Topic: [POLL] Should we recommend that noobs use an alternative client? - page 2. (Read 4638 times)

The point you make about inappropriately co-mingling the technical and social aspects is a good one.  Although there is probably a correlation between technically savvy persons and those who can recognize a social engineering scam, it is small enough such that I should not have done this to the extent that I did.

I think that it has done Bitcoin no small amount of damage to have had to many people who can be suckered into one scam or another, and this has naturally brought the scammers out in force.  Leveraging what slight correlation there might be between technically savvy people and those who have the mental equipment to avoid scams is worth something.

Bitcoin is, I believe, well enough established at this point that it's not going anywhere.  Thus, there should not need to be a strong incentive to 'recruit' and/or 'evangelize' without discrimination.  That is the main point I would like to make, and something I imagine that most of the community will disagree with.

I do applaud the efforts you yourself any anyone else who takes the time help those who are legitimately interested in Bitcoin.  For every technically skilled person who would fall for a scam there is a non-technically skilled person who would not, and a certain number of these will likely have a keen understanding of economics and monetary science (and/or strong feelings about liberty-ish stuff.)  These (rare) people are who I'd like to see diving in to Bitcoin at this juncture and are the one's to focus on helping.

Newbies who don't have the technical skills to understand the reference client (or better yet, plain old bitcoind) and why it acts as it does should not be encouraged to do anything with Bitcoin period.

For a vast majority of people in this world, Bitcoin is not good for them and they are not good for Bitcoin at this time.

Hopefully over time the system will mature and become more solid, and there will be more means by which good/bad actors in the community can be identified.   Then Bitcoin will be more appropriate for more people.

You're probably more technically inclined than my definition of "newbie."

I certainly didn't. I love Armory, but recommending that newbies use it would be rather stupid, so I didn't include it in the poll.

It is inevitable that majority of "users" in future will run some sort of thin client or web client.
If you envision spending on the go, a light/web client is your only choice.

As long as the amounts stored on the web/thin client are small enough to cater for daily transactions,
it is perfectly fine. Im not sure about US, but here in asia most daily transactions for meals, small purchases
are still largely done with cash. I carry about a weeks worth of spending in my wallet as cash.
I top it up from the ATM when its running low.

If i lose my wallet, its bearable.

The people who will HAVE to run the full client are miners and business owners who receive large/numerous
transactions. Which is no big deal for any business(big or small) really.
Ultimately it is the miners who run the network, they decide whether a transaction is valid or is spent.
As long as they run a full node(they have to, to avoid forming invalid blocks) and there are numerous miners around the world,
the network is on sound footing.

I am sorry to have to say that i wouldn't recommend any client, because they are still not ready for the average new user i meet, and the stagnant exchange rates reflect that. Reminds me of the Russian fable about the pike, crawfish and swan, where all are going in different directions trying to accomplish the same thing:




The whole process is still way too much of an uncertain, expensive hassle, despite all the hype and promotion. 

I recommend paper wallets to new users for any B they want to keep long-term. For spending, i recommend they just use the Blockchain online wallet, which they recharge as needed through Localbitcoins or Coinbase, or whatever is in their region of the world.

(We can't afford another Mybitcoin disaster. As far as i am concerned, Tom Williams could be behind any of the current online wallets too, because he got away with the Mybitcoin scam perfectly, and could do it again with minor changes. So could other scammers...)





 

I chose web based clients. I truly think those are the easiest and most simple for newbies. Plus no downloading the chain block which takes WAY to long in my opinion.

With HTML 5 you can absolutely scan QR codes. Any HTML5 enabled phone can take pictures of QR codes using WalletBit Mobile. Opera on Android works the best actually framing your camera on screen.

Maybe we should move our "One Wallet. Every Platform" logo to the front page.

coinapult for new, casual users.  It can be driven from a cellphone, and the users don't have to handle the bitcoins and bitcoin addresses themselves.

Short answer: Yes.

The initial blockchain download is just too long for a person who may only try it once. I personally like Electrum, but I think a lot of people are restricted to iPhones and have to use a web wallet.

You clearly aren't going to see things my way no matter what I say, and I can assure you that I'm not going to see things your way no matter what you say.  No sense in discussing this any further.  Difference is, my way of seeing it reflects the reality of the world.  New users who aren't serious about bitcoin are going to continue to "try it out" regardless of whether you want them to or not.  I'm ok with this reality, you are welcome to keep wishing that they wouldn't if that is what you want to do.

So what if it's a beta?  That means zilch with regards to increasing usability to the average end user.  The average end user can't be expected to download the full blockchain, doesn't need to care about running a full node, and shouldn't have to have patience to use it.  It's like you're looking innovation straight in the eye while it is laying on the ground bleeding to death, then giving a solid right-hander to the jaw-bone.  Why?  Just, why?

I don't understand why you want so few people to use Bitcoin.  Most people around here would really like more people to use it, but you seem insistent upon pushing everyone but the geekiest away.  If your argument is that Bitcoin isn't ready for the masses, my argument is, lets work on making it ready for the masses!  A good first step is not recommending that they spend 3 days syncing up the full blockchain...

I'll post up the error screenshots when I get a chance.  This is the text that confused me:
Completely agree.

From a long time user of the official Bitcoin client, I switched a while ago to blockchain.info's web wallet.

I find it much appealing not having to deal with long blockchain download times and the low entry barrier needed to use Bitcoin.

Then bitcoin.org should be much more straightforward about that before showing ANY download links.  How about a simple choice in BIG typeface on the homepage, such as:

Do you intend to use Bitcoin as a regular user or do you want to run you own node (powerful computer required / setup typically takes 48h+ / NOT recommended for most laptops)?

Regular user: offer links to Electrum, Multibit, and Blockchain.info

Full node user: offer links to Qt / bitcoind  (+ optionally, Armory for extra security and deterministic wallets)

u forgot Armory... sad

Hmmm... must be a while since you last tried it! Currently, there are no pre-requisites for Python runtimes or special command-line stuff - both Windows builds (whether slush's or mine) are 100% self-contained and run out of the box.  Perhaps time to give it another try?

Thank you, yes, this is exactly what I mean.

When I first got into Bitcoin, I wasn't at all serious about it.  I was trying out this new mining thing that had the potential to make me money, and it was intimidating (setting up QT and mining).  I can only imagine what a non-technically minded person might be thinking as they go through the cumbersome process of attempting to run QT, especially now that it takes days instead of hours to download and sync.

@gweedo, 99% of newbies aren't serious about Bitcoin.  Why do you insist that they should be pushed away?

I love the idea of Electrum, but the install process is a pain on Windows.  As far as I can tell, you need the Python package installed, then have to run some command from the command line to start it?  Regardless, I couldn't get past an error about a missing .dll (which it was looking for in the install directory??) when I last tried installing it.  It wasn't fun or easy, especially not for a newbie!  Once you have it to a point where it is a standalone install (doesn't require anything but Windows itself), then I think you'll have made significant progress!

that's the definition of Electrum 

No I think the noobies that have a hard time with waiting, are in denial that they are serious about bitcoin.

I think the reality is that for Bitcoin to take off it has to be something that a user doesn't have to be serious about.  They simply use the tools.  There should not have to be a whole lot of education about the topic.  Early adopters are the ones that are more willing to dig in and figure things out.  That's where we are now.  To move it forward, it should be simple and quick.