This isn’t genetics, it’s money. Crypto needs to be simple enough for everyone to understand before it can be adopted by everyone. My kids understand stocks and back transfers, while incredibly smart and savvy people are getting confused about crypto and losing money accidentally (it’s not just this single incident, it’s a common story). This isn’t good, and shouldn’t be dismissed as people having unreasonable expectations.

I agree that cryptocurrency has a ton of UX issues to work out in practice, but you don’t need the level of explanation in the top post in order to use it, so the issues mentioned aren’t relevant in practice, and aren’t a good example of “poor cryptocurrency UX for end users”.

What the redditor did was analogous to ignoring the exposed UI elements on a web page and instead opening up the console and calling the JavaScript functions directly. The average user doesn’t try to do that, and so any such failure is not an issue of the website “needing an advanced understanding”; simply following its UI elements is enough.

So it’s unfair to equate the understanding needed for the top explanation with the understanding needed to use a cryptocurrency app.

That contract could have been designed better.

That user could have used it how other people use it.

There are a lot of things here that have nothing to do with “crypto needs to be simpler” copypasta. This particular thing was not simple and never will be unless everyone stops using it. Focus on that one thing: How to design a better smart contract? How to design a better UI for the end user? Thats a great discussion for a programming forum actually.

> This particular thing was not simple and never will be

The user used a currency-exchanging thing, sent it a currency it shouldn't accept as input, and it swallowed his currency in stead of rejecting it.

What's "not simple and never will be" about that? Seems utterly simple to me: The currency-exchanging thing didn't work as it fucking obviously should. And the cryptards have the unmitigated gall to call this shit "smart"... Sigh. Geroffmylawn.

Treating this transfer of WETH as just 'money' is an overly simplified model that is going to get someone burned in the same way as this reddit user. You are interacting directly with low level APIs that are irreversible while sending a lot of money to them, without knowing what they do. This is NOT good, and believe anyone without thorough understanding of these risks and how ERC APIs work should NOT be doing this.

There is an absolute need for cleaner UX on top of this with assurance/insurance to avoid this scenario (both of which exist and are being improved regularly). In the same way you don't directly interface with SWIFT APIs when doing bank transfers, you should not interface directly with ERC20 approve/transferFrom APIs in Ethereum, unless you really know what you are doing.

Still, it shows that crypto is unlike other asset classes like cash, property, stocks, etc. where an unintended 100% loss on $500k is much harder.

Humans didn't design genetics, it's a chaotic and confusing system that evolved by chance.

If you are seriously comparing your monetary system to something that evolved by chance there is a problem with your monetary system.