Topic: [POLL] Should we recommend that noobs use an alternative client? (Read 4638 times)

This is my last post in this thread cause it is just going in circles and I hate re-explaining my views...


Have you ever tried to wire money it takes 3-4 business days, if the core values of bitcoins are not worth 24hours or even amazingly 3 hours then you shouldn't be using bitcoins and maybe not push them away which I never said, I said them to come back in 1-2 years when it is better.


As I said those are suppose to be use in "complementary" to QT, and they do hurt the network's health but no one cares about the network. There are situations those clients are acceptable but for use everyday is unacceptable.


Well think about it like this, I never had to use a deposit box, doesn't mean I don't know the situations I would use it for or how to get one from the bank. Or people go a lifetime without wiring money they still know how to do it. Those two things are important aspects and both help in security and useful for situations, that lets face it some newbies may need but aren't that skilled to learn. Basically your saying no one needs to know anything behind how bitcoin works just start using it. I think we are a ways away from that type of user case.


People like you make the newbies nervous by saying that, and it isn't true. QT isn't that difficult to use to be honest, but no patiences and people hate that.


FIRST OFF, I think if your offering a service or goods in bitcoins you should understand bitcoin and the network. If not then they shouldn't be using bitcoins. I never said push them away, I said ask them to wait until it is better for people in that situation, but if they are looking to sell stuff or help expand bitcoin then more likely they will learn the bitcoind to make it more automatic.

Now we are talking in circles. Bitcoins in general are not for newbies. AT THIS POINT IN TIME. Also keeping people who are not 100% dedicated to learning about bitcoins and to use advance features of bitcoin clients. At some point they all need to know how to sign a message, or create a rawtx it is just things that are normal for you and me, your just delaying their learning of important things. Bitcoins is still very much experimental thing in the sense that it is quiet stable as an economy yet the software that is given to us as you said is "geeky friendly" which I also disagree cause QT is very powerful, and if you read and take time to LEARN about bitcoins you can see why. I always point newbies to the QT client I think if they are serious they can learn about it. Out of 10 newbies in my personal life who have not wide range of computer skills they all were able to teach them selfs about bitcoins and how to use QT. The problem is more of patiences than "geeky-friendly". Also I think most newbies are whiny cause how many times have we seen "how do I speed up syncing", "why does syncing take so long" those people shouldn't be using bitcoin right now. In the future who knows, remember QT is still in beta, and I think so many people don't realize it or even consider it beta, cause we put so much trust into it.


Obviously it isn't that big of a deal, it has already been fix try 0.8.0.

Ok, a few counterpoints:

1)  Newbies are going to try using Bitcoin regardless of whether you think they should or should not be using it right now.  If they download QT, they will have a bad experience, they rag on Bitcoin every chance they get, and we lose potential adoption.  If they use blockchain.info, they like it, they start using it more, they send praises about it to their friends, and we gain adoption.  Now how can you possibly say that case #1 is better?

We aren't delaying those users from trying out Bitcoin - they are trying it out whether we like it or not.  We are permanently pushing those people away from Bitcoin by offering them a client not made for people new to Bitcoin.  Your proposal to ask them to wait is preposterous and unachievable.  People are going to try Bitcoin if they want to try it, and nothing you or I can do will stop it.  We may as well show them the best we have to offer instead of giving them a piece of software that is confusing and takes several hours before it is ready to use.

2)  People are used to software that is ready to use as soon as it is installed.  People are also used to wire transfers taking 3-4 days.  People are NOT used to software taking 3-4 days, and that's the whole issue.  You can't expect people to understand why it takes so long to sync to the network when they've never experienced anything like this before.  Why do you think threads titled something along the lines of "why is this taking so long to sync" appear almost daily on reddit?

3)  The network is perfectly fine with the number of full nodes we have running.  There is no legitimate reason to require people new to Bitcoin to run full nodes.

4)  I've never used a deposit box either.  I know it exists now, but I didn't know they existed before I started using a bank account.  Again, requiring people to know all facets of a particular technology before they start using any of it is silly.  It's like teaching a full course of algebra before allowing the students to do any problems on paper.  Why do that?  Instead, teach them a little bit at a time, let them use it, and then teach them more.  We shouldn't require that users know all of it before using any of it.  That's just silly.

5)  QT is more difficult to use than blockchain.info, especially if you don't know what the terminology means.  Blockchain.info explains in very clear terms what everything means - at least, much more clearly than QT does.  On the wallet homepage, for instance, it says in big bold lettering, "This is your Bitcoin address: 1blahblahblah." And yes, most people don't have much patience, so we give them the app that doesn't require patience, not the app that does.  You believing people should have more patience doesn't give it to them.

6)  Why does anyone need to understand more than the send and receive function of Bitcoin to use it?  Back to the math example, that's like saying you shouldn't use addition unless you also know algebra.  Why?  People should use it at the level they are comfortable with, and sometimes, that might only include the basic send and receive functionality.  Also, we all have to start somewhere - you can't instantly know everything about Bitcoin or anything else.  To learn algebra, you must first learn addition.  To learn about the blockchain, you must first understand sending and receiving, and often, that understanding only comes when you actually use the Bitcoin software.  So let them use addition first, and if they want to learn algebra on top of it, they can do so.


When I first started using Bitcoin, I knew very little about it.  I was skeptical, suspicious, and all I wanted to do was mine some Bitcoin and cash them out for USD as quickly as possible before I was stuck holding the bag in a scam ponzi system.  So, all I needed to know how to do was receive Bitcoins, then send them out again.  Once I got used to using Bitcoin by cashing out my coins a few times, I realized that it wasn't a scam, there was no central entity in control of things, and I became genuinely interested in the technology.  I learned more about the blockchain, the various features available to me, etc.  But I still don't know everything the client can do, nor do I believe I need to know everything it can do.  I don't understand the maths behind most of it, and I don't fully understand everything about the network or the blockchain.  Certainly, when I first started using Bitcoin, I knew nothing about any of that.

If you're saying that a person needs to understand Bitcoin and the Bitcoin network before they start using Bitcoin, then 99% of the people here (myself included) shouldn't be here, because the vast majority of us started trying out Bitcoin without having a complete understanding of "Bitcoin and the Bitcoin network."

TL:DR; Everyone has to start somewhere.  You're proposing a finish without a start.

Cutting 24 hours down to 3 still isn't acceptable, and will still push people away.  There are other issues as well - some of the other clients are easier to use, more intuitive, and more explanatory.  That's why newbies should be pointed to them.

I completely disagree with you that Bitcoins are not for newbies at this time.  We have newbie-friendly software - we should point newbies to it.  QT is not ready for newbies - I agree with you on that.  But other Bitcoin clients ARE ready for newbies.  So why do we not point newbies to the clients that are ready for newbies?

Newbies don't need to learn how to sign a message (I've never used that feature myself) or create a rawtx (again, never done it).  You can use bitcoin for a lifetime and never "need" to do either of those things.  If people want to take the time to learn more about the advanced features and use the QT client, then more power to them, but no one NEEDS to learn it, not everyone WANTS to learn it, and not everyone even has the capabilities to learn it.  You shouldn't force people to learn the most advanced version of a software before learning any of it.  Kids don't learn calculus before learning algebra.  People should be introduced to a version of Bitcoin that is extremely easy to use and intuitive, and those that want to learn more can learn more from there.

QT pushing people into the deep end of the pool before they ever learn how to swim.  No wonder they immediately get out and never want to give it another shot.

The issue is that people who could learn how to use Bitcoin TODAY are being pushed away for no good reason at all.  Not only do they miss out on the benefit of using Bitcoin, but we miss out on the potential that they offer more goods and services to purchase with Bitcoin, or that they offer more Bitcoins with which to buy the goods and services we are offering.  The more people who use Bitcoin, the better off everyone involved in Bitcoin will be.  Therefore, it is senseless to push people away from Bitcoin.  There is no reason that newbies should stay away from Bitcoin.

You took that way out of context, is so bad that newbies should stay away from bitcoins for another year or two? I don't see the issue, yet he doesn't explain his side.

I don't disagree, making sure that new users have a diverse selection of well maintained and user friendly clients to choose from is definitely important.  Arguing with gweedo, who believes that "Right now noobies that aren't serious or fully invested into learning and studying bitcoin shouldn't be using it" however, is a waste of time.

The conversation about how to educate new users, and which clients they should consider, can exist without constantly having to tell gweedo that "Bitcoin is for anyone who wants to use it".

Bitcoin is for anyone who wants to use it. And yes, those other options are complimentary to QT, in that they cater to newbies.  Thus, we should be pointing newbies to them, not QT.  Seems pretty straightforward, right?  Point newbies to the newbie-friendly software instead of the geek-friendly software?

Normally, I'd give up as well, but I believe this is the most important issue facing Bitcoin today.  It needs to be fixed, badly.

You obviously didn't read my statement. Bitcoins isn't for newbies, I don't know if you knew. You do also know that those other options are suppose to be "complimentary" to QT. If you took the time to read things.


This saddens me cause we are debating like we should be on this forum. Yet this bitcoin elitist obviously thinks it is a debate not to have or argument cause my opinion is different. You troll you get ignored, your opinion is different you get ignore also, very sad. This is also a big issue people not facing facts and learning from history.

Are you still arguing with him over his opinion that bitcoin should only be used by those who have a deep understanding of the inner workings and a true dedication to bitcoin?  I clicked ingore and stopped wasting my time on that argument.

But we HAVE point and click options right now.  QT ISN'T for newbies.  We have OTHER options that ARE for newbies.  Why do you insist upon bringing QT to the newbie-friendly level when even Gavin has stated that that is not its purpose?

I agree wholeheartedly.

I strongly recommend that new users DO NOT use the satoshi client. I typically recommend Paytunia if they are super noob, or blockchain.info if they're ready for a bit more advanced functionality.

I follow the twitter feed for keyword "Bitcoin" and it's amazing how frequently some new person says something like, "wow just downloaded bitcoin and it takes forever! this is ridiculous!" And for everyone who bothers to tweet about it, a hundred more just got turned off.

The satoshi client is important for a number of reasons, but noobs should not be directed to it, ever. It shouldn't even be mentioned to them.

Well then I guess Bitcoin will never be main stream.

The QT client is extremely not noobie friendly. Im surprised people even use it.

Voted yes and suggested MultiBit.

But any lightweight client is fine.

The qt client is not user-friendly, it force you to download the whole blockchain wich takes like a day, it automatically creates a wallet without even telling you where it is etc etc... It would not take a lot to improve the usability and interface, just  copy-pasting the ideas of multibit would be awesome, but the developers prefer to focus on the core features (and they are right), so suggesting it to new people isn't a good idea.
Yes, once you know how bitcoin works and you learn about wallets and blockchain you probably will want to use it, but until you learn these things, something like MultiBit wich instantly works is much better.

Things like blockchain.info are fine too but i prefer a client over a web based thing.

I was engaging in a bit of hyperbole (aka, trolling mildly) in my OP on this subject.  Your adjustment captures my true feeling better.

In actual fact, I have described the system to certain of my highly technically inclined friends and suggested that a modest (pocket change) speculative move into it has some logic.  For people I truly care about (i.e., family) I have suggested they NOT play with it, but some of the BTC I hold is earmarked for them in the event that it continues it's trajectory which over the last year I view as reasonably healthy.

To my surprise, nobody I know personally has been fascination by Bitcoin from a philosophical level.  I'm surprised mostly because I have friends from all over the spectrum in terms of their interests, abilities, etc.  Most people do seem to have a sub-conscious trust in our state sanctioned monetary regimes.  I'm pretty sure that at some point this trust will prove to have been mis-placed.

Just in case anybody is interested to continue this:  write me a pm. Domain + project is for sale for almost nothing..

+100000

signed

We should recommend noobs to stay away from computers completely!

As much of a turnoff as a lengthy download may be, losing all your BTC to some web-based scam would be an even bigger turnoff. 

That Bitcoin-QT has its inconveniences should be explained, but that the more convenient online wallets carry serious risks of loss that a noob is unlikely to be able to evaluate in an informed fashion.

Then people can decide on their own.  If someone just wants to play around with 1 BTC or so, they can probably take the risk of an online wallet, but if they want to put substantial money in play, they're probably best using an offline wallet and taking other security measures.  Offline storage, with backup, is still the best way to go for real security.

I'd personally recommend Coinbase of the online wallets, but a noob reading a bunch of recommendations and personal preferences from random people isn't going to be able to evaluate my opinion, decide if I'm on crack, and for that matter, even I am unaware of how Coinbase's track record will look in a year or two.  For that matter, they could be lying about every security precaution they supposedly take, and just be another Ponzi (although enough is known about the principals it seems unlikely).

In short, I don't think "we," whoever "we" are, can just recommend some alternative to a "real" Bitcoin client without noting that there are serious caveats and flaws to such alternatives that may very well outweigh their increased convenience.

Everyone really has to decide their own risk tolerance.