Bitcoin Forum
November 20, 2017, 10:01:15 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Why SW addresses start with BC1? Instead of B1 or BTC1?  (Read 439 times)
johnscoin
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 105


View Profile
June 24, 2017, 08:46:03 AM
 #1

I have searched a lot, and could not find any reasonable explanation.

As for me, "BC1" would be much more anti-intuition and less user-friendly than "B1" or "BTC1".

Is there any technical reason behind Core's decision that we must use "BC1" SW addresses?
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511215275
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511215275

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511215275
Reply with quote  #2

1511215275
Report to moderator
1511215275
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511215275

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511215275
Reply with quote  #2

1511215275
Report to moderator
1511215275
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511215275

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511215275
Reply with quote  #2

1511215275
Report to moderator
achow101
Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


17kKQppUsngUiByDsce4JXoZEjjpvX9bpR


View Profile WWW
June 24, 2017, 04:07:28 PM
 #2

First of all, this is not "Core's decision". Bech32 was not created by "Core" and has not yet been adopted and implemented by the other developers of Core. It is the proposal of a few people who work on Core but they are not and do not represent Core.

This is all explained in the BIP here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0173.mediawiki#rationale
Quote
Why use 'bc' as human-readable part and not 'btc'? 'bc' is shorter.

          ▄█████▄
        ▄█████████▄
      ▄████▀   ▀████▄
    ▄████▀   ▄ ▄█▀████▄
  ▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▀████▄
▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▄   ▀████▄
█████   ███▀   ▄███   █████
▀████▄   ▀██▄▄███▀   ▄████▀
  ▀████▄   ▀███▀   ▄████▀
    ▀████▄       ▄████▀
      ▀████▄   ▄████▀
        ▀███  ████▀
          ▀█▄███▀
.
|
.
|
          ▄█████▄
        ▄█████████▄
      ▄████▀   ▀████▄
    ▄████▀   ▄ ▄█▀████▄
  ▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▀████▄
▄████▀   ▄███▀   ▄   ▀████▄
█████   ███▀   ▄███   █████
▀████▄   ▀██▄▄███▀   ▄████▀
  ▀████▄   ▀███▀   ▄████▀
    ▀████▄       ▄████▀
      ▀████▄   ▄████▀
        ▀███  ████▀
          ▀█▄███▀
unthy
johnscoin
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 105


View Profile
June 25, 2017, 02:47:51 AM
 #3

First of all, this is not "Core's decision". Bech32 was not created by "Core" and has not yet been adopted and implemented by the other developers of Core. It is the proposal of a few people who work on Core but they are not and do not represent Core.

This is all explained in the BIP here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0173.mediawiki#rationale
Quote
Why use 'bc' as human-readable part and not 'btc'? 'bc' is shorter.

I have read that explanation before. So that's exactly my question. Now that "B1" is even shorter and distinguishable, why they chose "BC1“? Was there any technical reason? I read that BIP again and could not find any other explanation.

BTW, now that that BIP was proposed by Blockstream, it's extremely likely that it will gain "consensus", sooner or later. However, the blockstream-style logic always sounds weird to me.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!