{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-01-12\n📝 Original message:On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Jeremy Spilman \u003cjeremy at taplink.co\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e  I think for displaying the payment in the UI after it's been made via\n\u003e PP, we have to fully support sending to a new standard address type anyway.\n\u003e\n\nWhy? Showing an address is meaningless, especially if the user didn't type\nit in or see it somewhere else. It's just an opaque random number, all\nputting it in the UI can do is make it look scarier :)\n\nPart of the point of the payment protocol is it lets merchants provide\nhuman readable text for transactions instead of addresses.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140112/e2d2f4b8/attachment.html\u003e"}