I began up Bisq at this time. It had a pop-up (one among numerous through the years…) with elaborate directions on the right way to “improve Tor v2 addresses to v3”. This concerned shutting down Bisq, deleting a dir after which beginning it again up once more.
Positive, for me, it was only a small annoyance, however what might clarify that they’ve the customers do that manually? Why not merely do it robotically in Bisq, with out the person ever having to learn about it? Even having them press a “Sure” field is an excessive amount of IMO, however at the least can be acceptable. Requiring handbook, complicated steps just isn’t.
Even for me, it was work that needed to be executed which I did not need to do. And should not need to. However I feel primarily of all of the people who find themselves not pc freaks and who’re much more prone to cease utilizing one thing than sit and attempt to soar via hoops on a regular basis when there are new issues that break and alter. Bisq, in spite of everything, is essential in its function because the solely non-KYC, decentralized Bitcoin alternate on the planet. (Significantly, it’s the just one. If you do not get that, I haven’t got the time to persuade you in any other case.)
I will not even go into the truth that it’s a must to manually set up every new model as if it have been the preliminary set up of this system, however that is clearly additionally a main concern for the general “expertise” of utilizing Bisq.
It is tough to not get the sensation that that is executed on goal. As if Bitcoiners actually would favor it to not ever go mainstream, however relatively stay this mysterious, esoteric and complicated factor eternally. How else can one interpret issues like this?
Are Bitcoiners against wide-spread adoption on some, presumably unconscious, stage?