u003e the\n\u003e blockchain\n\u003e - The payee has explicitly designated they expect to receive more than\n\u003e one payment at that address\n\u003e - Payer can publicly prove they made a payment to the reusable address\n\u003e by revealing a secret\n\u003e\n\u003e I have high hopes for this feature. The war *against* address reuse may\n\u003e soon be a distant memory.\n\u003e\n\u003e On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:44:17 -0800, Jeff Garzik \u003cjgarzik at bitpay.com\u003e\n\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e \"static address\" seems like a reasonable attempt at describing intended\n\u003e\u003e use/direction.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Gregory Maxwell \u003cgmaxwell at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Ben Davenport\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \u003cbendavenport at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\u003e But may I suggest we consider changing the name \"stealth address\" to\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\u003e something more neutral?\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e ACK. Regardless of the 'political' overtones, I think stealth is a\n\u003e\u003e\u003e little cringe-worthy.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \"Private address\" would be fine if not for confusion with private-keys.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e \"Static address\" is perhaps the best in my view. (also helps improve\n\u003e\u003e\u003e awareness that normal addresses are intended to be more\n\u003e\u003e\u003e one-use-ness)------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.\n\u003e Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For\n\u003e Critical Workloads, Development Environments \u0026 Everything In Between.\n\u003e Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.\n\u003e http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431\u0026iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk_______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e",
"sig": "d6c6f58bd68f14efe47182283124707cedb167b58474dae4c74c102674c821614ceccbd361606705eedd40d1f8985decf2347e9fdd9a15e893262b70d979fd42"
}