Bitcoin needs to be simplified for the stupid.

[Loozik]

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.

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

[bennett616]

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

[wumpus]

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

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.

[Loozik]

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.

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.

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

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

[wumpus]

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 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 appreciate your having discussed the idea with others.

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...

[Loozik]

I think most of the developers prefer to be hired by companies such as Bitpay.

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?

[wumpus]

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.

[Loozik]

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.

[wumpus]

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.

[Loozik]

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.

[FinShaggy]

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.

[nwbitcoin]

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!