BITS = SATOSHIS

Bits.

That’s the new name for sats - rolled out quietly, but intentionally, during the largest Bitcoin conference of the year in Las Vegas. With corporations circling and political figures like Trump stepping onstage, we’re now seeing the slow rebranding of Bitcoin’s most fundamental unit.

No real community discussion.

No transparent rationale.

Just a switch - from “sats” (Satoshis) to “bits.”

As someone who studies this space daily and speaks from the perspective of an artist - I see this as more than a cosmetic tweak. This is a symbolic shift. A move away from Bitcoin’s roots. A subtle erasure of Satoshi Nakamoto from the language we use every day.

Sats were never just a unit of measure. They were a tribute. A memetic anchor tying Bitcoin to its origin and ethos. You don’t rename that lightly. You don’t discard it in the name of “clarity” or “adoption” without telling the community why.

“Bits” might sound cleaner. It might fit better on an app screen. But it comes at a cost: cultural continuity. Historical weight. Identity.

This is happening at a moment when Bitcoin is under more pressure than ever to conform - to be repackaged for mass markets, for regulators, for billionaires. And now even its smallest piece is being reshaped.

This isn’t about nostalgia. It’s about respect. For the people who carried Bitcoin through the early years. For the vision behind it. For the name that still matters.

And most of all - for the ethos of Bitcoin.

Sats are named after the inventor who disappeared so the network could live freely. That absence is the foundation of Bitcoin’s independence. It’s what makes it different. Their systems have money, but no mystery. Power, but no principle. Control, but no character.

Bitcoin has a legend.

And no matter how many interfaces get rewritten, or tickers rebranded, Satoshi Nakamoto should be honored forever - through the name of the smallest unit that makes this entire movement possible.

We should be asking:

Why now?

Why this?

And who benefits from rewriting the words we built this protocol around?

Because if sats can be rebranded overnight… what’s next?