Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.212.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.212.175; envelope-from=timon.elviejo@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-wi0-f175.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4EECDD5F.8030402@parhelic.com>
References: <201112170132.26201.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CAGQP0AFg7dMK4Rzm9M1Ur-jeQmAp85nKbE_Ry5sXr+Pw=e3EQg@mail.gmail.com>
	<1324138546.29801.3.camel@BMThinkPad.lan.bluematt.me>
	<4EECDD5F.8030402@parhelic.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:15:26 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGQP0AE-OkJroyAN5jga_a-s8i_SSub9uSgTQBZDrQQfzC=bSg@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Tim=F3n?= <timon.elviejo@gmail.com>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Pubkey addresses
Precedence: list

2011/12/17, Jordan Mack <jordanmack@parhelic.com>:
> While I think firstbits is an interesting idea, I agree with Matt on
> this one. Firstbits, while being a clever idea, produces a less
> desirable solution in comparison to the current alias proposals.

I'm just saying is useful for the "green address" particular case.
People don't have to write or memorize the firstbit address, it's just
to have a shorter string to put it in the QR code. In this particular
case you don't really care about "squatting" or typographic errors
because the users are bot going to write or even see the firstbit
address. I think aliases are a better solution for the "memorizing use
case".

But anyway, reading some comments I feel I'm missing something about
this proposal. How can you save space by putting the whole public key
instead of just the address (a hash of the public key) with each
output?
Is this what it's being proposed?