rich1.0npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2https://nostr.ae/npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2014-03-11 📝 Original message:On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:13:48AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Sure, but I don't see wallets being able to _assume_ _remote_ parties > have an HD wallet for a long, long time. Interoperability common > sense implies the environment will be heterogenous, perhaps forever, > invalidating assume-each-party-uses-HD logic. Maybe never: you can implement a wallet that uses stealth addresses for change, and doing appears to be advantageous in some scenarious with regard to privacy. -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 00000000000000a636d318d7384d2891c788af10e50b8d1e27b64df847f9117b -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 685 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140311/cb72c940/attachment.sig>