40 sats \ 2 replies \ @xz 28 Apr 2023 \ parent \ on: Groundbreaking Solution to BTC<>Sats Denomination Problem Implemented. bitcoin
Yeah, I think usage of the unicode symbol should be the way to go. Standardisation is key.
In a perfect world, I guess you'd want users to also learn that in addition to the integer, there's also a way to talk about denominations as 'things' as opposed to refering to fractions.
There is no unicode for sats, still, I wrote on habla.news on why i like satsymbol's approach The formatting is a bit off.
I am still a bit torn on the need for a sat symbol, and I really hope we can avoid it. If you look at the cent, it can be written as "cent", "ct", "¢", or just "c". Why not then be OK with "sat"?
Or we just have fun with it and go for "₿s" (inspired by the use of "Bs" by Venezuela and Bolivia for their currencies).
reply
Sure, I guess that there's not much difference in using three or four letters..
Pounds & Pence, Dollars & Cents, Bitcoin & Sats
Interesting point. Writings out sats or satoshis is not that difficult and is distinguishable.
I guess, similar to the redenominations of fiscal currencies over the years, the issue is then, for wallets to choose to adopt accounting in ₿ OR sats and [ satoshi ] would be transcribed into [ サト ] [ 中本聪 ] [ساتوشي ] [ Сато́си ] etc.
Maybe the simplest answer wins.
Or we just have fun with it and go for "₿s"
Not sure about that!
reply