On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 10:48:44AM +0100, Amir Taaki wrote:
> Everyone, I want to switch to using Bitcoin addresses instead of
> OP_RETURN. The change should be trivial to add (in addition to
> OP_RETURN, also checking address outputs). I'm tired of the bickering
> and constant switching between standards when we want to support this
> feature with CoinJoin working.

Didn't understand 100%, so had to read the entire PR (BTW, it's now
merged).

Didn't know about cryptograffiti.info, thanks. Guess you mean encoding
data same way they do it?

Can't form an opinion ATM, but if this goes, can the tx also be made to
have more outputs than strictly needed, perhaps in both "simple" amounts
(like 1, 0.1, 0.01, 5, 0.5, 0.05) and "random-looking" (like 4.808,
0.94, 0.007)? This could help with further obfuscating amount
transferred (and change), at least until some outputs are spent
together. And if several inputs happen to be used, it would look like
coinjoin...

... Nah, it's too complicated to do at first. Getting rid of the
watermark is nice, though.

Sorry for rambling, no sleep.

> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> ...
> From:     Gregory Maxwell <notifications@???>
> ...

>
> There is also a matter of driving competent design rather than lazy
> first thing that works.
> ...

Okay.