How can we make Bitcoin simpler?

[o_e_l_e_o]

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.

I agree with you, but most people don't. Most people have no interest in understanding that fiat banking is a giant scam - all they want is to type in their PIN and make the transaction. Most people have no interest in understanding the basics about car maintenance - they are quite happy to fork out a hundred bucks for a simple issue they could fix themselves at home in 15 minutes. Most people have no interest in understanding how to read the mempool or how to use RBF - they just want to make their transaction and be done with it.

I do of course think it is worthwhile learning about change addresses, RBF, proper wallet management, proper fee selection, and so on. But that is not the discussion at hand. The discussion at hand is how to make bitcoin as simple as possible. And just as I can use a credit card without understanding the fees involved, the clearing process, the settlement process, and so on, someone can make a bitcoin transaction without understanding the fees involved, RBF, change addresses, and so on.

It's not the best method by any means, but it is certainly as simple as it can get. Paste an address, type in an amount, pay.

[1714763754]

1714763754

[1714763754]

1714763754

[1714763754]

1714763754

[1714763754]

1714763754

[1714763754]

1714763754

[Macadonian]

It definitely will get more complex. There are few things which will happen such as quantum-resistant cryptography, bigger block size (despite LN and sidechain existence) or 8-byte timestamp (to solve year 2106 problem). At very least, it'll make maintaining full node software and wallet become more difficult.

This is a problem though right? The more complex we make Bitcoin the less people who will adopt it. I do not want to see Bitcoin become a currency only used by computer programmers or people with degrees I want it to be inclusive but most people are not willing to research new technology and prefer to be spoon fed and we might need to be prepared to spoon feed them if we want more adoption.

[Macadonian]

Yes, although it's common problem for any protocol and software which has been around for long time. However i'd argue it won't hurt Bitcoin adaption too much since average user don't really need to learn about old thing (e.g. P2PK address) and just need to know the basic in order to use Bitcoin

I agree that new users will not need to know the history of btc or what scripts were used in the past but do you think the software for Bitcoin will get more complex or user friendly? We should be aiming to make it as user friendly as possible.

[cafter]

here a idea in my head, maybe it is also available or it may not possible ,
idea :
anyone can build a software which will check they address by searching somewhere if it address exit or not,

2. cross checking will help lot of times, in my case copy pasting works better and i transacted many many times but not faced issue , i cross check 2 to 3 times ,
and double check first 3 and last 3 letter of address,

3. sending by scanning qr code is very easy and beginner friendly it never make mistakes ,

[Macadonian]

I hope that Core continues to make it more simple for users because I am concerned. Hardware wallets now are trying to accept as many shit coins as possible and it complicates the process of storing Bitcoin and a lot of hardware wallets have a exchange built in and I do not like that. I just want a hardware wallet that stores my Bitcoin without being advertised their exchange service.

[o_e_l_e_o]

anyone can build a software which will check they address by searching somewhere if it address exit or not

This won't achieve anything. If you try to send to an invalid address, the network will already reject your transaction. And if you are sending to a valid but malicious address, then simply checking the address exists won't save you.

and double check first 3 and last 3 letter of address

Vanity generators can brute force 6 characters very easily. You should double check the entire address.

sending by scanning qr code is very easy and beginner friendly it never make mistakes

There exists malware which can alter the contents of a QR code. You should still double check everything manually.

I just want a hardware wallet that stores my Bitcoin without being advertised their exchange service.

Then either use your hardware wallet with Electrum and not with their native software, or buy a bitcoin only hardware wallet.

[PrivacyG]

Thought this was an issue too.  But realistically you only need around a day or two of research and you get the basics plus a few extras very well.  Bitcoin is not that hard to understand.  If anything, it is harder maybe to learn maths or a hobby than to learn basic functions of Bitcoin.

I think it is about interest.  People do not care and are not interested.  Who ever is interested learns quickly.  More over.  The more years pass, the more familiar people will be with Bitcoin so the easier it gets to learn about it.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[Macadonian]

Thought this was an issue too.  But realistically you only need around a day or two of research and you get the basics plus a few extras very well.  Bitcoin is not that hard to understand.  If anything, it is harder maybe to learn maths or a hobby than to learn basic functions of Bitcoin.

I think it is about interest.  People do not care and are not interested.  Who ever is interested learns quickly.  More over.  The more years pass, the more familiar people will be with Bitcoin so the easier it gets to learn about it.

Interest is a motivation to learn but if Bitcoin becomes the main currency then people will not be interested they will just need to use it. I think you can learn the basics in a day or 2 but you cannot learn security in that time and I think a lot of people will lose their Bitcoin because they are their own bank but do not know how to secure it.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I think it is about interest.

Well said.

It's about interest, and I'm afraid that we hesitate to admit it; the title of this topic proves it. OP wants Bitcoin to become simpler so fiat users can adapt. But fiat users don't have the slightest interest in using Bitcoin as means of payment. My experience with real-world conversations about this has convinced me. I'd argue that the Gresham's law applies as well, among with this lack of interest.

[Accardo]

I think it is about interest.

Well said.

It's about interest, and I'm afraid that we hesitate to admit it; the title of this topic proves it. OP wants Bitcoin to become simpler so fiat users can adapt. But fiat users don't have the slightest interest in using Bitcoin as means of payment. My experience with real-world conversations about this has convinced me. I'd argue that the Gresham's law applies as well, among with this lack of interest.

Sending Bitcoin and sending money using a bank's ATM which is simpler? Bitcoin is, and requires no prior knowledge to send or receive money, the wallets UI are user friendly such that anybody can send Bitcoin swiftly. The Bitcoin usage is not a reason why it's not been adopted. Fiat users prefer to have same balance in their account over fluctuations. Even the elderly people can operate an ATM so Bitcoin wouldn't be that difficult to them, reducing Bitcoin transaction process to anything other than what it's now I don't know if they'll be need for that.

[thecodebear]

I think it is about interest.

Well said.

It's about interest, and I'm afraid that we hesitate to admit it; the title of this topic proves it. OP wants Bitcoin to become simpler so fiat users can adapt. But fiat users don't have the slightest interest in using Bitcoin as means of payment. My experience with real-world conversations about this has convinced me. I'd argue that the Gresham's law applies as well, among with this lack of interest.

I don't think this is the right way to think. Because EVERYONE is a fiat user. If this is how the world worked then there would be zero bitcoin users. People get into Bitcoin when they learn about its value. To say "fiat users", which is everyone, don't have the slightest interest in Bitcoin is just plain wrong. There's already many millions of fiat users who have gotten into Bitcoin.

To get more people into bitcoin, and specifically bitcoin as a means of payment, we need to spread bitcoin education, stop the vast amount of misinformation that makes people have a negative view of bitcoin, make bitcoin easier and simply to get into and use, which also of course includes making the LN simpler and easier to use because that is where 99.9% of bitcoin payments will be done.

So yes making bitcoin simpler is a big part of getting more people using it. Though the most important part is better bitcoin education.

[Carlton Banks]

I thought hardware wallets are a answer but they require a purchase and a lot of people who are trying Bitcoin will not want to use something that they have to purchase. I think this is a major obstacle for a lot of people buying Bitcoin they buy Bitcoin and they make a mistake and because of how Bitcoin is designed they can not reverse the mistake and lose their coins. I am not suggesting we allow Bitcoin to be reversible but how can we help people avoid losing their money through error?

well, the white paper did describe "a p2p digital cash system"

and cash shares the description of your listed problems:

• initial investment required
• loss is often not recoverable

I've lost cash before. Not much, but it happened.

[AverageGlabella]

Sending Bitcoin and sending money using a bank's ATM which is simpler? Bitcoin is, and requires no prior knowledge to send or receive money, the wallets UI are user friendly such that anybody can send Bitcoin swiftly. The Bitcoin usage is not a reason why it's not been adopted. Fiat users prefer to have same balance in their account over fluctuations. Even the elderly people can operate an ATM so Bitcoin wouldn't be that difficult to them, reducing Bitcoin transaction process to anything other than what it's now I don't know if they'll be need for that.

You should not have a Bitcoin wallet if you do not understand how to use it and it does require learning fees, double spend, confirmations and addresses. It is a lot different banks and to say it is not is not true. A lot of people struggle with ATM like the elderly and even more elderly people do not understand Bitcoin. I am what you an call elderly or getting old and a lot of my friends do not understand Bitcoin and are scared of the digital money era.

[zeuner]

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.

Have you checked RSK/Rootstock?

Will do, thanks.

[Macadonian]

Hardware wallets are becoming more popular and I think development will be prioritized to support hardware wallets instead of software wallets in the future. I think that would be a welcome development with all the people who lose their funds because they do not understand security. I was talking about Bitcoin Core when I made that post and I hope it does not get any more complex because I think people prefer to use Electrum because of its user interface.

[PrivacyG]

Hardware wallets are becoming more popular and I think development will be prioritized to support hardware wallets instead of software wallets in the future. I think that would be a welcome development with all the people who lose their funds because they do not understand security. I was talking about Bitcoin Core when I made that post and I hope it does not get any more complex because I think people prefer to use Electrum because of its user interface.

I think Bitcoin Core was actually meant to be that way.  Complex as in, you have all the functions you need in one software.  There is the possibility to create a double faced Bitcoin Core.  Choose between Simple and Complex UI in the initial setup stage.  But by removing even part of the complexity, you are removing a possibly very useful feature.  How do you define basic or simple UI?  Have only Receive, Send and only use one Address?  That is a Privacy risk and it means removing a LOT of very important information.  If you agree it is important to show information such as Confirmations and Fees.  Then why is it not important to have RBF option.  If RBF is important to have.  Then why remove the Console.  And so on.

Some body who has no idea how Bitcoin works will not understand fees, why their receiving Address changes every time they receive some Bitcoin, what Inputs and Outputs are, what Confirmations are et cetera.  This is why Bitcoin is not for every body.  Unfortunately, this is technology.  Look at computers.  How many people understood how a computer works 20 years ago.  How many people understood how Smartphones work.  Still, even today, a lot of people do not understand how either work.  And this is not bad.  And we do not necessarily have to do something about it.

Here is how I see the situation you are describing.  Technology will progress.  Bitcoin will progress.  People, not always.  And not every single one of them.  Some will accept and adapt, others will stay behind.  We have to accept this and move on.  I do not know if this is fortunate or not but Bitcoin is complex although it is as simple as it can be.  You can not compare a Bank with Bitcoin.  Because Bank workers do a lot of things behind the scenes.  Banks are Centralized.  Remember the saying?  Bitcoin is being your OWN Bank.  You have to check every thing thoroughly.  And, any mistake is a thing you are responsible for.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[oryhp]

You have to define what's simple. Bitcoin is very simple to me.

What tromp probably referred to is the simplicity of the system design. Make sure to check this video [1] if you're interested in the topic.

If you read the content of the linked page, you can see separate functionalities being enumerated like consensus model, emission, blockchain format, sync format, supply audit, PoW Algo etc.
If we define these as vectors and define 0 to be the simplest solution that can theoretically exist then we can, with some bias, assign a value to each dimension.
This means a blockchain can be seen as a point in a multidimensional space where (0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0) is the theoretically simplest possible blockchain to exist.
Of course we don't know what that looks like. But from the systems I've seen, I would agree Grin is by far the closest to that origin point and thus the closest to the theoretical optima of blockchain system simplicity.
That said, Bitcoin is closer to origin point than most of the other chains, but it's quite a bit more complex than the design linked. With regards to making Bitcoin simpler, it can be made simpler to use, but system complexity is unlikely to go away because you'll need to support all the current functionality which includes its expressiveness (scripting).

1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKtk3HCgTa8

[BlackHatCoiner]

People get into Bitcoin when they learn about its value.

People get into Bitcoin either due to its utility as currency, or to have fiat gains. Unfortunately, we can all agree that the latter are overwhelmingly more.

To say "fiat users", which is everyone, don't have the slightest interest in Bitcoin is just plain wrong.

For the sake of simplicity, I meant users who're fine at using fiat as currency. Fiat users who don't care about bitcoin as currency is the overwhelming majority of fiat users.

To get more people into bitcoin, and specifically bitcoin as a means of payment, we need to spread bitcoin education, stop the vast amount of misinformation that makes people have a negative view of bitcoin, make bitcoin easier and simply to get into and use, which also of course includes making the LN simpler and easier to use because that is where 99.9% of bitcoin payments will be done.

No. This is not enough, you're wrong. Education isn't the best, but it isn't what's missing. The real reason we don't have millions of users on board is that people are afraid of responsibility. They are satisfied in the feeling that in the current system, they have a third party to address to (even if they don't get the assistance they want). The extra responsibility bitcoin adds is unfortunately intimidating for the most.

[PrivacyG]

Education isn't the best, but it isn't what's missing. The real reason we don't have millions of users on board is that people are afraid of responsibility.

Also convenience.  They want convenience.  Click a button and voila.  If something goes wrong, responsibility is put on some body else's shoulders.  So what the user is looking for is convenience and transfer of responsibility.

But are these two not also coming from a lack of education?  You can not be afraid if you have knowledge and are educated.  It is usually the unknown giving people so much fear.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[BlackHatCoiner]

Also convenience.  They want convenience.  Click a button and voila.

I quite disagree on the convenience part. As someone belonging to this little group of people who got used to Bitcoin before they even create a bank account, I can assure you that I honestly found it difficult to adapt. Maybe my expectation that the banking sector would be more simple than Bitcoin did hype up the situation, but it wasn't very convenient to me.

Maybe it's just my e-banking app, but I see accounts, credit and debit cards, buttons for "New Payment" and "New Transfer" instead of just "New transaction", money boxes, savings, loans, investments, securities, amounts of money I have not reported to the taxman, then in "Transfers" I get the option to send to my banking account, to someone else's bank account of the same bank, to someone's bank account of another bank within the country's borders, to someone outside my country, or to someone just by giving a phone number (with IRIS). If I don't want to transfer via bank accounts, I need to withdraw some in my debit card, and thing goes on and on. There are statistics, profile stuff, and even an option to merge accounts and debit / credit cards that I don't yet understand what is all about.

And that's before I even mention the bureaucratic nonsense that costed me time when I had to go and get my debit card from the bank, and all these obscurities the banking sector is consisted of, like charging me 2 EUR for moving more than 15 EUR to another bank.

Revolut is much better, but I still don't find it more convenient than, say, Electrum.