I think the Bitcoin community needs a good person-to-person payment
protocol for BLE simply because Bluetooth LE is effectively
peer-to-peer. Unlike NFC or conventional Bluetooth, a $5 micro can
be either the master or slave and talk directly to other $5 micros
nearby.
[ASIDE... BLE is also the
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to request a BIP number for this.
Sure. BIP0066.
Four implementations exist now:
* for master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5713 (merged)
* for 0.10.0: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5714
In this case there is no need for P2P communication, just pay to an
address you already have for the other party. If you want to avoid
address reuse, use stealth addressing.
But yes, if you don't have a stealth address for the other party you can
certainly communicate in private as peers
2015-02-06 2:29 GMT+01:00 Eric Voskuil e...@voskuil.org:
On 02/05/2015 04:36 PM, Martin Habovštiak wrote:
I believe, we are still talking about transactions of physical
people in physical world. So yes, it's proximity based - people
tell the words by mouth. :)
Notice from my original
On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI, I've just tagged v0.10rc4, and pushed my signatures to the
gitian.sigs repository.
Please start your gitian builders!
Thanks to the extremely quick response (a whopping 9 gitian builders
already!), the executables and
On 02/06/2015 01:36 AM, Eric Voskuil wrote:
The main advantage of BLE over BT is that it uses much less power, with
a trade-off in lower bandwidth (100 kbps vs. 2 mbps). The BLE range can
be even greater and connection latency lower than BT. For payment
purposes the lower bandwidth isn't much
On 02/06/2015 12:40 AM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
On 02/06/2015 01:36 AM, Eric Voskuil wrote:
The main advantage of BLE over BT is that it uses much less power, with
a trade-off in lower bandwidth (100 kbps vs. 2 mbps). The BLE range can
be even greater and connection latency lower than BT.
On 02/06/2015 12:59 AM, Roy Badami wrote:
In this case there is no need for P2P communication, just pay to an
address you already have for the other party. If you want to avoid
address reuse, use stealth addressing.
But yes, if you don't have a stealth address for the other party you can
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Isidor Zeuner
cryptocurrenc...@quidecco.de wrote:
A possible approach to handle this issue would be to add a randomized
offset amount to the payment amount. This offset amount can be small
in comparison to the payment amount.
Any thoughts?
Adding/subtracting
BLE meets a different use case than regular Bluetooth. BLE is designed to
allow always-on broadcast beacons which are conceptually similar to NFC
tags, with very low power requirements. The tradeoff for this ultra-low
power consumption and always on nature is the same as with NFC tags: you
get
Yes. You can certainly add additional inputs and outputs -- and as such
you can increase privacy and defrag your wallet at the same time.
On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:11 AM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Isidor Zeuner
cryptocurrenc...@quidecco.de wrote:
A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/06/2015 03:08 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Yes. You can certainly add additional inputs and outputs -- and as
such you can increase privacy and defrag your wallet at the same
time.
A lot could be done to make regular spends resemble CoinJoin
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Isidor Zeuner
cryptocurrenc...@quidecco.de wrote:
Hi there,
traditionally, the Bitcoin client strives to hide which output
addresses are change addresses going back to the payer. However,
especially with today's dynamically calculated miner fees, this
may
13 matches
Mail list logo
