pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Design_r OP 15 Sep \ parent \ on: My First Thoughts on Silent Payments UX bitcoin
Yes technically yes, for the end user, that only aim to increase its privacy somehow, it could be comparable. The main issue is that not all users understand to these details the differences between all the BIPs/features.
Yes technically yes, for the end user, that only aim to increase its privacy somehow, it could be comparable.
Silent Payments doesn't increase privacy though, it's just a UX improvement that eliminates (half of) a round of communication between the sender and receiver when a new address is generated. Basically, it's BTCPay Server on steroids.
The main issue is that not all users understand to these details the differences between all the BIPs/features.
This knowledge gap was the huge problem with BIP47 that BIP352 fixes:
BIP47 Paynyms require the sender to have an understanding of how blockchain analysis tactics work, and then manage UTXOs carefully with labels before and after sending multiple on chain transactions.
BIP352 Silent Payments eliminate this clumsiness and the extra on chain fees. The only tradeoff is a heavier scanning requirement.
reply
The only tradeoff is a heavier scanning requirement.
Noted, hopefully there will be some workarounds sometime soon
reply