andreas has simplified it a little, but thats the general jist of it. id say its a fair, open explanation in plain english for the basics without the waffle.

TL:drb;(too long didnt read below
he could have mentioned the diversity of nodes is beneficial to ensure the best chances of good valid transaction confirmation without bias. and how a network without diversity would cause more issues for the lifecycle of a transaction

---

a more detailed explanation would be where some 'wallets' make a transaction but are not fullnodes and not part of the main relay network themselves, and so hand it to a full node(hand it up the network to the relay network)

he mentions that nodes are 99% similar with the transactions in their mempools. but this number is a little lower. some nodes reject transactions based on things like:
which peer sent it
format of the transaction
minimum fee the transaction includes
maximum bytes of tx
maximal signature operations
plus other variables

this is why they say nodes should have ~8 peers to have some diversity and increase the chance of having their transaction forwarded even with some biased nodes on the network that have set the acceptable tx variables too high/low

once the transaction gets relayd(forwarded) around the network, it hopefully reaches a mining pool. this pool is a special node that collates the transactions into blocks. andreas did say the mining pool collates transactions based on biggest fee first. however some pools also reject(not collate) transactions based on things like
which peer sent it
format of the transaction
minimum fee the transaction includes
maximum fee
signature operations
maximum bytes
plus other variables

yes some pools actually dont include transactions with too high a fee as they think the transactor made a error creating the TX and also by having too many high fee tx's in a block it raises the average tx fee up, causing social dispute and less people wanting to use bitcoin.

yes some pools actually dont include transactions that are segwit because of many social/moral/bias reasons.
yes some pools actually dont include transactions that are legacy to try to make it appear that segwit utility is higher

this is why they say the network should have more than a couple mining pools to have some diversity and increase the chance of people having their transaction included in a block at some point

what comes next was simplifed down. but once the mining pools sent the header to the asic miners to get the blockhash to solidify/secure the collated block of transactions into a fixed confirmed list. this is then sent out, not to all nodes at once. but to a certain group of nodes. mainly a group known as fibre. which validate the block and then relay it out more onmass than a mining pool is capable of alone

not all blocks get relayed if a block does not fit the rules or has an error, the block is rejected and so not all nodes see all possible blocks. this can be abused by some if say fibre nodes were set to ignore blocks created with a certain version number. even if the data and format was valid. by rejecting a block based on a biased version. the main relay network would not get these versions and so they would remain waiting for a block that does pass certain tests.

this is why some pools ensure they are not just connected to the fibre relay group, but also random nodes to work around the risk of say the fibre network controlling things

some say that allowing known rejectable blocks to still get relayed is a waste of bandwidth, but people who only get a limited controlled supply of data rather than the full range are not independent and thus it negates the point of independent testing. so its still better to be handed a rejectable block so that when you get it you can choose if its rejectable for a valid reason rather than say fibres biased reason to not relay certain versions.

also some nodes only request blockheaders (block identifier and transaction id list(not full transaction)
also some nodes only request stripped blocks (block identifier, transactions but not the signatures of certain tx(segwit)

thus not all nodes get the exact same data

but with enough diversity and enough unbiased set nodes in the network the network as a whole should settle on an agreed chain of blocks and with each new layer, making the previous even more acceptable to the network as a whole as it shows there is no mass network disagreement amongst the blocks.

Same here. Observed that the video op linked was from one of the sessions of MOOC 11 which is a seriously helpful source of material for newbies to understand the basics of blockchain, crypto etc.

My respect for this man keeps growing with time.

I watch the video, and I think that is the simple process of a transaction which he can describe to people who watch his video.
In his channel, we can see that he is showing to us about so many questions around us with a simple explanation and I think beginners can understand what he's saying.
Although I don't know much about him but watching his video can add some information for myself, and I can learn something from him.
Thank you.

We need more people like Andreas in this community, it helps people to understand bitcoin related things. We also can help to share the video in our social media or share it on bitcoin related groups/community. Probably we can edit the video (with permission of course) to add translation based on our local language so it will become easier to understand what is being shared on the video.

I haven't been following Andreas too closely lately, but from what I have seen so far, he seems rather realistic and self aware enough to understand that Bitcoin isn't something that will replace banks and fiat.

There is a difference between people wanting Bitcoin to replace banks and fiat, and the probability of it to actually happen. I prefer Bitcoin to function as digital Gold, because you simply aren't messing with government currencies. The very fact that we have had an easy ride throughout the first decade is because Bitcoin has never formed even a remote threat to fiat, and I prefer to keep it like that.

I also started my learning by reading his book mastering bitcoin.
https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook

This book is also a good starting point for a newbie.

Yup, the man is a fucking legend, one of the most respected person in the crypto sphere. His explanation should be an eye opener for every newbie in the crypto sphere. Yes, it's good to ask questions around if you are a newbie, but if you are going to follow Andreas youtube channel, then all your qualms or doubts will be answered for sure.

So just a tip for newbie, follow the man and his youtube channel, and read his books. Because the Andreas knows his stuff by heart.

Why wont Bitcoin replace banks and fiat?

I thought that was the whole point...

2009 BTC invented>banks laugh>2030 BTC $1,000,000>banks lose

Would be great if we have more like Andreas A. in some countries were cryptocurrency awareness is yet to bloom. I find cryptocurrency complicated since I am not really a techy guy, but somehow I was able to grasp ideas about it by watching videos created by him.

Worth watching especially for those who are aspiring to learn about cryptocurrency.