2014-03-08 8:52 GMT+00:00 Jan Vornberger j...@uos.de:
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 02:39:52PM +, Alex Kotenko wrote:
Not sure if you've seen it, but here is how we do NFC right now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGOMIG9JUY8 with XBTerminal.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing! Are the
Just to add some more numbers, in Canada, the maximum is $50 and I've used it
for transactions of $5, even less.
I use it every day to pay for breakfast and it works through my wallet, even
with multiple NFC enabled cards in there (though not overlapping). The
experience is quite smooth;
It heavily depends on where you use it. Here in UK any card payments are
often limited to minimum of £5 in small shops that have heavy transaction
fees burden and low margins. Big networks with more resources often let you
pay as little as you want by card, and they more often have NFC enabled POS
On 03/10/2014 04:09 PM, Alex Kotenko wrote:
Yes, I'm certain about that we need to switch to BIP70 asap. As I said
earlier - support among the wallets is the biggest problem here really.
Only Andreas' Wallet supports it right now AFAIK, and even in there it's
only as LABS feature, so will
Ah, I see, so it's only payee who has to enable it, payer side is on by
default. Then fine, situation is better than I thought. We'll look at
implementing BIP70 asap.
Best regards,
Alex Kotenko
2014-03-10 19:28 GMT+00:00 Andreas Schildbach andr...@schildbach.de:
On 03/10/2014 04:09 PM, Alex
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 02:39:52PM +, Alex Kotenko wrote:
Not sure if you've seen it, but here is how we do NFC right now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGOMIG9JUY8 with XBTerminal.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing! Are the two devices on the same
wifi network in the demo? In my
On 03/06/2014 07:03 PM, Alex Kotenko wrote:
Supporting Bluetooth is optional in the sense that if a wallet should
not support it, you will still receive the transaction via the P2P
network. So I'd say definately go for Bluetooth.
Yes, it's part of the plan. Just again - I need
2014-03-06 12:26 GMT+01:00 Andreas Schildbach andr...@schildbach.de:
In current phone implementations, the screen must be on already for NFC
to be active. Also it must be unlocked, although I certainly hope future
OSes will allow payment apps on the lock screen, just like they allow
music
I just did my first contactless nfc payment with a MasterCard. It worked
very well and was quite delightful - definitely want to be doing more of
these in future. I think people will come to expect this kind of
no-friction payment experience and Bitcoin will need to match it, so here
are some
I'm not sure if iso-dep is the way to go here. Afaik as soon as you pick
up the phone the connection breaks. It's ok if some people decide to let
the app do risk analysis, but you cannot force it onto users by picking
a protocol that cannot deal with manual verification. Users should
always have
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Andreas Schildbach
andr...@schildbach.dewrote:
I'm not sure if iso-dep is the way to go here. Afaik as soon as you pick
up the phone the connection breaks.
If the phone isn't willing to immediately authorise then it'd have to fall
back to HTTPS or Bluetooth as
On Mar 6, 2014 3:47 AM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote:
I just did my first contactless nfc payment with a MasterCard. It worked
very well and was quite delightful - definitely want to be doing more of
these in future. I think people will come to expect this kind of
no-friction payment
Hi Mike
Not sure if you've seen it, but here is how we do NFC right now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGOMIG9JUY8 with XBTerminal.
For now this is just an NDEF URI message with Bitcoin URI inside, and then
transaction itself propagated to the network by the phone using it's own
Internet
On 03/06/2014 02:44 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
I'm not sure if iso-dep is the way to go here. Afaik as soon as you pick
up the phone the connection breaks.
If the phone isn't willing to immediately authorise then it'd have to
fall back to HTTPS or Bluetooth as normal.
Ok, that would be
Not sure if you've seen it, but here is how we do NFC right
now http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGOMIG9JUY8 with XBTerminal.
Thanks for the video! It's always good to see these things in action so
you can start believing in it.
For now this is just an NDEF URI message with Bitcoin URI inside,
I wonder about the receipt step -- are you generating a PDF on device
and sending it via NFC? This is something that could be supported by the
BIP70 payment protocol. We should try to avoid the second tap, its not
intuitive.
Together, the signed PaymentRequest and the transactions in the
On 03/06/2014 03:51 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
I'm not sure if iso-dep is the way to go here. Afaik as soon as you pick
up the phone the connection breaks.
If the phone isn't willing to immediately authorise then it'd have to
fall back to HTTPS or Bluetooth as normal.
Ok, that
I think maybe the way you do it is to have a NDEF tag that triggers the
app, and then that starts an IsoDep protocol once opened. I *think*.
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 5:55 PM, Andreas Schildbach andr...@schildbach.dewrote:
On 03/06/2014 03:51 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
I'm not sure if
Thanks Alex!
About the video - I'm curious how your device is better than just a regular
tablet. Could you give us the elevator pitch? :)
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Alex Kotenko alexy...@gmail.com wrote:
I mean - if with Bitcoin v0.9 transaction fees will become really
floating, and it
if some sort of Stealth address or HD wallet root was the identity gaining
the reputation, then address re-use wouldn't have to be mandatory.
The identity would be the X.520 name in the signing cert that signed the
payment request. It doesn't have to be a difficult to obtain cert. It could
If there was a way for a Bitcoin user to provide feedback on a payment
(ECDSA signature from one of the addresses involved in the payment, signing
an identifier of the payment and a feedback score)
Well now you're getting into the area that I said rapidly got very
complicated.
Define
it's the responsibility of the individual members to maintain their own
good/bad user lists. Would you think that's a good thing or a bad thing to
give the individual players that level of control/responsibility?
If it's explicit, I think it's a non starter and nobody will bother with
it,
22 matches
Mail list logo
