summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/f9/33ef59fb414e6d1431d8384d95d8d8d964217a
blob: def78ed4ab5cba09373ebb0fe259dfe2f7981d18 (plain)
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
85
86
87
88
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1VhUPX-0005Lu-7z
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sat, 16 Nov 2013 01:10:55 +0000
X-ACL-Warn: 
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	id 1VhUPT-00064V-OT for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sat, 16 Nov 2013 01:10:55 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
	[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76])
	(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
	by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1FF11083787;
	Sat, 16 Nov 2013 01:10:53 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: Drak <drak@zikula.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 01:10:41 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.0; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAKaEYhK4oXH3hB7uS3=AEkA6r0VB5OYyTua+LOP18rq+rYajHg@mail.gmail.com>
	<201311142301.39550.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CANAnSg1-uW+g3KYyqdfqdvcUybpu2Mn2-j4hJN-5-gVWPrdgvg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANAnSg1-uW+g3KYyqdfqdvcUybpu2Mn2-j4hJN-5-gVWPrdgvg@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201311160110.42132.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain
X-Headers-End: 1VhUPT-00064V-OT
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 01:10:55 -0000

On Saturday, November 16, 2013 12:41:56 AM Drak wrote:
> So "a payment clears after one confirmation, but you might want to wait
> until the payment has been confirmed n times".
> Then at least you are not using the same word for two different meanings
> and you're using stuff more familiar in popular lexicon.
> I dont think it's helpful for users if we use the word "blocks".

"Confirmations" in a numeric context isn't correct, though. We're using to it 
because we've been using Bitcoin so long, but to the average person they would 
expect it to mean something more than it is. If not referring to blocks, then 
perhaps "witnessed N times"?

> For years, people had a problem with  "email address", instead using "email
> number" but they got there eventually. Most people nowadays use "email
> address"
> So "payment address" or "bitcoin address" make better sense here when
> qualified as a "<foo> address" and not just an "address"
> 
> You could also call it "payment id", but I dont think "invoice id" since
> no-one pays to an invoice id that's just a reference for a payment, not the
> destination.
> 
> People are very familiar with Paypal these days, and are familiar with
> "paypal address" or their "paypal id" so again I think valid contenders are
> "bitcoin address" or "bitcoin id".

I think you might be demonstrating my point with regard to user confusion 
here. Bitcoin addresses are *not* like email addresses, paypal ids, etc. 
Bitcoin addresses aren't the destination - they're point to a destination (an 
account in a wallet), but they also represent information such as who is 
paying and what for - in other words, a specific invoice.

Luke