Quote from: DannyHamilton on April 30, 2015, 12:24:54 PM

No, that particular output is unspendable. It was only intended as an example of how transaction outputs that the network considers "valid" aren't always encode-able as addresses. There are other output scripts that can be spent, but which cannot be encoded as addresses.

Here's an example of an output that is spendable (and was spent) that cannot be encoded as any of the standard address formats:
https://blockchain.info/tx/b8fd633e7713a43d5ac87266adc78444669b987a56b3a65fb92d58c2c4b0e84d

Got it. I see clearly in blockchain.info that they've choked on that 0.03 output. Can you reasonably easily let me know what's going on with this one (since it's not an unspendable output AND it's not encodable as an address (or as a series of addresses, ie, a multisig requirement))?

Thanks again, sincerely, for helping me/us learn about this. I'm pushing back on you a bit here because I have often seen posts from the more technically informed saying "there are no addresses!!!", but I'm not convinced that they are entirely halluncinated artifacts. I'm thinking that people are saying "there are no addresses" with such finality because they're trying to emphasize a point which is going to help newbies or those who don't have time to understand the subtleties. However, for those of us who are curious about the actual state of affairs, I'm just trying to squeeze you for a few more details. Thanks again!

Also, do you happen to have the list of the script codes which can be in a valid output (or know where to find it on a web-page, or in the source code for bitcoin-core)? Perhaps that page would answer my questions without you haveing to write to me so much