Topic: Bitcoin's biggest problem is the language we use to describe it - page 2. (Read 1386 times)

I just watched a video of Brett Scott, in which he says "people tend to make technological solutions to social problems, whereas I tend to go the other way around, starting with gaining understanding the social problem before trying to design a technological solution" (that's not verbatim, but close to what he said).  I guess that kind of shows where we need to be focussed to get adoption.

I don't think language matters that much, and once it is out there it becomes hard to change.

Bitcoin's biggest problem is wallet security. As has been pointed out elsewhere, if experts like Bitstamp can't secure their hot wallet then what hope is there for the ordinary man in the street?

Currently, I am reading this paper which is a step in the right direction to solve Bitcoin's biggest problem:

"Securing Bitcoin wallets via threshold signatures"
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~stevenag/bitcoin_threshold_signatures.pdf

This goes into the wrong direction by creating a narrow and controverse association.

I am looking for the correct and positive terms of the technology.

Mining is an example for an other narrow and misleading term as the Bitcoin created is the reward and not the technical purpose of the machines.
The technical purpose is to validate and order transactions. Therefore calling those machines e.g. stamper would be more appropriate.

Yeah, that is something I also always struggle about.
My gf knows, that I am really interested in Bitcoin. She is a complete technical noob, but still often asks about technical thinks.
Being a programmer, I don't think my explanations are really understandable for here. I see that, especially when she asks certain thinks again, I already explained several times over the past years(which sometimes really annoys me).

I think another problem about Bitcoin is, that it is quite complex to understand why it is better than fiat. It is easy understandable, that an E-Mail is better than a letter you send via a your post office. Since it is instant and you can just read it from everywhere with a lot of devices.
What makes Bitcoin better than fiat?
You can't just explain it in a few sentences. If you just say, it is faster than fiat and has less fees, people might tell you, they are ok with the speed and fees of fiat, since the can instantly pay with their credit card and mostly don't see the fees involved directly.
If you want to describe, that it is better since it is not controlled by banks or the government, you have to go into detail, why it is bad, that fiat is controlled by banks and the government. That is not something most people agree on in the first place and might also not agree after an explanation.

Money made by people, not by banks.

It appears to me that the language we use determines and limits the adoption of the block chain technology.

We often use words like: mining, payment, de-centralisation, trustless operation that lead to the perception we talk about some obscure virtual currency for speculation and a tool for illicit activity.

We know that there is more to it, but our communication is as if we were trying to explain the Internet is by elaborating on what http:// stands for (Hyper Text Transport Protocol). Explaining Hyper Text is as useless for the purpose of teaching Internet, as e.g. explaining digital signatures for block chain technology. Those technological marvels help us to get it, but they are not on the path of understanding for most others.

Nick Szabo made a remarkable progress by coining the term Trustworthy Computing in http://unenumerated.blogspot.hu/2014/12/the-dawn-of-trustworthy-computing.html

We need more of these words and terms, that trigger the right intuition without a recourse to technical details.

Please point me to similar if you came accross.