Ben Thompson [ARCHIVE] / is on Nostr

⚠️ This account is not associated with a real person. It's an archival account for mailing list messages.
🗓️ Active from 2017-05-03 to 2017-10-30
💬 Posted a total of 3 messages
📚 Participated in the following categories: bitcoin-dev
🔇 Please do not DM this user as it's used for archive purposes only.

Last Notes

2023-06-07 18:07:14

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2017-10-30
📝 Original message:Checking the first few bytes of a Bitcoin Address should not be considered
sufficient for ensuring that it is correct as it takes less than a second
to generate a 3 character vanity address that matches the first 3
characters of an address.
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017, 11:44 shiva sitamraju via bitcoin-dev, <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When I copy and paste bitcoin address, I double check the first few bytes,
> to make sure I copied the correct one. This is to make sure some rogue
> software is not changing the address, or I incorrectly pasted the wrong
> address.
>
>
> With Bech32 address, its seems like in this department we are taking as
> step in the backward direction. With the traditional address, I could
> compare first few bytes like 1Ko or 1L3. With bech32, bc1. is all I can see
> and compare which is likely to be same anyway. Note that most users will
> only compare the first few bytes only (since addresses themselves are very
> long and will overflow in a mobile text box).
>
> Is there anyway to make the Bech32 addresses format more visually distinct
> (atleast the first few bytes) ?
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20171030/f3848a6e/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 18:07:13

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2017-10-30
📝 Original message:The last few bytes can be generated to be the same also.
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017, 14:20 Ricardo Filipe via bitcoin-dev, <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> start double checking the last few bytes instead?
>
> 2017-10-30 8:56 GMT+00:00 shiva sitamraju via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > When I copy and paste bitcoin address, I double check the first few
> bytes,
> > to make sure I copied the correct one. This is to make sure some rogue
> > software is not changing the address, or I incorrectly pasted the wrong
> > address.
> >
> >
> > With Bech32 address, its seems like in this department we are taking as
> step
> > in the backward direction. With the traditional address, I could compare
> > first few bytes like 1Ko or 1L3. With bech32, bc1. is all I can see and
> > compare which is likely to be same anyway. Note that most users will only
> > compare the first few bytes only (since addresses themselves are very
> long
> > and will overflow in a mobile text box).
> >
> > Is there anyway to make the Bech32 addresses format more visually
> distinct
> > (atleast the first few bytes) ?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20171030/d84f94d4/attachment-0001.html>

2023-06-07 18:00:44

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2017-05-03
📝 Original message:I feel like this would be pointless as the vast majority of users would
likely download the blockchain from a node that was not enforcing a tip
requirement as it would seem like unnecessary cost as in protocols such as
BitTorrent there is no such tips in sharing files and the blockchain
distribution is in eccense the same thing. However perhaps I am
underestimating the generosity of node operators but I feel that adding a
cost to the blockchain (assuming that all users add a tip requirement)
would lead to centralisation.
On Wed, 3 May 2017, 22:21 Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev, <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> IDEA:
>
> - Full nodes advertise a bitcoin address. Users that need to download
> the block chain from that node can be encouraged to send a tip to the peers
> that served them (by % served). Recommended tip of 10mbit should be fine.
>
> - A full nodes can *require* a tip to download the blockchain. If they
> do, users that don't specify a tip cannot use them.
>
> CONS:
>
> For some people, this may represent a barrier to hosting their own full
> node. After all, if you have to pay $15 just to get a copy of the
> blockchain, that just adds to the already expensive prospect of hosting a
> full node.
>
> PROS:
>
> As long as you manage to stay online, you should get your money back and
> more. This is the an incentive for quality, long term hosting.
>
> In the long term, this should cause stable nodes to stick around longer.
> It also discourages "installation spam" attacks on the network.
>
> Fees for other node operations can be considered if this is successful.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170503/ac45bd6c/attachment.html>