rich1.0npub1pynqzktaxz4ffsv8w0ju86anmqmfjau252vwd43nmw0qdk3xrmtskld7pphttps://nostr.ae/npub1pynqzktaxz4ffsv8w0ju86anmqmfjau252vwd43nmw0qdk3xrmtskld7ppnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2014-01-15 📝 Original message:One variation of this, "recycled address", might avert misconceptions that the "re-use" is exclusive to one's own identity. Eric Martindale, relentless maker. http://www.ericmartindale.com +1 (919) 374-2020 | *BitMessage: *BM-2cWCmYBpV64FRSJpHHKWi1Cfc9W52jydwe *Note:* Beginning December 11th, 2013, I will only be intermittently available via email, SMS, and BitMessage. As a courtesy, please leave a detailed message so that I can respond in kind. Thanks! On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Jeremy Spilman <jeremy at taplink.co> wrote: > Might I propose "reusable address". > > I think that describes it best to any non-programmer, and even more so > encourages wallets to present options as 'one time use' vs 'reusable'. > > It definitely packs a marketing punch which could help drive adoption. The > feature is only useful if/when broadly adopted. > > I think it meets all the criteria required: > > - Communication between parties is a single message from the payee, > which may be public > - Multiple payments to the same address are not publicly linkable on the > blockchain > - The payee has explicitly designated they expect to receive more than > one payment at that address > - Payer can publicly prove they made a payment to the reusable address > by revealing a secret > > I have high hopes for this feature. The war *against* address reuse may > soon be a distant memory. > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 12:44:17 -0800, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at bitpay.com> > wrote: > > "static address" seems like a reasonable attempt at describing intended > use/direction. > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com>wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Ben Davenport <bendavenport at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > But may I suggest we consider changing the name "stealth address" to >> > something more neutral? >> >> ACK. Regardless of the 'political' overtones, I think stealth is a >> little cringe-worthy. >> >> "Private address" would be fine if not for confusion with private-keys. >> >> "Static address" is perhaps the best in my view. (also helps improve >> awareness that normal addresses are intended to be more one-use-ness) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. > Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For > Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. > Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140115/dad871e2/attachment.html>