. - page 2. | Bitcointalksearch.org

ShadowOfHarbringer

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1005

Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952

Quote from: CIYAM on October 30, 2012, 06:53:08 AM

Quote from: ShadowOfHarbringer on October 30, 2012, 06:12:18 AM

* WKWTAD people = People Who Know What They Are Doing

And those people can't use the raw tx API (even with the help of brainwallet.org)?

Even if that is possible, it will be far more convenient (and less time consuming) if it would be integrated in the mainline client.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1072

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: ShadowOfHarbringer on October 30, 2012, 06:12:18 AM

* WKWTAD people = People Who Know What They Are Doing

And those people can't use the raw tx API (even with the help of brainwallet.org)?

ShadowOfHarbringer

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1005

Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952

Quote from: CIYAM on October 30, 2012, 05:21:36 AM

Certainly I doubt it will ever be a feature that Gavin's grandmother will be asking for.

Well it's not necessary for normal usage and probably won't be used by 99% Bitcoin users, but it is a very important feature still for the uber-geek/cryptoanarchist/other WKWTAD* people.

--
* WKWTAD people = People Who Know What They Are Doing

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1072

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

For the more technically savvy the raw tx API (perhaps with help from brainwallet.org) reduces the priority of this feature a lot (as you have been able to do everything you want as far as controlling your coins since 0.7 was released).

For the less technically competent I guess the question is really whether the UI can be made easy enough to make the feature worthwhile implementing (if it's not easily understood then there is probably little point in doing more work on this). Note that I haven't actually tested the patch so have no idea how intuitive the UI is.

Certainly I doubt it will ever be a feature that Gavin's grandmother will be asking for.

K1773R

legendary

Activity: 1792

Merit: 1008

/dev/null

Quote from: ShadowOfHarbringer on October 30, 2012, 04:31:50 AM

Any updates on the topic ? Is anybody working on it ?

i hope they will update it, or someone pick it up since this is really important!

ShadowOfHarbringer

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1005

Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952

Any updates on the topic ? Is anybody working on it ?

K1773R

legendary

Activity: 1792

Merit: 1008

/dev/null

this is still a problem...

phelix

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1019

multibit with multiple wallets might be an alternative

ShadowOfHarbringer

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1005

Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952

Quote from: N.Z. on October 13, 2012, 04:52:08 PM

Gavin, if we, those who are interested in this function, provide our interest by donations to you or other developer, is there a chance that you will make this patch happen sooner?

+5 BTC

I join the question and pledge 5 BTC if anybody would want to finish it sooner.

N.Z.

sr. member

Activity: 427

Merit: 250

Gavin, if we, those who are interested in this function, provide our interest by donations to you or other developer, is there a chance that you will make this patch happen sooner?

phelix

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1019

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on September 24, 2012, 07:25:55 PM

Good luck Luke-jr.

However, I think you are probably thrashing a dead horse since both Gavin A. and Jeff G. have indicated they will defend bitcoin's current level of traceability.

Pictures or it never happened.

Of course there are plenty of disadvantages to coin control / sendfromaddress. Above all it makes bitcoin much more of a hassle to use.
But I think we somehow have to deal with this linkability issue. At least people using Bitcoin have to know about it, transparency is very important here. The patch lets people see what bitcoin really is currently.

I don't want Bitcoin to end up like the Royal Canadian Mint's Mintchip marketing vote incident.

Gavin Andresen

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 2216

Chief Scientist

~~Yeah, where did I say that?~~

Oops, edited, I forgot about my "don't feed the trolls" rule.

Bitcoin Oz

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

Wat

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on September 24, 2012, 07:25:55 PM

Good luck Luke-jr.

However, I think you are probably thrashing a dead horse since both Gavin A. and Jeff G. have indicated they will defend bitcoin's current level of traceability.

And why would they want that ?

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on September 24, 2012, 07:25:55 PM

However, I think you are probably thrashing a dead horse since both Gavin A. and Jeff G. have indicated they will defend bitcoin's current level of traceability.

So will I*. But I don't think any of us consider Coin Control to have much to do with traceability. I don't personally care about Coin Control either, which is why I've only been minimally keeping it up to date, not doing the proper maintenance it needs to get merged.

* Not to say there aren't things that could make Bitcoin less traceable for real, that could be accepted for other good reasons.

kjj

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1025

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on September 24, 2012, 07:25:55 PM

Good luck Luke-jr.

However, I think you are probably thrashing a dead horse since both Gavin A. and Jeff G. have indicated they will defend bitcoin's current level of traceability.

Did I miss something, or are you just trolling?

marcus_of_augustus

legendary

Activity: 3920

Merit: 2348

Eadem mutata resurgo

Good luck Luke-jr.

However, I think you are probably thrashing a dead horse since both Gavin A. and Jeff G. have indicated they will defend bitcoin's current level of traceability.

pretendo

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

I support this

phelix

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1019

Quote from: Luke-Jr on July 07, 2012, 05:45:41 PM

Quote from: ShadowOfHarbringer on July 07, 2012, 05:14:12 PM

Quote from: N.Z. on July 07, 2012, 04:58:22 PM

Strange things are happening to this useful patch. Author and followers abandon support for it constantly. More than a year has passed, but there is nothing about it in official client, even "experimental" and "for advanced use only". WTF...

P.S. Just my 0.02 btc, nevermind

Actually i remember reading somewhere that this will be implemented in 0.7.
Am I wrong ?

No, since the author and subsequent maintainer have both abandoned it, there is nobody to address the problems still left unresolved. Until that happens, it will not likely be merged. For the time being, I am keeping it minimally up to date for my next-test branches.

like here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/please-test-if-you-dare-next-and-next-test-2012-08-13-100390

thanks luke!

phelix

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1019

Quote from: zebedee on July 07, 2012, 01:45:38 AM

I don't think anyone has said it yet, so I'll just point out that this feature is available in the electrum client - you can prioritize addresses that you received at for a payment. In particular, if you prioritize an address that received more than you're sending, you can be sure that only that address is used for the payment.

interesting...

ShadowOfHarbringer

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1005

Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952

Quote from: Luke-Jr on July 07, 2012, 05:45:41 PM

Quote from: ShadowOfHarbringer on July 07, 2012, 05:14:12 PM

Quote from: N.Z. on July 07, 2012, 04:58:22 PM

Strange things are happening to this useful patch. Author and followers abandon support for it constantly. More than a year has passed, but there is nothing about it in official client, even "experimental" and "for advanced use only". WTF...

P.S. Just my 0.02 btc, nevermind

Actually i remember reading somewhere that this will be implemented in 0.7.
Am I wrong ?

No (...)

BTW, You just did a double-negative answer which could be understood by me as "yes you are right" Tongue

(Just fooling around here, don't mind me)

Topic: . - page 2. (Read 40299 times)