Frozen / Locked / Offline addresses tl;dr - "vijay" <uniquebits://vijay>All I want is to have single unique id, to use it for my BTC transactions, like this above link, that would return my then current bitcoin address (or whatever I set).  And yes, this would make all my transactions "nonymous", but that's ok with me.
https://blockchain.info/tagsThis is another way to implement what I was asking for. now I can't casually own and use single bitcoin address forever, but this solves my problem in a different way. If allowed to retag, I can associate my tags with new addresses. I think, that's not possible now, and it is only blockchain.info specific. Interestingly blockchain.info allows to tag multiple addresses with the same tag name. This is not the same as offline / frozen addresses, but I can use new address everytime. but, firstbits was so cute..  |
|
|
|
That's so evil. Such adjustments could encourage mining but not now.  |
|
|
|
Instead of using time locks that expire on a fixed date, I would suggest using 'ratchet' time locks where the expiry date can be postponed indefinitely by the owner of the address.
so, someone gets they key can extend the lock and prevent you from spending. how you could postpone a time lock? through a new transaction? |
|
|
|
|
Status please.
What's the last processed address so far.
|
|
|
|
|
Watch-only addresses please..
|
|
|
|
How about "X10", where 1 and 0 represent bits.
"X Ten" would sound better than "X zero one" or "X Oh one"
Saying "x one" seems missing zero.
Sounds nice, but all the others are alphabetic, which is also the convention e.g. USD, CAD. There is a separate numeric associated with each one as well. XBC has already been taken by the European central bank, unfortunately. Easy, then XIO / XOI ? "X oh eye" |
|
|
|
|
How about "X10", where 1 and 0 represent bits.
"X Ten" would sound better than "X zero one" or "X Oh one"
Saying "x one" seems missing zero.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin unit name suggestions, 1. using single currency symbol; subfix / superfix 1, 2, 3 to distinguish among micro / mega units 2. get two symbols approved; B & b. BTC 0.1=1b100; 0.003=1b3; 0.00004=2b40; 0.000000009=3b9; 1234=1B1.234; 5670000=2B5.67 Makes any sense?  |
|
|
|
when in doubt, "frozen" addresses can be unlocked, and then locked with new "freeze" key.
You keep saying this. I give up. easy for you, I can't do that. I still have to go a long way to answer questions like, whether this can be implemented? can I do this? will this ever be released? |
|
|
|
|
I think, "time-based lock" is different from "frozen".
"time-based lock" is for predefined time, "freezing" is adhoc.
compromised "time-based lock" address, has no protection.
when in doubt, "frozen" addresses can be unlocked, and then locked with new "freeze" key.
|
|
|
|
How to freeze your bitcoins:
1. Print a paper wallet at bitaddress.org
2. Send your bitcoins to the address printed on it
3. There is no step 3
Recover your bitcoins later by creating a throwaway Blockchain.info web wallet, importing the paper wallet, and sending the coins to an address of your choice. You can avoid leaving any unused coins in the web wallet simply by printing a new paper wallet and sending the balance there.
@casascius, thanks for your post. finally, I think my post got some attention. you are one of very few members, I can recognize by profile name. now, how would you solve my main problem, I want to keep my firstbits address 1vijay, 1visu forever, to receive and spend. |
|
|
|
finally, I got 1 more want in the poll. I am happy as if it is implemented. I will edit first post for clarity. |
|
|
|
something like this.. {
"hash":"...",
"ver":1,
"vin_sz":1,
"vout_sz":2,
"lock_time":0,
...
"frozen":1,
...
}I don't see where the "unfreeze key" is in that example? thats ok, it is just an idea. an incomplete example. |
|
|
|
something like this.. {
"hash":"...",
"ver":1,
"vin_sz":1,
"vout_sz":2,
"lock_time":0,
...
"frozen":1,
...
} |
|
|
|
Would like to end this thread, as I figure out implementation further. your suggestions always welcome. |
|
|
|
|
> The "script" that is used in a bitcoin transaction describes
> what is required to spend the transaction. How can
> this be used to lock and unlock an address?
the same way how script spends coins.
verify unlock signature, unlock, verify spend signature, spend
or, something similar to that.
|
|
|
|
|
And, don't worry. I am not trying to give someone else the authority to freeze all your addresses. If they can freeze your address, then they also can also spend your money. Means, you need original private key to freeze an address.
|
|
|
|
|
> The part I don't understand is how you think
> you can "freeze" an address without "lots of
> code changes"
Frozen or not is just 1 bit detail, I hope this is possible through 'script'ing, so requires zero or minimal change. Just we need to check whether address is frozen before proceeding with sign validation. Yet, I am not very sure.
> why you think "surely it wouldn't require a
> hard fork".
I am suggesting that this can be implemented as specialized freeze/unfreeze transaction, or through a new flag in usual transactions. Either ways, this is going to be a new transaction with a fee. We are not going to redo all the hashing from Genesis block.
> I also don't understand why you think that
> "address keep changing" with 2-of-2
> multisig.
This again for the emotional attachment with the random bits. I want to include compromised address as one of multisig address. Now, I have to let everyone know my new address. When this address gets compromised, or every time I want to use different key to sign, then I have to create another multisig address.
This way also, I cannot use one address forever.
|
|
|
|
The stuff you're saying doesn't make sense. I simply can't take anything you say seriously if you can't explain it in a way that makes sense. Either you don't understand how bitcoin works, or I don't understand what you are suggesting. (Maybe both?)
Ok, here's an example, Let's say you own firstbits address, '1Hamilton'. You spent lot of time, effort and money to generate it and you are happy to use this address for all your transactions. At some point of time, you doubt your firstbits private key was stolen / compromised. Now only option for you is to stop using it. Would that be OK for you? How about satoshi loosing his, firstbits '1'? You got the problem now? |
|
|
|
Actually you got your answer - cannot be done without changing the current bitcoin protocol.
So no need to push the issue further, if you want to prove your point you're free to implement it yourself. Then you can provide a patch to bitcoin developers for review.
Cheers.
OK, agree. And let me end this here. And, open another thread under technical / development forum, for implementation related help / tracking. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
