Topic: Some thoughts about the .7 changes (Read 1236 times)
whoops i think it was this link: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0015
Here is another link I found on the trail after following gavins' link.
Sorry, where?
Here is another link I found on the trail after following gavins' link.
Thoughts:
We need better authorization and authentication for payments. See https://gist.github.com/2217885 for my complete thoughts; the "are you paying who you think you are paying" process is relevant even if you're using a singlesig wallet.
We need better authorization and authentication for payments. See https://gist.github.com/2217885 for my complete thoughts; the "are you paying who you think you are paying" process is relevant even if you're using a singlesig wallet.
I would love such an option. It is not likely to be implemented though.
I think it will be great to have better search capabilities in the new changes, I'd imagine with better blockchain searching one could make it so the user could type in the address they are sending their Bitcoins from and then send the Bitcoins to a single supplied address per organization. This could make it so the organization dosen't have to worry about multiple in/out tx fees when sending Bitcoins the customer that is sending the payment well the transaction fees would be on them.
For instance lets say cheaperinbitcoins always gives the following address for their customers to send their payments:1AeohaHoVSJLhVwebvDWjcmNyN3NkmhVXC
So this is how a future bitcoin transaction will take place in theory:
*User places order and types in the bitcoin addresses the Bitcoins will be comming from...
*Reciept says send X.xx amount of Bitcoins to the address of 1AeohaHoVSJLhVwebvDWjcmNyN3NkmhVXC
*User sends X.xx amount of Bitcoins
*Merchant(CheaperInBitcoins) scans where the Bitcoins are coming from and funds the order.
-----
This method is helpful when making a purchase because a user is less likely to get mixed up in Bitcoin addresses when sending funds.
A user could tag "CheaperInBitcoins payments" to the address and thus never ever have to scan another Bitcoin address
Custom clients can have a WOT rating displayed next to the trusted address
Again adds trust by a single entity, instead of scammers constantly switching addresses and indentities.
The only con i see is that the official client will have to support showing which Bitcoin address will be sending the bitcoins (or have sent the bitcoins) otherwise it's just plain unintuitive to send Bitcoins to the address of 1AeohaHoVSJLhVwebvDWjcmNyN3NkmhVXC then try to search for one of your owned Bitcoin addresses in the large list of awaiting transactions going to the same address.
-----
Any other thoughts?
For instance lets say cheaperinbitcoins always gives the following address for their customers to send their payments:1AeohaHoVSJLhVwebvDWjcmNyN3NkmhVXC
So this is how a future bitcoin transaction will take place in theory:
*User places order and types in the bitcoin addresses the Bitcoins will be comming from...
*Reciept says send X.xx amount of Bitcoins to the address of 1AeohaHoVSJLhVwebvDWjcmNyN3NkmhVXC
*User sends X.xx amount of Bitcoins
*Merchant(CheaperInBitcoins) scans where the Bitcoins are coming from and funds the order.
-----
This method is helpful when making a purchase because a user is less likely to get mixed up in Bitcoin addresses when sending funds.
A user could tag "CheaperInBitcoins payments" to the address and thus never ever have to scan another Bitcoin address
Custom clients can have a WOT rating displayed next to the trusted address
Again adds trust by a single entity, instead of scammers constantly switching addresses and indentities.
The only con i see is that the official client will have to support showing which Bitcoin address will be sending the bitcoins (or have sent the bitcoins) otherwise it's just plain unintuitive to send Bitcoins to the address of 1AeohaHoVSJLhVwebvDWjcmNyN3NkmhVXC then try to search for one of your owned Bitcoin addresses in the large list of awaiting transactions going to the same address.
-----
Any other thoughts?
Jump to: