Topic: Reflections from a journalist of a Year of Toying With Bitcoin (Read 310 times)

She had written countless articles in coindesk some are related to altcoins yet her conclusion was its not ready for mainstream.
I can agree though but this technology is only 10 years old, you can't imagine how much it had branched out in terms of innovation particularly to altcoins and some wallets for the convenience. She could just use the electrum wallet and if she wants to get paid then there is QR code available. She doesn't have to experiment with LN.

There is a lot of hype in the space but that is not because of what bitcoin can do today but about what we will be able to do in the future with it, using bitcoin right now is not really practical since there are only a couple of millions of users all around the world and if you live in an area with a low concentration of bitcoin users then there is almost nothing you can do with it, but it does not matter, the technology is still young and will solve many of those issues and when it does we will forget about all the issues we currently have.

Yep, bitcoin did at some point. It may look running smoothly however, there are some conflicts/complexity that needs to be addressed, thus, must be let's say... improve? Besides, isn't it that bitcoin was truly designed for such purpose? And we must at least be satisfied to what it can be offer. Technologies, innovations would end at some point in time. Furthermore, there will be some newly revolutionary innovations to exist.

I read OP's article & got the impression a banker paid her $$ to write anti crypto propaganda. Its paid marketing, like a commercial. There's no real need to implement a lightning node to sell poetry books over the internet. Reliability is a higher priority than transaction speed for that role. Misrepresenting failures of setting up a lightning node, as failures of bitcoin itself, are misleading and dishonest.

Whatever conflicts she experienced backpacking in india due to cashless society being endorsed, coupled with the state's determination to wage a war on cash: can be attributed to a cashless society paradigm.

The author is more intelligent and clever than most. I think her anti crypto bias is apparent however.

In fact, you said everything correctly.  But on the way to such a reality is the most important problem, which is that the popularity of cryptocurrencies is very low today.  At the same time, the poor condition of the cryptocurrency market and the fall in prices in 2018 affected the popularity.  If as many people as possible are interested in cryptocurrencies, then not only bitcoin will be really used in everyday life of a person, but also other cryptocurrencies.

If anyone came up to me and told me they were interested in BTC and the very first thing they were going to do is set up their own lightning node I'd assume they were fucking nuts.

It's not something that's crossed my mind yet and it won't for a long time, if ever. I haven't seen anything yet to convince me. And no one is billing it as anything other than an outlier with a potential future at present.

Using bog standard tools and the most high profile and safe services is no harder than online banking. The security aspect certainly isn't but there's enough dayglo advice about that too.

Not bad. I read the article made by Leigh Cuen and I understand where she is getting it from and why she feels that way. If we are to talk about how people could send money half-way across the world with fewer fees, it's BTC ftw. In the case where it's in real-life situations when you need to use BTC, I understand it.

I like the way she approached the part where it's going to be some issues with regards to personal information risks. It's the connection between the aliases that you have online and the possibility of having it be connected if that's the concern you could have. It would be a problem, and it's still not perfect.

This article helps me realize that there is still room for improvement not just for Bitcoin but how we could use it IRL.

I am not going to disagree that "this technology is not ready for prime time", they might have a share in this fight which is why they dislike the notion that we are fully ready for a crypto world, or maybe they might be fully right that we are ready for it.

However, being ready is not the point, we may wait another 10 years to become ready for a full on crypto life style where you earn/spend bitcoin instead of buy/sell bitcoin, you can get your wages in crypto and spend your crypto wherever you go (or at least most stuff you buy) in 10 years and I will be fine with that, the point is to go into that path. If we can't get better and better with crypto and make it easier to use, whats the point of moving from fiat to crypto? We need to have something better than fiat to be able to say why we use crypto and that only happens with improvements.

I agree, and I've always thought that too. 

Good, honest article IMO.  And not only isn't bitcoin completely friendly to a lot of transactions, it isn't even called for in most financial transactions where fiat works just fine.  I'm not saying it doesn't have good uses or can't be used easily enough, but most people just don't need bitcoin.  At all.  That's also not to say that there never will be a need for it, because you never know.  Right now, though, bitcoin is a solution in search of a problem--a phrase I heard years ago about it that's still true today.

Bitcoin still has great value in the market as shown by its high price, but its utility as a currency?  Meh.  I love bitcoin as an investment more so than as a form of money.

If there is a lot of cheerleading in bitcoin space, then you need to somehow solve the problem. The main thing is that the crypto community accepted this.

To be fair the users are not the ones who will spearhead in the sorting of the issues, that is why on their end they seem to be doing nothing. The biggest part of the population do not know a thing about how the improvements are to be done. They know what is to be improved though. The hands that will actually handle all these improvements belong to a few experts. The cheerleading public are the users. They are the noisy ones of course. But that does not mean that there is no development happening at the back of this public noise.

Even I have never touched Lightning Network, i have ran a full node at most (back when my adsl actually worked). Frankly these subjects are advanced. I expect that "journalist" to at least have an active account here and asking questions. LN is not even in a finalized state...

Saying "no way this technology is ready" what does exactly mean? Bitcoin is ready, LN is not. Setting up your own payment processor, is not a subject most bitcoin users will ever face, some merchants might, and even them can hire people to have it set up for them. Its like saying computer programming is not ready because its hard...

Setting up a BTCpay store is a great project, but its NOT for newbies. But guess what, that is completely unrelated to Bitcoin.

DEX are also complex beasts. Again not for newbies, it is not "basic". I myself have a hard time making bisq run, because of its embedded tor which "should" work in most other countries without censorship. And those exchanges have a very low volume anyway.

Most things this person seem to be focused on, are related to exchanging. If you are a merchant and directly price things in bitcoin and receive BTC directly, you don't even need a payment processor. Maybe some accounting software, and again that's beyond Bitcoin.

Is a hardware wallet hard to use? Guess what, that is also NOT Bitcoin's issue. You do not need one, ever. They are a convenience, but its an OPTIONAL convenience. A paper with 12 written words make the best "unhackable" cold wallet, no gadgets required. The hardware wallet becomes handy if you want to spend small amounts of money and don't want to use your insecure windows or android device. They should not be used for storing large quantities, leave that for the cold piece of paper...

This is no "cheerleading", its facts. Bitcoin is ready to use, LN might not. So? To use bitcoin install a light wallet like Electrum and transfer, done. If you want to receive payments, give them one of your wallet addresses. How is this not ready? Mind you, normal people don't run nodes, in fact most people never will.

Is this an issue with the CASA device? Then point it in the title, don't blame Bitcoin if Casa doesn't do what you expected, direct that to the developers of it. Perhaps this is yet again coindesk just wishing more traffic to their site...

Coindesk published a read worthy article? for a change ...
first of all lightning network =/= bitcoin , she did some toying with the network , but only running a node and moving bitcoin from mobile apps to a hardware wallet  and using a decentralized exchange cannot be counted towards being an expert , although , truth be said , she doesn't position herself as one
struggling with a router , "clicking all the buttons" made me chuckle and that is a person rather advanced in terms of technology and internet
now imagine a 60 year old trying to discover bitcoin from scratch and digging through all the technicalities and installing wallets and all that jazz
or a housewife who just read an article about bitcoin and who is trying to buy some here and now
the main problem why we do not see the triumphant global adoption , IMHO , is that bitcoin remains a rocket science to the majority of general public

Lightning Network is very difficult to establish a node. I want to help with this. It wasn't taken seriously last year, but it's very important for Bitcoin. The electricity cost of Bitcoin has reached very high dimensions.

LN is an opportunity for this market. Atomic Swap is an opportunity for this market. LN is a developing technology. The number of nodes is increasing every day. However, full performance still cannot be achieved. Bitcoin needs to increase transfer costs and speed.

Though Lightning Network looks promising to be honest, but drawbacks are to be expected. It does improve over time, but he might be correct that it's still not ready to scale that much to accomodate being used as a payment medium for all-scale transactions. Still, it doesn't necessarily mean that Bitcoin could not grow. There are still works to be done, and the progress is ongoing. It doesn't stay stagnant as far as I know.

I often read articles by many ignorant journalists and I always cringed after what I read. They are so negative to bitcoin and they do not know what they are saying. It is literally a ignorance because they saying false information and they have wrong knowledge. They keep writing an article even if they do not know fully undeestand the whole cryptocurrency market.

We’re still in the early stages of implementation. There are things to sort out and it will take time. It’s also true that Bitcoin is not completely anonymous.

Altcoins are the research and development area of the market. There is also another situation. Altcoins to one side. Bitcoin itself is in the experimental stage. Everything's like a test board. We're in a market of $ 250 billion. This amount is not very important for world markets. It's been 10 years since the launch of bitcoin. I think Bitcoin did it.

i could have told you that.

we're still in the early adopter stage. this is extremely speculative technology, which is why we early adopters are well positioned to prosper years down the road if/when it catches on.

convenience and UX are big obstacles to mainstream usage and thus network effect. fortunately, the market is already very confident in bitcoin's monetary and network security properties, so speculation alone is a major source of adoption. lots of speculators---those who aren't washed out of the market during bear runs anyway---end up becoming avid everyday users. i'm one example of that. i came for the bubbles but stayed for the technology.

speculator demand provides a lot of base value to the market while the usability and liquidity kinks are ironed out over the course of years. rome wasn't built in a day after all!