I was and am team sats. I wish it would work. But honestly after our team building a UI for people actually paying for things, and having non-Bitcoiners stumble over “wtf is a sat even” every. single. time. I threw my hands up and regretfully side with this B thing. We’re still gonna use sats in a sneaky location where it makes sense (merchant services). But you can’t force an entire cohort of people to just “get it”. You tweak this one stupid B thing and it gets people using it plus they stop with the “I’ll never be able to buy a bitcoin so what’s the point?” bullshit. And it doesn’t change the underlying tech whatsoever. So you get to the point where you’re like “fuck it everyone’s stupid”- and just ship it. Satoshi would be happy more people are using it as money and not give a fuck about his nym anyway.

Replies (6)

Stepping outside of the hardcore bitcoin/nostr bubble, 90% of the time people ask me if I am talking about a new shitcoin when I mention Sats. Then I take a step back and remember most bitcoiners have never even got to make their firts transaction out of their stack. Open and accesible markets fix this 🚀🤝✨
I mean using the logo even when talking about sats is fine. But its then Bitcoin, not Bitcoins. Thats a huge difference, almost deceptive. 2 satoshis are not 2 bitcoins, but it is bitcoin. I also think, people get dollars and cents, they can figure out bitcoin and sats. Will you rename fractional satoshis also bitcoin when its implemented?
Im pretty sure its gonna play that way. A "satoshi" is an after the fact ambiguity title I think anyway. Whatever sticks with the unwashed masses will be the norm.
I get the point of simplicity. And even the valuation in sats could make more sense for many. But how does this help explaining the scarcity of Bitcoin? "It's absolute scarce because there will ever only be 2.1 quadrillion Bitcoins."