Thread

Replies (88)

So dollars and cents aren’t confusing but bitcoin and sats are?! Gimme a break 🀣 I would rather have a BIP proposal that deals with fixing Bitcoin’s privacy than this retarded gabish. nevent1qqs8756kpq6h0vawhfr3csfdfgq5fk66ng77dt8z96znmadlfczjfdgpyfmhxue69uhkummnw3ez6an9wf5kv6t9vsh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet5d0htx9
"Reduce confusion"?!? πŸ˜‚ If we were to do that, it should have been when 100M base units was not valued at $100k, but at $1k. A smaller user base would be more accepting and easier to inform, especially because they were not normies. I agree, however, that the high value of the base unit makes it a challenge for the uninitiated, not knowing that you can trade in tiny bits, not only in whole coins. Generally speaking, coins are not meant to be broken up, so there's a verbal connotation to the whole unit being indivisible. Sats are easy enough, though, I think. We can also use mili- and micro- to denote other denominations as we need.
Very expensive rebranding... More than 20,000 blogs would have to change this unit name. Impossible to do in YouTube videos and courses. Every Bitcoin company would have to restructure its keywords. Again, impossible to make changes in books written on Bitcoin. This change will create confusion in the non-tech community and potentially the first polarization in the Bitcoin community. We shouldn't do this at this stage; giving a new name to a 15-year-old son isn't a clever thing to do. Bitcoin is 15 years old now. Let's make Sats a standard. This also keeps the legacy of Satoshi alive, which will connect with the masses as a courageous story.
As vezes eu acho que uma punheta pode evitar muitos problemas, desde filhos indesejados atΓ© mente vazia. Isso nΓ£o faz sentido, pros nodes jΓ‘ Γ© assim, sΓ³ existem satoshis, nΓ£o existem nΓΊmeros de ponto flutuante nos softwares de Bitcoin. 1 Bitcoin Γ© uma unidade abstrata que vale 100m satoshis, mas isso sΓ³ existe nas wallets Γ© a forma como vocΓͺ representa 2345 Satoshis com 2.345. NΓ£o tem porque mudar essa representaΓ§Γ£o, nΓ£o vejo nenhum necessidade, sΓ³ tempo livre e mente vazia demais.
farooq's avatar farooq
BIP177 proposes redefining Bitcoin's base unit by making 1 satoshi = 1 bitcoin. Currently, 1 bitcoin = 100,000,000 satoshis. This change aims to simplify transactions and reduce confusion.
View quoted note →
The US dollar has cents, the British pound has pence... The smallest unit of currency should have a different name, and the commonly used pricing units can actually have aliases. I think it is right to price Bitcoin in satoshis, and it should not be changed randomly. However, you can consider renaming the unit alias for 100 satoshis.
What it aims to do is not relevant what it would do is. This is a stupid thing and the ONLY reason it is even being discussed is because @jack likes it. Jack is wrong here, history will show it. Jack wants bitcoin to be spent and has done some absolutely impressive but wrong mental gymnastics to support that the term sats is why people don't spend bitcoin. It is hard to understand how a man as smart as Dorsey can be this wrong on something this simple.
British where redefining feet and inches to match the new kings limbs, they also created miles, foot, yard, etc, because they had to invent new names for different lengths. Much more useful was international systems of units which stoped renaming units and just added prefix like gram, kilogram, miligram. Byte, Megabyte, Gigabyte, terabyte. Now you can have BTC, milibtc, micro-btc, etc. You can call data as bitsats If you want to make it sound familiar. But renaming SATs to BTC is like renaming milimiter to kilometer. This name change is not backwards compatible. Imagine an accounting system made in 2030 talking to one made in 2018 to Check their Ballance. What will happen when you mess you the units in the accounting systems and different systems try to communicate: Metric vs Imperial Units: How NASA lost a 327 Million Dollar Mission to Mars