Bitcoin Forum
May 02, 2024, 11:48:04 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: [2014-4-9] Coindesk - MultiBit User’s Loss Highlights Need for New Wallets  (Read 570 times)
Carlton Banks (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3430
Merit: 3071



View Profile
April 09, 2014, 10:15:26 PM
 #1

http://www.coindesk.com/multibit-user-loss-high-need-bitcoin-wallets/

Multibit has somewhat of a reputation for buggy behaviour that causes less catastrophic problems. Most interesting is this pair of quotes:

“Until now wallets have all been written by volunteers who put huge time and effort in for free. This is one reason bitcoin has low transaction costs, but it isn’t sustainable.”
“One of the most critical transitions the community will have to make this year is to a world where most of us are paying for our wallets in some way.”

Is this a call for protocol enforced fees to fund development? Seems like a strange way of making the case for that.

Vires in numeris
1714650484
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714650484

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714650484
Reply with quote  #2

1714650484
Report to moderator
1714650484
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714650484

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714650484
Reply with quote  #2

1714650484
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714650484
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714650484

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714650484
Reply with quote  #2

1714650484
Report to moderator
1714650484
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714650484

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714650484
Reply with quote  #2

1714650484
Report to moderator
odolvlobo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4298
Merit: 3214



View Profile
April 09, 2014, 11:22:40 PM
 #2

Is this a call for protocol enforced fees to fund development? Seems like a strange way of making the case for that.

Not at all. All Hearn is saying is that if people want professional-grade Bitcoin software, they are going to have to pay for it. I disagree to some extent because much of the most widely-used software available today is professional-grade, and yet it is open source and free. There is no reason why Bitcoin won't be similar.

"Protocol enforced fees" require a central authority to set the fees. That will never fly, especially when market-based fees will work just fine.

Join an anti-signature campaign: Click ignore on the members of signature campaigns.
PGP Fingerprint: 6B6BC26599EC24EF7E29A405EAF050539D0B2925 Signing address: 13GAVJo8YaAuenj6keiEykwxWUZ7jMoSLt
Carlton Banks (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3430
Merit: 3071



View Profile
April 10, 2014, 12:11:18 AM
 #3

Is this a call for protocol enforced fees to fund development? Seems like a strange way of making the case for that.

Not at all. All Hearn is saying is that if people want professional-grade Bitcoin software, they are going to have to pay for it. I disagree to some extent because much of the most widely-used software available today is professional-grade, and yet it is open source and free. There is no reason why Bitcoin won't be similar.

"Protocol enforced fees" require a central authority to set the fees. That will never fly, especially when market-based fees will work just fine.

I don't see how free and open software can continue if the user pays for distribution copies. The only reliable mechanism for enforcing fees to use wallet software is to introduce something new to the protocol. Hacks, alternative wallets and other workarounds are a certainty otherwise.

Vires in numeris
trior
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 85
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 10, 2014, 12:25:25 AM
 #4

I see the future of wallets software filled with surprises .
Just stay tuned for the good ride .

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!