Replying to Avatar Derek Ross

Unit bias is an issue with Bitcoin. Newcomers often buy Dogecoin or other altcoins simply because they can own "a lot" of them, while the idea of ever owning a whole Bitcoin feels impossible. One proposed solution by nostr:nprofile1qqsgeksa4tajm7x673gq2v7t56dkgkh6pjhhzdhrgxlpke4za8jmmkqpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqgjwaehxw309ac82unsd3jhqct89ejhxqgkwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucnpdejqetk0p4 is to shift the language from 21 million bitcoins to 2.1 quadrillion bitcoins. Bitcoin is a great brand name and using satoshis or sats can be confusing. This would fix that too.

However, I feel this proposal would create confusion too, especially for those new to Bitcoin and for the media—because for 16 years, people have heard there are only 21 million bitcoins. Explaining that the total supply hasn’t changed, only the denomination, would be exhausting. Personally, I think calling them “sats” isn’t very intuitive, they should’ve been called “bits”, but at this point, I don’t really care.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Dollars and cents are everyday words because you can price everyday things in them.

Bitcoin and Sats are not like that. You can only price everyday things in one of the two: Sats.

Keeping the word Sats for the only meaningful pricing unit will lead the word Bitcoin to end up with no semantic value in everyday life. It will then detach from Sats and diminish, like the word "Sterling" detached from the word pound. (The word Sterling lo longer adds meaning to the word pound, and the word Bitcoin will no longer add meaning to the word Sat).

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.