Thread

Replies (84)

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.
Who the fuck cares what this fed-collaborating snake has to say? Everyone does remember what he did while still at Twatter right? You dont just walk away from working with the feds.
jack's avatar jack
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin. i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
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.
jack's avatar jack
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin. i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
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.
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 @jack are already doing.
🛡️
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
jack's avatar jack
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin. i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
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...
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
🛡️
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.
↩ replying to ransom
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.
↩ replying to ransom
Thanks for your take. Other than this thread posted by @jack , I haven’t peeped into anything else. I’m sure people are talking in circles and giving themselves a headache. 🥴 Honestly, I was waiting to follow up with more information. But I’ll go ahead and add it now. Part 2 of My Response: Creating a new denomination system is potential solution. But it is only a temporary solution and not a permanent fix. Why? Because the value of Bitcoin is volatile and not fixed. For those who want Bitcoin to increase to $1,000,000, it will change the value of a sat. And other denominations. As a result, the smallest denominations will be hard to fathom in everyday use. At this point, it’s too late to go back to the 1:1 system. The only exception is if everyone agrees to remove the valuation system from Bitcoin. Now who wants to go back to Bitcoin being $0.00? Are people ready to have *that* conversation? Since governments, investment companies, businesses, etc. have a financial stake in Bitcoin, are they willing to be ok with Bitcoin being $0.00. Since they will HODL, can Bitcoin even go down to $0.00? Probably not. I recall people were ecstatic when Bitcoin made it to $100k. And when I had some issues with it, I received a multitude of negative comments. 🤷‍♀️ So I kindly repeat, who wants Bitcoin to go back to being $0.00? As a reminder, the original intent of Bitcoin was to bypass financial institutions. But now we’re here. I’m an educator. I can pose these questions all day. Many of the Bitcoiners are overly passionate about Bitcoin. At times, too emotional and don’t think logically about Bitcoin. Bitcoin is founded in math. Math is rational, logical, and analytical. Some math concepts have fixed solutions. Bitcoin has a finite amount. 21 million. Once it became attached to something that is considered infinite (the US dollar because it can be printed to infinity), we now have a problem. Who can think of a logical solution to the problem? How can adoption be increased around the world? Is the term sats holding people back from adoption? Or are other things holding people back from adopting Bitcoin? If so, list them AND provide solutions. Math problems typically have solutions. Who can provide attainable solutions that can be reasonably implemented ? P.S. Answer carefully. Otherwise, you’ll give “them” justification to usher in stablecoins.
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
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.
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.
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
jack's avatar jack
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin. i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
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.
🛡️
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.
jack's avatar jack
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin. i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
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. image
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
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.
jack's avatar jack
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin. i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
There will only ever be 2.1 quadrillion bitcoin.. might as well get some in case it catches on!!! nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz
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
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