No special meaning (well maybe green as a symbol for "go ahead, it's safe"). I just picked a name for it so it's easier to talk about it.
I suppose the name 'instawallet' was already taken.
I agree with a later poster. Green has little to do with it. Rather instant and trustworthy = Instantrust?
I would have hoped your address would be more memorable, perhaps a "vanity" address with short 5 character
firstbits. The best I can do for mnemonic is CoDe-YeS-W.
I was thinking of creating a vanity address, but then decided not to do it. I was wondering if people might start relying on recognizing the address from memory. That might be dangerous, as it is not hard to create another vanity address that looks similar and that might slip by such a "manual check". So this way people might rather give the task of comparing it to a computer, which tends to not be fouled by these things. ;-)
Are you familiar with
firstbits? It is short, unambiguous and decentralized - indeed all that is required is the block chain and a simple algorithm. Your "green" address is 1cdysw and nothing more (nor less). The genesis address was '1'. All others are 2+ characters.
However, I guess the SENDING address does not need to be as memorable as the RECEIVING address.
Why not patch the C++ client to accept a list of "green addresses" from bitcoin.conf and display 0/green_unconfirmed in the transaction log? I expect you'll find support for it. Later we can consider a more complex DECENTRALIZE WOT model. You are in the best position to immediately implement this and see how sticky the patch is. We vote with fork pulls.
Interesting suggestion. But I think that is putting a little bit too much stuff into the Bitcoin daemon which isn't really related to the "core" protocol. I would (and probably will soon) rather go the way of providing an RPC call that returns input addresses used by a transaction and then build an external tool around that.
It seems a purely presentation layer feature. I already see 0/unconfirmed transactions. All that has to happen is that the presentation logic recognizes the sending address, matches it against a list, and displays 0/green_unconfirmed.
in some situations you can _only_ accept instant payments ... ATM machine shows QR code, says "please use a green address", ... user comes along who ignores the "please use a green address"
Sure, but then you need a hand shaking protocol and never send the receiving address before confirming the client/user groks the green address concept.
USR: Hello, I wanna buy a cola
ATM: Hello, it's 0.25 BTC, payable by 1A, 1B, 1C, 1CDysW, 1D green addresses
USR: Great, I love green addresses, what's your address?
ATM: 1bitcola
USR: You can expect that from 1CDysW
ATM: Got it, Thanks. Now here's your cola
