sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steveβs points in this video.
Thread
Login to reply
Replies (71)
Yeah, let's focus on serious issues such as this


Never underestimate the power of the marketing
Who are you marketing to?
They aren't everyday people if they hold sats.
Nice to meet you π€π
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.
Nice to meet you bro π€π
I would say merchant adoption and capital gains on Bitcoin transactions are larger friction points
Never gonna happen.
View quoted note β
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 β
While the simplicity is tempting, it could be damaging for someone to buy 10 βBitcoinβ and find the fees to spend it make it not valuable, when they heard for 15 years how valuable bitcoin was/is.
Bitcoin is moneyβ¦ money is also a language. And if weβre 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. Thatβs 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 youβre referring to discrete objects and would still be grammatically valid and arguably necessary for clarity. But mostly, it's bitcoinβ¦ 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. Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
Nice to meet you benjamin π€π
Iβll add my two centsβ¦
Thanks for mentioning this. Iβve been waiting to discuss this topic. Iβve addressed it in my research paper βBitcoin: The Reality, The Issues, and The Potentialβ.
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 itβs an *issue*, letβs start with the initial paper. In the paper, βsatsβ 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 Bitcoinβs *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 weβre here. π€·ββοΈ
So, letβs 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. π₯΄
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, whatβs 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) π₯΄, 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. Iβll let yβall hash it out.
For the record, this is one potential solution and itβs relatable. There are other solutions as well. If you donβt like the one posted, then you post a potential *solution*. π
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 followingβ¦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 π₯΄ Nonetheless, $0.34 can typically be written as 34 cents.
Since Bitcoinβs value is based on the dollar, it would make sense to create something that is relatable to the dollar. Youβre 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. Thatβs it. Nothing else. But now weβre here. π€¦ββοΈ
P.S. Iβm not sharing my research paper yet. Iβm not posting my *work*. Iβll 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 whatβs in the research paper. I wrote it and not AI. π The research paper is more thorough though. Iβm an academic! π₯³
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 β
0.01 btc = 1,000,000 sats β
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 / 100Β’
"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 steveβs 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 β21,000 usdβ... sounds so much more appealing, right?
Sure, most people don't know what a satoshi is, but we are just being lazy as educators...
Nice to meet you kuroikuma π€π
Nice to meet you! π€
This is what we call noise.
twitter is definitely the wrong term and was stopping everyday people from posting on x.
I donβt agree with both points.
The reason some people are not spending is because itβs a capital gains tax event.
Another reason is they want to keep the harder money and spend melting fiat first.
Another reason merchants donβt have that option on square or products they are using.
In some countries, itβs not legal tender as exchange of services.
But there is no reason someone doesnβt 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 β
Not a chance.
Nice to meet you ramen ππ€
Iβve had to reiterate time and time again to people Iβve 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 Iβll 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 βwhy satsβ which leads you to the origin story and further hooks to why bitcoin is different than the rest.
Units named after inventor/discoverer, and what they measure:
ampere (A) - Electric current
Γ₯ngstrΓΆm (Γ
) - Distance
Bark scale - Psychoacoustical scale
becquerel (Bq) - Radioactivity
biot (Bi) - Electric current
(degree) Celsius (Β°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 (Β°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 (Ξ©) - Electrical resistance
pascal (Pa) - Pressure
poise (P) - Dynamic viscosity
Richter magnitude - Earthquake
rΓΆntgen (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
This is Sats. I don't care what they say.
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 β
Iβve been catching heat all day from the βsats foreverβ or βwhole-coinerβ diehards, but after multiple rounds of Discord drama, your take is honestly spot on.
All the self-proclaimed Bitcoin βexpertsβ fumbling just trying to figure out how many cents are in one satoshi βitβs 1 cent, itβs 0.1 of a cent, itβs 1/10 of a centβ etc etcβ if thatβs not proof the UX is busted, I donβt know what is. Decimals like β0.000038 BTCβ and niche terms like βmillibitsβ or βΞΌBTCβ arenβt helping normies ether; theyβre creating friction that pushes everyday people away and convinces these same normies to stay locked in the fiat money system.
Fuck all of this βeasy onboarding talkβ π
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 βa 10th of my currency coinβ.
So the nobody despite their logic, influence or whatever will dictate how these decentralized nation will call its smallest denominator.
Thanks for your take. Other than this thread posted by @jack , I havenβt peeped into anything else. Iβm sure people are talking in circles and giving themselves a headache. π₯΄
Honestly, I was waiting to follow up with more information. But Iβll 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, itβs 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. π€·ββοΈ
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 weβre here.
Iβm an educator. I can pose these questions all day. Many of the Bitcoiners are overly passionate about Bitcoin. At times, too emotional and donβt 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, youβll give βthemβ justification to usher in stablecoins.
People still call it Twitter.
You canβt effectively rename things once they are out in the wild.
Doesnβt matter if itβs βwrongβ.
(itβs not- βsatsβ is an emergent term that honors the creator)
nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz
Confusing that you would call an emergent name in a decentralized system βwrongβ
Fuck all of this βeasy onboarding talkβ π
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 βa 10th of my currency coinβ.
So the nobody despite their logic, influence or whatever will dictate how these decentralized nation will call its smallest denominator.
Overthinking itβ¦ missing the forest for the trees. People donβt use Bitcoin or sats because itβs still not stupid easy to use for normal people and thereβs still not enough merchant adoption. The name isnβt 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.'
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.
Itβs 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 steveβs 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.
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqquxdpn0xlh4zqw9k3patfqml9nnndqkyd9e642sfxzlycj5279pqqsragcdr2a3cm33yf9rleju8zq9etta72phyukfdz5e95qxcxjadrcwdvvps
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 steveβs points in this video.
View quoted note →
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.
Test
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.
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. heβs a genius.
View quoted note β
This is about as bad a take as you had when taking twitter public.
... but 120 characters forces you to write better tweets.
My son & all his friends instantly got what a βsatβ or a βsatoshiβ was when I said - itβs like Bitcoins cents - there is nothing about it thatβs complicated to understand & it doesnβt need a rebrand π what Bitcoin needs is real world companies & people using it - they will call it whatever itβs called.. when they use it.. the issue of not understanding.. and slow adoption has nothing to do with the name.
nevent1qqsrp3k4yl8tz6c9qlsv5pr8r2xf7a7hq6jj5mypmqw2ugjghy0490cpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqeazfz
So dumb
Never thought it would be a day I strongly disagree with Jack.
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 steveβs 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 π
There is a company called:
BitKey
Is it a coincidence? πππ
#nostr #asknostr
sats is definitely the wrong term and is stopping everyday people from holding and spending bitcoin.
i agree with steveβs points in this video.
View quoted note →
the history of US dollar sign π² 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 dollarβs 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
Letβs 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 steveβs points in this video.
View quoted note →
Occamβs 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

