How can we make Bitcoin simpler?

[Accardo]

Cryptography is difficult to debunk, be it tech or secret codes, and it's the unswerving foundation of the bitcoin network. Distilling a simple bitcoin technology down to simpler form can be detrimental to its existence. Aside the development aspect of bitcoin the use case is understandable and people who find it difficult can seek help. Like others said, the reason for lesser adoption is the time range or young existence of bitcoin. Fiat has been around for years with the central bank attached to the Government, which controls the citizens. Bitcoin is at war with world leaders, and top bank officials who express to the masses how nefarious bitcoin can be to their life savings. Bankers can give customers bad instances of bitcoin to help retain compound interest customers on their nest, because they're people that actually need bitcoin.

Inflation has drifted out the profits compound interest should have presented to investor, but they're far from the truth. The bank officials make more money off their savings. We wouldn't be having this conversation, if only, such people had few hours trust for bitcoin and studied the this and that accompanying bitcoin growth; and how it can yield profits on the long run more than compound interest can do for them Since its a battle between the bank and bitcoin, the adoption would be tough, bankers can as well pump and dump the market to chase away potential bitcoin investors back to the bank. Yet that doesn't mean bitcoin should become ABC, that will take away trusted and firm users of bitcoin even more. As the process goes bitcoin will become stronger enough to attract more users.

[1714987518]

1714987518

[1714987518]

1714987518

[1714987518]

1714987518

[Macadonian]

Ok maybe I was wrong saying that every one understands the dollar but do we think Bitcoin is ready for adoption by the least technical people possible? I am thinking old people who did not grow up with computers who struggle to use banking software and do most of their banking physically. How can Bitcoin help convert that generation to Bitcoin or are we going to accept that these people will never adopt Bitcoin and we should look to attract the younger generations?

[pooya87]

Ok maybe I was wrong saying that every one understands the dollar but do we think Bitcoin is ready for adoption by the least technical people possible? I am thinking old people who did not grow up with computers who struggle to use banking software and do most of their banking physically. How can Bitcoin help convert that generation to Bitcoin or are we going to accept that these people will never adopt Bitcoin and we should look to attract the younger generations?

If these people who have problems with technology and struggle with anything digital is what you had in mind when you asked "How can we make Bitcoin simpler?" then the answer is we can't. There is nothing we could do and things can not get simple enough for such people, they will continue struggling with "digital" bitcoin.

[Greg Tonoski]

Ok maybe I was wrong saying that every one understands the dollar but do we think Bitcoin is ready for adoption by the least technical people possible? I am thinking old people who did not grow up with computers who struggle to use banking software and do most of their banking physically. How can Bitcoin help convert that generation to Bitcoin or are we going to accept that these people will never adopt Bitcoin and we should look to attract the younger generations?

If these people who have problems with technology and struggle with anything digital is what you had in mind when you asked "How can we make Bitcoin simpler?" then the answer is we can't. There is nothing we could do and things can not get simple enough for such people, they will continue struggling with "digital" bitcoin.

Don't you know any older and non-techie people that use Bitcoin? (I assume that a smartphone skill is not enough to fall into the techie category.) Moreover, there are services for computer illeterate people so they can use Bitcoin just like they do their "banking physically", e.g. brick-and-mortar Bitcoin exchanges https://www.bitcoin-store.net/_next/image/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.bitcoin-store.net%2Fcontent%2Fimages%2F2021%2F10%2Fthe_cover_of_the_wall_street_journal_article_about_brick_and_mortar_cryptocurrency_exchanges.png&w=1080&q=100

[o_e_l_e_o]

I am thinking old people who did not grow up with computers who struggle to use banking software and do most of their banking physically.

In those cases; no, probably not. The simplest way to use bitcoin, while still maintaining some amount of safety and self custody and not just relying on a centralized custodial (which after all is the whole point), is to download a good wallet app on your smartphone, write down the 12 or 24 words it gives you, and generate a receiving address. It can't really get much simpler than that. If, however, we are talking about people who have never learned how to use a smartphone at all, then no, they cannot use bitcoin, just as they cannot use digital banking, Google Pay, PayPal, or any other electronic fiat app.

It is worth pointing out that such people are in the minority, and without being too macabre, that minority is rapidly shrinking. In developed nations where smartphones are ubiquitous and have been for years, then as time goes on the elderly population which have never used them shrinks, while the number of people who have exposed to them pretty much from birth grows. With the technology getting cheaper and with more and more old and second hand devices being sold, then in developing nations they are becoming much more common as well. As time goes on, the number of people in the category you are referring to will continue to shrink.

You simply can't use a digital currency without some ability to use a digital device.

[AverageGlabella]

The older generation will need to learn how to use digital devices or they get left behind the world is changing and even the dollar will not be physical in 10 or 20 years instead we are moving onto a digital currency which should encourage people to convert to Bitcoin because people will learn more about security because it will be forced if they want to keep it safe. Evolution happens because you NEED to adapt.

[zeuner]

I would actually think that Bitcoin's big advantage when compared to other cryptocurrencies _is_ it's simplicity of design. Most projects that strive to compete merely add a lot of obscurity (e.g. to hide the fact that they removed important components like a working consensus mechanism).

That being said, it might be interesting to research what bells and whistles could be removed from Bitcoin, while still keeping the main mechanism and its potential to layer all the complexity on the top of it.

[tromp]

I would actually think that Bitcoin's big advantage when compared to other cryptocurrencies _is_ it's simplicity of design. Most projects that strive to compete merely add a lot of obscurity (e.g. to hide the fact that they removed important components like a working consensus mechanism).

That being said, it might be interesting to research what bells and whistles could be removed from Bitcoin, while still keeping the main mechanism and its potential to layer all the complexity on the top of it.

The only coin focussed on simplicity seems to be Grin [1].

The biggest simplification relative to Bitcoin is the absence of script. Yet nearly all commonly used script functionality is still available through "scriptless scripts".

The problem with complexity in the consensus model is that once you have accumulated some, you can never get rid of it, as it will always be needed to verify past history. So a blockchain's complexity can only increase over time. In that sense no blockchain can be made simpler.

Odds are that something like Ethereum will be so complex in a century that no-one can understand all of it (some would argue that's already the case right now:-).

That also means that the best way to improve functionality is outside of the consensus model. Lightning is a great example of that.

[1] https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoTechnology/comments/kyhgcv/are_there_any_public_cryptocurrencyblockchain

[BlackHatCoiner]

You have to define what's simple. Bitcoin is very simple to me. You download a lightweight wallet, generate a seed phrase, write it down, and you can now send money overseas via the Internet, with an easily accessible backup. The backup isn't even some complex series of numbers, it's just 12 words. It literally doesn't go more simple than that.

What you're trying to figure out is how we make Bitcoin more accessible. In my opinion, more responsibility and education is all we need.

[Welsh]

I think BlackHatCoiner is onto something. Accessibility is probably what we lack, trying to get started into Bitcoin is pretty hard because a quick search via your favourite search engine could send you to an array of different sources, all varying in terms of accuracy.

Obviously, we have some decent documentation out there, however I don't think it's dominating the search results too much, and it's usually news, and sensationalist websites about Bitcoin that actually occupy the top spots, which is a little troublesome.

Given enough time, Bitcoin is probably just as easy as fiat currencies, it's starting off that is the problem. Whereas, fiat currencies are taught in school; Bitcoin is pretty much self learnt. Even if the documentation is readily available, and somewhat easy to find it's then the difficulty of convincing people to self learn something.

[Macadonian]

Odds are that something like Ethereum will be so complex in a century that no-one can understand all of it (some would argue that's already the case right now:-).

That also means that the best way to improve functionality is outside of the consensus model. Lightning is a great example of that.

What about Bitcoin do you think that it could get more complex and that could be the down side for Bitcoin which stunts growth? Altcoins tend to put worthless features in a lot that make it more complex and not adding much to the functionality. Bitcoin does not do that and only adds features which revolutionize the currency like segwit etc.

[lovesmayfamilis]

Anyone who could read and learns how to use a mobile phone can also learn how to use BTC wallet. It's not rocket science. The majority of the population has phones, and each person in India even has two phones. They don't have to buy a hardware wallet for they can already use thier phones with an app wallet. 

I didn't make it complicated for my sister to learn to use BTC. Only receiving and sending BTC using the app wallet was enough for her. But of course I remind not to share the Priv key.

This is the simplest explanation of the discussion of this topic. Indeed, if a person knows how to read, given that he understands what he reads, knows how to be attentive and accurate, and is not a user who has just discovered the Internet but knows how to surf the net in order to find the right information, difficulties in mastering information about bitcoin and its storage should not be an issue.
If we talk about the elderly, then it is somewhat more complicated, given their age, memory, attention, and again, their ability to use digital devices. Well, we can say that attention and responsibility should always be present in our lives, so it will not be a problem for older people if they have someone nearby who can explain everything to them in an accessible and understandable way.

[Lucius]

~snip~

Backup is only part of what we are talking about, and that part is of course not too demanding, unless you are going to explain to someone how those 12 or 24 words have a backup function at all - because 99% of people think that words are just words, and yet it is a visual presentation of something much more complex.

On the other hand, try to put yourself in the position of someone who installed a wallet, had a backup and now wants to learn how to make transactions. You have to explain to that person what a public address is, what a change address is, what clipboard malware is, what a fee is and how to set it up correctly, what RBF is and how to use it in case the transaction gets stuck... In addition, if the wallet is not localized in a language that the person understands, you only have one more problem on top of everything else.

I don't see how using Bitcoin can be simpler than it is now, but let's be honest, it's not for anyone no matter how hard we try to make it.

[BlackHatCoiner]

On the other hand, try to put yourself in the position of someone who installed a wallet, had a backup and now wants to learn how to make transactions.

Another obstacle is fees. People don't realize fees in electronic fiat in the same way they do in Bitcoin. In Bitcoin, fees are direct. You make a transaction, you set the fee, you have a pretty clear understanding of where this fee goes, and the like. In fiat, there is usually no fee projected. The merchant has agreed with the credit card company to pay the fee, but this fee isn't apparent from a customer's point of view. The average customer doesn't know that there is a fee, but there is. And the funny part is that whether you pay with credit card or with cash the price is the same; obviously, it's not in favor of the merchant to have different prices with different payment methods, so it gets more complicated, and cash users pay part of that extra credit company cost too.

[Macadonian]

On the other hand, try to put yourself in the position of someone who installed a wallet, had a backup and now wants to learn how to make transactions. You have to explain to that person what a public address is, what a change address is, what clipboard malware is, what a fee is and how to set it up correctly, what RBF is and how to use it in case the transaction gets stuck... In addition, if the wallet is not localized in a language that the person understands, you only have one more problem on top of everything else.

I think you understand. Bitcoin is alien to every one when they 1st start and because it is difficult and not like a normal bank they could be put off by it and not use Bitcoin. I do not think addresses are a good way of explaining something because when I 1st used Btc I thought it was a location or it was stored somewhere. I have explained it to friends that thought the same and were confused that it is like a bank account number and they understood better. RBF is very hard to understand and I am not sure I understand it all now.

I think there are a lot of complicated things in Bitcoin that are not in normal money systems and it can lead to less adoption because people are scared that it is complex and they have to host their own money and not be protected by a bank. I think if we can make it simpler it would increase adoption and decrease the worries new people have.

[Boilo]

Make it an official currency, so that people will be attracted to it, then it will be easier, I think

[zeuner]

I would actually think that Bitcoin's big advantage when compared to other cryptocurrencies _is_ it's simplicity of design. Most projects that strive to compete merely add a lot of obscurity (e.g. to hide the fact that they removed important components like a working consensus mechanism).

That being said, it might be interesting to research what bells and whistles could be removed from Bitcoin, while still keeping the main mechanism and its potential to layer all the complexity on the top of it.

The only coin focussed on simplicity seems to be Grin [1].

The biggest simplification relative to Bitcoin is the absence of script. Yet nearly all commonly used script functionality is still available through "scriptless scripts".

Interesting concept.

The problem with complexity in the consensus model is that once you have accumulated some, you can never get rid of it, as it will always be needed to verify past history. So a blockchain's complexity can only increase over time. In that sense no blockchain can be made simpler.

I partially agree. You could still deprecate complexity that can be implemented in a separate layer and make it invalid after a certain block depth. Older blocks still need to be verifiable, but the removed complexity will be static at this point, so the logic needed to verify it doesn't need to have a first-class seat in the codebase. Not an incredibly aesthetic approach, but maybe better than having to start a completely new blockchain.

Odds are that something like Ethereum will be so complex in a century that no-one can understand all of it (some would argue that's already the case right now:-).

Yes, although exciting things are being done on Ethereum, the seemingly lacking sense of proportion when it comes to adding complexity is one of the things that makes me sceptical about it. Apart from the decision to remove the consensus algorithm.

That also means that the best way to improve functionality is outside of the consensus model. Lightning is a great example of that.

Exactly. It's a pity that there don't seem to be any legit smart contract platforms layered on the top of Bitcoin.

[o_e_l_e_o]

On the other hand, try to put yourself in the position of someone who installed a wallet, had a backup and now wants to learn how to make transactions. You have to explain to that person what a public address is, what a change address is, what clipboard malware is, what a fee is and how to set it up correctly, what RBF is and how to use it in case the transaction gets stuck...

You don't need to explain most of those things. A person does not need to know what a change address is - a good wallet will take care of this for them. They should have some awareness of the fee, but again, a good wallet will pick an appropriate fee. They definitely don't need to know what RBF is, and many people still don't. Sure, it is good to learn about all these things, but if you are looking to keep things as simple as possible then they are not absolutely necessary in order to make a transaction. Paste in an address, double check it, choose how much you want to send, confirm. That's all that is absolutely necessary in order to make a transaction.

And the funny part is that whether you pay with credit card or with cash the price is the same; obviously, it's not in favor of the merchant to have different prices with different payment methods, so it gets more complicated, and cash users pay part of that extra credit company cost too.

There are a couple of merchants I use who offer a discount of a few percent (the highest goes up to 10%) for paying with bitcoin, presumably exactly because they can avoid the credit card company taking a cut of every transaction.

[Accardo]

On the other hand, try to put yourself in the position of someone who installed a wallet, had a backup and now wants to learn how to make transactions. You have to explain to that person what a public address is, what a change address is, what clipboard malware is, what a fee is and how to set it up correctly, what RBF is and how to use it in case the transaction gets stuck...

You don't need to explain most of those things. A person does not need to know what a change address is - a good wallet will take care of this for them. They should have some awareness of the fee, but again, a good wallet will pick an appropriate fee. They definitely don't need to know what RBF is, and many people still don't. Sure, it is good to learn about all these things, but if you are looking to keep things as simple as possible then they are not absolutely necessary in order to make a transaction. Paste in an address, double check it, choose how much you want to send, confirm. That's all that is absolutely necessary in order to make a transaction.

Explaining those terms to someone close to us is more like a discussion class. They can throw such easy questions often, which can be explained to them without wasting much time or referring them to an article that can distill the term down to their understanding. Even though the person cannot read to understand, carrying out the actions practically in front of them can ease their stress. Unless the person is far away then it may not be necessary, just follow the normal routine as you pointed out. But, if he's a neighbor, family member (old), or flatmate; those we have daily facial interaction with, explaining those terms is indeed simple and necessary.

[Lucius]

~snip~
RBF is very hard to understand and I am not sure I understand it all now.

It's not nearly as complicated as you might think, because it's just that there is an option to increase (bump) the fee for your transaction in case you set too low a fee and the transaction got stuck because the mempool found itself under a much higher load than it was that was the case when you sent the transaction. In that case, you will simply select RBF (replace by fee), enter a new fee and broadcast your transaction - and the miners will confirm the new transaction before the old one, which becomes worthless.

You don't need to explain most of those things.
~snip~

I am more in favor of the approach that if you want to do something, do it the right way, because you will save yourself a lot of time later. Many times using Electrum, I experienced that the wallet itself offers a fee that is not quite in line with what mempool shows, and I think there was also a discussion on that topic in the Electrum board. That's where you're in trouble, because if you made a transaction with a low fee and you don't know about RBF, you'll think that Bitcoin is slow or you'll panic and come to the forum to ask why the transaction got stuck.

I may have an approach that is not the simplest, but some people later thanked me because they understood much better how Bitcoin works and of course they pass that knowledge on to others.