1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <zgenjix@yahoo.com>) id 1RrMkc-0008Fb-Km
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 29 Jan 2012 04:52:26 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from nm39-vm5.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com ([98.138.229.165])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with smtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1RrMkc-0000DI-0B for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 29 Jan 2012 04:52:26 +0000
Received: from [98.138.90.48] by nm39.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
29 Jan 2012 04:52:20 -0000
Received: from [98.138.89.233] by tm1.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
29 Jan 2012 04:52:20 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1048.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
29 Jan 2012 04:52:20 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 382722.62221.bm@omp1048.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 79135 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Jan 2012 04:52:20 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: WGpGvR8VM1nb.iTUqoDppxwJx_A9gyg4QudpQRen3Ikzajg
7ZgEy2WW3ahwC8mRfgHbTSNOEY5JUF4vLbShWizj63qY7.5brrrsvyf8uaUN
nj.GP4Vjd21QZkL0PWAJw3TaggX8lqH5Bc7za3p.sT8sLc_tF.2vqcM5rCfv
zqF37gZ2qtwsxnNn2rjmgWFEv2xxIQvHCm6TJxt3oteemACHYs5FjOlwn.uz
V7TeS3xwztQjNQsQ2vMddzbyqNoDJEqC7sGLTetPXH0.WIoey4_kp18W3iJi
K7z9jRoI1KFA2Tt3hvq0Lv8glw4AWbAQ6T9LUlWXirVB45QH3goWajTmxx1Q
mKKhurRho67y5wLSaoD.uFZI73yokP1qPT7rnAUMJY260zZoWF0793JMu_g- -
Received: from [92.20.138.208] by web121002.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP;
Sat, 28 Jan 2012 20:52:20 PST
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.116.331537
Message-ID: <1327812740.41242.YahooMailNeo@web121002.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 20:52:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Amir Taaki <zgenjix@yahoo.com>
To: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(zgenjix[at]yahoo.com)
1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net
[Blocked - see <http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?98.138.229.165>]
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [98.138.229.165 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-0.5 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1RrMkc-0000DI-0B
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Quote on BIP 16
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Amir Taaki <zgenjix@yahoo.com>
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 04:52:26 -0000
Gavin said:=0A"Part of the controversy is whether really long bitcoin addre=
sses would work-- would it be OK if the new bitcoin addresses were really l=
ong and looked something like this:=A0=A057HrrfEw6ZgRS58dygiHhfN7vVhaPaBE7H=
rrfEw6ZgRS58dygiHhfN7vVhaPaBiTE7vVhaPaBE7Hr=0A(or possibly even longer)=0A=
=0AI've argued no: past 70 or so characters it becomes a lot harder to copy=
and paste, a lot harder to scan an address with your eyes to see if you're=
paying who you think you're paying, harder to create a readable QR code, h=
arder to upgrade website or database code that deals with bitcoin addresses=
, etc. There is rough consensus that very-long addresses are not workable."=
=0A=0AHow could you have a 70 byte long address without a P2SH scheme? Is t=
his a mistake?
|
