[ANN] The world's first handheld Bitcoin device, the Ellet!

[ShireSilver]

I'm not so sure this will fly as a consumer device, but if it has good POS functionality it might be just the thing to get retail operations on board with bitcoin. Imagine a small shop with a couple teenagers as cashiers. You don't want them using their own smartphones or the store owner's to do POS transactions, but having a small and cheap device next to the cash register would be easy to integrate into your regular operations.

Having some way for it to be integrated into an existing POS system would be very helpful (at least for those businesses that care about accurate accounting).

[1714006941]

1714006941

[BitPay Business Solutions]

Tony, thanks for the comment. I've heard this argument before even with other projects like Yifu's tablet but ultimately all that matters is what consumers want and what the product can do.

All obvious security benefits aside, I don't think the arguement of consumers not wanting multiple devices has ever had any merit. One need look no further than iPod to see that. Mobile phones have the same mp3 playing functionality, but proper branding, marketing and a feature list made it a household device all across the world.

Let the free market decide!

ipod sales have been declining for years my friend.  phones are the trend.

[justusranvier]

Because there is no bill.

Because the service is free.

Of course it is.

Quit being such a condescending dick. Of course it can be free. My checking account actually pays me interest, and the interest is actually greater than that of my savings account. Additionally there are other perks, such as refunds of ATM fees, and more.

If you are using a shitty bank that charges you money to use a checking account, don't assume that all other banks suck that hard. Also, switch banks.

Nothing is free. I'm not going to try to force you to understand the mechanisms by which you pay for the services you receive from your bank; but if you're old enough to to be posting on an online forum you really should have figured out by now that perpetual motion doesn't exist anywhere in the universe and so should already be suspicious about any claim of "free".

[Portnoy]

Tony, thanks for the comment. I've heard this argument before even with other projects like Yifu's tablet but ultimately all that matters is what consumers want and what the product can do.

All obvious security benefits aside, I don't think the arguement of consumers not wanting multiple devices has ever had any merit. One need look no further than iPod to see that. Mobile phones have the same mp3 playing functionality, but proper branding, marketing and a feature list made it a household device all across the world.

Let the free market decide!

ipod sales have been declining for years my friend.  phones are the trend.

Sounds like it's time for a new trend ^_-

So what you are counting on is becoming a greater huckster than Apple?  You certainly do need to raise many more millions of dollars in funds... or maybe you can choose a larger font for your announcements. ( and you didn't answer BadBear's question, "What is coming next week?" )
I can't see the market deciding for this over an app they can put on their phone.

[Xenland]

I personally think there is some fallacy in thinking "Why would someone carry another electronic device when their are smartphones that already facilitate Bitcoin transactions?"

Wish i could remember which one it was called tho.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies


Seriously tho if you really trust that all smartphone manufactures are not hiding packets of data that send statistical usage and data behind your back(without your consent) then please continue to use the smartphones to trust your money with it.

 I know for a fact that after seeing all these hackings with Bitcoins I guarantee their will be businesses(more like scammers) in the future that their sole purposes is to sell cheap smartphones with some (mischievously-altered) open source operating system preloaded on it that will send your private keys to the server and the worst part of it all is that they will encrypt the data so you don't even know what they are sending and those businesses will succeed from selling private keys to other companies and of course on top of selling smart phones to all those who think that fallacy above is true. -- That is all.

Ps. Heck in the future when Bitcoins hits masspopulation/mainstream their will be college kids saying "Hey bro you wanna make some money?", "Sure how?", "lets sell our (altered)phones to innocent people and when they receive Bitcoins on their smartphone they will be automatically sent to us instead"

[Portnoy]

Seriously tho if you really trust that all smartphone manufactures are not hiding packets of data that send statistical usage and data behind your back(without your consent) then please continue to use the smartphones to trust your money with it.

Why should the average consumer trust this new device any more than existing devices? Because Bitcoin!   

[rjk]

Nothing is free. I'm not going to try to force you to understand the mechanisms by which you pay for the services you receive from your bank; but if you're old enough to to be posting on an online forum you really should have figured out by now that perpetual motion doesn't exist anywhere in the universe and so should already be suspicious about any claim of "free".

Why do I need to be suspicious? I have a balance sheet with hard numbers on it. Are you going to argue with math and hard numbers?

As for the opportunity cost, well there is no cost if it isn't any worse than the other options, in terms of features and rates.

And I really don't know how the heck you got to the conclusion that anything was "perpetual". Just because one service pays out doesn't mean that there isn't another that sucks it right back in again. I just don't happen to use the credit services that charge 25% APR just because they can. So sue me for not using credit in the way that a bank would like me to, and leaching off of the non-credit, paying services.

[Xenland]

Seriously tho if you really trust that all smartphone manufactures are not hiding packets of data that send statistical usage and data behind your back(without your consent) then please continue to use the smartphones to trust your money with it.

Why should the average consumer trust this new device any more than existing devices? Because Bitcoin!   

That's a very good point, thanks for bringing that up. Now I can explain why this device should be open source with justification but I can't declare I have any control to make that decision for this product but someone else had to bring it up(besides me) to make it real.

[caveden]

I like Matthew and he's done a bang-up job with the magazine, but I have to agree here.  The key to getting wider adoption is absolutely, positively in making better software, not hardware.  

Unfortunately software alone will never be secure enough to protect the private keys of non-tech people. No matter how much you invest in your software, it cannot be more secure than the environment it runs at. And if the environment is "generic", it is not secure.
A dedicated device is needed for security purposes.


That said, I also wonder if people would like to carry another device around. Maybe for daily spends, smartphone apps are the way to go. Devices like this would be kept home, to access your savings account.
Don't know, let's see how it goes.

[rjk]

That said, I also wonder if people would like to carry another device around. Maybe for daily spends, smartphone apps are the way to go. Devices like this would be kept home, to access your savings account.
Don't know, let's see how it goes.

The "having another device" issue is the main reason why I am looking forward to a card that fits in my wallet.

[justusranvier]

Why do I need to be suspicious? I have a balance sheet with hard numbers on it. Are you going to argue with math and hard numbers?

As for the opportunity cost, well there is no cost if it isn't any worse than the other options, in terms of features and rates.

And I really don't know how the heck you got to the conclusion that anything was "perpetual". Just because one service pays out doesn't mean that there isn't another that sucks it right back in again. I just don't happen to use the credit services that charge 25% APR just because they can. So sue me for not using credit in the way that a bank would like me to, and leaching off of the non-credit, paying services.

The original question was whether or not the fraud protection provided by banks was free or not. It is not free because the resources the bank uses to refund your money in the event of a stolen card, for example, are resources they aren't using to pay you a higher interest rate on your deposits or provide other services. Likewise, deposit insurance is not free.

People who think the resources which are used to provide certain services in the traditional banking system magically appear out of thin air are going to be confused about why it doesn't work the same way in a Bitcoin economy.

[Xenland]

People who think the resources which are used to provide certain services in the traditional banking system magically appear out of thin air are going to be confused about why it doesn't work the same way in a Bitcoin economy.

I think i might stick that in meh sig.... well said!

[Rarity]

Why do I need to be suspicious? I have a balance sheet with hard numbers on it. Are you going to argue with math and hard numbers?

As for the opportunity cost, well there is no cost if it isn't any worse than the other options, in terms of features and rates.

And I really don't know how the heck you got to the conclusion that anything was "perpetual". Just because one service pays out doesn't mean that there isn't another that sucks it right back in again. I just don't happen to use the credit services that charge 25% APR just because they can. So sue me for not using credit in the way that a bank would like me to, and leaching off of the non-credit, paying services.

The original question was whether or not the fraud protection provided by banks was free or not. It is not free because the resources the bank uses to refund your money in the event of a stolen card, for example, are resources they aren't using to pay you a higher interest rate on your deposits or provide other services. Likewise, deposit insurance is not free.

People who think the resources which are used to provide certain services in the traditional banking system magically appear out of thin air are going to be confused about why it doesn't work the same way in a Bitcoin economy.

I see, so if I use the bitcoin wallet instead am I going to get those extra interest payments from the wallet company instead of having them held by the bank?  And then I can pay for my insurance with them?

[rjk]

People who think the resources which are used to provide certain services in the traditional banking system magically appear out of thin air are going to be confused about why it doesn't work the same way in a Bitcoin economy.

Very true, but the original argument was whether a user paid specifically for fraud protection, perhaps as a line item. Not where the funds to cover it came from. I am not disputing that banks create money or at least do so indirectly by getting funds from the fed.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

The Ellet functions instantly for Bitcoin transactions and incorporates a secure Electrum client written specifically for Ellet architecture.

Can the owner specify the server it will connect to, and eventually set up his own?

[PolymorphicAssasin]

Seriously tho if you really trust that all smartphone manufactures are not hiding packets of data that send statistical usage and data behind your back(without your consent) then please continue to use the smartphones to trust your money with it.

"Trust but Verify" is my motto. 

Here's a scenario for you.  I receive a paper check from a customer for $1,000 for services rendered.  I take a picture of said check with my smartphone, and it deposits that money into my bank account.  After ACH clearing that night, the next day I walk into my local bank and withdraw said $1,000.

This is a service supplied by several large US banks.  Personally my tin foil hat is just as large as yours appears to be and won't let me utilize this service, but vast numbers of the public do.

The money/time/energy would be better spent integrating this concept into NFC/Bluetooth smartphone transactions.  See how many smartphones around the world are already being used for micropayments.  If you could one-up them by adding paypal, dwolla, btc, etc, you might have a viable business model.

Hence my opinion that the time/energy/money being spent here would be better spent making the software and then hardening software/infrastructure etc.  If Chase Bank can [pay some developers to] do it, surely some group here in Bitcoinia (word?) can do it as well or better.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

"Ellet" sounds awful  

I want to go on record in stating that I don't dislike the name because of the way it sounds or looks (in fact, I'm intrigued by the word), but  I am against naming the product such from a marketing standpoint. Unless the domain ellet.com is own by the team, of which I seriously doubt,

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, LLC (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: ELLET.COM
Created on: 28-Jun-98
Expires on: 27-Jun-16
Last Updated on: 11-Jul-11

then that fact alone makes it dead-in-the-water, I believe, coupled with the following: https://www.google.com/search?aq=f&sugexp=chrome,mod=14&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=ellet  =  About 2,120,000 results (0.15 seconds). That's the point I was trying to bring home.

In no way were my earlier posts meant as humor toward the product or Matthew. I was simply intrigued with the product and desire to see it succeed, but with proper branding. The product alone will have an uphill battle, so why add improper SEO into the mix, starting with the product's name.

Allow me to illustrate:

Bob: Nice product you have there. What is it?
Alice: It's an Ellet. I never have to carry any forms of money again, for it's all safely stored on my portable cloud.
Bob: Neat! How do you spell that?
Alice: E-L-L-E-T.
Bob: Great! Simple enough. I'll look it up when I get home. (or search on his smartphone when he has more time)
BoB: (later that same day, he searches for Ellet, remembering the spelling) What the fuck! So many results. Maybe I spelled it wrong. I don't have time for this. Too bad Alice was a stranger, or I would call her to get some more information about that great Ellet thing she had. Damn it!

Now, I hope that the above drives home the important point I've been trying to relay.

Later, Matthew.

~Bruno~

[kokjo]

As a dedicated, encrypted and hardware locked device, the Ellet is safe from hacking, malware, and even if stolen, cannot be used to take your money.

do you even self believe that? Anything, can be hacked. I don't care about nice and funky hardware features: it will be broken, FAST.

[Xenland]

As a dedicated, encrypted and hardware locked device, the Ellet is safe from hacking, malware, and even if stolen, cannot be used to take your money.

do you even self believe that? Anything, can be hacked. I don't care about nice and funky hardware features: it will be broken, FAST.

I believe it, its very feasible to have Ellet device not store anything at all and still be able to send bitcoins. Thus in the event of a stolen ellet device there is nothing on it to steal. The wallet seed could be stored by some other means(laminated paper, manually typing it in, or inserting and SD card,etc) and when the ellet device user is ready to send they load it up(This level of security is obviously for only people that hold alot of BTC in their device and/or use it for business transactions)

[kokjo]

As a dedicated, encrypted and hardware locked device, the Ellet is safe from hacking, malware, and even if stolen, cannot be used to take your money.

do you even self believe that? Anything, can be hacked. I don't care about nice and funky hardware features: it will be broken, FAST.

I believe it, its very feasible to have Ellet device not store anything at all and still be able to send bitcoins. Thus in the event of a stolen ellet device there is nothing on it to steal. The wallet seed could be stored by some other means(laminated paper, manually typing it in, or inserting and SD card,etc) and when the ellet device user is ready to send they load it up(This level of security is obviously for only people that hold alot of BTC in their device and/or use it for business transactions)

nothing on it -> can't make ecdsa signatures -> can't send bitcoins.
something on it -> hackable/stealable/cheatable -> can send bitcoins.
seed-on-paper approach -> steal paper.