Shouldn't the offcial Bitcoin client be advertised as running your own bank?

[interlagos]

This might help alleviate some confusion people are having with blockchain download time.

It's not a small utility program to send and receive bitcoins as many newcomers might think.
It's a full-fledged Bitcoin Bank node with certain requirements for HDD space, processing power and security.

And then if they don't want their own bank they are free to choose lite clients or e-wallets.
What do you think? Having to maintain the blockchain is nothing compared to what's needed to have your own fiat bank, this should buy us some time.

[publio]

Does the bitcoin client accept deposits, and give out loans?

It doesn't seem like a bank.

[DeathAndTaxes]

In the US (and in many other countries) the word "bank" has specific legal meaning.   It would be a good way to attract the wrong kind of attention from regulators.  You are prohibited from even incorporating a company with the word "bank" in the name unless you registered bank due to the potential confusion it would lead to.

Also the client is more like a processing node in VISA network than a bank.  Personally I would love to see the two aspects completely split; the processing node and the wallet/client.  To be a node I don't need a client/wallet and to have a client I don't need a node on the same machine but currently those two independent functions are tightly integrated which is a pain for custom development.

[FreeMoney]

Does the bitcoin client accept deposits, and give out loans?

It doesn't seem like a bank.

It enables you to do those things with funds you provide. Just like a building downtown and 20 employees can accept deposits and give out loans.

I think 'bank' is closer than 'wallet' but still not perfect.

[Topazan]

I've been thinking it's more accurate to describe the whole network as a bank.  You can make deposits by buying bitcoin, and withdrawals by selling bitcoin.  There's a certain amount of interest from deflation, and of course it lets you do something equivalent to checking or wire transfer.

That said, I agree that what we call a 'wallet' is more like a bank account than a physical wallet.

[mccorvic]

No. People do not want to run their own bank. They want banks to be banks.

[Boussac]

This might help alleviate some confusion people are having with blockchain download time.

It's not a small utility program to send and receive bitcoins as many newcomers might think.
It's a full-fledged Bitcoin Bank node with certain requirements for HDD space, processing power and security.

And then if they don't want their own bank they are free to choose lite clients or e-wallets.
What do you think? Having to maintain the blockchain is nothing compared to what's needed to have your own fiat bank, this should buy us some time.

The bitcoin "official" client is software that enables people to manage themselves money deposits and transfers, just faster and cheaper than their bank does.
Loading and maintaining an up-to-date local database of transactions is the only fixed price to pay to the p2p network (aside from the tx fees that are a variable cost).

[interlagos]

In the US (and in many other countries) the word "bank" has specific legal meaning.   It would be a good way to attract the wrong kind of attention from regulators.  You are prohibited from even incorporating a company with the word "bank" in the name unless you registered bank due to the potential confusion it would lead to.

Also the client is more like a processing node in VISA network than a bank.  Personally I would love to see the two aspects completely split; the processing node and the wallet/client.  To be a node I don't need a client/wallet and to have a client I don't need a node on the same machine but currently those two independent functions are tightly integrated which is a pain for custom development.

I didn't know about legal issues it might cause.
The analogy I had in mind was banks communicating with each other via SWIFT network to achieve settlement of balances each bank and account has.
That's exactly what bitcoin nodes do.

[interlagos]

No. People do not want to run their own bank. They want banks to be banks.

It's ok, then we should let them know somehow that by using official client they will be attempting to run the Bitcoin Bank node!
Currently they might think it's something small and simple like maybe a BitTorrent client.
It is not!

[interlagos]

This might help alleviate some confusion people are having with blockchain download time.

It's not a small utility program to send and receive bitcoins as many newcomers might think.
It's a full-fledged Bitcoin Bank node with certain requirements for HDD space, processing power and security.

And then if they don't want their own bank they are free to choose lite clients or e-wallets.
What do you think? Having to maintain the blockchain is nothing compared to what's needed to have your own fiat bank, this should buy us some time.

The bitcoin "official" client is software that enables people to manage themselves money deposits and transfers, just faster and cheaper than their bank does.
Loading and maintaining an up-to-date local database of transactions is the only fixed price to pay to the p2p network (aside from the tx fees that are a variable cost).

Exactly, when people are nagging about blockchain download they should understand that what they are doing is akin running a bank in fiat world and not something like using PayPal.

[Topazan]

I think the important thing is that people should understand lite wallets and e-wallets are available.  Maybe the problem isn't how full wallets are marketed to casual users, but that they're marketed to them at all.

[mccorvic]

No. People do not want to run their own bank. They want banks to be banks.

It's ok, then we should let them know somehow that by using official client they will be attempting to run the Bitcoin Bank node!
Currently they might think it's something small and simple like maybe a BitTorrent client.
It is not!

I still think using the term bank in any form will just confuse people.  Remember, we're talking about people who most likely don't know zilch about economics, banking, or bitcoin.  And they probably won't really care to know (they're busy people).

The term bank makes people think of large, complex, and expensive institutions.  Wallet is something they hold onto that stores their money.  Wallet is very easy to understand and personable.  

[FreeMoney]

No. People do not want to run their own bank. They want banks to be banks.

It's ok, then we should let them know somehow that by using official client they will be attempting to run the Bitcoin Bank node!
Currently they might think it's something small and simple like maybe a BitTorrent client.
It is not!

I still think using the term bank in any form will just confuse people.  Remember, we're talking about people who most likely don't know zilch about economics, banking, or bitcoin.  And they probably won't really care to know (they're busy people).

The term bank makes people think of large, complex, and expensive institutions.  Wallet is something they hold onto that stores their money.  Wallet is very easy to understand and personable.  

Yes, and most people will use a 'wallet' currently known as a light node and stop using 'banks'. It just lets them know they are getting into more than they might want.

[hazek]

Forget the word bank, the official client is a ledger and a wallet.

If they don't want the ledger part, direct them to a wallet only client, if they also want a copy of the ledger, they can download the full thing.

Problem solved. (and I do believe this is a problem since I also feel like too many new potential users get discouraged after they unnecessarily download the official client)

[interlagos]

I just thought that Bitcoin Server Wallet might be a better name for Bitcoin-Qt. But that will only make things easier to understand for people familiar with computers. Then in the description we may compare Bitcoin Server Wallet to a bank in a financial world without formally calling it a bank to avoid legal issues.

Anyways I heard discussions among devs about separating full nodes and SPV nodes sometime in the future. So we will probably make it more clear by then.

[mccorvic]

Forget the word bank, the official client is a ledger and a wallet.

If they don't want the ledger part, direct them to a wallet only client, if they also want a copy of the ledger, they can download the full thing.

Problem solved. (and I do believe this is a problem since I also feel like too many new potential users get discouraged after they unnecessarily download the official client)

I think "ledger" is a better choice of words, fo sho. 

[MaxSan]

Full Bitcoin Ledger & Wallet application.

There. No more bitching

[barbarousrelic]

What is a bank?

A bank is a place that

1)Takes deposits and pays some interest for them.
2)Lends out money and charges more interest than they pay for 1)
3)Acts as a clearing house for transactions.

Bitcoin software only acts as the third of these functions.

[cbeast]

When did banks come to be such all important businesses? What did banks ever do for anyone? Banks don't heal people, they don't invent things, all they do is store money. They don't even loan money, their depositors do that, well theoretically anyway. Look what they did to the world economy. It's time they go into the history books. Be your own bank.

If the Bitcoin client was advertised that way, it wouldn't be making any specific claims. I would call it the Piggy Bank for grown-ups.

[istar]

No, that would simply be wrong, you are far from being a bank just by running the client or using Bitcoins.
To transfer or store value, is not the same thing as being a bank.

To be a bank you must as a business give out loans and take deposits etc.
You must also use fractional reserves, and try to become to big to fail  

There is a bank running by using Bitcoin as currency, The Islamic Bitcoin Bank.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=21732.0