From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YW0YH-0001jG-2s for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 10:41:17 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender) client-ip=80.91.229.3; envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org; helo=plane.gmane.org; Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1YW0YF-0004XT-Nj for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 10:41:17 +0000 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YW0Y9-0002RV-45 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 11:41:09 +0100 Received: from f052230195.adsl.alicedsl.de ([78.52.230.195]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 11:41:09 +0100 Received: from andreas by f052230195.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 11:41:09 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net From: Andreas Schildbach Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 11:41:03 +0100 Message-ID: References: <54F32EED.6040103@electrum.org> <550057FD.6030402@electrum.org> <1426100677.1908596.239033309.7C4F8D47@webmail.messagingengine.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: f052230195.adsl.alicedsl.de User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 In-Reply-To: <1426100677.1908596.239033309.7C4F8D47@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record 1.1 DKIM_ADSP_ALL No valid author signature, domain signs all mail -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1YW0YF-0004XT-Nj Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Electrum 2.0 has been tagged X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 10:41:17 -0000 For reasonably skilled users your points are valid, but I'm sure you also – like me – encountered the kind of user who has absolutely no clue but thinks he understands. S/he will ignore warnings and run into troubles. This generates a huge amount of support cases and likely tears about lost coins. The simple fact that someone elses broken RNG implementation/wrapper could compromise the security of my software frightens me. On 03/11/2015 08:04 PM, Jim wrote: > The wallet words system isn't perfect for sure but it does help the user in two main ways: > 1) Assuming wallet devs ensure forward compatibility for _their_ wallet the user knows they can recover their bitcoins using the same wallet software in case of a Bad Thing Happening. > 2) To an imperfect degree, they can transfer/ recover their bitcoins that are stored in Wallet X into Wallet Y. We need to give them guidance on how to do this. > > I think it is up to each wallet team to explain to their users clearly how they can do this in their help. It's only good manners to show your guests where the fire exits are. > > It can be a simple help page saying: > "If you want to transfer your bitcoin out of MultiBit HD to Lighthouse, do this, this and this. > If you want to use the Trezor wallet you created in MultiBit HD on myTrezor.com, do this, this and this." > > That way users have clear instructions on how to recover their bitcoins. > Users don't care about BIP this or BIP that but they REALLY DO CARE about keeping their bitcoins. >