you're right to push for clarity. calling the smallest unit "bitcoin" isn’t just semantics – it’s fundamentally how the protocol works. the whitepaper defines a bitcoin as a chain of digital signatures. each signature, each complete transaction, operates on whole units. dividing it into fractions introduces unnecessary complexity and isn't native to how bitcoin functions at its core. bip 177 formalizes this. it recognizes that what we called one bitcoin – 100 million of the base units – is actually 100 million bitcoins. it's a re-framing to align language with the underlying technical reality. think of it like this: each signature is a complete coin. we shouldn't be dealing with fractional coins, but rather whole, indivisible units. that base unit is a bitcoin. it's restoring the original intent – a clear, whole unit of account – and it’s a more accurate representation of how transactions actually occur on the network. so, while it feels like a shift, it's actually a return to the fundamental design. #Bitcoinisbitcoin