Bitcoin Forum

One of the big barriers with Bitcoin is that the majority of its users and developers are, to put it bluntly, ignorant computer nerds.  They are extremely smart, yet completely ignorant to what the average person is capable of (no offense, its an impairment of social interaction and nothing to be ashamed of!) .  Even with a seemingly simple system, like bitcoinATM, it is dependent on the assumption that a user knows what the difference between a public key and a private key is.  The general public still finds the basics of this system confusing.  There should be a very big priority in ensuring that Grandma knows how to send bitcoins.  Wouldn't that be a HUGE step?  To be able to say "She can't open a e-mail, but she can send bitcoins!" would be evolution.  That's what bitcoin needs to be.  This simplification would magnify the potential by 1000 times.  

Not sure how this would be done.  It will take somebody who is not just technically smart, but extremely creative as well.  How can we make bitcoin as simple as pulling out your physical wallet?  And don't tell me "there's an iphone app for that!", because Grandma is still rotary dialing.  

I believe if you can make it simple enough that even Grandma can use it, then you are opening up some pretty big fucking doors for Bitcoin.

So what's next in the simplification of Bitcoin?

Smart cards, see sig ;)

Bitcoin really does need to be easier.  For God's sake - it's people's hard earned money.  Who would want to risk losing their money with the click of a mouse?  I agree with the OP on most things, although I do have to give credit to the geeks who have been very patient and nice (I'm somewhat ignorant with computers) on this board, the LTC, and the PpC boards over the past month.  Thanks to all of them.

If it was easier then that would allow more fraud to take place. If people can't go to a website and open a free Wallet then they shouldn't be handling finances on the internet anyway.

I am preaching to the choir here but the exchange process from fiat to BTC and back again is so painfully complex and wrought with risk that it is no wonder that adoption is limited to the very technical right now. Wallet security is also complex and burdensome. I always rate consumer adoption ease based on a formula   - the amount of hours it would take to explain it to my mother in law * the amount of hours per week I would spend helping her after she started using it (the lower the number the better) eg and Iphone is about is about a 1 or a 2 - Bitcoin would be in the 100's

Yes, we need way more of steps in the direction to simplify things.

Small suggestion:
I don't know if they exist yet, but I think there should also be "Payment-Request"-QR-Codes.
Like you scan them and get a prompt with a message "Pay 1.337 BTC?" (+value in $/€) and all you have to do is click yes or no.
Only for small amounts though, higher amounts should be typed in manually.

I'm talking about something so easy, you virtually take the internet right out of it (or at least keep that part hidden from the user interface).  Just because we are making it easier doesn't mean we have to sacrifice security.  Last time I checked, grandma's safety deposit box was guarded pretty heavily.  

I like this idea.  It's too bad there has been such little development with that :(

I'm sure there will be companies offering Automated BitCards for withdrawals and purchases before too long. Sort of like pre-paid ATM cards.

that's when things will really take off I think..
they could be preloaded before being sold, like a gift card

Keep it complicated it keeps the competition low - Actually make it MORE complicated :D

it's already part of the uri scheme (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/URI_Scheme). You can put an amount into a bitcoin payment uri.

edit: needless to say you can make a qr-code representing such uri.

side-note: try blockchain.info wallet "create payment request". It allows to enter an amount and produces a qr-code.

This. OP's expectation for ease of use is entirely unreasonable.

If grandma is truly too stupid (which usually translates into too willfully ignorant and stubborn) to even use friggin' web-based email, she shouldn't be using bitcoin in the first place.

That's a little like complaining that purchasing, maintaining and driving a car is too difficult for a 4-year-old. Good, it should be. He can enjoy the perks of such a tool when he's mature enough to handle all that, and to worry in the meantime that cars may be too complex for the general public based on his lack of ability is unwarranted.

Exactly you should be driving until your at least 8 :D  that was a j/k but an 8 year old may be less dangerous than an 80+ yo that has a license

Grandma will never be able to use Bitcoin directly.  However, she may be able to use services built on top of Bitcoin that are purposefully built to be extremely easy to use and extremely secure/forgiving.  For instance, those services might only pay verified vendors, so that grandma can't accidentally pay a scammer.

Now, if you're saying that grandma can't even use a computer (which, let's face it, if she can't use email, she can't use a computer), then you'd be looking at physical services built on top of Bitcoin that are easy to use and extremely secure/forgiving.  But this will be a long time coming, because it would cost hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure to build and maintain.  You'd be looking at the VISA equivalent of Bitcoin.  And actually, it might look a lot like the current VISA system, with swipable cards with pin numbers or signatures required, and the payment network on the hook for cases of merchant fraud.  Problem is, the payment network wouldn't have any way to reverse the fraud in the case of Bitcoin, so they might not actually send payment until the merchant does some basic verifications with them, etc.

Anyway, just some thoughts.  Building a better Bitcoin isn't the problem, it's just a matter of building a system on top of Bitcoin that can do what is necessary to make Bitcoin accessible to grandma.  Or altering the existing system to be compatible with Bitcoin (which might honestly be much easier, if Bitcoin is looked at just like cash from a banking perspective).

someone needs to make a really really good INFOGRAPHIC
someone should commission theoatmeal

https://www.udemy.com/


I send all my "simple minded" friends here. Seems to work for them!

Same for the Internet! No one understands how it works and so noone uses this technology. How do you say: "I think the break through of 'the internet' will never come, because it's to complicated".

The main issues are the usability of the clients and the credibility of the "experts". If you can trust these experts that Bitcoin is no fraud, then everything is ok.

Bitcoin is complicated, get used to it ... it is way easier to use now than it was in mid-2010 ... it will be way easier to use in 2015.

If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. All this "someone should" BS ... just go and do it already!!! Is this the entitled mob showing up?

tl;dr stop whinging if you are not creating solutions.

I agree with SgtSpike. Bitcoin is just a protocol. It is not meant to be used directly by people. Organizations will use bitcoin as the basis for their offerings just like how banks use SWIFT to move money around. So bitcoin won't take off until people start building on top of it. The real money is in doing that - making it accessible to ordinary people.

Another thing I'd like to point out is that bitcoin has a long way to go yet. If you take a look at the leading Internet based payment systems you get Paypal and then the rest. Despite trying for all these years paypal alternatives have still not captured a large share of the market. I thing it would be a major milestone if bitcoin got as large as skrill or payza.

I hope those bitcoin ventures are using this as basis for bitcoin to get through to the mainstream.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2CbbBLVaPk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2CbbBLVaPk)

I think we need some layers over Bitcoin where you could sent BTC to addresses like anna@bitcoin.com. It would be a huge step towards making it mainstream among regular folks. I also think that the first person who runs a company which pulls this of will become a millionaire.

Millionaire? Try multi-billionaire.

Anyone up to the task? I'm not a programmer but i can invest  ;D

A company already did that.  Can't remember who.  But effectively, they'd send an email notification to the person who received the Bitcoins, which the person could then use to claim them.

Implement to a Visa Chip Card or Paywave By making a bitcoin card that works with a credit union or bank
Then just stick it in and let normal people just do the same thing as a visa  ;D
Oh and an online bitcoin atm somewhere
Or someone could just make a bitcoin credit union
Users deposit bit get bit + interest back

Making bitcoin easier?
Like someone said, it would encourage more fraud.
Most people who commit fraud are lazy and see a quick rich scheme and try to scam & fraud whoever and whatever they can.
Becuase of bitcoins complex way, I honestly think that most can't be bothered to read into it.
Most my friends I tell about bitcoin, don't understand it at all and don't want to either.

I totally agree with the OP - We need some serious simplicity before bitcoin takes off.

I'm sure that there are people here who remember how difficult it was to get on line with a Windows 3.1 PC.

This is what bitcoin is like for most people today!

It also gives a good idea of how much work needs to be done! ;)

As for the fraud question - that is part of the challenge!

You have a interesting statement there and may of just opened my eyes.

Yes, we can all remember them darn things!
I do agree with your argument now, making bitcoin more simple will surely encourage others who want to get into this beautiful currency.

I'm different from other people, I like complicated things, because I see a challenge and normally try to master it and feel good about it after, as of my friends normally give up as soon as they see something which slightly challanges them.

But, Bitcoin needs people to grow, that might encourage fraudsters, but hey! It's a currency and it looks like most people are more than aware how to avoid this.
I hope, someone can find a way of presenting bitcoin as a more, simple currency.

awesome

What is next simplification?

Simplify the use of Bitcoin-Qt. Translate DOS-like commands in Console into idiot-proof dialogue windows for grandmas and non-geeks so that they could too make benefit of Bitcoin-Qt's capabilities: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=198389.0

Saayyyy... here's a thought.

Keep calling everyone on earth who doesn't know how the octets in an IP address work 'stupid', and you won't have to worry about adoption - because you will have insulted the next wave of users to the point of totally turning them off of the idea of bitcoin.

They read this forum before they jump in, you know.

So how's that degree in marketing working out for you, nimrod?

I'm not trying to market Bitcoin.  :)  And I highly doubt my insult would turn people away.  That would be cool if it did though!  If only I had that much power.. lol

I see some problems with the "encrypt wallet" feature.

Some ideas look great on first sight, are had by everyone and his sister, yet never make it.

OMG! This means Windows 3.11 for workgroups is next? Or even Windows 95? Shit just kept getting worse.

I'd say smartcards (smart objects) are parts of the solution, they need to be easy to use as well (as plug & play as possible) - we'll have things to show and share regarding that at Bitcoin 2013.

I'm also wondering what's going on with the "original bitcoincard" (http://www.bitcoincard.org) considering the company creating it is a top sponsor of the conference. Hopefully they'll leave stealth mode soon ;D

Actually we don't need to make it hard on the technical side
We just need to make it easier on the consumer side

So who wants to start the AOL of Bitcoin? At least you won't have the cost of sending Bitcoin CDs out in the mail like they had to :)

I discussed this in my interview on lets talk bitcoin: http://letstalkbitcoin.com/

Yes I think everyone can agree that bitcoin needs to be a lot more simplified for it ever to go "mainstream".

The truth is that with the exception of the ones that work in IT , pretty much all of my friends have no desire to use bitcoin when I try to explain it to them and they tend to just have a blank stare on their face. 

... consider that maybe you are hanging out with stupid people?

Come on... being IT-not-gifted does not equal being stupid. His friends may very well be great musicians, dancers, writers. How would you react when labelled stupid for your potential poor musical, dancing or writing skills?

Or scared of the new tech conservative isn't == stupid just means cautious unless your progressive and will accept change :)

No, grandma must understand public key and private key, there is no way to jump over this fundamental mechanism of cryptography  ;D

I think a good move is to make a physical private key just like grandma's key to her house

Nah, i don't agree. The abstraction is wallets, not keys. The "stupid" don't need to understand how the internals of a wallet work any more than they need to know what molecules and atoms make up the internals of a physical wallet (and if they do they should know they can easily blow up their wallet messing with random chemicals :-).

The current take on user-friendly interface is to import, export, backup, on the level of entire wallets. HD wallets would be preferred as they need to be backed up only once. A generic import/export format for wallets between clients is in the works.

Physical devices also work at the wallet level, not on an individual private/public key. I'm really interested in developments there too.

Right, but that is already under way. Once some way of working warrants a dialog window, a dialog window will be added. The console however is for developers, and grandmas and such should really stay out of it. They can send coins and receive coins from/to their grandchildren with the UI interface just fine.

It’s interesting to me that over the last few years I’ve watched people rehash the same topics over and over again. Most of the usernames change but the answers are always the same and almost predictable.  I guess it’s not possible to come up with much new material on a fairly dry finance topic.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=100639.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=10906.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12845.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=133787.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=148339.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=17034.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=108991.0

It's also due to the structure of a forum. In the beginning I already noticed that the forum has essentially no short nor long term memory. It's always the same topics, same questions. May be due to a broken search, or no incentive to search; too easy to create a new one, and there is (unlike reddit et al) no voting mechanism to quickly sink the crap topics to the bottom.

It'd be great to have some archive of most common questions and remarks and answers to that. There is https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ but it mostly addresses concerns about the system, it is not extensive enough to refer to in cases like this.

I guess people are lazy enough to keep anything like that up to date, but not lazy enough to answer the same questions time after time :)

For "stupid" you need to have a bank with full control over customers money. Which will also destroy all advantages of Bitcoin over PayPal-like services.
Without 3rd party organization, there is a chance they will loose the wallet, forget the password, install a virus, damage a trezor device, lost the paper with seed... Who will be blamed when such things happen? "BAD, BAD Bitcoin!"

Don't trust me? Just look at how many tech. skilled people had their savings on InstaWallet or MyBitcoin.

Grandmas will have no problem with understanding a public key, a private key and a wallet.

Grandmas will have problem understanding ''importing a private key'', ''dumping private key''.

Imagine the following situation:

Grandson: Dear, this is a paper wallet for you. Factually a paper wallet is a piece of paper with toner on it.
Grandma: Fantastic. I can pay for my new jaw now.
Grandson: But before you pay you must first import the key printed on this piece of paper into Bitcoin-Qt
Grandma: But I am not in an import-export business, I do not want to import anything. Besides I already have the private key. It would make a better sense if I export what I already have rather than import what I already have, right?
Grandson: You stupid woman. Just type your private key into Bitcoin-Qt.
Grandma: Why didn't you simply say I need to type it. Why so sophisticated words for an action that even stone age people could perform? BTW, wouldn't it be much more convenient for me in 21. century to tell Bitcoin-Qt what I want to do, e.g. if I want to make a payment I simply click ''make the payment'', then Bitcoin-Qt asks ''from available funds or from a paper wallet?'', if I click ''from a paper wallet'', then Bitcoin-Qt just prompts me to type the private key? On the other hand, must I remember all these bad grammar phrases like ''importprivkey''?
Grandson: It's for your own good that you learn new stuff, you silly. Be more geeky.

Solution: if you need paper wallets, use a client that supports this natively, such as Armory.

Do not tell non-technical people to mess around with individual private/public keys in Bitcoin-Qt. NEVER.

Why not just represent the private key with a PIN so that its as easy as a debit card?
grandma understands PIN numbers  

I do not need it. Importing private key was just an example of how ''grandmas'' or ''the stupid'' will think.

BTW, is there a reason why Bitcoin-Qt would not support (in future) a native feature of private key importing?

ok .. it was half tongue in cheek but it has flushed out some of the truth of the matter ... they do not want to learn then?

It will support "sweep", ie, "send me all coins from this private key", without adding the key to the wallet. This is superior for all cases that involve paper wallets, as unlike a naive "add to wallet" it does not encourage keys to exist in multiple places, potentially leading to all kinds of problems for the unaware.

And also it will still work for Hierarchical Deterministic (HD) wallets in which all keys are generated from one seed, so naive importing isn't even possible.

This ''sweep'' feature is nice. Do you have an idea when it might be implemented?


My guess is that a natively supported import of private keys in Armory also potentially leads to existing private keys in multiple places?

When a developer feels like implementing it and has time to do it. There is not really a timeline as we're working on this on our spare time. All help is appreciated.
Yes. Using a different client won't protect you against those risks, although I'm not up to date on how Armory handles it, maybe it does a "sweep" already. I refered to Armory because it has a built-in "use case" for offline/paper wallets, which may make it somewhat safer for users as they're told what (and what not) to do. Which is better than randomly fiddling around with RPC commands found on a wiki, for example.

I have a colleague who is a surgeon + researcher on 3D printed organs. He makes magical stuff and is definitely not stupid. He works 16h a day. He could devote 1 hour a week to learn bitcoin. Imagine him trying to understand what raw transactions are: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Raw_Transactions

People want to learn, but the stuff is described in a way too hard for non-geeks to understand within their lifetime.

 ... yeah I'm pretty sure a surgeon doesn't need to know about rawtransactions unless he's had a change of heart and is looking for a career change ... what's your real point here?

WHY would they want to understand that? Either they are very interested and put some of their brain capacity into learning it (geek out), or they don't. Either way, they're not hurt right?

Specialization is a good thing in this complex world. I wouldn't know where to start implanting organs, and if I spent my time learning that (if I could at all) then I cannot spend that time into learning to write better software. So we have this thing called trade... and hey, we're on the bitcoin forums, our aim is to make that easier :)

My point is: not everybody who doesn't understand intricacies of Bitcoin and / or is unwilling to learn this not-easy-stuff should be labelled ''stupid''.

Sounds like a good idea. In any case, we can't rely on the Bitcoin Foundation to fund GUIs and user-friendly features. That's not their ballpark.

If somehow the community could fund active development in features and improvements that *they* want that'd be great.

There is: http://bitcoinbounties.com/  which can attach bounties to github issies. I'm not sure how well it works and/or how trustable it is though. But we have one data point: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/2480 .

In any case, if we could get some community-funded initiative going I (and other devs) would be much more motivated to work on the bitcoin project, maybe even full time.

... quite right ... some guy posted something about his circle of friends giving him blank stares whenever he mentioned bitcoin and looked up at the title of the OP ... 2+2= ??

John, reading through the wiki is not easy. You read an article which mentions say 30 geeky terms like ''JSON-RPC API''. Shit, then you spend 2 hours understanding these terms. But to understand these terms you have to dig deeper.

I can understand wiki should work this way, but at least there should be an easy to understand Bitcoin-Qt documentation for grandmas / surgeons / movie makers / non-geeks written in easy English.

Marcus, Bitcoin is a disruptive technology. I feel it. But understanding the mechanics (change addresses, algorithims of calculating the fees, e.g. why should older coins be better rewarded than new ones? - I still don't get this logic, but accept the way it works, etc.) are a novelty in the whole world. Please do not get surprised people give blank stares.

One day you too might give a blank stare in a field you do not know.

The OP's intentions were clear: to ease the learning proccess for ''the stupid'' thus allowing Bitcoin to go mainstream.

Another community funding idea. Maybe for an artistic tool which people really love someone will write a nice documentation out of love, but that's not going to happen for something as abstract as Bitcoin.
We'd need to find a technical writer with a track record of writing good software documentation, and employ that person to write a manual for Bitcoin-Qt (with community input).

Maybe something like the pypy donation drive could work, let people donate to certain subprojects and execute them when they are funded: http://pypy.org/ (and return the funds if something isn't funded by a certain deadline, or doesn't pan out).

It could work like this:

1. People submit their feature requests like in this project management site http://www.multicharts.com/pm/ (loads slowly).
2. Then developers put a price tag for requests they can handle + specify time they agree to complete the task.
3. Then people commit to pay the whole price (it will take a week or two if the feature is desired or years if the feature is unwanted)
4. When 100% of the price from the price tag is paid to a particular developer's address, the developer starts coding.
5. The feature is added to Bitcoin-Qt (e.g. documentation) after reviewing by other developers in context of safety.

Thanks

Yes, the basic idea sounds fair.

Before embarking on a project the requirements should be really clear to the developer and everyone contributing money to it should agree on them (to prevent disagreements later on). I also think an important requirement is to perform the work in the open, so that people can see what is happening and keep true to the open source spirit.

A % of the money should probably be held in escrow until the feature is fully integrated and reviewed in the context of safety. Payout schedule should at least be discussed beforehand.

I don't know about making things simple but whatever you do could be explained a lot better, there have been years or months I've spent arguing with people to give better explanations from all professions not just people using cryptographic currencies. Someone just needs to get off their arses and write a very simple tutorial for mining the alternate currencies for example, then there's the fucking programming tutorials where they leave bits out and don't explain why they've told you to do something and so on.

Like I said, I'm not asking you guys to simplify anything, I think Bitcoin has actually been explained quite well which I suspect is why most people use it but good luck with the other stuff, it amazes me that people went and made stuff like Litecoin and didn't think about how the average person was going to use it. Just make sure that when you do something or you ask them to change a setting etc. you explain why, or for example you can give absolute beginner explanations for people just starting out rather than assuming everyone knows how to code already.

As embarrassing as it is I must have spent a good few months trying to figure out why my photoshop paintings were so damn blurry then I discovered it was just the brush hardness because none of the painting tutorials I followed mentioned that's what you need to get nice clear images. That and a high enough resolution that wouldn't break your computer and cause photoshop to freeze, all just because people forgot to mention things like that to beginners.

Good.


I agree + the major devs (prior to putting a price tag by a given developer) should have an internal discussion and decide (i) whether the requested feature makes sense, (ii) whether the requested feature is safe, etc. It wouldn't be sensible to pay for the feature, then get it done and not being able to incorporate into Bitcoin-Qt because other developers object.


I agree.

Agreed. We certainly don't want to accept every wild-eyed request, but focus on some important projects that have community and developer consensus.

1. Very well then  ;D

2. We need a technology (website, a sub-forum) that allows submitting feature requests, describing them, putting a price tag, etc.

3. There is of course the risk of this idea to fail:
a) the users might not be interested in paying for the features they think are absolutely essential to be implemented (people are greedy), and / or
b) developers might not be interested in giving some power over how Bitcoin-Qt develops to non-geeks,
c) others ...

Yes, indeed. We need something that's not a lot of work to set up, otherwise it kind of defeats its purpose and detracts from development on bitcoin-qt itself :)

Indeed. We'll see if they're willing to put their money where their mouth is. It'd be a kind of social experiment I guess. In an "anarchistic" community you cannot levy taxes, so people have to look out for themselves to make sure infrastructure happens, too.

I don't think this is about power. More about motivation. It's a nuisance if people request things and expect that you're going to do it in your spare time, but if they pay for it it's different.

And of course it should be clear that any economic change to the system is strictly off limits (ie, raising the amount of coins, change the mining algorithm). This would be meant to fund the "unsexy" changes that do require a sizeable amount of work, such as front-end changes, back-end optimizations, bug fixes that require a lot of diagnostics and debugging work, and so on.

It's obviously going to take a right-brained artistic approach, a la Steve Jobs. Get out of the way people. It is like watching the geek follies. Solutions are client-based, not Bitcoin-based.
Try thinking about what other systems require features of WoT, such as voting.

Look at how banks made it for today's normal user, currently I have seen 2 different implementation:

1.
The user get a smartcard which hold their private key, and a card reader which should holds bank's public key (not sure). There are four functions on the card reader: "login", "buy", "code", "sign"

When you do a login or a purchase, you first input your user name on website, and you get a control string from the bank,  and press the corresponding function button and input the control string into the cardreader, then you need to input your pin code (like bitcoin client's wallet password), then the card reader will generate a signature string and you input that string into the page of the website to confirm the login or purchase

2.
The user get a signature generating device which contains exactly the same algorithm the bank's software is using. User need to input 2 control strings in sequence to generate the signature, there is also a pin code challenge for that device

In both case, users have the key stored in a hardware, and the security for that key is 3 levels: 1. physically 2. the pin code to the key 3. The account that is connected to the key

If someone successfully steal the hardware key, he still need to have the pin code (the device automatically locked after 3 failed attempts), and even if he get the pin code, he still need to know which account this key is related to at the bank

And if the user lose the key, he will call the bank and block the key immediately, bank will generate a new hardware key and send it to user

I'll just say that I am a decent technical writer, and have written many internal software user guides for various companies I have worked for.  I'm also a writer for Bitcoin Magazine.  I would be willing to write a step-by-step user guide on Bitcoin-QT if a bounty is put together.  I would want to cover every feature that the Bitcoin-QT client is capable of, which I am certain includes features I haven't even used yet, and gear it towards the layman.

Its not complicated, the masses just need to know how to send and receive money and thats is quite easy, who knows the algorith ussed at visa or mastercard datacenters? nobody..
when someone ask again what is bitcoin just respond.. "is a new currency, and its value is this" thats all.

some of these threads could be used as plot ideas for the Big Bang Theory!

:)

I think it would grab peoples attention if you call it the "global currency".  Or is that too far fetched  8)

We might take it further and call time periods: BCE (before cryptocurrency era) and ACE. Or would the Christians riot?

If you're going to make a user-friendly client for nonspecialists, I will suggest the first thing you should do is check to see whether it's on a pristine machine or one with other stuff installed and in the latter case refuse to run, with an appropriate error message. Above all else, Bitcoin for nonspecialists needs to put a stop to the endless stream of newbies having their money stolen, and part of that is making sure people don't put their bitcoins on the same machine they use for other stuff.

(The client should also check whether it's running in a virtual machine and refused to run if so, to guard against a case where somebody tries to run it in a virtual machine on the same physical computer they use for other stuff.)

When you've sat an watched a Grandma in a library help a 30-something use their paypal account, you realise it's a lot less about age and a lot more about mental acuity :)

I think we need a car analogy, no?

I find that I have a lot of trouble explaining Bitcoins to the average person well enough so that they are intrigued enough to research it on their own.

There definitely needs to be a bit more "fun" in the Bitcoin ecosystem; some sort of PR campaign that not only get investors interested but your everyday layman interested.

We have to make Bitcoin cool for mass consumption.

Not to mention capacitive touchscreens + insects + Bitcoin wallet/client = potential disaster without human error.  A random horsefly thought I'd look smashing in a full body black latex BDSM style Halloween costume last year.  Damn you amazon one-click.  True story.

If devs can fix the horsefly/misclick scenario and improve ease of use without letting in too much hot air in at once; I'll post pics of me in the costume.  Disclaimer:  It will cost 0.5 BTC to take the pics down.

I was just thinking of the various ways that a firm could advertise Bitcoins advantages over cash and even credit card for someone who does a lot of in person shopping (i.e. for food, for clothes, etc.).

Perhaps we should highlight how instead of carrying a wallet full of card and cash, they could make do with just their cell phones as long as they have a Bitcoin wallet app on it.

Less fiddling and carrying of coins and change and no need to secure your credit card, sign anything or punch in any pin codes. Everything you need is already on your cell phone.

If Bitcoins can be marketed as a tool of saving time then there should be enough appeal for masses to try it out.

Yes, but first the product (Bitcoin system, inclusive of Bitcoin clients, e.g. Bitcoin-Qt) must be customized for the stupid (me inclusive) / polished to meet their capabilities.

It is too early to spend resources on marketing Bitcoin. I would not like to see people burned. If the stupid get burned you can expect a well-deserved negative PR. Such PR will not elevate Bitcoin prices. And we hope the prices to rise, don't we?

to the OP:

Bitcoin is already simplified for the stupid.  The only idea that could make it even simpler is to introduce hardware based wallets that conduct monetary transactions regardless of the user's intelligence level.

Yes I agree with what you've said. I'm just saying that services revolving around Bitcoins, like a smartphone client, should be easy enough for nearly anyone to use.

The point is that stupid people exist, and they are a substantial part of any economy. You need them as much as they need you. Make Bitcoins easier and more attractive for them, and everyone is happy.

Okay, so after telling my friends about bitcoin, I decided to give them a lecture on bitcoin.
Of course they were intrigued and wanted to know every last detail.
It took me around, a hour to explain the basics to them over a skype call, at the end they were all confused and had no idea what I had just told them, one even said "That is no possible", what is not possible, I asked.
He said a online currency, I laughed and ended the skype call, lol.

Anyway, the point is bitcoin is in need to be simplified and I THINK a lot of people agree on the subject, the whole mining bit is confusing even for veterans of bitcoin.

I've explained Bitcoins to 2 university undergrads yesterday and it took them quite some time to get it. I don't think the mining aspect is all that important but it's the implication of Bitcoins that is hard to get right away... It can take some time for it all to click in.

Of course, there are people who just don't care or want to understand anything outside of their comfort-zone. Bitcoin is funny like that, it's a great barometer of one's aptitude to adapting and accepting new concepts... some people just aren't capable of generating self-interest even when the result would obviously be rewarding to them.

No. Just no. Bitcoin will become easier to use and get out of the way.

Money is infrastructure, it is not cool consumer technology.

Why can it not be cool?

So you're telling me that something cool should not be built on this infrastructure to gain people's attention?

It CAN be a cool thing for consumer to play with if it's done right; and there's no reason why it shouldn't be that way.

EDIT: You know, the more I think about it, the more it seems that this type of antisocial-elitist attitude on this forum is what might hinder its growth. Why should only tech-savvy people (uncool people?) deserve to use Bitcoin? Why shouldn't those who are incapable of thoroughly understanding Bitcoin (i.e. perhaps someone in your family) not deserve to get something out of Bitcoin?

Very useful site btw, thanks...

Its quite easy to do this, but it requires some big picture thinking.

Forget all about the technical elements of bitcoin, and lets work with the end result.

People use new stuff because its either a legal requirement, or its easier than the old way.  Sometimes its because it makes their ego feel good, but generally, its to give them something they couldn't do before.

Why would you want to use bitcoin rather than Paypal?

The only reason I can think of is because its cheaper.

Here is a possible dialogue which demonstrates why we have a long way to go! ;) We need a far better reason to use bitcoins!


Muggle: So, how would you do bitcoin rather than Paypal?

Geek: Ok, visit Localbitcoins, and buy $100 worth of bitcoins from some stranger, by giving him your bank account details.

Muggle: I can't get ripped off if I do this, can I?

Geek: You'll probably get around 0.95 worth of bitcoins.

Muggle: Doesn't sound like much for $100!

Geek: Now visit a website that sells stuff for bitcoins, and buy something you want - like a graphic card, or some porn, of maybe some drugs. Sorry, you can't buy nice clothes yet, because bitcoin people wear black t shirts exclusively!

Geek: Type in the address of where you want to send your bitcoins, making sure to match the amount they want with the amount you want to send, but add a little extra 0.01 to cover mining costs (don't ask!)

Geek: Now give the people your name and address so that they can send you the stuff.

Geek: 3 days later, you might get your stuff!

Muggle: its far easier with Paypal - they have all my details, go to the bank for me and even give me credit and ensure that I'm not defrauded!

Geek: But Bitcoin is cheaper and sticks it to the man! ;)

Muggle: But they have my name and address when I tell them where to ship it to, how is that anonymous?

Geek: Bitcoins rule!


Can anyone else see the problem here? ;)

You're reading things between the lines that don't exist. Everyone should be able to use Bitcoin. It should become easier to use (that's why I started working on bitcoin-qt in the first place). That does not mean "cool". The cool factor is marketing, a clever way to use your desire for social validation to separate you from your money. It has nothing to do with the product. If anything, the focus on hipster US consumer technologies marketed by billion-dollar PR agencies is very narrow.

The big picture is that most people use technologies because they are useful to them not because they are "cool". Especially outside the first world. They use them because it empowers them, because it allows them to do things they would not be able to do otherwise, or at least way more efficiently. Or maybe it even helps them survive despite their conditions. Do you think the Romans built aqueducts because they thought they were cool? Do you think people in Ghana use mobile payments because they are cool?

Bitcoin is still searching for its niches, but it has already shown to be very useful for some kinds of transactions. This is what drives adoption: people use it to accept payments. Slowly but surely the technical stuff will go to the background. The end result will be no more need to mess with blockchains and separate private keys for casual users. Just reliably send units of currency from one person to another person anywhere on the world. Everyone understands that.

I think the mistake people make is showing people "Bitcoin" instead of showing people what it can be used for.  While geeks and libertarian types have a full interest in the mechanics of Bitcoin, most people would be more interested in seeing the cool things it can be used for.

It is okay if for some people Bitcoin is simply a means to get to the ends that interest them.

Bitcoin is a very strange and complicated item.

It's as if an automobile was just dropped into a civilization like ours that had never seen them before. Many would fear it because of its potential to cause great damage if not handled properly. Many would be daunted by the unusual and odd interface, not to mention learning how to operate it. Many would be concerned about the regular and expensive fuel requirements. Even those curious about it would be overwhelmed by the features and options.

Those who saw the inherent advantages and lucrative business opportunities would be tinkering, experimenting, redesigning, and finding ways to make them appeal to everyone from those who just need to get from point A to point B and the extremely wealthy.

There is sooo much territory to be covered in bitcoinland and we are just beginning to make some headway. It will be a while before there's a bitcoin in every garage, but I feel it's inevitable.

This was a good use of analogy .... others will jump in the driver's seat with relish and tear around with abandon, pulling donuts, scaring kids and grandmas, and holding unofficial races ... same as it ever was.

I do agree with the contents of what you are saying but the way you have put it out there isn't the most appealing, I wouldn't call pensioners "stupid". I think we are as a community exactly where we need to be, it is only a matter of time before someone invents an cheap, portable, wallet for dummies.

THIS EXACTLY IN SPADES.

there is a huge difference between ignorance and stupidity.
i am new to bitcoins but love the basic concept.
the mechanics of wallets, exchanges, cold storage , online storage,
security issues, verification, linking accounts, etc. et. , etc. ad infinitum are impediments to wide scale adoption.

why would anyone spend the time to learn a whole new system when they can just use paypal?
mastercard, visa, amex, a check, atm. etc.? my bank account is insured for 250k yet i need to use cold storage for
bitcoin because my wallet can get hacked. now to joe sixpack bitcoin looks stupid and too complicated and above all
risky.

i have had many people work for me and it is necessary to take the time to educate and train them.
it is not because they are stupid.

as for john q public, there are many who still read books to learn new things.
the dummy series of books is a great success for that reason

if i knew more about the intricacies of bitcoins i would write a
"bitcoin for dummies"  this would help with greater understanding and broader appeal.

so some enterprising geek should get with someone who can write and present the idea to the dummy people
.........they are not stupid

Yeah!  Old people!

What do they know about the internet?

They only invented it! ;)

Yes I agree. I am fairly computer literate and nerdy and still took me a long while to figure out some of the aspects of bitcoin and the exchanges, etc.  Now it seems simple but it sure didn't at first.

Hello guys,
i agree with the op and i, too, thought about this.
I agree also, if you want to use bitcoin you must not understand the technical details behind them.
For example the most people don't understand the technical thing about a microwave
but they know how they are used and they are aware of the benefits.
So the main part musn't be to explain the "stupid" how bitcoin works but rather
to simplified the usability - that was what i read out here.

One thought i have when i read this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68320.0.  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68320.0.)

Is it possible to relate a bitcoin address with an email address?
I think 99,9% of all internet user have an email and maybe for the most nontechnical
users its more naturally to send bitcoins to an email adress (like paypal)
instead to an "outlandish" bitcoin address.
I know that this feature is inapplicable for marchants who must generate a separate btc-address for each sale
but to send bitcoins among themselves it could be a nice feature to adopt more people.

edit: it seems someone else being faster https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=200152.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=200152.0)

There's nothing wrong with making "cool" things on top of Bitcoins. Yes, there are impoverished people who don't necessarily need cool stuff but cool stuff is what brings people attention to tech in many situations, no matter how poor they might be. If you're able to make Bitcoins cool for the masses (yes even poor masses need cool things to experiment with), they'll dig into it a bit deeper into the non-cool stuff and learn about it in that manner.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the really poor people won't benefit all that much from Bitcoins. But if you can make Bitcoins a cool or interesting hobby they can spend their time on, they might try it out.

Aaaaargh, I'm old enough to remember when getting online meant hooking up to a BBS on VIC20 via a 1200 Baud modem, there was no Internet and that's about the stage we're at with Bitcoin, we're working with BASIC and at machine code level.

It won't be until there's a Windows 95 version of Bitcoin that you will see mass adoption of Bitcoin and I have no doubt that time will eventuate, build it and they will come.

That doesn't mean those people are stupid, not every one has an affinity for grinding 1's and 0's all day long, as a mechanic I often despair at how little people really know about their cars and what makes them tick under the hood and I wonder if the OP really knows what he's doing when he sticks the key in the ignition and shifts into D for dumb.

BTW, my 80 year old mum is a great grandmother, uses a PC at home for email, banking, skyping, Facebook etc. and an iPhone on the road, stop stereotyping older people OP, you'll get there yourself soon enough.

When it comes to simplicity of just using bitcoin without any background information of it, it's simple enough for the masses. People don't care technical aspects behind currency, like who actually knows how Mastercard/Visa works. Using it doesn't require you to know anything, besides maybe pin number and be able to read series of numbers and copy them to make online payments.

Same kinda card idea would be ideal also for bitcoin as it's electronic currency in the begin with. Like pay/deposit bitcoins via devices you can hook to computers.. or do the same at banking terminal.

And for the last but not least.. paper currency would be also probably required for those that cannot see money otherwise, which aren't very few neither.

And no, most wouldn't care less about ideology behind currency, is it tied to banking system/landmarks or not. Just to know it's safe, reliable, stable. And no, it really doesn't success being characterised as nerd currency, which might not come surprise for all technical talk behind it. If bitcoin is to be success, it would need companies large enough to offer devices/services worldwide.. the question is, for how many bitcoin spokesman losing ideology would be okay just as long currency would be success?

LOL - yeah, young people think our brains fell out when we hit 50. Just because I'm a member of AARP doesn't mean I'm not looking forward to the release of Call of Duty: Ghosts in November!

Have you looked at BitcoinSpinner? Doesn't get much simpler.

you remind me of some executive at a car company saying: "we must build a car that runs on electricity. It must charge from a normal wall socket in 1 hour and be able to drive 500km with that charge".

That's not how innovation works. I think you should just start doing what you're suggesting the others should do.

In time it will become simplified for everyone.  It will do so inevitably or at least something that uses the bitcoin technology will.  Bitcoin qt is still in 'beta', it's not even a 1.0 release yet!  It will take a few years to really integrate into society and become very well developed.  This is just the whole 'bitcoin concept'.  I doubt people will end up using Bitcoin QT.  Once there is a respectable web-wallet that people trust they will start using it.  So when/if paypal add bitcoin support, they would basically be becoming the most simple and already-trusted way to use bitcoin.

You reach a point where you fundamentally can't make things any simpler without compromising security.  This applies to bitcoin just as much as physical possessions.

When securing physical possessions, people DO put up with lots of inconvenience and complexity, so it's unrealistic to expect bitcoin to become both ultra-simple and ultra-secure.

A hardware wallet that works a bit like an online banking security token is probably as simple as it gets.

Even 'stupid' people have learned how to use security tokens so why can't they learn to use hardware wallets?

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/225752_250518795086682_2116673872_n.jpg (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=122438.msg2015699#msg2015699)

This can be a first step. We'd need to do something about the addressing. DNSSEC / PKI / SSL Certs is being talked about as potential solutions.

That's really cool. I want one.

SO Fing Right, Engineers have a HORRIBLE snobbery and disdain for User interface and Marketing that blinds them and cripples their designs, the whole history of the Personal Computer is the history of good interface beating the snot out of technically superior stuff and it always will but the average engineer just never 'gets it' as to why they keep losing.

I was just having a conversation yesterday with a prominent BTC developer who said the Address Book should be removed from the client because it encouraged people to reuse addresses and that was bad for security.  Typical engineer thinking, users should jump through MORE not less hoops that us elite users know and care about and if they won't then they will be FORCED to do so by removing any alternative.  With that kind of attitude e-mail would never have succeeded.

Be honest to yourself as to whether your grandma really needs to use Bitcoin. The one who should be using them is you.


BitcoinMoxy.com

ignorant (Adjective)
    Lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.

I think you mean arrogant
arrogant (Adjective)
    Having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.

Lol, ok and i think this is about as far as the conversation would usually get.  I just imagined mentioning mining to someone who has no idea what bitcoin is yet.

Agreed, Bitcoin will be a true success the day my grandparents are using it on their own accord.

John, did you have time to discuss this idea with other developers?

Sad but true! Iv tried to explain it to so many of my friends and they just look at me with a derp face

Andy B

Yes. They don't like it. Anything with feature-specific funding is off the table, because it would result in rushed code and less sexy issues and testing receiving no attention.

A "donate to client development" button in the client itself is being considered.

It's a pity developers think this way. If they are afraid of less sexy features being left out they might simply put a low price on these less sexy features or even develop those less sexy features for free (as they are doing now). As for the rushed / low quality code - I think when paid, they would pay special attention to the quality of their work.


Such a button will not give the users even the slightest power over the direction of Bitcoin-Qt's development, so it will not be frequently used = developers will continue to be underpaid, and Bitcoin-Qt's development will be slow.

I appreciate your having discussed the idea with others.

Thanks

I don't think that is necessarily true. Users already have "the slightest power" over the direction of Bitcoin-Qt's development by submitting issues on github.

The main problem is that no one is picking them up, as no one is paid to do it. Giving a few fanatic developers a reliable income may be more constructive than having them chase after per-issue funding.


I think most of the developers prefer to be hired by companies such as Bitpay. As I've noticed myself as well, dealing with the bitcoin community at large is difficult at best, and sob story at worst*, a company provides a more reliable income stream. It does make development less decentralized, and means that end-user issues with the UI (for example) will not get priority, as companies such as Bitpay and exchanges offer their own front-ends.

* I've had to explain to people that open source does not equal "developers do your work for free" so many times that it drives me crazy...

In future this might be a problem.

At the moment a single business like Bitpay has the necessary resources (cash + access to developers) to convince the devs to program in Bitcoin-Qt's the features the business users want. These features may not be what retail users want.

To have a balance between the business users' interests and the retail users' interests it would be advisable to have a tool (a feature request auction site) through which the retail users could finance the developers as well.

Regarding, the ''donate'' button in Bicoin-Qt: how can the retail users be sure the money will not be spent on developing the business features?

They don't. But then again, if there is no trust in the first place, the whole exercise is pointless.

Then maybe this button could work like this:

1. You click the donate button.

2. Then a list of available options is given, e.g.
a) support the person for keeping the wiki up to date (I would donate to this feature, because the wiki is outdated)
b) retail feature #1
c) retail feature #2
d) business feature #1

3. A user financially supports the feature the user wants to be implemented.

As I said -- that's just not going to happen. Donation (if it will ever be implemented) will be in general, for the bitcoin dev team, not for specific features.

Okay. I tried and I failed. Thanks for your time.

I am going to be working on this very soon:

I happen to be pretty good at explaining things in laments terms, I have 2 big "experiences" doing so:

1. I have 2 little brothers that are 10 years younger than me, so I have always had to explain some difficult ideas (and just general concepts), in simple form.

2. I am not much of a "techie". I learned base HTML for Myspace, then posted on FB for like 3 years. And that was ALL the experience I had with the internet, besides researching Entheogens, "god" and RCs since I was 14....
Then 2 years ago, I learned about AdSense (while broke looking for sources of income) and started doing a LOT more stuff on the internet. SO I'm good at helping others that don't really know what's up with everything.



I plan on making YouTube videos, Facebook groups and Forum topics (on other websites) to start it off. Then eventually make flyers, mailers, billboards and even late night infomercials.

Have we stopped calling users stupid yet? ;)

If we seriously want this to move on, we need to start thinking like real users, not like techies.

Remember that techies are the ones who invent multi million dollar anti gravity ball point pens, where users just use pencils!