Alex Agut Name and picture from twetch — not on-chain. The signature is; the profile is not.

Congratulations guys! You're killing it!!

In our opinion (all team agrees) it would be confusing.

We even opposed Paymail's format using @ instead of $ just to be clear where we stand.

It doesn't work with a mailto:

Here's a list of the payment requests we support:

They also work as deeplinks.

Have a great weekend everybody!

I'll be off social media for a while - reach me at apagut@handcash.io

Sounds like a great idea to me!

To our target audience that's a huge inconvenience, and we don't desire them to be dealing with these things. It's as easy as using better standards ecosystem-wide but hey, I'm only in charge of HandCash.

Thanks Jack!

Legacy addresses still work with HandCash (copy > send), but we don't support them as QR codes for reasons I already stated.

For that, use other products. Supporting the legacy side is super expensive, but non-developers don't understand this because they don't see the cost and resources required: running nodes, crawling the blockchain, potential double spends, support...

If it were expensive BUT better, then OK, but being expensive and way worse... there's no way we're going back to supporting Legacy (once we finally get rid of it 100% as soon as other things are in place)

Yes, we protect users from themselves. That's why they use HandCash in the first place. If they wanted to code their own wallet and deal with keys, they'd be using other products. HandCash is not for everybody.

You have the same credibility as my release dates, bro.

If it doesn’t have an amount, you’ll have to copy the address. Go to Send and a dialog will ask you if you want to send money to the copied address. It’s hidden for strategic purposes but it’s there.

We’re compatible with BIP21 with an amount - that works with HandCash. But not raw legacy addresses again, for security purposes. Not blaming users at any point either: blaming other app developers who want to stick to bad UX. Not our call.

We won’t use unsafe standards where people send money into the void just because most wallet developers don’t care about their users sending money into the void - for whatever reason. We either move the needle or become irrelevant.

It’s a security decision.

Back in the beta new people to Bitcoin were sending all the time to BTC/BCH/BSV legacy addresses. Nobody wanted a unique standard so we cut it off. We have paymail for thay anyways.

Send to your paymail in that case.

Plus by restricting the QR scanner to payment requests only we can call it “PAY” and it’s more understandable than a generic “SCAN”. We know Bitcoin “veterans” hate it but tbh we don’t care: our target doesn’t lose money and they get it better.

Lack of control over JS execution basically.

That’s why Apple does not approve apps relying on webviews and Google will soon do the same.

It’s basically worth the future of sustainable mobility, because they created and dominated that category. Very different from car manufacturers. Those are doomed. Maybe not Ford, they’ve been smart and partnered with Uber.

Who did you vote for last time?
/poll [Kang,Kodos]

My first time using @15671 , very neat!

I truly admire what you guys did with this.

Great job!

Damn in Pokémon silver I caught a shiny Hoot-Hoot in my first 20 minutes of gameplay and it evolved into Ash' golden Noctowl. Next summer a stupid kid stole my game at the pool. It still hurts.

Thanks buddy!

We all have a lot to do still but to be honest I'm getting really good vibes lately about the whole BSV ecosystem.

Noctowl

Music to my ears!

Well done @1461!