Thread

Imagine telling a Bitcoin noob: “Hey, the base idea of Bitcoin is that there will never be more than 21 quadrillion bitcoins.” They’d look at you like—what the hell are you talking about? Now tell them the truth: “There will only ever be 21 million Bitcoin.” That line hits. It lands. It matters. If you don’t understand the difference, then I honestly don’t think you understand Bitcoin, or the memetic power that drives everything we’re building in cyberspace. This push to rebrand sats, flip decimals, and create 21 quadrillion coins is pure madness. It’s detached from reality. It’s a bizarre attempt to reshape something that’s already stood the test of 15 years. Yes, we can improve Bitcoin. Make it more robust, more decentralized, more resistant. But start there. Start by encouraging people to run full nodes. Educate them about consensus—what it is, who holds it, why it matters. Stop wasting energy on campaigns that solve no real problem and only risk breaking the culture that got us here. This isn’t progress. It’s vandalism. And it blows my mind.

I think that people who have barely heard of bitcoin know that there will only be (approximately) 21 million or at least that its supply has strict rules that do not allow absurd jumps and is decreasing. So, going from 21 million to 21 quadrillion, overnight, especially in a currency that is known for not being able to be created out of thin air, even if it is a mere nomenclature, seems to me to be a greater detriment to adoption than making people understand that 1 BTC = 100 million sats.

If somebody do not understand it, better for them not to touch Bitcoin

Sats don't stop people from using #Bitcoin anymore than cents stop people from using the dollar. Understanding #Bitcoin's utility as money and a savings vehicle vs inflatable currency is the only barrier. View quoted note →

Cap gains taxes are stopping that. sats is the term that emerged. Trying to change it now from the top down will fail and lead to even more confusion.

Everyone should use "bitcoin sats" as the standard. After everyone is accustomed to the new unit of measure (many years) they will naturally want to shorten it and just drop the sats.

S@z/*****

cents is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending dollars.

Agree. It's confusing. I like bits.

I listenes to too many ad reads from @Marty Bent saying that @npub1cash...dg5l was making sats the standard to accept this statement from you

Nope

cents is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending dollars.

You don’t need a BIP

Sats seems fine to me. People understand the relation to a bit. It’s similar to dollars and cents.

Why is the use of Sats as a term stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin?

I concur & have no objections to immediate implementation of BIP 21Q ( 📃.md )

Bitcoin Magazine

It’s Time To Admit It – There Are Only 2.1 Quadrillion Bitcoins

I'm in favor of BIP 21Q – it's a clever way to resolve known problems with Bitcoin denominations.

Yeah, let's focus on serious issues such as this

Jack being subversive again. People on Nostr have collectively sent hundreds of millions of sats through thousands of transactions. They’re sats.

They aren't everyday people if they hold sats.

Why are listening to shitcoiners? There is no "crypto ecosystem" and nobody is afraid of thinking in sats. The problem is volatility, and it's not a problem it's evidence of growth and success. Nobody is going to jump to bitcoin as a unit of account until the volatility decreases and that is not until at least the 6th epoch. Stop trying to turn the knobs in hope of finding more signal. You do not change bitcoin, bitcoin changes you.

Good luck with that take.

Idk how retarded people are these days, but when I learned people use btc to trade on the internet (silkroad at that time), it was clear that you just can have any denomination. Otherwise you couldn't make trades. The number bias is a problem solely constructed by investor mindset (stocks), not a problem of the regular user (money). Let stupid investors starve bc of number bias and just keep promoting btc as a daily driver money like you @npub1sg6p...f63m are already doing.

I would say merchant adoption and capital gains on Bitcoin transactions are larger friction points

Never gonna happen. View quoted note →

I always use Sats a s the unit. Bitcoin is the name of the network. But yes i wouldnt change the UNIT of the 21 Million Bitcoin cap. You just have to learn that 100 Million Sats = 1 Bitcoin View quoted note →

Wouldn't tamper with that before hyperbitcoinization. It could destroy naturally grown trust over 16 years and confuse people. They will learn. When finally billions use it daily the market will decide what it's called.

I’ll add my two cents… Thanks for mentioning this. I’ve been waiting to discuss this topic. I’ve addressed it in my research paper “Bitcoin: The Reality, The Issues, and The Potential”. Using sats as it relates to commerce is an *issue* of Bitcoin. Recall, according to the initial paper that introduced Bitcoin, Bitcoin is to be used for peer to peer online transactions. Therefore, my following perspective relates to commerce. To understand why it’s an *issue*, let’s start with the initial paper. In the paper, “sats” were never mentioned. Only Bitcoins. At the time, Bitcoin was not based on the value of the US dollar. Bitcoin was simply a new medium of exchange. If I sold a shirt, I would get 1 Bitcoin in exchange as proof that the transaction occurred . There was no US dollar value attached to the sale. And no fractional units at play. The inherent *value* was in the 1 Bitcoin itself. In my opinion, it should have stayed that way. It could have been *the* standard. Nevertheless, if people know the history of Bitcoin, the exchange for cash for Bitcoin came a little later. And now Bitcoin’s *value* is based on the US dollar. Furthermore, this *value* fluctuates based on many factors which is another issue for Bitcoin as it relates to commerce. When the price of Bitcoin started to increase and became too expensive to purchase a whole Bitcoin, people started to encourage the buying of fractional amounts. Specifically sats. And sats then took on a life of its own. With that said, now we’re here. 🤷‍♀️ So, let’s explore two examples. Example 1. Suppose a luxury car sells for $50,000. The seller agrees to accept Bitcoin. Which of the following sounds and looks better for the sale? 1. 0.5 Bitcoin, or 2. 50,000,000 sats Most people would say 0.5 Bitcoin. So, decimals are fine. Correct? Example 2. Suppose a bag of potato chips sells for $5. The seller agrees to accept Bitcoin. Which of the following sounds and looks better for the sale? 1. 0.00005 Bitcoin, or 2. 5000 sats Most people would say 5000 sats. So, sats are fine. Correct? Thus, the usage depends on the sales amount. Correct? Mathematically, it makes sense to use decimals or fractions. With that said, we know most people struggle with math. 🥴 But does it make sense to value *everything* in sats? No. Using sats as a denomination for every sale has never made sense to me especially for values over $100. So, what’s a *potential* solution? One answer: Create additional denominations. For the US dollar, there are denominations other than a penny. If sats are considered the Bitcoin version of the penny, then create a nickel, dime, quarter, 50-cent version of Bitcoin. You can choose what you want to call them. For those who struggle with math especially decimals and fractions (fourth grade concepts) 🥴, let me help you. A penny is 1/100th of a dollar. A nickel is 1/20th (5/100th) of a dollar. A dime is 1/10th (10/100th) of a dollar. A quarter is 1/4 (25/100th) of a dollar. You can create similar denominations for Bitcoin. I’ll let y’all hash it out. For the record, this is one potential solution and it’s relatable. There are other solutions as well. If you don’t like the one posted, then you post a potential *solution*. 🙃 Personally speaking, I think decimals and fractions should be used as it relates to subunits of Bitcoin for the majority of transactions. Sats could be used when representing the value of items less than $100. Why? Because of the following…As a comparison, we use decimals daily when writing dollar amounts. $25.14, $7656.43, $0.34. We rarely write $25.14 as 2514 cents or $7656.43 as 765643 cents 🥴 Nonetheless, $0.34 can typically be written as 34 cents. Since Bitcoin’s value is based on the dollar, it would make sense to create something that is relatable to the dollar. You’re more than welcome to create something else but take into consideration learning curve and adoption. As stated previously, Bitcoin should have stayed 1:1. Simple and easy. 1 Bitcoin exchanged in a peer to peer transaction as written in the initial paper. That’s it. Nothing else. But now we’re here. 🤦‍♀️ P.S. I’m not sharing my research paper yet. I’m not posting my *work*. I’ll share it in due time. Please excuse the long response. I believe it was a little over two pages. I wrote an informal version of what’s in the research paper. I wrote it and not AI. 🙄 The research paper is more thorough though. I’m an academic! 🥳 For those who want to comment on my post, you are welcome to do so. Remember to be respectful.

0.01 btc = 10,000.00 bits ✔ 0.01 btc = 1,000,000 sats ❌ Marketing wise, "bits" is approachable. Think normie. 1. Brand familiarity. BITcoin, BITs. Easier correlation. 2. Decimal placement, familiarity with currency denomination. 3. Human readable, human approachable. Meet people where they're at. "I'll pay you one dollar" vs "I'll pay you one hundred pennies." $1.00 / 100¢ "I'll pay you one bit," v "I'll pay you one hundred sats." 1.00 bit / 100 sats

Sure, calling 21,000 bitcoins instead of 21,000 satoshis will magically boost adoption. By that logic, we should start calling 21 cents “21,000 usd”... sounds so much more appealing, right? Sure, most people don't know what a satoshi is, but we are just being lazy as educators...

twitter is definitely the wrong term and was stopping everyday people from posting on x. I don’t agree with both points. The reason some people are not spending is because it’s a capital gains tax event. Another reason is they want to keep the harder money and spend melting fiat first. Another reason merchants don’t have that option on square or products they are using. In some countries, it’s not legal tender as exchange of services. But there is no reason someone doesn’t spent sats because they did not like those 4 letters.

Everyday people care more about privacy than names for small units.

Anybody that cares more about bitcoin as money than as an investment tool should get on-board with this change. Bitcoin is money, and nobody knows what sats are. Saylor won't be happy about this, but he's turned a FIAT villain since some time now. View quoted note →

Not a chance.

I’ve had to reiterate time and time again to people I’ve explained Bitcoin to that sats = cents. Granted, the dollars of the world have had a governing body to mandate the name but since Bitcoin is following natural adoption and still early, I think I’ll try using bits in my conversations to see if it resonates. I can see it being easier to explain but Sats also opens up the questions to “why sats” which leads you to the origin story and further hooks to why bitcoin is different than the rest.

Units named after inventor/discoverer, and what they measure: ampere (A) - Electric current ångström (Å) - Distance Bark scale - Psychoacoustical scale becquerel (Bq) - Radioactivity biot (Bi) - Electric current (degree) Celsius (°C) - Temperature centimorgan (cM) - Recombination frequency coulomb (C) - Electric charge curie (Ci) - Radioactivity dalton (Da) - Atomic mass darcy (D) - Permeability decibel (dB) - Ratio debye (D)Electric dipole moment Dobson unit (DU) - Atmospheric ozone eotvos (E) - Gravitational gradient (degree) Fahrenheit (°F) - Temperature farad (F) - Capacitance fermi (fm) - Distance galileo (Gal) - Acceleration gauss (G or Gs) - Magnetic flux density gilbert (Gb) - Magnetomotive force henry (H) - Inductance hertz (Hz) - Frequency Hounsfield scale - Radio density jansky (Jy) - Electromagnetic flux joule (J) - Energy, work, heat kelvin (K) - Thermodynamic temperature langley (ly) - Solar radiation langmuir (L) - Gas exposure dose maxwell (Mx) - Magnetic flux newton (N) - Force oersted (Oe) - Magnetic field strength ohm (Ω) - Electrical resistance pascal (Pa) - Pressure poise (P) - Dynamic viscosity Richter magnitude - Earthquake röntgen (R) - X-rays or gamma radiation siemens (S) - Electrical conductance stokes (S or St) - Kinematic viscosity svedberg (S or Sv) - Sedimentation rate tesla (T) - Magnetic flux density torr (Torr) - Pressure volt (V) - Electric potential & electromotive force watt (W) - Power & radiant flux weber (Wb) - magnetic flux

"There's only ever going to be 2.1 quadrillion bitcoin" doesn't hit as well

This is Sats. I don't care what they say.

This is uncomfortably true for Bitcoiners and evidently clear for anyone that works on UX. I introduce Bitcoin to <a lot> of people on the lower end of technical literacy and the introduction of sats is definitely a common point of friction when it comes to using Bitcoin. Not only is the sats brand kind of awkward by way of idolatry, it's also kind of unnatural for people to have to divide by 100,000,000 (sats) rather than just 100 (cents) and it''s just confusing for most people. Things simply need to just work and just make sense. Another reality is that the problem is already solved for opponents to this "change". Owners of entire Bitcoins are already referred to as Wholecoiners or having a Whole coin. Let that continue, while allowing everyone else to simply buy and spend Bitcoin. View quoted note →

I’ve been catching heat all day from the “sats forever” or “whole-coiner” diehards, but after multiple rounds of Discord drama, your take is honestly spot on. All the self-proclaimed Bitcoin “experts” fumbling just trying to figure out how many cents are in one satoshi “it’s 1 cent, it’s 0.1 of a cent, it’s 1/10 of a cent” etc etc– if that’s not proof the UX is busted, I don’t know what is. Decimals like “0.000038 BTC” and niche terms like “millibits” or “μBTC” aren’t helping normies ether; they’re creating friction that pushes everyday people away and convinces these same normies to stay locked in the fiat money system.

People still call it Twitter. You can’t effectively rename things once they are out in the wild. Doesn’t matter if it’s “wrong”. (it’s not- “sats” is an emergent term that honors the creator) nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz

Confusing that you would call an emergent name in a decentralized system “wrong”

Fuck all of this “easy onboarding talk” 👋 When visiting other countries the first few days people are confused by the difference in currency and always calculate into their own. But nobody gets to decide the other countries name for their currency and starts referring to it as “a 10th of my currency coin”. So the nobody despite their logic, influence or whatever will dictate how these decentralized nation will call its smallest denominator.

Overthinking it… missing the forest for the trees. People don’t use Bitcoin or sats because it’s still not stupid easy to use for normal people and there’s still not enough merchant adoption. The name isn’t changing that, just education and risk takers do change it.

Nanobitcoin would be accurate but boring. Satoshi didn't ask for anything in return - I think he deserces 'sats.'

I disagree. I don't see a need to change anything. We don't need to encourage adoption with a terminology change, it's going to happen no matter what words are used for whatever. All this is doing is splitting the community and putting us against each other, when what we should be doing is aligning and working towards a common goal. Words are arbitrary, Jack. They are abstract descriptors for things based on language and culture. They are all open to interpretation, by default. Primarily, they are a distraction. Let's stop dividing and distracting ourselves. There's too much work to do. Unity in action trumps semantic squabbles.

Hard disagree. It’s not hard to wrap your head around sub-units. We have dollars and cents. No one gets confused.

The developing world sending remittances figured it out People living in hyperinflation figured it out Activists figured it out The corporations & sovereigns figured it out Kenyans using Tango figured it out Home miners figured it out Necessity leads to understanding

cope

Reminds me of early Christianity. Every group want their own church. You're free to fork Bitcoin and start your own church and call everything whatever you want. But changing code won't make a difference, people will gravitate toward clients that make sense to them.

nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqquxdpn0xlh4zqw9k3patfqml9nnndqkyd9e642sfxzlycj5279pqqsragcdr2a3cm33yf9rleju8zq9etta72phyukfdz5e95qxcxjadrcwdvvps

Renaming sats into bitcoins is a terrible idea. BIP-21Q / BIP-177 proposes that 1 satoshi = 1 BTC, retiring the "satoshi" term and flipping the entire display convention on its head. That means: Instead of 21 million BTC, we'd now say 2.1 quadrillion BTC. Even though the supply and code stay the same, this change in display causes major problems: — Massive confusion: Old users think 1 BTC = $60k, new ones think it’s a few cents. — UI chaos: Wallets, exchanges, books, and codebases would all diverge. — Cultural erasure: “Stacking sats” and micro-payment memes? Gone. — No real gain: We already have sats. Just display them. No need to rename. — Trust erosion: Bitcoin’s appeal is predictability. This feels like a marketing stunt. Also, let’s not forget: Units are traditionally named after their inventors — like the newton, watt, or tesla. “Satoshi” honors the anonymous mind who created Bitcoin. Why erase that? Bitcoin is not a brand to repackage — it’s a protocol to preserve. Sats work. BTC means something. Leave it alone. #Bitcoin #BIP177 #BIP21Q #StackSats #BitcoinNotCrypto #PreserveBTC #Nostr View quoted note →

Strong disagree here. Biggest question, for me, is why now? Why is this argument, attempting to change something which has evolved over time through the community at large, happening at this moment in time? Just as a bigger discussion about op return is going on? Seems like obfuscation to me. Totally unnecessary. 21 million. That's the end of the matter as far as I'm concerned.

This is stupid, the market / users already settled on Sats, you can't force change that. Ppl know the difference between dollars and cents, it's the same thing, they are not that stupid, this "discussion" is.

Test

Being told, for 16 years, that Bitcoin is only being used by criminals is what kept everyday people from adopting Bitcoin. Not the term sats.

What is confusing to newcomer is exactly this debate poping out every few years. We owe it to Satoshi Jack! Stop it.

People unaware of the problems with the current money is what is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin

Have to respectfully disagree with you in this Jack. It's always been 21M Bitcoin and it should remain that way. Also stack Sats on Saturday just won't sound right. Sats make cents.

Below is a single fiat currency, and you're argument is that's far too much freedom for your decentralized alternative. You know, the one that prevents a small group of elites and insiders from altering peoples perception of money? Jack, your statist is showing again, bubba.

1 Bitcoin = 1 Bitcoin = 100M sats 21M Bitcoin forever.

my take: he did this on purpose so people would stop bashing Bitcoin Core and focus on something else instead. he’s a genius. View quoted note →

This is about as bad a take as you had when taking twitter public.

My son & all his friends instantly got what a “sat” or a “satoshi” was when I said - it’s like Bitcoins cents - there is nothing about it that’s complicated to understand & it doesn’t need a rebrand 😂 what Bitcoin needs is real world companies & people using it - they will call it whatever it’s called.. when they use it.. the issue of not understanding.. and slow adoption has nothing to do with the name. nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz

So dumb

Never thought it would be a day I strongly disagree with Jack.

Personally, I think the most irritating part of this is that this guy speaks as if he knows anything about the everyday person? He probably has more Sats than most people using NOSTR combined. Most of the time I like what Jack has to say, but this is a hard miss.

There will only ever be 2.1 quadrillion bitcoin.. might as well get some in case it catches on!!! nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz

From most of the replies, I feel like not many have actually watched the video 🙈

There is a company called: BitKey Is it a coincidence? 😂😂😂 #nostr #asknostr

the history of US dollar sign 💲 is interesting in this context, as its most likely origin has nothing to do with the American dollar and much more likely with the Spanish pesos. This one was widely known in the general population and there adoption (So no greater big brain logic, just giving the common man what he wants) Perplexity: The dollar sign ($) is used in the United States because, when the U.S. established its own currency after independence, it modeled the new dollar on the widely used Spanish dollar (or peso), which had been the most common currency in the American colonies for over a century. The Spanish dollar’s symbol and value system were already deeply familiar to Americans, merchants, and the broader economy.

people have compared things like tailored suits, life stock and similar things to what ever they saved in for a long time. e.g. a suit would be 0.0243 B 2,430,000 sats Meaning many things people will buy have less symbols up until another 100x Let’s wait until the user base and adoption has at least 10x before trying to confuse everyone

People are echoing it and crying about this But no one is explaining their thoughts process behind it Maybe they don't have one

Occam’s Razor. Perhaps A/B testing on large sample sizes might provide deeper insights into the complexities of global onboarding and what actually works. For example, micro and small vendors make up nearly 90% of global businesses and contribute almost half of global revenue, yet only 20% - 30% have adopted digital tools. From my experience they understand the value of money but do not yet appreciate the complexity of exchange. Bitcoin adoption sits at a moderate 4% of the global population after 16 years. We need to figure out what would help accelerate the s-curve

Not sure about it, we're using dollars and cents, why not bitcoins and sats ? Maybe just shift the bitcoin denomination to leave 2 decimals on the right like mankind do for every other currency ?

Serial killer