I think its a mistake, given that there already is a big, well established world of exchanges, wallets, services etc. out there that function under the 1.00000000 BTC paradigm, and simply will not change given the sizes/volumes involved. I.e. its financial markets vs retail perspectives, and now this retail perspective is trying to claim a thing the financial market perspective had a hold of since day 1.
Organically a sollution already emerged in the form of sats (whilst 'bits' clearly lost that fight). Jack's effort would have been better spend at either getting the sat symbol into unicode, or addopting the lightningbolt (U+1F5F2).
Login to reply
Replies (2)
I think its a bold move, not sure if mistake
It's self evidently a horrible idea. Units matter.
"bItCoIn iS sCaRcE! tHeRE wIlL oNlY eVeR bE 2.1 qUaDrIlLiOn!"
"cEnTs aNd dOlLaRs aRe tHe sAmE!"
I became somewhat internet famous for almost exactly this sort of units confusion. See "VerizonMath".
What could possibly go wrong?
Didn't we lose a $300 million Mars orbiter due to units of measure being mismatched?
Imagine scanning an article/stream/video paywall invoice for 5 "₿"? Totally insane. Is this guy going for broke in terms of being a bad actor or just high on his own supply?
Original Recording of Verizon Customer Service Call
Here is a repost of my verizon call using blogspot's new video feature: