Thread

🛡️
Now @jack is pushing BIP-177 to change satoshis to bitcoin. Are these people crazy?! Turning 21 million bitcoin into 2.1 quadrillion “bitcoins” isn’t just bad branding—it completely nukes the most important meme in Bitcoin’s history. This isn’t just a bad idea. It’s a recipe for confusion, dilution, and long-term cultural fragmentation. We’ve spent 15 years building absolute clarity around one of the strongest memes in monetary history: 21 million Bitcoin. 100 million satoshis each. Simple. Elegant. Untouchable. And now, right on the edge of global adoption—now—they want to rewrite the script? This doesn’t feel like UX optimization. It feels like a narrative hijack. A subtle takeover—not of the protocol, but of how people think about Bitcoin. And that’s just as powerful. Maybe I’m paranoid. But changing the unit, the name, and the supply right before mass onboarding doesn’t just feel tone-deaf—it feels strategic. Like rewriting the map while millions are just beginning to find their way. I’ve never heard anything more short-sighted, more dangerous, or more fundamentally disconnected from what makes Bitcoin work. It’s not a UI bug. It’s a memetic monument. You don’t demolish it for clicks, smooth UX, or vanity campaigns. You protect it—because mass adoption is coming. And what people adopt must be the truth, not a convenient lie wrapped in “accessibility.” image

Replies (47)

🛡️
↩ replying to τέχνη
The decimal isn’t fake—it’s a human-readable layer on top of satoshis, which are very real and very intentional. Removing the decimal and calling satoshis “bitcoin” doesn’t solve anything—it destroys the clarity we’ve built. And the idea that “no one cares about the 21 million meme” is just wrong. That meme is why Bitcoin works. It’s why people trust it. It’s why it has value. It’s what makes it different from every fiat system on Earth. You don’t rip out the heart of a protocol just because some people don’t get it yet. You teach them. Because Bitcoin doesn’t adapt to confusion. It survives because it resists it.
🎯
GLACA's avatar GLACA
Now @jack is pushing BIP-177 to change satoshis to bitcoin. Are these people crazy?! Turning 21 million bitcoin into 2.1 quadrillion “bitcoins” isn’t just bad branding—it completely nukes the most important meme in Bitcoin’s history. This isn’t just a bad idea. It’s a recipe for confusion, dilution, and long-term cultural fragmentation. We’ve spent 15 years building absolute clarity around one of the strongest memes in monetary history: 21 million Bitcoin. 100 million satoshis each. Simple. Elegant. Untouchable. And now, right on the edge of global adoption—now—they want to rewrite the script? This doesn’t feel like UX optimization. It feels like a narrative hijack. A subtle takeover—not of the protocol, but of how people think about Bitcoin. And that’s just as powerful. Maybe I’m paranoid. But changing the unit, the name, and the supply right before mass onboarding doesn’t just feel tone-deaf—it feels strategic. Like rewriting the map while millions are just beginning to find their way. I’ve never heard anything more short-sighted, more dangerous, or more fundamentally disconnected from what makes Bitcoin work. It’s not a UI bug. It’s a memetic monument. You don’t demolish it for clicks, smooth UX, or vanity campaigns. You protect it—because mass adoption is coming. And what people adopt must be the truth, not a convenient lie wrapped in “accessibility.” image
View quoted note →
Jack ain’t been the same since Drake fucked his girl Thought he was smarter than this Anyone with a quarter oz of a brain in their skull knows this is the dumbest BIP ever Like it literally makes me angry that people are this fuckin stupid in Bitcoin It’s disgusting
🛡️
↩ replying to The Tim
Nice meme, but no—1 Bitcoin ≠ 1 satoshi. The source code uses integers, yes—but it counts in satoshis, not bitcoin. 1 BTC = 100,000,000 satoshis. That’s how it’s always been. Saying 1 satoshi = 1 bitcoin isn’t a clever insight—it’s a total redefinition of the unit, supply, and meme. And it’s not in the code. It’s in the narrative you’re trying to rewrite.
🛡️
↩ replying to NorthOfTheWall
Respectfully, you’re missing the red flag here. BIP-177 isn’t a protocol-level proposal—it’s an informational BIP. That means it bypasses consensus entirely. It’s not about changing Bitcoin Core. It’s about changing how wallets and exchanges display Bitcoin—by redefining 1 satoshi as 1 “bitcoin” in the UI. That’s what makes it dangerous. It targets perception, not protocol. And now that Jack Dorsey—a wallet manufacturer with massive reach—is backing it, you start to see the full picture. This isn’t about software constraints. It’s about steering the narrative, quietly, through design. That’s not drama. That’s strategy. And we’d be naive to ignore it.
🛡️
if man changed satoshi into bitcoin , then man also deprecated the value , as jack mention 1 sats = 1 btc and that would be unfair to people who onboarding first , their bitcoin value would be less , very very less . in my opinion .