Proposal for simplifying account registration

[xeroc]

So whats all about  https://proofofperson.com/
I thought that's the whole point of the project above!

[cass]

this is the biggest "broken window" in the product

yup definitely great barrier to get mass adoption

[gamey]

Is a one time use ugly hash really a big deal?

I agree - it's not.

My experience of it -

A few months ago I downloaded the wallet and tried to transfer some funds from bter - I was caught in the catch 22, no funds to register, no way to get funds until I registered. That was a real barrier.

Recently I downloaded again - this time I can transfer to the ugly hash from bter. No problem. Just need to make sure exchanges will transfer to ugly hashes, and worry about bigger issues.

In the short term, most new users are going to be coming from a Bitcoin background and will be perfectly at ease with an ugly hash. The id will come as a pleasant surprise. 

(All that said, POW registration is elegant, but over-engineered for what is required)

With no comment about Alphabar's particular idea, people really need to get away from the idea that account names are of such importance.  Few will try to remember a BTC address for obvious reasons.  However they will try to remember a name.  One can go look up 100s of studies (ok, number out of my butt) in sociology showing how fallible human memory is.

It really comes down to reframing what these addresses are.  Do not call them "addresses".  Call them "account addresses" or  something.  Everyone thinks of marketing and framing solely in reference to adoption.  These sort of discussions should also be had about named accounts vs hashes.  Bounce rates etc are analogous - cut out all these crap middle steps.  If the assumption is that people are cut and pasting addresses, then having a long string is no significant loss. 

I'd need to think more, but it almost seems like allowing an "account number" where we are no longer encoding in an alpha-numerical base would be an improvement.  Just make it numerical.  It is all cut and paste anyway.  I'm not pushing this idea, but really consider these things.

Arhag and Freetrade both agree with the meat of this post AFAIK.  These are 2 people I have an excess of respect for in their opinions. 

[FreeTrade]

Is a one time use ugly hash really a big deal?

I agree - it's not.

My experience of it -

A few months ago I downloaded the wallet and tried to transfer some funds from bter - I was caught in the catch 22, no funds to register, no way to get funds until I registered. That was a real barrier.

Recently I downloaded again - this time I can transfer to the ugly hash from bter. No problem. Just need to make sure exchanges will transfer to ugly hashes, and worry about bigger issues.

In the short term, most new users are going to be coming from a Bitcoin background and will be perfectly at ease with an ugly hash. The id will come as a pleasant surprise. 

(All that said, POW registration is elegant, but over-engineered for what is required)

[alphaBar]

Curious why nobody commenting on this? In my opinion, this is the biggest "broken window" in the product. I signed someone up for BTSX a while back and even I was confused where to send his funds since he had no account registered. Think how easy it would be if I could have sent him an email with an invite URI that immediately launched his client and "claimed" an account that I had registered for him (with a single click). Grabbing a custom account handle registered by a trusted referrer is a great onramp for new users. I do also agree that we should make it easier to use the "ugly hash address" for those users who do not want to use referral.

[alphaBar]

I should mention for completeness that this free-floating account registration would need to expire (ie, be released) if not claimed within X blocks. This would maintain the non-transferable nature of account names while still allowing for the free floating registrations.

This could enable all sorts of referral based onboarding whereby users/services can invite their friends/contacts, register accounts for them in advance, and provide a referal link that the client uses to "claim" the registered account.

[toast]

Bump. I think this is good.

[sschechter]

Is a one time use ugly hash really a big deal?

What do you propose your solution will cost? How expensive will this be in man hours?  Who will you need to support this idea?

My solution to the same problem.....a label.  That's it.  "Here's your temporary id, this is why you need it, and this is what to do with it." Cost? Trivial.

The hash isn't the problem.  The lack of user friendliness is.  Where is the help screen that explains things like how voting works?  Why is this not there yet? Is it reasonable to assume that the user should leave the app and have to google the forums for help? Absolutely not.  File Menu -> Help -> Dialog Box -> Label.  That's it.  I know the new UI is coming, so it may not do much now, but this type of stuff should have been there 3 months ago. I will be extremely disappointed if I'm using the new UI and have questions that can't be answered inside the app itself.  I know I must not be alone on this.

You are perfectly right. What is cool is that the community as a whole can try to contribute on this, we just have to find how to organize (who?) and implement it (google doc ?). It isn't really the job of the developers to create this help : they have more crucial things to do, and they are so plunged in their stuff that they cannot see what new users experience.

You're right too - I agree with this.  But a lot of the help type stuff already exists in the wiki

[inarizushi]

Is a one time use ugly hash really a big deal?

What do you propose your solution will cost? How expensive will this be in man hours?  Who will you need to support this idea?

My solution to the same problem.....a label.  That's it.  "Here's your temporary id, this is why you need it, and this is what to do with it." Cost? Trivial.

The hash isn't the problem.  The lack of user friendliness is.  Where is the help screen that explains things like how voting works?  Why is this not there yet? Is it reasonable to assume that the user should leave the app and have to google the forums for help? Absolutely not.  File Menu -> Help -> Dialog Box -> Label.  That's it.  I know the new UI is coming, so it may not do much now, but this type of stuff should have been there 3 months ago. I will be extremely disappointed if I'm using the new UI and have questions that can't be answered inside the app itself.  I know I must not be alone on this.

You are perfectly right. What is cool is that the community as a whole can try to contribute on this, we just have to find how to organize (who?) and implement it (google doc ?). It isn't really the job of the developers to create this help : they have more crucial things to do, and they are so plunged in their stuff that they cannot see what new users experience.

[sschechter]

Is a one time use ugly hash really a big deal?

What do you propose your solution will cost? How expensive will this be in man hours?  Who will you need to support this idea?

My solution to the same problem.....a label.  That's it.  "Here's your temporary id, this is why you need it, and this is what to do with it." Cost? Trivial.

The hash isn't the problem.  The lack of user friendliness is.  Where is the help screen that explains things like how voting works?  Why is this not there yet? Is it reasonable to assume that the user should leave the app and have to google the forums for help? Absolutely not.  File Menu -> Help -> Dialog Box -> Label.  That's it.  I know the new UI is coming, so it may not do much now, but this type of stuff should have been there 3 months ago. I will be extremely disappointed if I'm using the new UI and have questions that can't be answered inside the app itself.  I know I must not be alone on this.

[matt608]

Remember to come on mumble if you can in half an hour to talk about this.

[joele]

IMO, if you are not able to figure out using a bitcoin-style address, you should not be storing your money on your own computer or holding your own private key. I think using the public hash for your first transaction to a local wallet is a good barrier to entry to ensure that the people who actually use the full nodes are at least technically capable enough to understand things like back-ups, passwords, don't install toolbars etc.

Most complete noobs should only start out using a blockchain.info type of setup that also allows them to buy easily. Then they can register their name at the same time as they make their first buy.

I think the purpose of the topic is to make bitshares wallet user friendly for ordinary users/noobs.

[Rune]

IMO, if you are not able to figure out using a bitcoin-style address, you should not be storing your money on your own computer or holding your own private key. I think using the public hash for your first transaction to a local wallet is a good barrier to entry to ensure that the people who actually use the full nodes are at least technically capable enough to understand things like back-ups, passwords, don't install toolbars etc.

Most complete noobs should only start out using a blockchain.info type of setup that also allows them to buy easily. Then they can register their name at the same time as they make their first buy.

[julian1]

How about - create a web-wallet on-ramp.

The user registration fee can be paid from dilution or simply absorbed by the delegate.

Spurious account registration can be controlled by having the server track session-cookies, ETags, ip addresses, captchas etc.

[joele]

The simplest is lend one account name for new registered user.
This lend account is not transferrable and private key is not viewable unless you pay a fee.

Not following you. Who registers the "lent account" and how does one "claim" it without funds?

Once new user downloaded the wallet and entered the password, it's a new user, the code detected this and give free new account name, it means it does not require a fee to register an account name, but there is a information message about registering an account name without a fee, it is limited access, it can only accept bts, to make it full access it need to pay a fee.

Who creates and records the "limited access" account and decides the code and how is it provided to the user? This must be recorded on the blockchain, which requires a fee.

It need hard fork for new lend limited account name.
The fee are coming from delegates commission, like another allocated % for this kind of lend account for new users.

Doesn't prevent spam account registration. One could drain the lend account with no cost.

Yes, there is always a bad actors, but this lend account name is not beneficial to them, because its function is only to accept bts, it's not included in the backup and private key is not viewable.
But still there are bad actors that might sabotage this, just like they might sabotage the blockchain.

The solution for easy new account solved this, the spam is different story.

[alphaBar]

The simplest is lend one account name for new registered user.
This lend account is not transferrable and private key is not viewable unless you pay a fee.

Not following you. Who registers the "lent account" and how does one "claim" it without funds?

Once new user downloaded the wallet and entered the password, it's a new user, the code detected this and give free new account name, it means it does not require a fee to register an account name, but there is a information message about registering an account name without a fee, it is limited access, it can only accept bts, to make it full access it need to pay a fee.

Who creates and records the "limited access" account and decides the code and how is it provided to the user? This must be recorded on the blockchain, which requires a fee.

It need hard fork for new lend limited account name.
The fee are coming from delegates commission, like another allocated % for this kind of lend account for new users.

Doesn't prevent spam account registration. One could drain the lend account with no cost.

[joele]

The simplest is lend one account name for new registered user.
This lend account is not transferrable and private key is not viewable unless you pay a fee.

Not following you. Who registers the "lent account" and how does one "claim" it without funds?

Once new user downloaded the wallet and entered the password, it's a new user, the code detected this and give free new account name, it means it does not require a fee to register an account name, but there is a information message about registering an account name without a fee, it is limited access, it can only accept bts, to make it full access it need to pay a fee.

Who creates and records the "limited access" account and decides the code and how is it provided to the user? This must be recorded on the blockchain, which requires a fee.

It need hard fork for new lend limited account name.
The fee are coming from delegates commission, like another allocated % for this kind of lend account for new users.

[alphaBar]

The simplest is lend one account name for new registered user.
This lend account is not transferrable and private key is not viewable unless you pay a fee.

Not following you. Who registers the "lent account" and how does one "claim" it without funds?

Once new user downloaded the wallet and entered the password, it's a new user, the code detected this and give free new account name, it means it does not require a fee to register an account name, but there is a information message about registering an account name without a fee, it is limited access, it can only accept bts, to make it full access it need to pay a fee.

Who creates and records the "limited access" account and decides the code and how is it provided to the user? This must be recorded on the blockchain, which requires a fee.

[joele]

The simplest is lend one account name for new registered user.
This lend account is not transferrable and private key is not viewable unless you pay a fee.

Not following you. Who registers the "lent account" and how does one "claim" it without funds?

Once new user downloaded the wallet and entered the password, it's a new user, the code detected this and give free new account name, it means it does not require a fee to register an account name, but there is a information message about registering an account name without a fee, it is limited access, it can only accept bts, to make it full access it need to pay a fee.

[alphaBar]

The simplest is lend one account name for new registered user.
This lend account is not transferrable and private key is not viewable unless you pay a fee.

Not following you. Who registers the "lent account" and how does one "claim" it without funds?

[joele]

The simplest is lend one account name for new registered user.
This lend account is not transferrable and private key is not viewable unless you pay a fee.

[alphaBar]

You can just register another account after you use the faucet to get your first account.

Yes but you must still send the funds from the faucet to an "ugly hash address". My proposal avoids this.

[emski]

You can just register another account after you use the faucet to get your first account.

[alphaBar]

How will you prevent someone from flooding the network with such floating accounts ?

Same mechanism as now. The free floating accounts cost the same as regular account registrations. The only difference is that they can be "linked" to a set of private keys when they are claimed by the client, upon which they become regular accounts.

[emski]

How will you prevent someone from flooding the network with such floating accounts ?

[alphaBar]

This was buried in some debate about personal issues in this thread, so I'm repasting here for feedback:

Problem

Creating a new account requires use of an ugly Bitcoin-style hash address to receive funds. This is not intuitive for most users. In other words, you must have BTS in your wallet in order to register a new account, but you cannot receive BTS easily without already having an account (chicken and egg problem).

Proposed Solution

We create a transaction type that involves registering a "free-floating" account name and a password hash. This "free floating" name could then be "claimed" by any wallet by simply broadcasting a transaction that proves they are in possession of the password. This way, faucets and exchanges could pay for account registrations using the regular security mechanisms (captcha) and broadcast those names as free-floating registered accounts. Then a user would simply launch their client, enter the password they have chosen, and link the registered account name to their private keys. "Free-floating" accounts would be ineligible to receive funds until claimed. Here is a step-by-step illustration:

1) User launches their client which says "visit any of the following sites to register your account: BTSfaucet.com, BTSregister.com, Bter.com, etc. etc.
2) User visits one of those sites (possibly in a web view, or in their own browser)
3) The site has a captcha or requires email verification or whatever else to prevent spam. After passing the challenge, the site asks the user to select a username and a password (at least 10 characters - no need to be super-secure here). The site broadcasts a "free floating" account registration (including fee) and redirects the user back to their client ("Done! Now just open your client to claim your username").
4) The user returns to their client and enters the new username and password to generate a new transaction claiming the username (ie, linking the username to the private keys of that particular client).

The “chicken and egg” problem is not due to a lack of funds. Plenty of faucets and exchanges would pay for the .01 BTS necessary to register accounts. The real problem is the use of the “ugly hash” to receive that first transaction My solution solves this issue directly, without making payment-free registration (which is not necessary).