Quote from: HardwareReviewer on December 15, 2014, 09:51:21 PM

Quote from: doof on November 26, 2014, 10:49:55 PM

I post here hoping that Mr Dario Di Pardo a reporter from CoinDesk http://www.coindesk.com/author/dario-di-pardo/ might read this forum. The submission you suggest is ridiculous and limits innovation. What you are proposing ties all vendors of hardware terminals, invoicing software and any other wallet to one vendor. The government.

From Document 6, page 2:

"2. Proposed scenario
Addresses will be registered/issued by an entity that is in possession of the user's verified identity.
This entity could be a governmental institution or regulated financial institution. In this proposal we choose a bank to fulfill this task, because of its expertise in the area of security and finance."

There are hundreds of reasons why this is a bad idea; security risks, trusting the government not to store you private keys, trusting they have implemented enough entropy, no bugs in the system, no third party vendors or providers or contractors sniffing the network along the way.... we could go on.

One of my clients generate literally thousands of addresses per day. Most of them unused.

For some who claims "Dario has been working as an IT consultant for almost ten years, mainly in the telecommunications industry. Since he first heard about bitcoin in 2013, he's been a keen follower of cryptocurrencies." you simply don't get it. These kind of submissions only confuse government further and will aid them making rash and misinformed decisions regarding legislation.

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Digital_currency/Submissions
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Digital_currency

Hi,

Security is addressed here: https://bitcoinfoundation.org/forum/index.php?/topic/1021-ideal-legislation-model-for-state-level/page__st__20#entry12231.

What would change with regard to your friend generating thousands of addresses per day, is that he/she would then use a different tool for this.

What is somewhat naive (or ridiculous if you prefer) though, is thinking that millions of pseudonymous bitcoin transactions per day, will be transparent without any kind of identification system.

PS: I am/was a CoinDesk contributor.

I don't really understand your position. As you can see by the "security" diagram, the credentails are passed along the wire by a number of actors, who all have the potential to misshandle that data.

After working for a years in one of Australias banks, I can tell you their procedures and security policies arn't the best. They have physical assets (ie cash in branches, valuts) to secure the balance