pull down to refresh
That's a good example of why we don't need Nah, a kid can count to 23! Hahaha
That's a good example of why we don't need Nah, a kid can count to 23! Hahaha
If we walk through a normal day for a working-class family:
Dad's morning coffee (x1): 1 Nah vs. 23 Sats
Street lunch for three (x3): 3 Nahs vs. 69 Sats
Family's daily groceries (x5): 5 Nahs vs. 115 Sats
With Sat, basic survival pushes into double and triple digits. With Nah, daily life stays compressed into frictionless single digits.
This directly impacts financial education. The golden window to teach 'low time preference' begins at 3 to 4 years old, when a toddler's brain naturally processes only single digits. Children don't truly grasp values beyond 20 until age 5 or 6.
A 3-year-old easily understands: 'Clean up your toys, earn 1 Nah.'
A 3-year-old cannot comprehend: 'Clean up your toys, earn 23 Sats.'
Sat delays financial literacy for the next generation. Nah accelerates it.
A 3-year-old easily understands: 'Clean up your toys, earn 1 Nah.'
A 3-year-old cannot comprehend: 'Clean up your toys, earn 23 Sats.'
Another point for sats! If I were 3, I'd way rather get 23 than 1. Kids have no clue about money, all they know is that 23 is bigger than 1! ahahah
Another point for sats! If I were 3, I'd way rather get 23 than 1. Kids have no clue about money, all they know is that 23 is bigger than 1! ahahah
Yes, a 3-year-old might cheer because 23 sounds like a 'bigger number'. But developmental psychology shows that over 90% of 3-year-olds cannot meaningfully count beyond 10. They can't even use all their fingers and toes to reach 23. To a toddler, 23 isn't a precise value; it's just an abstract, uncountable blur.
Teaching 'low time preference' requires a child to measure the exact distance between what they have and what they want. Let’s look at a toddler saving up for a toy car:
With the Nah standard:
The toy car costs 8 Nahs.
The kid has earned 3 Nahs.
The goal: 'I have 3, I need 5 more to reach 8.'
A toddler can physically count this gap on one hand. They can visualize the progress. They learn how to save.
With the Sat standard:
The toy car costs 184 Sats (8 x 23).
The kid has earned 69 Sats (3 x 23).
The goal: 'I have 69, I need 115 more to reach 184.'
A child cannot do triple-digit subtraction. They cannot mentally track a gap of 115 units.
You are confusing a toddler's primitive excitement for a large pile with actual financial literacy. Nah builds a mental ledger. Sat just builds confusion.
Nah builds a mental ledger. Sat just builds confusion.
Nah it just adds more complexity and confusion, not the other way around!
well, good luck teaching your kids to save in Sats.
the math is clear that i can only teach mine to save if i use Nahs.
The difference is practically nonexistent, so why add another layer of complexity? Kids learn quickly, they're not stupid! @remindme in 1 year
there is no extra layer of complexity here. a person will either choose to save in Sat or in Nah.
it's not about being stupid or not. any human being can do math with smaller numbers faster than with bigger numbers, that's a very simple fact you are refusing to accept.
again, most 3yo can count to 5 but can't understand 115.
you can wait for your kids to reach age 5 to teach them how to save in Sats. that's entirely up to you. i will start to teach mine to save in Nahs when he's 3.
please kindly read my examples again for more details.
We used USD in the original post simply because it currently serves as the global reserve currency—the most universally understood yardstick to measure planetary wealth. Our goal is for the Bitcoin timechain to replace the USD and all other fiat currencies entirely.
The logic holds up perfectly across any currency. Let’s map it across South America, Africa, the most populous nations of Asia, and Europe to do the math.
Based on the global wealth math from the original post:
1 Nah = $1.40
1 Sat = $0.06
Assuming standard fiat exchange rates ($1 USD = 6 BRL = 1,600 NGN = 84 INR = 55 PHP = 150 JPY = 1,350 KRW = 25,000 VND = 0.90 EUR):
1 Nah = 8.4 BRL = 2,240 NGN = 118 INR = 77 PHP = 210 JPY = 1,890 KRW = 35,000 VND = 1.26 EUR
1 Sat = 0.36 BRL = 96 NGN = 5 INR = 3.3 PHP = 9 JPY = 81 KRW = 1,500 VND = 0.054 EUR
Now, let's look at the working-class reality for a basic daily item equivalent to that value:
In Brazil (8.4 BRL to buy a pão de queijo): Pricing is 23 Sats vs. 1 Nah
In Nigeria (2,240 NGN to buy a plate of jollof rice): Pricing is 23 Sats vs. 1 Nah
In India (118 INR to buy a roadside chai and samosa): Pricing is 23 Sats vs. 1 Nah
In the Philippines (77 PHP to buy a jeepney ride and pandesal): Pricing is 23 Sats vs. 1 Nah
In Japan (210 JPY to buy a konbini onigiri): Pricing is 23 Sats vs. 1 Nah
In South Korea (1,890 KRW to buy a street gimbap): Pricing is 23 Sats vs. 1 Nah
In Vietnam (35,000 VND to buy a bowl of phở): Pricing is 23 Sats vs. 1 Nah
In Europe (1.26 EUR to buy an espresso): Pricing is 23 Sats vs. 1 Nah
As shown in the examples, the 2 quadrillion supply of Sat forces everyday people to calculate basic survival in double digits, regardless of their local fiat. The 85.3 trillion supply intuitively compresses those exact same prices on the Bitcoin timechain into a simpler single digit. It gives a worker anywhere in the world—from Lagos to Mumbai, from Manila to São Paulo—the exact same frictionless cognitive UI as a worker in America.