I think by "we" paulie means the owner of a given BTC address, so no centralization is involved...
Ah. Sorry for misunderstanding the gist.
Now that I get it, I'm on the fence. I'll have to mull it over.
Topic: what about allowing an owner to lock BTC to an address for a period of time? - page 3. (Read 3442 times)
September 06, 2012, 11:48:50 AM
Ah. Sorry for misunderstanding the gist.
Now that I get it, I'm on the fence. I'll have to mull it over.
September 06, 2012, 11:45:12 AM
what if we could flag certain btc
Who's the "we"? What if "we" don't like your politics, your religion or "we" think you're funny looking and want to shut your coins down?
The danger of centralization is far greater than the danger of decentralization.
I think by "we" paulie means the owner of a given BTC address, so no centralization is involved...
September 06, 2012, 11:39:26 AM
what if we could flag certain btc
Who's the "we"? What if "we" don't like your politics, your religion or "we" think you're funny looking and want to shut your coins down?
The danger of centralization is far greater than the danger of decentralization.
September 06, 2012, 11:24:14 AM
perhaps this is a way to deal with the tainted/stolen coin problem:
what if we could flag certain btc with something like "this cannot be transferred from this address within X period" (able to be changed by the owner)? for example, in a long-term savings situation, this would allow even an unprotected walled, assuming all coins were marked, to be safe for a period of time.
of course protecting the data relating to when it becomes un-protected would be important information for hackers to have to do time-based attacks/extractions on wallet files, so unless that is figured out maybe this is useless.
but, just thinking out loud...
what if we could flag certain btc with something like "this cannot be transferred from this address within X period" (able to be changed by the owner)? for example, in a long-term savings situation, this would allow even an unprotected walled, assuming all coins were marked, to be safe for a period of time.
of course protecting the data relating to when it becomes un-protected would be important information for hackers to have to do time-based attacks/extractions on wallet files, so unless that is figured out maybe this is useless.
but, just thinking out loud...
That's a feature I for one would LOVE to see.
But I have no idea how complex it would be to implement properly...
September 06, 2012, 11:19:55 AM
perhaps this is a way to deal with the tainted/stolen coin problem:
what if we could flag certain btc with something like "this cannot be transferred from this address within X period" (able to be changed by the owner)? for example, in a long-term savings situation, this would allow even an unprotected walled, assuming all coins were marked, to be safe for a period of time.
of course protecting the data relating to when it becomes un-protected would be important information for hackers to have to do time-based attacks/extractions on wallet files, so unless that is figured out maybe this is useless.
but, just thinking out loud...
what if we could flag certain btc with something like "this cannot be transferred from this address within X period" (able to be changed by the owner)? for example, in a long-term savings situation, this would allow even an unprotected walled, assuming all coins were marked, to be safe for a period of time.
of course protecting the data relating to when it becomes un-protected would be important information for hackers to have to do time-based attacks/extractions on wallet files, so unless that is figured out maybe this is useless.
but, just thinking out loud...
Jump to: