To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
From: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 17:59:57 +0200
Message-ID: <oi8sdn$ksl$1@blaine.gmane.org>
References: <CAO3Pvs8ccTkgrecJG6KFbBW+9moHF-FTU+4qNfayeE3hM9uRrg@mail.gmail.com>
	<oi8e8k$g56$1@blaine.gmane.org>
	<537fb7106e0387c77537f0b1279cbeca@cock.lu>
	<55482016.LADLl5KXAH@strawberry>
	<4052F361-966C-4817-9779-146D4B43D1FE@jonasschnelli.ch>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/52.1.1
In-Reply-To: <4052F361-966C-4817-9779-146D4B43D1FE@jonasschnelli.ch>
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Compact Client Side Filtering for
	Light Clients
Precedence: list

On 06/19/2017 05:49 PM, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev wrote:

>>> It's been debated if [filtering of] unconfirmed transactions are
>>> necessary,
>>
>> Why would it not be needed? Any SPV client (when used as a payment-receiver)
>> requires this from a simple usability point of view.
> 
> 
> I think many users would be willing ...
> a) … to trade higher privacy (using client side filtering) for not having the „incoming transaction“ feature
> b) – if they want 0-conf – to fetch all inved transactions

Another number: I'm answering dozens of support inquiries about
delayed/missing transactions per day. Over the 7 years of Bitcoin
Wallet's existence, I estimate about 50000 inquiries.

On the other hand, I remember only 1 (one) inquiry about the privacy
problems of BIP37 (or privacy at all).

From a regular user's point of view, privacy is non-issue. Sure,
everyone would take it for free, but certainly not if it a) delays
incoming payments or b) quickly eats up your traffic quota.