Nostr Web Client

No 2. Is wrong. The idea is that BTC is the 100_000_000 thing and remains so.

All people are saying is call sats lower case bitcoins.

I don't care either way. But at least criticise the real suggestion.

The real suggestion is much worse. The BIP says that the internal represetation in core is Bitcoin. Every engineer knows that internal representations are never the truth. Internal representations are just encodings of what users want. And what users know is that we have 21M BTCs, not 2,1 quatrillion BTCs.

Your argument then is that BTC is synonymous with lower case bitcoins.

But a counter argument could be that BTC is distinct from bitcoins, and are usually pronounced bee tee cee.

The only reason this shit matters, if it does matter is that calling BTC bitcoins, instead of calling sats bitcoins, make bitcoin sound extremely unaffordable.

You can argue that normies are retarded for not knowing that BTC is millions of times bigger than what they can actually buy, but that won't help.

I hope people arguing against the bip at least engage with the unit bias argument instead of insisting that the 21 meme has anywhere near the same effect on the general population perception of Bitcoin

No, my argument is that our global "consensus" of 21 million bitcoins is bigger than any code anywhere.

But what I am saying is;

1. We don't have that consensus at all, we only have a consensus on the 21_00_000_000_000_000 units, regardless what they are called, sats or bitcoins.

2. To the extent that the "21 million" meme matters to anyone, it is regarding the token "BTC", not for the lower case bitcoins word.

3. That the negative effect of the unit bias, is way bigger than the positive effect of the 21 meme, even if you insist that the meme is "21M bitcoins" not "21M BTC"

If you disagree with that... fine, people will fight this one out in their app implementations, no one can force anyone to do anything.

1. No one even knows about the 21_00.. units. Only devs know how Bitcoin is represented in code. How can we have "consensus" on somebody nobody even knows it exists? That's not the consensus.

2. 21M is not a meme. It is on all books and all serious educational materials and software we use. Calling it a meme means you are discussing this in bad faith. You know better.

3. Unit bias is negative and will always be negative regardless of which decimal point you write "bitcoins" after. Multiple countries will have different unit biases. You can't solve this by moving the decimal.

Again, you are just saying that BTC is interchangeable with "bitcoins".

I can accept that argument and the discussion ends after that because I disagree and it is too subjective to settle, and everyone can do what they want going forward.

But I disagree with the last point too, I don't think we will need to divide bitcoins further than the granularity in the code, even though I actually don't think "millisats" are fake, but I just don't think we will have that much economic activity on the Internet flowing through Bitcoin that one unit becomes too expensive.

Anyways, if only these were our biggest problems.

Let me know how many people will be pissed when they send 20000 bitcoins from your platform and the receiver only gets 0.0002 bitcoins in theirs.

Well, Bitkit already started, you let me know if the sky falls or if anyone gives a fuck at all.

What we are fighting is apathy. I know Turks bought gold instead of Bitcoins to escape inflation, even when they had to import more on containers after the local supply dried up... so let's not count are chicken before the hatch.

I don't know anyone using Bitkit... But I just installed it and found it very confusing to generate an invoice in the right amount I wanted.

Don't you at least think that no one could ever mistake a 100Mx? As in if you saw 100,000 bitcoins on an invoice, is there a chance in hell you are going to confuse that for a 100,000BTC?

I don't know man, I just want bitcoins, I don't want sats it sounds shit.

But what I want the most is for Ark (or something) to work and scale so we can have this debate again when there are actual users.

:P 7mo ago 💬 1

So you want to explain to the normies that Bitcoin’s price went from over 100k to 9 cents?

The normies will start laughing and say I’m not buying that shit it’s going to zero.

No BTC price will stay the same.

You can tell the "normies" that BTC is a large denomination and that they can afford 1000 bitcoins.

If you think telling them they can afford sats instead... fine, but you have to engage with the fact that "sats" means absolutely fuck all to people.

:P 7mo ago 💬 1

Most people have heard of Bitcoin and think they can’t afford it.

(That’s the whole point of making the decimal point disappear)

So when they see that Bitcoin is at 9 cents they will think Bitcoin has crashed all the way down from 100,000.00 to 0.09

This creates more confusion and doesn’t help anyone.

No one fuckin wants to change the decimal point for BTC man, the price charts will not change.

All what people say is just use "bitcoins" where you are currently using "sats".

Anyways, it doesn't matter really 😅

🇵🇸 whoever loves Digit 7mo ago 💬 1

Idk, at least a few media outlets would probably present it as Bitcoin crashing, and at least a few people would misunderstand the news and think it means Bitcoin is crashing even if it's presented right

They can do that even if Bitcoin is at all times high, we are way past truth sir :)

🇵🇸 whoever loves Digit 7mo ago

Not me

nostr:nevent1qqswtzreje7azengu3fed4we363ayazat38c0tysgyz3q9yrnw78hccpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgq3qgcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqxpqqqqqqzkarsu8

Countless people are criticising the bip for what they think it says not what it actually says.

Again, I don't care either way, but if you follow that bip, then 1 BTC remains 1 BTC, you rename "sats" to "bitcoins"... if you have a problem with that, discuss that.

Sats are not anywhere near the status of BTC ... at all.

franzap 7mo ago

Also if as a user you can't figure out what a sat is, you don't fucking deserve it

Jobojobogreentea 7mo ago

How was the initial BTC determined to be 100,000,000 sats? Wasn’t that kind of arbitrary to begin with?

Hamlin 7mo ago

My brain hurts

Vitor Pamplona 7mo ago

exactly

surfporn 7mo ago

If we move to 9 decimal places in the future, it should be called a Hayek.

I'm a fan the BIP because it aligns the globally recognizable name with the base unit ("1 bitcoin" equals one base unit) and reduces the amount of things you have to explain to newcomers (what is a sat, why is it named that, etc.)

Are there proponents of BIP177 that are arguing we should continue renaming the smallest unit if/when we need ever smaller units in the future? At that point, I think using decimals are fine.

Garbage nsec 7mo ago

Yes. The other thing is that if Sats take off in a small retail context then it ties the value of Sats to agriculture, to production, to the Panama Canal, to the cost of reprinting a menu in glossy A4—to a zillion things that underpin small retail globally, and it will inevitably plateau, given that we aren't going to be adding all that much new fertile land or all that many new Panama canals.

Another way to say it is that if your money can all of a sudden buy twice as many omelettes but the number of chickens in the world hasn't changed then something's not right.

What you are basically saying is, "people are too stupid to understand a sat is a fraction of a bitcoin, but not too stupid to realise we just went from promising there will only be 21m bitcoin, to now saying there are 2.1 quadrillion"

Do you see how dumb this is?

The people I've onboarded didn't know bitcoin had an upper limit. To them, bitcoin is something they've heard about on the news whenever there are big swings up or down. I have to educate them on the rest.

Then educate them that sats are the base unit 😂

You are telling me you explained the rest and all the complexity, but the one thing we need to change is the base unit name to make it easier?

Yes. As I said in my original post, BIP 177 is cool because it eliminates the number of thing you need to explain to onboard someone.

Them: "I think I'm ready to buy some bitcoin"

Me: "Cool, let me help you get set up"

Them:

Me: "Click the receive button, let me sent you some sats"

Them: "What's a sat?"

Me: "Well you see, the creator of Bitcoin used the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto and..."

It's cool history, but the average consumer doesn't care. They just want bitcoin :)

And anyone who does understand the history just wants ONE of the 21m bitcoin.

Look, this is very simple, people are not going to walk away because they now now a sat is a fraction of a bitcoin, are they?

Zero people have gotten all the way to pushing the buy button, and then decided to stay away because of the name sats.

It has never happened. Let's be honest about what this is - unit bias shitcoinery leaking into the minds of bitcoiners.

I agree people aren't going to change their minds after hearing about SATS, but I still think it simplifies things for newcomers. Bitcoin has strong name recognition, let's build on that by not diluting it with "new" terms.

We're likely to never agree on this BIP and that's fine. Let's see where things shake out.

Wishing you a great week.