Re: [Bitcoin-development] Version bytes 2.0

2011-12-13 Thread Mike Hearn
Why does anyone care what an address looks like? If the user is seeing an address, that's a usability fail right there. It's common today because AFAIK nobody finished off the URL handling support in the main client for browser integration. It'd be a much better use of time to finish off that

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Version bytes 2.0

2011-12-13 Thread Wladimir
All, I fully agree with Mike Hearn on this. Like email addresses, bank numbers, phone numbers, IPv4/v6 addresses and such the bitcoin address is just an opaque identifier for machines to be able to send each other messages. Base58 was chosen not for human readability but to make it easy to

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Version bytes 2.0

2011-12-13 Thread Mike Hearn
Base58 was chosen not for human readability but to make it easy to copy/paste. It was also chosen for hand-writeability, weirdly enough. That's why it excludes some confusible characters. But Satoshi didn't really understand how people would end up using Bitcoin, he originally imagined most

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Version bytes 2.0

2011-12-12 Thread Pieter Wuille
It seems base58 is actually quite terrible for producing nice human-recognizable addresses, even though base58 is specially intended for human usage. We'll just have to deal with it, or completely overhaul it and move to a saner encoding. Luke's proposal is somewhat more drastic than my original

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Version bytes 2.0

2011-12-12 Thread Luke-Jr
On Monday, December 12, 2011 3:56:01 PM Pieter Wuille wrote: It seems base58 is actually quite terrible for producing nice human-recognizable addresses, even though base58 is specially intended for human usage. We'll just have to deal with it, or completely overhaul it and move to a saner