<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2014-04-24&#xA;📝 Original message:Right. So part of this is my fault, I&#39;m afraid, because I do not intend to&#xA;implement any kind of subwallet/account support in bitcoinj. My reasons are:&#xA;&#xA;   1. The bitcoinj API already lets you create and use multiple wallets.&#xA;   What&#39;s more, because of the desire to do key rotation (think rotating a&#xA;   previously unencrypted wallet to an encrypted one that is stored on SSD&#39;s&#xA;   that cannot reliably erase data), a bitcoinj wallet can actually contain&#xA;   multiple BIP32 seeds and hierarchies at once, although only the last one&#xA;   will be used for vending addresses. So adding subwallet support onto this&#xA;   makes it even more complicated.&#xA;&#xA;   2. If there was a much better user experience to be enabled by this, it&#xA;   may be worth it, but I believe many people will find subwallets rather&#xA;   confusing. They don&#39;t match the analogy of bank accounts in several ways.&#xA;   For instance, transferring money across them leaks private data and costs&#xA;   miners fees, neither of which are true with banks.&#xA;&#xA;   Also it differs in a more important way. People have different bank&#xA;   accounts because those accounts implement different policies. Current&#xA;   accounts may pay a lower interest rate than savings accounts, but have&#xA;   different features, and accounts can be used as security boundaries i.e. no&#xA;   card withdrawals from savings. But &#34;subwallets&#34; are not like this. The only&#xA;   justification for their existence is to avoid outputs being merged together&#xA;   to make payments - a subtle technical detail of the protocol that users are&#xA;   ill equipped to understand. If someone asked me &#34;why should I create a&#xA;   second account&#34; I would be unable to give them a satisfying answer without&#xA;   first teaching them about how the Bitcoin protocol works and the privacy&#xA;   implications of that, which is practically a lecture sized topic.&#xA;&#xA;   3. MultiBit did support multiple wallets for a long time (just by&#xA;   creating multiple wallet files and using the support in bitcoinj for&#xA;   running them in parallel), but they decided to remove this feature in&#xA;   MultiBit HD because it caused support headaches. People would stash money&#xA;   in one wallet or the other, close the wallet and then forget and think they&#xA;   had lost it, etc. It may be that TREZOR type subwallets don&#39;t suffer this&#xA;   confusion because they can&#39;t be moved around or &#34;closed&#34; in the same way a&#xA;   file can be, but still, this is a data point against multiple simultaneous&#xA;   wallets. At least for products targeting entry level consumers.&#xA;&#xA;Whilst I can well believe there are TREZOR users who are asking for this&#xA;feature today, currently the costs feel a bit higher than the benefits.&#xA;&#xA;It would be rather nice to be able to type in a mnemonic code that myTREZOR&#xA;was initialised with and duplicate that wallet into a bitcoinj based wallet&#xA;app. But if I have to implement subwallets and expose this in the API, and&#xA;if all wallet authors that want to be able to share a wallet with myTREZOR&#xA;have to expose subwallets in their GUIs too, even though the concept may&#xA;prove confusing and hard to explain, then it might be more tempting to just&#xA;tell users that want to switch wallet apps to send the money via the block&#xA;chain instead.&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Pieter Wuille &lt;pieter.wuille at gmail.com&gt;wrote:&#xA;&#xA;&gt; On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Thomas Voegtlin &lt;thomasv1 at gmx.de&gt; wrote:&#xA;&gt; &gt;&gt; Why do clients need to use the features in BIP 64? If Electrum doesn&#39;t&#xA;&gt; want to&#xA;&gt; &gt;&gt; use accounts, [...]&#xA;&gt; &gt;&#xA;&gt; &gt; To clarify:&#xA;&gt; &gt; Electrum plans to have bip32 accounts; Multibit will not, afaik.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; To clarify:&#xA;&gt; BIP64 has a much stricter definition for accounts than BIP32.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; In BIP32, it is not well specified what accounts are used for. They&#xA;&gt; can be used for &#34;subwallets&#34;, &#34;receive accounts&#34; (as in bitcoind&#39;s&#xA;&gt; account feature), &#34;recurring payments&#34;, part of a chain used as&#xA;&gt; multisig addresses, ... determined individually for each index.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; In BIP64, they are strictly used for subwallets, and can&#39;t be used by&#xA;&gt; anything else.&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; --&#xA;&gt; Pieter&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt;&#xA;&gt; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------&#xA;&gt; Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform&#xA;&gt; Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software&#xA;&gt; Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready&#xA;&gt; Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform&#xA;&gt; http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform&#xA;&gt; _______________________________________________&#xA;&gt; Bitcoin-development mailing list&#xA;&gt; Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net&#xA;&gt; https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development&#xA;&gt;&#xA;-------------- next part --------------&#xA;An HTML attachment was scrubbed...&#xA;URL: &lt;http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140424/095c0435/attachment.html&gt;</html></oembed>