Feathercoin daemon and wallet production version 0.17.0.2

[news] Coin Control is close to merge in Bitcoin 0.9 Discusion


  • Moderators | Tip wrapper

    Just been reading about this upcoming change to coin control, worth being prepared for.

    https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/pull/77


  • Spammer Banned | Tip Kevlar

    Great catch.

    I’m a big fan of this. Control over your wallet is ultimately a good thing, and really has no downside whatsoever.


  • | Tip lizhi

    Is this the mainstream ? 🙂


  • | Tip Bushstar

    I have been looking at this with some interest. How much demand is there out there for CC?

    I guess there must be a reasonable amount of demand if Bitcoin looks to make this a native feature.


  • Moderators | Tip wrapper

    Now the rush of the weekend support is over, here’s some more research on coin control

    What is coin control?
    When you send bitcoins to someone else, the bitcoin client chooses kinda randomly which of your addresses will send the coins. With coin control you can exactly choose, which of your addresses will be the sending addresses. And even more specific which of your unspent outputs will be the sending inputs.

    Read more:

    https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=7n6b5hdsepvapm9ubmpbpgccn5&topic=144331.0

    Sounds good to me.


  • | Tip spynappels

    I like the sound of this, I always wondered why you could not do this already and I think this would be good to intriduce.


  • Regular Member | Tip zerodrama

    Coin control should be done by control of account not address. Sending address should still be random for privacy purposes. Accounts are groups of addresses.

    So yeah, no thanks.


  • Moderators | Tip wrapper

    [quote name=“zerodrama” post=“39048” timestamp=“1386070295”]
    Coin control should be done by control of account not address. Sending address should still be random for privacy purposes. Accounts are groups of addresses.

    So yeah, no thanks.
    [/quote]

    Have you any links to any discussion on this?. Doesn’t sound like a stopper to me. Wouldn’t it be “trivial” to add an account function?. How does the suggested implementation cause a problem? Isn’t it just not optimal?


  • Moderators | Tip wrapper

    Don’t get me wrong, none implementing a feature also differentiates Feathercoin, which worries some people.

    I have previously advocated investigating all changes upstream and turning them off if necessary.


  • Spammer Banned | Tip Kevlar

    [quote name=“wrapper0feather” post=“39053” timestamp=“1386070916”]
    [quote author=zerodrama link=topic=4642.msg39048#msg39048 date=1386070295]
    Coin control should be done by control of account not address. Sending address should still be random for privacy purposes. Accounts are groups of addresses.

    So yeah, no thanks.
    [/quote]

    Have you any links to any discussion on this?. Doesn’t sound like a stopper to me. Wouldn’t it be “trivial” to add an account function?. How does the suggested implementation cause a problem? Isn’t it just not optimal?
    [/quote]

    This feature already exists.

    If your on Windows, hit ctrl-alt-delete, and click Switch User.
    On a mac, I believe it’s under the apple menu.
    On Linux, su.

    I can think of no reason to re-implement what’s already working just fine: The client uses the OS built in accounts to keep separate wallets for each account, and OS security keeps them separate. Want a wallet for a different account? Just log into the account, and fire up the client.


  • Regular Member | Tip zerodrama

    [quote name=“Kevlar” post=“39257” timestamp=“1386109718”]
    [quote author=wrapper0feather link=topic=4642.msg39053#msg39053 date=1386070916]
    [quote author=zerodrama link=topic=4642.msg39048#msg39048 date=1386070295]
    Coin control should be done by control of account not address. Sending address should still be random for privacy purposes. Accounts are groups of addresses.

    So yeah, no thanks.
    [/quote]

    Have you any links to any discussion on this?. Doesn’t sound like a stopper to me. Wouldn’t it be “trivial” to add an account function?. How does the suggested implementation cause a problem? Isn’t it just not optimal?
    [/quote]

    This feature already exists.

    If your on Windows, hit ctrl-alt-delete, and click Switch User.
    On a mac, I believe it’s under the apple menu.
    On Linux, su.

    I can think of no reason to re-implement what’s already working just fine: The client uses the OS built in accounts to keep separate wallets for each account, and OS security keeps them separate. Want a wallet for a different account? Just log into the account, and fire up the client.
    [/quote]

    O_o. LOL. Good one. Except it matters if you’re sending to an exchange or a service where you need to separate. Because to differentiate you would need:
    Separate account.
    Separate bank verification.
    Separate VPN.
    Separate settings with all your preferences.

    Switching at OS level is just not optimal. Might as well boot from a different drive. I need a new account. Imma go to my other house.