Your comments on YouTube and Bitcointalk as sites of education for Bitcoin are largely accurate in this regard, particularly in that you differentiate the hype-oriented content from the more structured, peer-reviewed discussions. YouTube: Broad but Not Trustworthy. are correct to be skeptical of YouTube as a source of education on Bitcoin. YouTube certainly has a large audience and significant crypto content, though much of it is sensationalized. Others go for views and engagement, making videos titled something like “Bitcoin tomorrow $1 million!” or “This altcoin will 100x!!!”, usually with no substance to back their arguments. This is not education, it’s entertainment (and marketing sometimes) .The power & impact of paid sponsorships, affiliate links and other sponsored or paid content is for real. This makes it hard for audiences, especially new audiences, to tell if something is analysis or marketing when content creators are not transparent about these relationships. Take into account that many YouTubers simply aren’t developers or just aren’t that technical, and it makes sense why their explanations are shallow and/or incorrect. But, of course there are some creators that still produce educational and balanced content. They are simply less prevalent, and to find them you generally have to sift through the noise. Bitcointalk: slower, more serious, peer-reviewed. Bitcointalk, as you put it, goes about things in a completely different manner. It is text, not image-based; it is community-moderated, and it is based on collaborative learning. Because other people can edit, critique, or add to posts, the information is reliable over time. The guides on Bitcointalk tend to be long and technical, written by people who do understand the code or have real experience. And because it has less to do with virality and more with actual conversation, it is a better space for serious learners interested in things such as private key management, running nodes, or how the protocol works to learn the nuances.