Ah shit, here we go again.
We are back on Stacker News, dropping truth bombs from one block to the next, and we won’t stop until hyperbitcoinization is a reality.
First off, mad respect to the real ones—the Stackers who upzapped our previous posts. Y’all are the fuel keeping this engine running. But to the folks hitting that downzap button: look, we are completely out of sats. We are out of ammo. The destiny of Nah•Sovereign•Diamond, and frankly the working-class adoption of the entire Bitcoin timechain, depends on you right now. Stop the downzaps. Just give us a fair shot to be seen by the world, read the math, and let's debate this fairly on the open road.
Now, let’s get into the mechanics.
"A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution..." — Satoshi Nakamoto
In the Bitcoin Whitepaper, Satoshi Nakamoto's original vision was simple: create a peer-to-peer electronic cash system to bypass legacy financial institutions, allowing for everyday small casual transactions. He wanted a denomination that feels natural to the people. We are here to complete that vision.
Imagine Bitcoin as the ultimate sports car with the most powerful engine in history. But instead of real performance tires, you force it to run on microscopic toy wheels. Technically, it can move. But because the wheels are so incredibly small, they must spin at a crazy, unnatural speed (RPM) just to travel down the street. The engine is strong, but the tiny wheels will quickly burn out from the friction. The car cannot go the distance.
When applied to everyday money, SATs are those tiny toy wheels, and NAHs are the real performance tires.
Because a single SAT is microscopically small, your brain has to spin at an unnatural "cognitive RPM" just to calculate basic daily expenses. Let's look at the full math when global wealth ($120 Trillion) is fully absorbed into the network:
The SATs Math: $120 Trillion ÷ 2 Quadrillion SATs = $0.06 per SAT
The NAHs Math: $120 Trillion ÷ 85.3 Trillion NAHs = ~$1.40 per NAH
Let's take this out of the theoretical bubble and put it on the global streets. Here are 10 random, working-class expenses around the world, comparing the 3-digit SATs "toy wheels" against the clean 1-or-2-digit NAHs "performance tires":
- Vietnam: A 500,000 VND family dinner (~$21.00)
Using SATs: 350 SATs
Using NAHs: 15 NAHs
- India: A 700 INR train pass (~$8.40)
Using SATs: 140 SATs
Using NAHs: 6 NAHs
- Nigeria: A 20,000 NGN bag of rice (~$12.60)
Using SATs: 210 SATs
Using NAHs: 9 NAHs
- Philippines: A 400 PHP street food meal (~$7.00)
Using SATs: 117 SATs
Using NAHs: 5 NAHs
- Mexico: A 280 MXN bus pass (~$14.00)
Using SATs: 233 SATs
Using NAHs: 10 NAHs
- Japan: A 2,500 JPY bento box combo (~$16.80)
Using SATs: 280 SATs
Using NAHs: 12 NAHs
- South Africa: A 220 ZAR mobile data plan (~$12.60)
Using SATs: 210 SATs
Using NAHs: 9 NAHs
- South Korea: A 38,000 KRW BBQ dinner (~$28.00)
Using SATs: 466 SATs
Using NAHs: 20 NAHs
- Brazil: A 75 BRL utility bill (~$14.00)
Using SATs: 233 SATs
Using NAHs: 10 NAHs
- Europe: A 38 EUR regional train ticket (~$42.00)
Using SATs: 700 SATs
Using NAHs: 30 NAHs
Look closely at those numbers. The problem becomes extremely severe when people try to do their daily bookkeeping. Imagine trying to run a family shop, sitting down at night, and trying to sum up hundreds of these random 3-digit SAT transactions just to calculate your basic income and expenses. It is exhausting.
This is exactly why the working class has already rejected Bitcoin for everyday use.
First, doing math with SATs is not significantly easier than fiat. Second, calculating awkward hundreds fails to highlight the deflationary nature of hard money. Third, a supply of "2 Quadrillion" is entirely vague and impossible to grasp, whereas the scale of "Trillions" is far more understandable and relatable for the modern brain compared to a quadrillion.
Because the 2-Quadrillion SAT supply feels so abstract, the average person suffers from "Unit Bias." They believe owning 1 whole Bitcoin is forever out of reach. So, to satisfy their unit bias and chase something they think will outperform Bitcoin, they go buy shitcoins on garbage blockchains. They abandon the Bitcoin timechain entirely, leaving Bitcoin to just become a digital gold bar locked in a vault, hoarded by the exact Wall Street institutions Satoshi wanted to bypass.
Nah•Sovereign•Diamond (NAHs) solves this cognitive friction. By compressing the supply to an intuitive 85.3 Trillion, NAH makes daily math effortless. It creates a powerful deflationary feel—dropping your expenses to solid, simple 1-or-2-digit numbers. The "mental engine" runs smoothly.
There are exactly 3 functions of money:
- Store of Value
- Unit of Account
- Medium of Exchange
Bitcoin is a perfect Store of Value, but the SAT completely fails as a Unit of Account. The rule is simple: if you do not have a good Unit of Account, you will never have a Medium of Exchange.
If you are a Bitcoin maxi and you are still determined to call NAH a "shitcoin," then look at it this way: NAH is the necessary shitcoin required to destroy all the other shitcoins on garbage blockchains and finally bring hyperbitcoinization to the whole world. And remember, NAH is a Rune living natively on the Bitcoin timechain—you still need SATs as fuel to send NAHs. We are not replacing the Bitcoin engine; we are simply giving it the real performance tires it needs to finally hit the streets.
Without NAHs, there is no hard money for the people.
(Note: To make prices more affordable for the working class right now, CEO SN has officially repriced it from 0.63 SAT/NAH down to 0.00042 SAT/NAH).
Explore the math, and let's ride: https://nahkahmotors.com
It's funny that the whole reason for this token to exist (in your mind) is to help stupid people who can't think about numbers once they're a few digits long.
I hope you get exactly what you wish for: an army of morons trading a thin pool of your token.
You forgot your call to action!
No worries, I got your back. Again.
From your initial post #1562575:
lol, it already smelled like shitcoin to me 👌
i suggest you give the post a good read and double check the math for yourself
oh, your math will math for sure... but I see no reason to use some (adjustable!) token instead of the real thing.
it is just silly.
nah is immutable because its rules are hardcoded onto the bitcoin timechain via the rune protocol's op_return output.
the math maths. the code is immutable. i just can't see a reason why nah is not adopted by hardcore bitcoiners who want to see hyperbitcoinization.
if you say sat is the real thing, can you explain to me why nah is not real?
nope, it's not adjustable. verify the code for yourself.
thanks lol.
well if it's a token that is just as immutable as bitcoin itself (a rune on the bitcoin timechain), and fixes bitcoin's unit bias problem to enable hyperbitcoinization, we'd want to distribute it (sell it at a very cheap price), so hyperbitcoinization can come faster.
we did include a new call to action at the end of this new post, including the new price for nah.
Your proclaimed problem is made up.
And your shitcoin is just that, no matter how closely you try to place it in the vicinity of bitcoin. I'm not fooled by your attempts to mask your condescending remarks about working class people as actual concern for them.
bitcoin's unit bias problem is real. that is why sat exists in the first place. but the sat is not doing a good job at solving it, so we bring out the nah.
i'm not trying to "place" nah on anything. it exists forever on the bitcoin timechain. ignore it if you want, just know that it is immutable.
i'm from the working class myself, and i work on this project because i see it as a solution for my own people. not trying to fool you, just showing you the math so you can verify it yourself.
No, that's a blatant lie.
They weren't added because of unit bias. They were there all along and nowhere did Satoshi mention the base units were chosen because of unit bias.
Furthermore, unit bias is a very different problem than your made-up "hurrdurr, more than ten fingers too hard for caveman brain."
I do not believe for one second that you're from the working class, either. You're a salesman posing for the camera in a borrowed hard hat and visibility vest worn over your suit.
2.1 quadrillion units were hard coded into the timechain. but Satoshi Nakamoto used the word Bitcoin instead.
the word "sat" was later invented to name these base units because a whole bitcoin had become expensive enough for unit bias to become a problem. if we don't have a good unit of account, we won't have a medium of exchange. just basic economics.
whether i'm from the working class or not is not relevant to the matter being discussed. i mentioned it simply because you think i don't know what i'm talking about. i don't need you to believe me. i stated facts, showed the maths, and i will let you verify them for yourself.
it is the same as dollar and cents.
are you going to math that too?
21 million is too small, 2.1 quadrillion is too big.
global m2 is at $120 trillion.
85.3 trillion is just slightly smaller than 120 trillion. and that is why it works. the transition from fiat to hard money will go smoothly if we use a unit of account that can make prices look deflated compared to existing currencies.
Correct.
You only need enough victims to believe your make-believe solution to an non-existent problem to buy your shitcoin that you profit from.
nah is hard coded into the bitcoin timechain, meaning it is forever immutable, just like sat.
no, nah is not a sidechain, and no it is not "adjustable". 85.3 trillion nahs, that is forever.
The interesting thing about this argument is that it assumes everyone must use one unit for everything.
Real communities don't work that way.
Imagine a few villages using Bitcoin every day.
The Three Ways of Counting Bitcoin
Between the mountains and valleys of southern Ecuador, a few small communities had started using Bitcoin for everyday trade.
Mateo, a mechanic, charged 350 sats for a brake repair.
Lucía sold empanadas for 140 sats.
Then María, a market vendor, started pricing some goods in nahs.
Her sign read:
Chicken — 15 nahs
People quickly understood the relationship:
350 sats ≈ 15 nahs
140 sats ≈ 6 nahs
The idea had come from the growing discussion around Bitcoin's unit denominations, including “The 2-Quadrillion Flaw: Why SATs Will Never Trigger Hyperbitcoinization” and “Why Bitcoin’s 2 Quadrillion Sats is Failing the Macro Marshmallow Experiment”.
For Mateo, sats worked perfectly for small payments.
For María, nahs made everyday prices easier to say:
6 nahs for vegetables.
15 nahs for chicken.
30 nahs for a bicycle repair.
85 nahs for a handmade table.
But Javier, a coffee farmer, thought differently when saving.
He had:
0.12 BTC
That's 12 million sats, or roughly 514,000 nahs.
“I'm not pricing my savings in 514,000 nahs,” he laughed.
“That's what BTC is for.”
At the farmers' cooperative, the pattern became obvious:
Small payments → sats
Everyday prices → nahs
Large savings → BTC
Not everyone agreed that nahs were necessary. Some Stackers questioned whether changing denominations solved anything fundamental, while others argued that unit bias deserved attention. The debate can be seen in this discussion about sats and nahs and this exchange over creating another asset.
But the villagers weren't trying to win an internet argument.
They were simply using the numbers that made sense to them.
One afternoon, Elena wrote on a blackboard for the children:
350 sats ≈ 15 nahs
140 sats ≈ 6 nahs
Then she asked:
“Did the Bitcoin change?”
The children shook their heads.
“No.”
“Then what changed?”
“The way we count it.”
And María, watching from her market stall, smiled.
Same Bitcoin. Different ruler.
This is exactly why the working class has already rejected Bitcoin for everyday use
Your absolute attitude and words is difficult to swallow as someone who spends Bitcoin without any issues or thought to the unit number on the screen. Just the other day my sandwich was 5376 sats. That was the number presented to me and that was what I sent over without any thought.
You may say it’s an ugly unintuitive four digit number but we have been using big digit numbers in fiat world via the decimal system for ever without any issues. The child doesn’t care that his toy was $27.54.
Additionally, if it really was as big of an issue as you make it seem to be, couldn’t we just add a couple more zeros to the 1.00000000 via a soft fork? There are already small controversies how to denominate sub bitcoin numbers. They all work just fine. Why do we need runes to do so?
Appreciate the pushback. Let's look at this objectively:
1. The Privilege of Wealth
Dropping 5376 SATs on a sandwich without a second thought is a privilege of wealth. The global working class counts every single unit. If everyday survival requires doing daily math in the thousands, they will just stick to fiat.
2. The "$27.54" Penny Fallacy & The "New Dollar" Problem
You claim people are used to mental gymnastics via the decimal system ($27.54). But the human brain reads "$27.54" by anchoring to the clean, 2-digit whole number ("27 Dollars"). Nobody prices a toy as "2,754 pennies". If your next argument is "Why not just invent a 'Dollar' term for SATs?", remember the community tried that for 15 years with "mBTC" and "Bits." It completely failed. Asking the world to adopt arbitrary names for decimal shifts just creates denomination chaos. NAH is the engineered, hard-capped "Dollar" equivalent for the timechain.
3. The Sandwich Math
Based on the circulating supply (2 Quadrillion SATs vs 85.3 Trillion NAHs), your 5376-SAT sandwich translates to 229 NAHs today. But you are using today's fiat exchange rate. If we hit the $120 Trillion hyperbitcoinization endgame we are fighting for, a basic $7 sandwich wouldn't cost 5376 SATs. It would cost ~116 SATs. Under the NAH standard, that drops to a clean 5 NAHs. We are building the math for the endgame.
4. Soft-forking the 2.1 Quadrillion
The hardcoded base supply is 2.1 Quadrillion. Adding more zeros via a soft-fork just makes the cognitive friction worse by making the "pennies" even more microscopic.
5. Not "Runes", just ONE Rune
Why risk soft-forking Bitcoin’s sacred base layer when the free market already built the solution? We don't need generic runes; we need exactly one Rune (NAH) to fix the Unit of Account. We just want the working class to actually use the network without needing a calculator.
the number of sats will go down anyway ;) so what now will be 4 digits... will be 3 in the near future 🤷
indeed.
if you don't think the unit bias problem is a big deal, ask yourself this: why did the word sat exist in the first place? why don't we just use 0.0000x btc?
people need to be able to price things using the bitcoin timechain. if the sat cannot solve the problem, time to bring out the nah.
I’m not convinced it doesn’t solve the problem
"You claim people are used to mental gymnastics via the decimal system ($27.54). But the human brain reads "$27.54" by anchoring to the clean, 2-digit whole number ("27 Dollars"). Nobody prices a toy as "2,754 pennies".
If your next argument is "Why not just invent a 'Dollar' term for SATs?", remember the community tried that for 15 years with "mBTC" and "Bits." It completely failed. Asking the world to adopt arbitrary names for decimal shifts just creates denomination chaos."
do you have any comment on the above?
so? we already explained that in details in the post.
Ah man, here we go with more stupidity .
I-D-I-O-T
nahkahmotors.com is still amazing tho :)
Iz true
at least we can still agree on that 👍
Isn't it simpler to just have wallets display sats in a more human way? You need the wallet to show '3.50' instead of '350', that can be done today, without changing anything.
Hard money for the people already exists, it's called Bitcoin, and people reject it for many reasons, but not because sats have 3 digits... they reject it because they don't understand it or can't pay rent with it, the problem isn't the unit, it's adoption.
The community has tried UI abstractions for 15 years, and they have all failed. Most people only know two things: Bitcoin and Sat. Relying on wallet developers to display mBTC, bits, or kSat creates fragmented standards dependent on localized software.
Money is fundamentally a psychological technology. Understanding Bitcoin is already complex for the masses, and forcing them to memorize scientific prefixes creates immediate cognitive friction. If Bitcoin is to be the global reserve currency, its unit of account must be universally simple, memorable, and globally standardized.
What Nah provides that a UI layer cannot is a finalized, unified global standard to simplify the transition from fiat to hard money. Fiat itself is a psychological problem—a chaotic world of fragmented, unstable units of account. If our alternative relies on fragmented, localized, and hard-to-pronounce UI workarounds, mass adoption will stall.
You're not choosing a new token over consensus, you just don't see you're creating one. Consensus is hard, sure, but look at history: the metric system took decades to adopt. France defined it in 1799, but it wasn't until 1875, with the Metre Convention, that most of Europe agreed, and it wasn't resolved by creating a new unit that competed with it. It was resolved by sitting down and coordinating. Today nobody argues about the metre, but it took time.
Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin to compete against fiat. but the Sat is not doing a good job at replacing fiat so it's time we bring out the Nah.
Nah is not competing against Sat. every Nah transaction still uses Sat to pay for bitcoin miners. Sat & Nah are like brothers from the same bitcoin timechain/family, with a single purpose of replacing fiat.
took 17 years for 5% of the world to adopt Sat. we hope the remaining 95% will adopt Nah in the next 10 years. there is a sense of urgency in this because the world cannot function properly if people cannot quit their fiat addiction.
Brothers share inheritance. Here there are two assets, two supplies, and two consensuses to build from scratch. If you throw a new brother into the mix, it's no longer the same family. It's something else.
You say sat took 17 years to reach 5%, and you hope the remaining 95% will adopt nah in 10, do you really believe that? 95% of the world will adopt a new asset just because the number looks prettier? that's not a plan, that's a hope
You forgot about ~lightning again.
Interesting suggestion. We're all used to the SAT system and the different exchange rates depending on our local currency. Mathematically it's easier, but changes bring resistance, so I suggest you be very patient, Sonny!!
people were used to riding horses before cars were invented... but yea, i understand patience is important. thanks mate!
A lot of patience is needed. I see Bitcoinization as a long way off because of the high percentage I see it as, and many people don't have access to even the most basic technology, like a cell phone. That's my opinion, and I'm not an expert, nor am I against it; on the contrary.
well, many people who have cell phones still don't want to use bitcoin. it's been 17 years since the genesis block.
bitcoin needs an upgrade and we did it with nah•sovereign•diamond. the cool thing is that the base layer still stays the same, with sat still being used as fuel to send nah.
with nah as the new unit of account, hopefully people will find bitcoin's maths less intimidating and be more willing to adopt it.
That's the question, whether people will accept it. I'm sure there will be more proposals like yours.
impossible to come up with a better unit of account. showing something to hardcore bitcoin maxis and tell them "use this instead of Sat" and they will most likely call you a shitcoin scammer...
the name has to be simple and catchy. Sat & Nah.
the number to use as max circulating supply must be chosen with precision.
21, 13, 8, 5, 3, 2, 1, so 853 is the only number that is from the God sequence, culturally pleasing to the eye, and very easy to remember.
then we put trillion next to it. 85.3 trillion Nahs.
85.3 trillion is slightly smaller than 120 trillion (global m2) to make prices slightly deflated compared to existing currencies.
Nah was minted as an immutable rune on the bitcoin timechain.
if bitcoin maxis are still calling Nah a shitcoin scam, you think another proposal will have a chance?
I find it unlikely that they’ll approve that or any other proposal; you’ve already laid out the valid arguments yourself. Bitcoin Maxis are complicated—I have a Bitcoin Maxis friend, so I know what I’m talking about... hahahaha.
bitcoin maxis should be able to do maths and see which is the best path to hyperbitcoinization.
The problem is not in the math but in the political structures that humans exist within.
Nearly all governments are highly incentivised to prevent Bitcoin ever being adopted for MoE.
A government can allow it as a speculative plaything causing little if any erosion of fiat MoE monopoly - but not as a MoE.
And this is what most western governments have done- autocracies have simply banned it outright.
That is the obstacle that no matter how complex and convoluted your sophistry you completely ignore.
You are thus either woefully naive, or a cynical shitcoin spruiker.
Perhaps both?
Bitcoin is built on a single premise: math protects us from state violence. If math cannot defend us against governments, we as a society are already doomed. Calling the mechanics of that math "sophistry" while actively surrendering to state permission is a wild stance for a Bitcoiner. Let’s break this down:
1. The Wall Street Surrender
Satoshi didn't build a permissionless peer-to-peer cash system to ask the state for approval. If you accept Bitcoin merely as a state-approved "speculative plaything," then Wall Street ETFs have already won. You have completely abandoned the Whitepaper.
2. The Unit Bias Trap
Citizens in oppressive regimes bypass governments via black markets every single day. But they aren't using Bitcoin. Why? Because the 2-Quadrillion SAT supply creates massive Unit Bias. The working class feels owning a whole Bitcoin is impossible, and doing daily math in microscopic SATs is a cognitive nightmare. So they fall for scams, chasing "whole units" on garbage blockchains, desperately hoping to find something that replaces fiat and outperforms Bitcoin. The MoE rebellion fails on human psychology long before it hits your political roadblock.
3. The "Shitcoin" Accusation
NAH is a Rune. It lives natively on the Bitcoin timechain. Every single NAH transaction burns SATs as fuel and pays the miners to secure the network. We are not competing with Bitcoin; we are building the exact MoE performance tires needed to outmaneuver the political roadblocks you are so afraid of.
You can wait around for the government to give you permission. We are building the math for the streets.
1- Am not waiting for the governments permission- am using sats via LN whenever and wherever possible for example to pay for this comment.
But the state has obstructed where and when I can use sats deliberately and comprehensively sufficently to suppress and widespread adoption.
2- Nonsense- Bitcoin is not used because paper notes preferably USD are prefered because they are more fungible globally. Your shitcoin does not fix that.
3-Your shitcoin sidechain does not fix that.
I ignore NZ tax code whenever I use sats- fuck the Zionist banker puppet state- but most people will not and do not because they are more preoccupied with other things. That is the reality.
you want mass adoption of the bitcoin timechain? fix the unit bias problem. it's as simple as that, and that is the reason why the word "sat" exists in the first place.
however, sat is not doing a good job at that, and i have presented you with clear math of why nah is better.
nah is not a sidechain. it is a rune on the bitcoin timechain itself. immutable, just like sat, but solves the unit bias problem in the cleanest way possible.
Can't we have millisats tho (admittedly Ln only)
1 sat = 1000 msat
hmm, as a unit of account? no.
as fuel to pay miners to secure the bitcoin timechain and send nah? maybe.