I would if it was easy. Just wanted to raise voice to what we loose by changing the behavior.
On bitcoinqt I generate a new address for each incoming transaction and label them accordingly, so I have "[from eric for his $x pizza] received yɃ from [eric]". This way I kind of label the transaction. Handling with only few addresses, I would want to label the transactions, too, so the current design is far from perfect for me.
Maybe some "Insufficient funds in the currently selected address. [add random addresses[check to make default]] [add specific addresses [check to make default]]
"Problem" is the sender would think to be sending from his Giszmo address but as Giszmo is at 0Ƀ, Giszmo would not show up at all in the resulting transaction.
It's really tricky You don't have "Balance 2Ƀ (total: 5Ƀ)" but "Balance 2Ƀ (total: 5Ƀ, spendable: 1Ƀ)" with "Balance [current address]Ƀ (total: [all addresses]Ƀ, spendable: [addresses with private key ready]Ƀ)"
Oh, and this will be funny, if users keep their private keys off the device all of the time and for some transactions have to show to the device 5 addresses for the signing process.
Also I want a swipe all functionality to consolidate all keys into one, leaving exactly zero in all the addresses paying minimum fees.
the way i see it currently the following can happen:
user downloads an apk. any MITM could now alter the apk. with "regular" apps this is also not a problem, except if they use other exploits.
it is a problem if the user downloads a "system" apk and installs it. for example an update to HTC sense. if an attacker now manages to modify the apk before it is installed - for example via malware on the server, a router or an intermediary PC - he can execute whatever code he likes with the access privileges of the original app.
i still don't know why play store is unaffected - it is kind of hard to MITM play store downloads and additionally the play store installer might do some more checksum checking.
An admin in the play store is the worst case I could think of, and on the long run I guess it's very likely to have all such wallets get wiped out in some incident. The reward is just too huge to not do it. (Ok, so far all huge hacks went without spending their coins but with ZeroCoin they become spendable again and I'm sure some day we will have that.)