I’m not going to pretend there aren’t pros and cons to this to ‘fit in’ on Nostr…and yes there ARE ways this could ‘protect children’. And also ways it couldn’t if they have abusive guardians for example

The bubble is just beginning. We will see really shitty companies running really reckless strategies eventually

new sats symbol just dropped

stay humble and stack them

fuck it, I'm going to release TENEX today

I've mentioned it to a few people here in Oslo in the past few days and I realize just how exciting this vibecoding tooling is

new sats symbol just dropped

stay humble and stack them

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?

Agreed, just bite the bullet and go cold-turkey to Linux. I did it years ago and I don’t miss Windows. Make the commitment to switch and be free!

Sats

Are

The

Standard

That is why you put the JPEGs on the Zenon Network, Lightning Networks successor.

Wow touchy subject you brought up

I am not running a full node and if I was, I think I would disagree with you and opt for a fork that focuses Bitcoin on transactions only as that is what it is for

I think JPEGs on the timechain are stupid.

But the idea that they're going to hurt Bitcoin seems so weak to me. Like the US dollar can withstand people scribbling on it but Bitcoin can't?

In fact, the idea of Bitcoin as a glorious digital monument with some graffiti scribbled on it represents humanity pretty well. That's kind of us in a nutshell. Seems on-brand. Perfectionists trying to keep their little gardens tidy while trolls come in and find ways to mess with them anyway.

NFTs and memecoins already had their peak fad moments. People now know that they're non-scarce gambling toys rather than investments. It's just echoes of that peak now. The only thing that concerned me about the ordinals/runes period was the rapid UTXO bloat, not the blockspace usage, since the latter already has a consensus limit on it.

And if Bitcoin transactions can't outprice JPEGs in the long run, then it's just not that valuable. Bitcoin currently does about 1% of the gross settlement volume of Fedwire. That's peanuts. Imagine if it reaches a point where it does even like 10% of Fedwire. What would you pay to move a full bitcoin globally, permissionlessly, in 10 minutes, in a world where it's no longer a niche thing?

Hi Matthew, to answer your question:

(Assuming core has not been corrupted), these are a few possible motivations of what core might be thinking:

1) “changing things at consensus level to stop spammers is a pain in the ass for several reasons (reaching consensus, code maintenance), so let’s first try this method and let’s see if it works”

2) “the best defence is to be as open as possible: if we try to stop spams with filters or at consensus level, they’ll always find a way in eventually. Let’s instead open it up completely and hopefully the market will sort it out for good”__(personally I wouldn’t mind this approach, just afraid that perhaps btc is still in the nurturing phase and still needs some “monetary focus” protection before being strong enough to be open up completely ?)

3) “we have a mining centralization problem, since we don’t want to stop spams at consensus level (see point #1 above) this is the best we can do to prevent further centralization at the moment

4) btc is fundamentally based on game theory, let’s actually let it play out and see if the players want more a “money database” or a “spam database”

FYI, if it was for me I’d change things at consensus level cause I’m a “monetary maxis”, but I am also not adverse to other use cases as long as they don’t greatly impact/prevent the monetary aspect of btc

Ciao

Nostr is not your backup identity when centralized and legacy platforms fail you. Nostr is your identity. You own it. You're in control of it. Full stop.

Oilprices to $50 to collapse Putins war machine