sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
Login to reply
Replies (181)
Changing the terminology now is more confusing for me
i said this already 🤷🏻♀️
Is anyone who's against the op_return PR in favor of this? I'm curious if people line up on the same sides of these issues. I personally think both are stupid ideas (removing the limit and trying to rename sats).
how is a word stopping anyone from doing anything?
#bitcoin has no meaning .. it is NOT the unit .. it is reward for mining ..
The real unit is #sats ..
Bitcoin education totally messed it up .. cuz when you say #bitcoin ..it becomes symbol of scarcity..thus store of value ..
When you use the word #sat ..it is abundance .. and this medium of exchange ..
Being saying this for ever .. I mean over six months :-)
If the unit is #sat - it is medium of exchange
If the unit is #bitcoin - it is store of value ..
Talk about #sats .. .. actual unit of network is Sats .... fix Bitcoin education ..
View quoted note →
"Hey normie friend, have you heard you can get a meal at Steak n Shake for 10,000 bitcoin."
How does this help adoption exactly?
If we search for sats on Google, the first ones results are a shitcoin called Sats.
Nice to meet you bum 🤝😉
“There will only ever be 2.1 quadrillion bitcoins” and wow one bitcoin is so cheap at $0.00104. Is now the right time to rename sats to bitcoins?
What's next? 'let's rename Bitcoin because it confuses noobs?'
convert all the world's money into BITCOIN
“Sats is definitely the wrong term” is an oddly arrogant take.
Bitcoin’s been around for 15 years.
21 million BTC. 100 million sats per coin.
This structure isn’t confusion—it’s precision.
It’s history. It’s design. It’s intentional.
Preserving that isn’t stubborn—it’s staying true.
nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz
Imagine telling a Bitcoin noob:
“Hey, the base idea of Bitcoin is that there will never be more than 21 quadrillion bitcoins.”
They’d look at you like—what the hell are you talking about?
Now tell them the truth:
“There will only ever be 21 million Bitcoin.”
That line hits. It lands. It matters.
If you don’t understand the difference, then I honestly don’t think you understand Bitcoin, or the memetic power that drives everything we’re building in cyberspace.
This push to rebrand sats, flip decimals, and create 21 quadrillion coins is pure madness. It’s detached from reality. It’s a bizarre attempt to reshape something that’s already stood the test of 15 years.
Yes, we can improve Bitcoin. Make it more robust, more decentralized, more resistant. But start there. Start by encouraging people to run full nodes. Educate them about consensus—what it is, who holds it, why it matters.
Stop wasting energy on campaigns that solve no real problem and only risk breaking the culture that got us here.
This isn’t progress. It’s vandalism.
And it blows my mind.
I think that people who have barely heard of bitcoin know that there will only be (approximately) 21 million or at least that its supply has strict rules that do not allow absurd jumps and is decreasing.
So, going from 21 million to 21 quadrillion, overnight, especially in a currency that is known for not being able to be created out of thin air, even if it is a mere nomenclature, seems to me to be a greater detriment to adoption than making people understand that 1 BTC = 100 million sats.
If somebody do not understand it, better for them not to touch Bitcoin
I think this will all be history when a sat is worth 1 cent, then a quarter of a dollar and so on.
It will be poetic to say the least to see the creator's pseudonym become the most common and most used name of the creature.
Sats don't stop people from using #Bitcoin anymore than cents stop people from using the dollar.
Understanding #Bitcoin's utility as money and a savings vehicle vs inflatable currency is the only barrier.
View quoted note →
All this "mathematical psychology" will lose its meaning when 1 sat becomes 1 cent, and then a quarter of a dollar, and so on...
People will find their own terms for multiples of sats (10x, 100x, 1000s), and sats will probably be the name of the currency itself.
It's all about thinking in BTC quantities and not in fiat quantities.
What is extremely harmful is explaining to your non-bitcoiner friend that the network that you say doesn't create money out of thin air and used to have only 21 million BTC now has 21 quadrillions.
Cap gains taxes are stopping that.
sats is the term that emerged. Trying to change it now from the top down will fail and lead to even more confusion.
Everyone should use "bitcoin sats" as the standard. After everyone is accustomed to the new unit of measure (many years) they will naturally want to shorten it and just drop the sats.
S@z/*****
A buck?
cents is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending dollars.
Agree. It's confusing. I like bits.
I listenes to too many ad reads from @Marty Bent saying that @Cash App was making sats the standard to accept this statement from you
Derek, you're officially permabanned from @SoapMiner's marketing department for this.
...I still like you though...
Nope
cents is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending dollars.
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
Sats seems fine to me. People understand the relation to a bit. It’s similar to dollars and cents.
Why is the use of Sats as a term stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin?
I concur & have no objections to immediate implementation of BIP 21Q ( 
)
GitHub
balls/BIP 21Q.md at main · BitcoinAndLightningLayerSpecs/balls
Bitcoin Improvement Proposals for Bitcoin Improvement Proposals - BitcoinAndLightningLayerSpecs/balls
Bitcoin Magazine
It’s Time To Admit It – There Are Only 2.1 Quadrillion Bitcoins
I'm in favor of BIP 21Q – it's a clever way to resolve known problems with Bitcoin denominations.
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
This is a deeper philosophical question than you might be aware of.
ok bro, you keep philosophizing, I'll keep not giving a rats ass
Hm, yeah. This alone is a good reason to switch.
Yeah, let's focus on serious issues such as this
Never underestimate the power of the marketing
They aren't everyday people if they hold sats.
Why are listening to shitcoiners? There is no "crypto ecosystem" and nobody is afraid of thinking in sats. The problem is volatility, and it's not a problem it's evidence of growth and success. Nobody is going to jump to bitcoin as a unit of account until the volatility decreases and that is not until at least the 6th epoch. Stop trying to turn the knobs in hope of finding more signal.
You do not change bitcoin, bitcoin changes you.
Good luck with that take.
Idk how retarded people are these days, but when I learned people use btc to trade on the internet (silkroad at that time), it was clear that you just can have any denomination.
Otherwise you couldn't make trades.
The number bias is a problem solely constructed by investor mindset (stocks), not a problem of the regular user (money).
Let stupid investors starve bc of number bias and just keep promoting btc as a daily driver money like you @jack are already doing.
I would say merchant adoption and capital gains on Bitcoin transactions are larger friction points
Never gonna happen.
View quoted note →
I always use Sats a s the unit.
Bitcoin is the name of the network.
But yes i wouldnt change the UNIT of the 21 Million Bitcoin cap.
You just have to learn that 100 Million Sats = 1 Bitcoin
View quoted note →
If ain't broken, don't fix it.
There are plenty of countries in the world with just one currency unit, which is tiny, and everything else is priced an amount of that. Works fine.
#StartSmall
(🙏 I’m extremely Sorry for spam but it’s an emergency ❤️🩹 )
Hello @jack sir, I am Sid, a gold artist.
I need your Help Please 🙏
I kindly request your few minutes please on my Primal Note on my profile 🙏
It’s genuinely an emergency for us, From my Job, to my family, our house & endless Medical bills❤️🩹
I can share any proof to verify everything,
But please save me & my family, please 🙏 Thank you 🙏 @jack
Sid
Hello @jack Sir, Sid Soni here from india. I need your Help, Please save us 🙏 I’ll try to keep this as short as possib...
Nonsense
While the simplicity is tempting, it could be damaging for someone to buy 10 ‘Bitcoin’ and find the fees to spend it make it not valuable, when they heard for 15 years how valuable bitcoin was/is.
Bitcoin is money… money is also a language. And if we’re trying to teach that language to the world, it has to be really, really easy. Not because people are stupid but bc learning a language is not easy. The more friction there is...decimal gymnastics, sats, jargon...the fewer people will speak it. That’s why people are moving toward treating bitcoin as pluralia tantum like bison or deer. Below 1? Just say bitcoin. And maybe the tradeoff is for whole coins or more, as dumb as it sounds, maybe bitcoins still has a place when you’re referring to discrete objects and would still be grammatically valid and arguably necessary for clarity. But mostly, it's bitcoin… no matter the amount. The language we use to teach the language shapes adoption and if we make it smooth and intuitive it will stick. But sats does kinda rhyme with cents. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I’ll add my two cents…
Thanks for mentioning this. I’ve been waiting to discuss this topic. I’ve addressed it in my research paper “Bitcoin: The Reality, The Issues, and The Potential”.
Using sats as it relates to commerce is an *issue* of Bitcoin. Recall, according to the initial paper that introduced Bitcoin, Bitcoin is to be used for peer to peer online transactions. Therefore, my following perspective relates to commerce.
To understand why it’s an *issue*, let’s start with the initial paper. In the paper, “sats” were never mentioned. Only Bitcoins. At the time, Bitcoin was not based on the value of the US dollar. Bitcoin was simply a new medium of exchange. If I sold a shirt, I would get 1 Bitcoin in exchange as proof that the transaction occurred . There was no US dollar value attached to the sale. And no fractional units at play. The inherent *value* was in the 1 Bitcoin itself. In my opinion, it should have stayed that way. It could have been *the* standard.
Nevertheless, if people know the history of Bitcoin, the exchange for cash for Bitcoin came a little later. And now Bitcoin’s *value* is based on the US dollar. Furthermore, this *value* fluctuates based on many factors which is another issue for Bitcoin as it relates to commerce.
When the price of Bitcoin started to increase and became too expensive to purchase a whole Bitcoin, people started to encourage the buying of fractional amounts. Specifically sats. And sats then took on a life of its own.
With that said, now we’re here. 🤷♀️
So, let’s explore two examples.
Example 1. Suppose a luxury car sells for $50,000. The seller agrees to accept Bitcoin. Which of the following sounds and looks better for the sale?
1. 0.5 Bitcoin, or
2. 50,000,000 sats
Most people would say 0.5 Bitcoin. So, decimals are fine. Correct?
Example 2. Suppose a bag of potato chips sells for $5. The seller agrees to accept Bitcoin. Which of the following sounds and looks better for the sale?
1. 0.00005 Bitcoin, or
2. 5000 sats
Most people would say 5000 sats. So, sats are fine. Correct?
Thus, the usage depends on the sales amount. Correct?
Mathematically, it makes sense to use decimals or fractions. With that said, we know most people struggle with math. 🥴
But does it make sense to value *everything* in sats? No. Using sats as a denomination for every sale has never made sense to me especially for values over $100.
So, what’s a *potential* solution? One answer: Create additional denominations.
For the US dollar, there are denominations other than a penny. If sats are considered the Bitcoin version of the penny, then create a nickel, dime, quarter, 50-cent version of Bitcoin. You can choose what you want to call them.
For those who struggle with math especially decimals and fractions (fourth grade concepts) 🥴, let me help you.
A penny is 1/100th of a dollar.
A nickel is 1/20th (5/100th) of a dollar.
A dime is 1/10th (10/100th) of a dollar.
A quarter is 1/4 (25/100th) of a dollar.
You can create similar denominations for Bitcoin. I’ll let y’all hash it out.
For the record, this is one potential solution and it’s relatable. There are other solutions as well. If you don’t like the one posted, then you post a potential *solution*. 🙃
Personally speaking, I think decimals and fractions should be used as it relates to subunits of Bitcoin for the majority of transactions. Sats could be used when representing the value of items less than $100. Why? Because of the following…As a comparison, we use decimals daily when writing dollar amounts. $25.14, $7656.43, $0.34. We rarely write $25.14 as 2514 cents or $7656.43 as 765643 cents 🥴 Nonetheless, $0.34 can typically be written as 34 cents.
Since Bitcoin’s value is based on the dollar, it would make sense to create something that is relatable to the dollar. You’re more than welcome to create something else but take into consideration learning curve and adoption.
As stated previously, Bitcoin should have stayed 1:1. Simple and easy. 1 Bitcoin exchanged in a peer to peer transaction as written in the initial paper. That’s it. Nothing else. But now we’re here. 🤦♀️
P.S. I’m not sharing my research paper yet. I’m not posting my *work*. I’ll share it in due time. Please excuse the long response. I believe it was a little over two pages. I wrote an informal version of what’s in the research paper. I wrote it and not AI. 🙄 The research paper is more thorough though. I’m an academic! 🥳
For those who want to comment on my post, you are welcome to do so. Remember to be respectful.
0.01 btc = 10,000.00 bits ✔
0.01 btc = 1,000,000 sats ❌
Marketing wise, "bits" is approachable.
Think normie.
1. Brand familiarity. BITcoin, BITs. Easier correlation.
2. Decimal placement, familiarity with currency denomination.
3. Human readable, human approachable. Meet people where they're at.
"I'll pay you one dollar" vs "I'll pay you one hundred pennies."
$1.00 / 100¢
"I'll pay you one bit," v "I'll pay you one hundred sats."
1.00 bit / 100 sats
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
Sure, calling 21,000 bitcoins instead of 21,000 satoshis will magically boost adoption.
By that logic, we should start calling 21 cents “21,000 usd”... sounds so much more appealing, right?
Sure, most people don't know what a satoshi is, but we are just being lazy as educators...
pls kn0w the diff m0ney vs currency.
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp6dkfqdu8fn4de5laa6a4wh9xhqa6vmpe86yx3tm6n2a2ha20s7qqqsr2n5jqrmd5hakt0959kcghkms5usefcfhpq4gynjkr3sch45mq9gscc9j7
Oh, please. Call it "something you pay for stuff with" then. Whether it appreciates or depreciates is besides the pint. Can you price scrambled eggs in it? If yes, that's what we're talking about.
This is what we call noise.
twitter is definitely the wrong term and was stopping everyday people from posting on x.
I don’t agree with both points.
The reason some people are not spending is because it’s a capital gains tax event.
Another reason is they want to keep the harder money and spend melting fiat first.
Another reason merchants don’t have that option on square or products they are using.
In some countries, it’s not legal tender as exchange of services.
But there is no reason someone doesn’t spent sats because they did not like those 4 letters.
Everyday people care more about privacy than names for small units.
Anybody that cares more about bitcoin as money than as an investment tool should get on-board with this change. Bitcoin is money, and nobody knows what sats are. Saylor won't be happy about this, but he's turned a FIAT villain since some time now.
View quoted note →
Not a chance.
I mean people will price things in sats or denominations of multiples of sats, which may be jargon that we can't even think of yet.
Suppose that is a problem.
Changing the name sat to btc will only increase the problem. In addition to people having to face the problem of scale (today a sat is not worth a cent and it is necessary to invent expressions for multiples of sats, which would also be necessary for multiples of the new denomination, btc) they will still have to understand why the 21 million btc became 21 quadrillion.
Só, basically, the solution is to add another layer into the problem.
Nice to meet you ramen 😉🤝
I’ve had to reiterate time and time again to people I’ve explained Bitcoin to that sats = cents. Granted, the dollars of the world have had a governing body to mandate the name but since Bitcoin is following natural adoption and still early, I think I’ll try using bits in my conversations to see if it resonates. I can see it being easier to explain but Sats also opens up the questions to “why sats” which leads you to the origin story and further hooks to why bitcoin is different than the rest.
Nice to meet you kuroikuma 🤝😉
Nice to meet you benjamin 🤝😉
Nice to meet you MRbtc 🤝😉
Nice to meet you bro 🤝😉
Nice to meet you 🤝😉
Nice to meet you 🤝😉
Nice to meet you jess 🤝😉
Nice to meet you! 🤗
Units named after inventor/discoverer, and what they measure:
ampere (A) - Electric current
ångström (Å) - Distance
Bark scale - Psychoacoustical scale
becquerel (Bq) - Radioactivity
biot (Bi) - Electric current
(degree) Celsius (°C) - Temperature
centimorgan (cM) - Recombination frequency
coulomb (C) - Electric charge
curie (Ci) - Radioactivity
dalton (Da) - Atomic mass
darcy (D) - Permeability
decibel (dB) - Ratio
debye (D)Electric dipole moment
Dobson unit (DU) - Atmospheric ozone
eotvos (E) - Gravitational gradient
(degree) Fahrenheit (°F) - Temperature
farad (F) - Capacitance
fermi (fm) - Distance
galileo (Gal) - Acceleration
gauss (G or Gs) - Magnetic flux density
gilbert (Gb) - Magnetomotive force
henry (H) - Inductance
hertz (Hz) - Frequency
Hounsfield scale - Radio density
jansky (Jy) - Electromagnetic flux
joule (J) - Energy, work, heat
kelvin (K) - Thermodynamic temperature
langley (ly) - Solar radiation
langmuir (L) - Gas exposure dose
maxwell (Mx) - Magnetic flux
newton (N) - Force
oersted (Oe) - Magnetic field strength
ohm (Ω) - Electrical resistance
pascal (Pa) - Pressure
poise (P) - Dynamic viscosity
Richter magnitude - Earthquake
röntgen (R) - X-rays or gamma radiation
siemens (S) - Electrical conductance
stokes (S or St) - Kinematic viscosity
svedberg (S or Sv) - Sedimentation rate
tesla (T) - Magnetic flux density
torr (Torr) - Pressure
volt (V) - Electric potential & electromotive force
watt (W) - Power & radiant flux
weber (Wb) - magnetic flux
"There's only ever going to be 2.1 quadrillion bitcoin" doesn't hit as well
Yeah I guess it would be unusual. It would be like renaming cents as dollars and that being the only denomination. I think there’s definitely utility in having at least two denominations, it helps in accounting, pricing and speech.
Perhaps we could peg the price of one bitcoin to the price of a cup of coffee in the developed world and make a sat 100th of that and a microSat a further 100th for micro transactions.
In Vietnam for example there is one word: dong. 1 USD is around 25,000 dong. There is no other word. If you want to sell something you can ask for 100k dong, 1 million dong, 100 million dong, 1 billion dong, whatever.
Works totally fine. You don't need multiple words.
We already have the words: hundred, thousand, million, billion...
This is Sats. I don't care what they say.
🥂
Nice to meet you Boniz23 🤝🥳
This is uncomfortably true for Bitcoiners and evidently clear for anyone that works on UX.
I introduce Bitcoin to <a lot> of people on the lower end of technical literacy and the introduction of sats is definitely a common point of friction when it comes to using Bitcoin.
Not only is the sats brand kind of awkward by way of idolatry, it's also kind of unnatural for people to have to divide by 100,000,000 (sats) rather than just 100 (cents) and it''s just confusing for most people. Things simply need to just work and just make sense.
Another reality is that the problem is already solved for opponents to this "change". Owners of entire Bitcoins are already referred to as Wholecoiners or having a Whole coin. Let that continue, while allowing everyone else to simply buy and spend Bitcoin.
View quoted note →
Agreed. You can always say 100 million sats.
I’ve been catching heat all day from the “sats forever” or “whole-coiner” diehards, but after multiple rounds of Discord drama, your take is honestly spot on.
All the self-proclaimed Bitcoin “experts” fumbling just trying to figure out how many cents are in one satoshi “it’s 1 cent, it’s 0.1 of a cent, it’s 1/10 of a cent” etc etc– if that’s not proof the UX is busted, I don’t know what is. Decimals like “0.000038 BTC” and niche terms like “millibits” or “μBTC” aren’t helping normies ether; they’re creating friction that pushes everyday people away and convinces these same normies to stay locked in the fiat money system.
People still call it Twitter.
You can’t effectively rename things once they are out in the wild.
Doesn’t matter if it’s “wrong”.
(it’s not- “sats” is an emergent term that honors the creator)
nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz
Confusing that you would call an emergent name in a decentralized system “wrong”
Yes exactly. The words Sats is all you need, the word Bitcoin becomes unnecessary and slowly becomes like the word Bullion for gold, used only by traders and such.
Just a silly branding move, that's all. Build the Bitcoin brand, then throw it all away for the Sats brand.
Build the dollar brand, then throw it all away for the cents brand. Got it.
Wait why do we have to throw it away?
No because you can price normal things in dollars. You can't price normal things in BTC. Denomination words fade out of a language when you can't price normal things in them.
Fuck all of this “easy onboarding talk” 👋
When visiting other countries the first few days people are confused by the difference in currency and always calculate into their own.
But nobody gets to decide the other countries name for their currency and starts referring to it as “a 10th of my currency coin”.
So the nobody despite their logic, influence or whatever will dictate how these decentralized nation will call its smallest denominator.
Fuck all of this “easy onboarding talk” 👋
When visiting other countries the first few days people are confused by the difference in currency and always calculate into their own.
But nobody gets to decide the other countries name for their currency and starts referring to it as “a 10th of my currency coin”.
So the nobody despite their logic, influence or whatever will dictate how these decentralized nation will call its smallest denominator.
Overthinking it… missing the forest for the trees. People don’t use Bitcoin or sats because it’s still not stupid easy to use for normal people and there’s still not enough merchant adoption. The name isn’t changing that, just education and risk takers do change it.
Nanobitcoin would be accurate but boring. Satoshi didn't ask for anything in return - I think he deserces 'sats.'
Thanks for your take. Other than this thread posted by @jack , I haven’t peeped into anything else. I’m sure people are talking in circles and giving themselves a headache. 🥴
Honestly, I was waiting to follow up with more information. But I’ll go ahead and add it now.
Part 2 of My Response:
Creating a new denomination system is potential solution. But it is only a temporary solution and not a permanent fix. Why? Because the value of Bitcoin is volatile and not fixed. For those who want Bitcoin to increase to $1,000,000, it will change the value of a sat. And other denominations. As a result, the smallest denominations will be hard to fathom in everyday use.
At this point, it’s too late to go back to the 1:1 system. The only exception is if everyone agrees to remove the valuation system from Bitcoin. Now who wants to go back to Bitcoin being $0.00? Are people ready to have *that* conversation? Since governments, investment companies, businesses, etc. have a financial stake in Bitcoin, are they willing to be ok with Bitcoin being $0.00. Since they will HODL, can Bitcoin even go down to $0.00? Probably not.
I recall people were ecstatic when Bitcoin made it to $100k. And when I had some issues with it, I received a multitude of negative comments. 🤷♀️
So I kindly repeat, who wants Bitcoin to go back to being $0.00? As a reminder, the original intent of Bitcoin was to bypass financial institutions. But now we’re here.
I’m an educator. I can pose these questions all day. Many of the Bitcoiners are overly passionate about Bitcoin. At times, too emotional and don’t think logically about Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is founded in math. Math is rational, logical, and analytical. Some math concepts have fixed solutions. Bitcoin has a finite amount. 21 million. Once it became attached to something that is considered infinite (the US dollar because it can be printed to infinity), we now have a problem.
Who can think of a logical solution to the problem? How can adoption be increased around the world? Is the term sats holding people back from adoption? Or are other things holding people back from adopting Bitcoin? If so, list them AND provide solutions.
Math problems typically have solutions. Who can provide attainable solutions that can be reasonably implemented ?
P.S. Answer carefully. Otherwise, you’ll give “them” justification to usher in stablecoins.
I disagree. I don't see a need to change anything. We don't need to encourage adoption with a terminology change, it's going to happen no matter what words are used for whatever. All this is doing is splitting the community and putting us against each other, when what we should be doing is aligning and working towards a common goal.
Words are arbitrary, Jack. They are abstract descriptors for things based on language and culture. They are all open to interpretation, by default. Primarily, they are a distraction. Let's stop dividing and distracting ourselves. There's too much work to do. Unity in action trumps semantic squabbles.
Hard disagree.
It’s not hard to wrap your head around sub-units. We have dollars and cents. No one gets confused.
The developing world sending remittances figured it out
People living in hyperinflation figured it out
Activists figured it out
The corporations & sovereigns figured it out
Kenyans using Tango figured it out
Home miners figured it out
Necessity leads to understanding
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
He did.
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
cope
Reminds me of early Christianity.
Every group want their own church.
You're free to fork Bitcoin and start your own church and call everything whatever you want.
But changing code won't make a difference, people will gravitate toward clients that make sense to them.
i got a message on Twitter from Tessa internet taktic?
Tell me what to do?
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqquxdpn0xlh4zqw9k3patfqml9nnndqkyd9e642sfxzlycj5279pqqsragcdr2a3cm33yf9rleju8zq9etta72phyukfdz5e95qxcxjadrcwdvvps
Jack:Follow me on Twitter...stupid monkey..
sometime tonight..
Strong disagree here.
Biggest question, for me, is why now?
Why is this argument, attempting to change something which has evolved over time through the community at large, happening at this moment in time?
Just as a bigger discussion about op return is going on?
Seems like obfuscation to me. Totally unnecessary.
21 million. That's the end of the matter as far as I'm concerned.
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
Come on, it's just two names and primary math. The other name is the pseudonym of the creator. How difficult that can be? People with an IQ unable to get that, probably will not adopt BTC in the first place.
This is stupid, the market / users already settled on Sats, you can't force change that.
Ppl know the difference between dollars and cents, it's the same thing, they are not that stupid, this "discussion" is.
Atoms is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from embracing existence in the material realm
Test
I followed You..on Twitter..
Being told, for 16 years, that Bitcoin is only being used by criminals is what kept everyday people from adopting Bitcoin. Not the term sats.
What is confusing to newcomer is exactly this debate poping out every few years.
We owe it to Satoshi Jack! Stop it.
No you don't Darek. Trust me, you don't 😄
People unaware of the problems with the current money is what is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin
Have to respectfully disagree with you in this Jack. It's always been 21M Bitcoin and it should remain that way. Also stack Sats on Saturday just won't sound right. Sats make cents.
Below is a single fiat currency, and you're argument is that's far too much freedom for your decentralized alternative. You know, the one that prevents a small group of elites and insiders from altering peoples perception of money? Jack, your statist is showing again, bubba.
1 Bitcoin = 1 Bitcoin = 100M sats
21M Bitcoin forever.
my take: he did this on purpose so people would stop bashing Bitcoin Core and focus on something else instead. he’s a genius.
View quoted note →
This is about as bad a take as you had when taking twitter public.
===========================
#2 🔥 Community Highlights
===========================
1. Just 3 days left for @Bitcoin FilmFest 2025
View quoted note →
2. The unwillingness of @jack with the term #sats
View quoted note →
3. The #Nostr question
View quoted note →
4. Proof of the #bitcoin payment
View quoted note →
5. An Amazing talk with @Satoshi's Sip
View quoted note →
6. The proof of lightning payment to #steaknshake
View quoted note →
7. Nostria Publishment of @SondreB
View quoted note →
8. A @Purple Konnektiv meeting with 8 people
View quoted note →
#community_nostr_recap
... but 120 characters forces you to write better tweets.
My son & all his friends instantly got what a “sat” or a “satoshi” was when I said - it’s like Bitcoins cents - there is nothing about it that’s complicated to understand & it doesn’t need a rebrand 😂 what Bitcoin needs is real world companies & people using it - they will call it whatever it’s called.. when they use it.. the issue of not understanding.. and slow adoption has nothing to do with the name.
nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz
So dumb
I just blow into my screen thinking a littke spider was walking over it. Take my sats
Never thought it would be a day I strongly disagree with Jack.
(message)Τessa internet tactic on twitter is asking me for my email and password,what should i do?
?
Jack?
Dino:?
Jack:?
Dino?
Jack?
Dino?
Jack?
Dino?
Jack?
Dino:Tessa internet tactic(scam)?
Personally, I think the most irritating part of this is that this guy speaks as if he knows anything about the everyday person? He probably has more Sats than most people using NOSTR combined. Most of the time I like what Jack has to say, but this is a hard miss.
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
There will only ever be 2.1 quadrillion bitcoin.. might as well get some in case it catches on!!!
nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz
From most of the replies, I feel like not many have actually watched the video 🙈
There is a company called:
BitKey
Is it a coincidence? 😂😂😂
#nostr #asknostr
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
@jack No beginner I've taught Bitcoin to (it's in the thousands now) has been confused about how Sats are smaller pieces of a whole Bitcoin. Neither kids nor adults.
Literally not one person has had trouble with it.
Of all things Bitcoin confuses people about, this ain't it dawg. 😒
View quoted note →
Bullshit.
pure gold
the history of US dollar sign 💲 is interesting in this context, as its most likely origin has nothing to do with the American dollar and much more likely with the Spanish pesos. This one was widely known in the general population and there adoption
(So no greater big brain logic, just giving the common man what he wants)
Perplexity:
The dollar sign ($) is used in the United States because, when the U.S. established its own currency after independence, it modeled the new dollar on the widely used Spanish dollar (or peso), which had been the most common currency in the American colonies for over a century. The Spanish dollar’s symbol and value system were already deeply familiar to Americans, merchants, and the broader economy.
people have compared things like tailored suits, life stock and similar things to what ever they saved in for a long time.
e.g. a suit would be
0.0243 B
2,430,000 sats
Meaning many things people will buy have less symbols up until another 100x
Let’s wait until the user base and adoption has at least 10x before trying to confuse everyone
People are echoing it and crying about this
But no one is explaining their thoughts process behind it
Maybe they don't have one
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steve’s points in this video.
View quoted note →
Who are you marketing to?
USD obviously
nevent1qqs244x5u5rsqjlxftax07g2ap0nhqjmvazpghdmqds7f6mt6zvkl8gpr9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucm9wf3kzarjdamxztndv5frr3nw
1Q real state money = NFTs
everything tokenized
given:
total world’s money = 2.1 Q USD = 2.1 × 10^15 USD
price of 1 BTC = 100,000 USD
BTC maximum supply = 21 M BTC = 21 × 10^6 BTC
if we convert all the world's money ( 2.1 Q USD ) into BITCOIN
what will be the price of 1 BITCOIN ?
understand the scenario
2.1 Q USD buys all 21 M BTC
BITCOIN’s price will adjust to match this market cap
new bitcoin price = total money / total bitcoins
2.1x10^15 / 21x10^6 = 2.1x10^15 / 2.1x10^7 = 10^8 = 100,000,000 US
1 BTC ≈ 100 M USD
if we convert all the world's money ( 2.1 Q USD ) into BITCOIN ( 21 million BTC)
1 BTC ≈ 100 M USD
world’s money = 2.1 Q USD
BTC max supply = 21 M BTC
new BTC price ( if all money converted ) = 100M USD
nevent1qqstw3u4889s5xdkhpkg6vupj69ya5k0uv7r37hp4hsjclsqectf5xspr9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucm9wf3kzarjdamxztndv5274580
nevent1qqs8ql7q07mycwwhxdutumxd6x0r5np9n0vq7nul5ajym83x8xpjdvqpr9mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuam9d3kx7unyv4ezumn9wskvxqa5
nevent1qqsyr4w8rx79utf25t6f0c64md820wd60e39g5g8lwk5jfa34xhdkdgpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgzznl7n
nevent1qqsz027rcx6rhgwj8valyxxg4tk88n265a5t4d3nhdu8dtlrxm39p8cpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet55pd0ha
At that point the price of 1 ₿itcoin would be 1 ₿itcoin and I would recommend arming yourself if you haven't already.
i’m very well armed
powers of 10
if we convert all the world's money ( 2.1 Q USD ) into BITCOIN ( 21 M BTC )
1 BTC ≈ 100 M USD
world’s money = 2.1 Q USD
BTC max supply = 21 M BTC
new BTC price ( if all money converted ) = 100M USD
nevent1qqsymshn69p3v85hrhs7sz8p2cz65hylanve4wx68lhkm2frycg7q0cpr9mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuam9d3kx7unyv4ezumn9ws44qyk7
nevent1qqs04x8wf53ezght0hvgl92mngp6sq0u7yy8lmucjl6lteqsudw7rqgprdmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuumhd9ehxtt9de5kwmtp9e3kscygvxd
Occam’s Razor.
Perhaps A/B testing on large sample sizes might provide deeper insights into the complexities of global onboarding and what actually works. For example, micro and small vendors make up nearly 90% of global businesses and contribute almost half of global revenue, yet only 20% - 30% have adopted digital tools. From my experience they understand the value of money but do not yet appreciate the complexity of exchange. Bitcoin adoption sits at a moderate 4% of the global population after 16 years. We need to figure out what would help accelerate the s-curve
Serial killer