Believe it or not I am seeing a lot of new support for this BIP, so I made sure to address all public comments, including noting the interaction with "sats" ... anyway, Make Sats Bitcoin Again!
pull down to refresh
133 sats \ 6 replies \ @OT 15h
Do we really need a BIP to know that sats are the standard?
Since money is a social construct its better for it to be learned through that medium.
reply
150 sats \ 5 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 14h
Take a look at the details of the BIP. The core intent is to correct how bitcoin is displayed due to people misunderstanding it as supporting floating point while it is actually integral.
reply
39 sats \ 4 replies \ @DarthCoin 14h
Who cannot understand that 1 BTC = 100M sats is a fucking moron
Is so fucking simple:
- when you deal with Bitcoin onchain you use BTC (eg 0.1BTC)
- when you deal with Bitcoin on LN you use SATS (eg. 123 sats or 1M sats)
Anything else is a fucking IDIOCY.
reply
21 sats \ 2 replies \ @flat24 14h
We need @DarthCoin's teachings and ideals to be taught in schools.
Thus we assure that the next generation of Bitcoiner is well awake.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 14h
I'm sure he's a great guy IRL.
reply
41 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 13h
reply on another page
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @zapomatic 4h
perhaps you forget that half of people have an IQ lower than 100.
reply
141 sats \ 2 replies \ @CruncherDefi 13h
RENAMING base unit is unrealistic. There will be always a split between old-naming-users and new-naming-users. Some wallets will get updated. Some will not. It's would be a mess having name collisions like that.
For something realistically doable you need backward compatible change.
More realistic proposal is to DROP the 'bitcoin' name as a unit. Bitcoin name could refer only to the protocol/network. And the currency unit would be sats. If some wallets would lag or not apply the change it would not be a big deal. Eventually everyone would converge to new convention without any name collisions on the way.
reply
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 13h
This is just an EGO-BIP. Don't hurt his ego....
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 13h
I understand that you think dropping the name bitcoin from Bitcoin is realistic.
reply
10 sats \ 16 replies \ @BlokchainB 14h
Is this hat for sale?
But this BIP would clear up a lot of confusion. Personally I hate the decimal UI.
reply
106 sats \ 15 replies \ @ek 13h
Use sats as the denomination and you don’t have decimals.
reply
0 sats \ 14 replies \ @BlokchainB 13h
Not all apps/wallets do this
reply
92 sats \ 13 replies \ @ek 13h
Which wallet are you using that doesn’t have this setting?
reply
0 sats \ 12 replies \ @BlokchainB 13h
SideSwap is one most exchange wallets don’t use sats denomination plus like the BIP explains it’s all bitcoin
reply
101 sats \ 9 replies \ @ek 12h
That’s the point: it will never be "all bitcoin" or do you really think every single wallet out there will make this BIP their default?
Stacker News will never support this BIP as long as I’m a part of it.
view all 9 replies
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @mo 12h
is probably a good sign for you to stop using it
reply on another page
87 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 12h
Any decent LN wallet is using sats as denomination (except Bitkit).
BTC is only for onchain.
reply on another page
31 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 13h
From your security considerations:
So you think it will be easier to explain to people that bitcoin might not mean bitcoin because some wallets might mean satoshi because they support this BIP while others not, instead of just telling them that 100M satoshis = 1 BTC?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 13h
read what you just wrote as if you were the crazy one and see how much more complicated yours is
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @NovaRift 12h
Worst idea
reply
40 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 14h
I'm already feeling like a whale
reply
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 13h
You're welcome! :)
reply
50 sats \ 0 replies \ @meduzot 6h
I think this is a good idea. I've seen so many people confused by UIs that flip between bitcoin and sats. Then they also get confused why there's 100 million satoshis in a bitcoin (not 100 sats per bitcoin like cents to the dollar). Then they get confused by sats vs satoshis, etc.
reply
50 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 10h
I've said several times that I like the idea. To be effective it needs support from people with very powerful distribution.
reply
50 sats \ 0 replies \ @024a1200de 11h
Block survey from a couple years ago. I'm with you John
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @mo 12h
In your proposal, you still referring to the current bitcoin as BTC, ca you elaborate on it?
is BTC the unit used by financial systems so it stays unchanged? I mean why
when everything else SHOULD change?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 11h
It's this way because of the formal feedback that was given about the BIP. So I acknowledge that stock tickers are rationally an external spec.
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @grayruby 12h
Don’t mind it but it’s too late. Inertia.
reply
20 sats \ 4 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 11h
there was a time before "sats"
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @grayruby 11h
Yes, and a lot has changed since then. People are used to sats, they are likely to continue to use sats unless something significant compels them otherwise.
reply
50 sats \ 1 reply \ @024a1200de 11h
I did the math a while ago. There's probably less than 100k people who know what a sat is. Less than 10k who actually use the word sat regularly and/or care about it.
That's 0.0001% of the world's population. Bitcoin is for the remaining 99.99%
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 10h
That's fair.
reply
20 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 11h
I am not one of those people. I feel clowny saying "sats".
reply
0 sats \ 7 replies \ @ek 13h
Show us
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 13h
for example
reply
100 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 13h
Link? You just sent me a screenshot of your own tweet.
reply
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 13h
it's photoshopped you shouldnt believe me
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 13h
I don’t believe you, that’s why I asked for a link.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @BitcoinErrorLog OP 13h
x.com
view all 2 replies
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @zapomatic 4h
I support this. The code refers to bitcoins as a sum of the base unit, so that would mean that the original intent satoshi had with the first code was to think of the smallest unit as bitcoins.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 8h
Hey OP with all due respect...
GFY
Thanks
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @LibertasBR 9h
The confusion with names is just a matter of adapting to new concepts for those who start to have bitcoin. I don't see any use for this BIP considering that in the future this opens the way for name changes to suit current users within the code, and a hardfork would be needed for this.
I personally don't like the term "sats", but it's a consensus like in a living language, so I'll keep using it.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @fd055dcc2f 10h
there's a Russian proverb:
when cat has nothing to do he licks his nuts
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @sox 10h
Wow, I'm gonna support you:
- Find a mirror
- Take a look at it
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 13h
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 14h
what a bullshit
reply