To your point about: "I’m still left wondering: “Why do I need a single-use address at all? Why not always show me a reusable address?”.
The issue was meant to be minimally invasive, and even just the text change turned out to be too big of an ask and spiraled into a conversation around feature adoption across the whole ecosystem. I've gotten very careful around scoping these types of requests and keep them very focused because of these types of dynamics.
Big picture, once reusable addresses are adopted, you will not need the single-use ones anymore. We need to ensure that the ecosystem is actually cool with the reusable address tech, wallets need to implement it, and then we need to migrate users over. The reusable address type that Blue Wallet recently implemented uses BIP-47, which was created in 2015. Almost no wallets support it. So you might think that the ecosystem either does not think of it as a good technical solution, or does not see the feature as important enough to bother implementing. And you have a competing, fairly similar at the top-level, approach with the more recently published BIP-353 (silent payments). Now we're in a situation with two competing approaches and need to somehow figure out which one should be the one. Once all this is sorted out and we have broader adoption, then reusable addresses can be the default.
So easy in our design tools, yet so messy and complicated IRL, but that's how things are sometimes (and what makes them interesting challenges).
Great work & meetup!
Thanks for coming out and reading!
Thanks for the mention.
To your point about: "I’m still left wondering: “Why do I need a single-use address at all? Why not always show me a reusable address?”.
The issue was meant to be minimally invasive, and even just the text change turned out to be too big of an ask and spiraled into a conversation around feature adoption across the whole ecosystem. I've gotten very careful around scoping these types of requests and keep them very focused because of these types of dynamics.
Big picture, once reusable addresses are adopted, you will not need the single-use ones anymore. We need to ensure that the ecosystem is actually cool with the reusable address tech, wallets need to implement it, and then we need to migrate users over. The reusable address type that Blue Wallet recently implemented uses BIP-47, which was created in 2015. Almost no wallets support it. So you might think that the ecosystem either does not think of it as a good technical solution, or does not see the feature as important enough to bother implementing. And you have a competing, fairly similar at the top-level, approach with the more recently published BIP-353 (silent payments). Now we're in a situation with two competing approaches and need to somehow figure out which one should be the one. Once all this is sorted out and we have broader adoption, then reusable addresses can be the default.
So easy in our design tools, yet so messy and complicated IRL, but that's how things are sometimes (and what makes them interesting challenges).
True! Great context, thanks for adding
Great wrap up! Thanks again for having me on the show,
thank YOU! was so much fun