Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
That's a good idea. I'll implement it as soon as I've got the time.
I hope that I don't need any additional permission for this (e.g.
READ_CONTACTS).
(Did I mention Android badly needs optional permissions?)
Original comment by andreas....@gmail.com
on 16 Jul 2012 at 12:19
Sigh. In order to read the "me" contact, you need not only READ_CONTACTS but
also READ_PROFILE permissions. I suspect the users will go haywire about this,
especially since there is no efficient way to explain to users what the
permissions are used for.
Probably not worth the hassle.
Original comment by andreas....@gmail.com
on 16 Jul 2012 at 3:18
I think in the longer term there'll be more and more social features
integrating with Bitcoin. Rather than deal with raw addresses (which IMHO need
to slowly disappear into the background), it's a much friendlier experience to
just pick names/photos from a list, eg from Facebook or G+. So address book
integration makes a lot of sense to me, it also makes it easier to switch
mobile clients because you don't lose all your accumulated addresses (they're
stored in the central contact store).
For example, I was thinking also that when starting the app for the first time,
offer to use the users name as we discussed and ALSO allow the user to embed
their G+ profile ID, if there is one, into any generated URIs. On the other
side, we can investigate how the transactions list can look when instead of
being address-oriented it's people oriented, eg, showing names/photos and
showing the person widget, allowing you to send Bitcoins from the ICS contact
screen, etc.
Probably if you do that, it also generalizes to +Pages without any effort, so
for instance, not only could Room77 put its name into the URI label, but the
act of performing a transaction makes it just a one-tap operation to
circle/follow/+1 the business. I guess the same is true for Facebook pages as
well. That's a feature many businesses would really like!
However, you're probably right that some users today would see that as a
privacy problem. Ultimately privacy is something that is a very personal
matter, where users fall on the use-vs-hide data spectrum is never going to be
consistent, short of some big changes in our society.
How about this compromise for now, until Android permissions are overhauled
(I'm sure they will be one day). The regular Bitcoin Wallet app goes in the
direction of integrating with your services and data, and adds features like
these. There can be a separate build, call it "Bitcoin Wallet Incognito", which
is the same app but without any features that might upset very privacy oriented
people.
This distinction can help later too. For example, an incognito build of Bitcoin
Wallet might have some kind of coin mixing protocol activated by default. At
night-time it'd mix your coins, perhaps paying small transaction fees to do so,
whereas perhaps by default the regular build would not do that unless/until it
can be done freely and without inconvenience. It could use Tor by default, etc.
I think just generally bundling up "strong privacy" vs "good convenience" into
one simple choice the way Chrome does makes a lot of sense, and today the
easiest way to accomplish that on Android is with two builds.
Original comment by mh.in.en...@gmail.com
on 17 Jul 2012 at 7:51
Oh, and I forgot to mention - even if we punt on all of that for now, asking
the user to provide their name/business name on first run and then propagating
that to new addresses by default is still a nice improvement. We want to move
the Bitcoin world away from addresses poking out everywhere. They're ugly and
unhelpful.
Even if we can't pre-fill the welcome screen edit with the name from the phone
without annoying some people today, letting people re-type it will still help a
lot.
Original comment by mh.in.en...@gmail.com
on 17 Jul 2012 at 7:59
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
mh.in.en...@gmail.com
on 16 Jul 2012 at 9:26