pull down to refresh
30 sats \ 3 replies \ @davidw 17 Feb freebie \ parent \ on: Stacker Saloon
Nothing needs changing.
I only see this increasing the complexity. If no other standard exists to date, there’s almost zero chance it’ll be adopted by all wallets. It’s one thing to have a network fork, but a complete other thing to have a subjective fork that is very personal to each person.
Sats are well recognised now. Perhaps we’ll see devs and wallets implement their own sats symbol variant, but as long as they’re still called sats… all is well as far as I’m concerned.
The problem is not user bias. It’s that people don’t understand bitcoin. And that there still today aren’t enough products to rival fiat UX. We should design to solve those problems IMO, not new names for sats and not increasing the friction to understanding a simple concept like sound money.
I am mostly on board with you. Every suggested option is objectively terrible (besides maybe #2), not saying the one I drew up in paint isn't. I do however like it more than almost every other option I've seen suggested. The kebab makes me want to die.
"Sats" might be here to stay, might not. Sats are well recognized by early innovators, "real bitcoiners" or some devs and/or those who actually care about the 'lore' of bitcoin, but if bitcoin ever just becomes universally understood as money that >99% of people only choose to use because the other 99.9%+ of the world uses it, then the only true universally understood and accepted name for the asset on the Bitcoin network will be bitcoin. "Bucks" are well recognized as dollars, but never legally or formally speaking.. probably a similar fate for "sats".
Also my point remains that I believe Satoshi himself would be shaking his head at the community for coming to that consensus.
reply
reply
Also, the lack of standardization across the industry leads to unnecessary complexity and confusion for newcomers.
reply