📅 Original date posted:2014-01-15
📝 Original message:One variation of this, "recycled address", might avert misconceptions that
the "re-use" is exclusive to one's own identity.
Eric Martindale, relentless maker.
http://www.ericmartindale.com
+1 (919) 374-2020 | *BitMessage: *BM-2cWCmYBpV64FRSJpHHKWi1Cfc9W52jydwe
*Note:* Beginning December 11th, 2013, I will only be intermittently
available via email, SMS, and BitMessage. As a courtesy, please leave a
detailed message so that I can respond in kind. Thanks!
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Jeremy Spilman <jeremy at taplink.co> wrote:
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140115/dad871e2/attachment.html>;
Eric Martindale [ARCHIVE] /
npub1py…ld7pp
2023-06-07 15:11:43
in reply to nevent1q…qkdn
Author Public Key
npub1pynqzktaxz4ffsv8w0ju86anmqmfjau252vwd43nmw0qdk3xrmtskld7ppPublished at
2023-06-07 15:11:43Event JSON
{
"id": "4d36f36a01dfca52de8029e17e31137cae2413e25c0ad627c811acc4fc7b0e72",
"pubkey": "092601597d30aa94c18773e5c3ebb3d83699778aa298e6d633db9e06da261ed7",
"created_at": 1686150703,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"6b79d8c7bec3dc6952db91cc68d0510d9897c37dcf58a24d8e2f4288fe42525c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"1f3ebbc1207e59ec461b4176ada09d88f98e815258dd1d69dd6a680966bd4631",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"1c61d995949cbfaf14f767784e166bde865c7b8783d7aa3bf0a1d014b70c0069"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-01-15\n📝 Original message:One variation of this, \"recycled address\", might avert misconceptions that\nthe \"re-use\" is exclusive to one's own identity.\n\n\nEric Martindale, relentless maker.\nhttp://www.ericmartindale.com\n+1 (919) 374-2020 | *BitMessage: *BM-2cWCmYBpV64FRSJpHHKWi1Cfc9W52jydwe\n*Note:* Beginning December 11th, 2013, I will only be intermittently\navailable via email, SMS, and BitMessage. As a courtesy, please leave a\ndetailed message so that I can respond in kind. Thanks!\n\n\nOn Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Jeremy Spilman \u003cjeremy at taplink.co\u003e wrote:\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 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\n\u003e \"static address\" seems like a reasonable attempt at describing intended\n\u003e use/direction.\n\u003e\n\u003e On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Gregory Maxwell \u003cgmaxwell at gmail.com\u003ewrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Ben Davenport \u003cbendavenport at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e \u003e But may I suggest we consider changing the name \"stealth address\" to\n\u003e\u003e \u003e something more neutral?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e ACK. Regardless of the 'political' overtones, I think stealth is a\n\u003e\u003e little cringe-worthy.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e \"Private address\" would be fine if not for confusion with private-keys.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e \"Static address\" is perhaps the best in my view. (also helps improve\n\u003e\u003e awareness that normal addresses are intended to be more one-use-ness)\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\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\n\u003e http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431\u0026iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk\n\u003e _______________________________________________\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\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140115/dad871e2/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "f96d030108825d16b8cfd2715ee4d4e7186426a866e54120d5e0d4ad134c9b27cc897be313d6b753aa5e7701a668229f2e0911790cf5f9719aa61de600335579"
}