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!
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.
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.
Provide clear educational materials and coordinated messaging.
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?
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.
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.
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%
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.
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.
Properties of Money