News flash: Most people don’t want the responsibility of holding their own keys. If you don’t solve for that, any proposed upgrades to Bitcoin Core to encourage self-sovereignty won’t make a difference.
Login to reply
Replies (11)
Have this conversation all the time. People can barely manage bank accounts.
Timed transactions which we need for inheritance would also maybe help make this less daunting for people. Could make it so if you lose your keys, your money gets sent to a trusted exchange or bank you use
"Custodians are a feature not a bug" thinking will result in regulatory capture of the network.
People have to man up and learn to manage their own private keys.
If not to manage their own money,
To prove their own identity on an online world
Most people don't want to be responsible, period. I don't think there's much of a solution for that.
And that's what created the fiat system in a nutshell. Mommy mommy I don't wanna do it, I'm tired, do it for me mommy.
Adults need to take responsibility over their own lives, giving their money and their other keys to third parties is irresponsible, simple as that
Most people don't want the inconvenience or friction.
The UX for holding keys has improved drastically over time. Same with email and WiFi.
Strawman argument. This is like saying no one will use the internet because dial up sucked. The UTXO limitation is technical, what you describe is social.
don't conflate the argument of 'will they' with 'can they'. Two separate issues.
Being technically able to is a different concern from willingness.
News flash: Most people don’t want the responsibility of holding their own keys. If you don’t solve for that, any proposed upgrades to Bitcoin Core to encourage self-sovereignty won’t make a difference.
View quoted note →
Do people have an alternative to banks? Is it technically possible?
Go read first paragraph of the whitepaper.
Also, you can already do inheritance with script. Time decaying multi-sig exists today.
It's only getting easier.