friendlier addresses? - page 2. | Bitcointalksearch.org

thesouljourner

newbie

Activity: 30

Merit: 0

No one types addresses now because it's so hard

Here's some use cases:

Billy calls home from college and asks mom for money and wants to give her his address
The Red Cross has a tv/radio ad and wants to give a donation address

Basically any time you need to communicate an address through a medium that doesn't have copy nad paste (phone, TV, radio, billboards, in person)

Also useful because when you go back to look at your history you can tell who the money went to.

grau

hero member

Activity: 836

Merit: 1030

bits of proof

One would only re-use an address for the sake of easy audit-ability. Think e.g. of donations.

Otherwise addresses are transitory helper that do not need to have any persistence or meaning after a transaction is done.
No one types addresses and they have a built in checksum to recognize typos.
Check out https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0070.mediawiki for a suggestion on how to bind an address for a transaction.

thesouljourner

newbie

Activity: 30

Merit: 0

It seems like, one barrier to adoption for the mass market is how ugly and non-memorable addresses are. I know that on the back end they need to represent people's public keys, but it seems like it should be easy enough to hide that from the end user. If the clients simply signed a document that said "this address may be aliased by this name", you could then have clients able to send money to the name not the address. You then have the clients verify that no one else has signed a document with that name to keep it unique. To support one name across multiple addresses, you can have that first address sign for other addresses, which could then sign for other addresses, etc.

That way, you could send money to something human readable rather than an unintelligible string of characters that is easily typoed or even maliciously altered.

Thoughts?

Topic: friendlier addresses? - page 2. (Read 1697 times)