BTC must split into smaller units to survive

[Jet Cash]

A Satoshi is a small unit. Why not use Bitcoin to describe the currency ( like Sterling or Renminbi), and Satoshi as the unit ( like Pound or Yuan).

[1714679779]

1714679779

[1714679779]

1714679779

[1714679779]

1714679779

[1714679779]

1714679779

[leopard2]

A Satoshi is a small unit. Why not use Bitcoin to describe the currency ( like Sterling or Renminbi), and Satoshi as the unit ( like Pound or Yuan).

LOL  

yes that would help beating XRP but Bitcoin is not meant to function atomically. Satoshis are there so you have almost no rounding errors and high precision when converting fiat/altcoin into Bitcoin.

Also I found that extremely large circulations are problematic because people have difficulties reading such numbers. I believe anything beyond a trillion is too high. There are

21 000 000 000 000 00 satoshis, this is not good, will appear as scientific notation (1e##) on CMC charts, not good for Earthlings.

[leopard2]

To anyone who has working eyes and brains, it should be clear now that today, the only important factor for success of  a cryptocoin (or a non-cryptocoin like XRP) is, that it looks cheap. Just go on coinmarketcap; circulation upside down. Result: higher supply coins get all the profit. Cardano, XLM, XRP, Iota, et cetera.

I will disagree with you on the bold part of your message in the following ways

1. You don't have to go on the insultive side in trying to pass your message across as you can do in a well matured way than going that route of insulting as if you are the most intelligent in the whole community.

Sorry for the undertone then. That is absolutely not what I intended. I am only pissed off that some tokens are so successful just because they look cheap. I wrote that in a bad mood. It is more cynicism than anything. 

[illinest]

To anyone who has working eyes and brains, it should be clear now that today, the only important factor for success of  a cryptocoin (or a non-cryptocoin like XRP) is, that it looks cheap. Just go on coinmarketcap; circulation upside down. Result: higher supply coins get all the profit. Cardano, XLM, XRP, Iota, et cetera.

That's only during a particular phase of the speculative mania. I first got involved with Bitcoin at the height of the April 2013 bubble. My first inclination was to buy LTC because it was "cheap" and possibly "the next Bitcoin." I paid dearly for that mistake, and over the next year year I immersed myself in all things cryptocurrency. In the end, I came to realize that Bitcoin is by far the most reliable blockchain and store of value in the space. There is a learning curve here. "Cheap price" is no replacement for brilliant and driven developers. Newcomers to the space will learn that over time, and likely by buying into projects based on nothing more than unit price. That will come back to bite them.

I propose a hardfork, 1 BTC (old) = 1000 BTC (new) 

No thanks. This whole "we need to rush things and make gimmicks to compete with altcoins" attitude is destructive and divisive.

It would also make it more practical for smaller payments....

How so?

[nicemycoin]

Sorry I can't  agree with you .
I am considering it's the most high price of BTC  attracting the media and encourage them to report BTC when it hit a new record,it will let more people know BTC.

[leopard2]

Sorry I can't  agree with you .
I am considering it's the most high price of BTC  attracting the media and encourage them to report BTC when it hit a new record,it will let more people know BTC.

Well, you got a point but....BTC is not getting any dough right now, so having the high price is not as good as having a high market cap

I will stop posting here, just one last post. If nothing is done, it is possible that in the next few months, maybe weeks, BTC will be surpassed by XRP and a bunch of other coins and drops to under 10% market cap

Once the top positions have been filled by others, the king status will be gone. Already BTC owners lose many billions due to this idiocy. If BTC had split in early 2017, from 1000 to 1, it would now be at $100. Our 100 000$ BTC, would already be here.

To illustrate my point and as a final wakeup call here is a pic of CMC, "all coins" then sorted by circulation - reverse. Up to 1000% in 1 day, up to 2000% in 7 days, this is money that BTC owners lose due to all the autistic denial of being "KING". BTC domination down to 33% Cheers.

Some coinz do all the work that BTC has done in 2017, in 10 days. DIX asset - not even a website - rubbish - but 2500% in a week.  

https://imgur.com/3SgMRTJ

[Carlton Banks]

If nothing is done, it is possible that in the next few months, maybe weeks, BTC will be surpassed by XRP and a bunch of other coins and drops to under 10% market cap

XRP is not blockchain tech, it's centralised and hence censorable. Any gains in value are temporary, and besides, Bitcoin circumvents the Ripple use case anyway.

I will stop posting here, just one last post.

Thank god for that

[Rahar02]

To anyone who has working eyes and brains, it should be clear now that today, the only important factor for success of  a cryptocoin (or a non-cryptocoin like XRP) is, that it looks cheap. Just go on coinmarketcap; circulation upside down. Result: higher supply coins get all the profit. Cardano, XLM, XRP, Iota, et cetera.

Only solution is splitting. Stocks do it all the time.

I propose a hardfork, 1 BTC (old) = 1000 BTC (new)  

I will disagree with you on the bold part of your message in the following ways

1. You don't have to go on the insultive side in trying to pass your message across as you can do in a well matured way than going that route of insulting as if you are the most intelligent in the whole community.

+1
Insulting others who have a different perspective and act like the smartest person here, it's not a good way to start a discussion with those words.
if Op really thinks it will work, just ask core developers to do so, doubt they will approve it though.
Change the amount of bitcoin from 1 to 1000 doesn't solve the problem of bitcoin transaction, even though it may seem cheap and more people will see it as a bunch of numbers to buy, but it will add the backlog on the mempool without proper scale solution implemented yet > more adopters but the network still on current condition = transaction fees increase even higher and confirmation time become longer.

[chimcoin]

I also think that if other coins eg Litcoin, Dash etc, surpass bitcoin ,there may face similar issues as segwit and many hard forks .As it stand now,Bitcoin has gone to the level where those segwit  hard forks may not make much impart in bringing down the price,as in a hardfork, 1 BTC old= 1000 BTC new,but there could be a solition that may resolved these issues later .

[cellard]

Jimmy Song proposed a BIP that has to do with this issue:

Hey all,

I am proposing an informational BIP to standardize the term "bits". The
term has been around a while, but having some formal informational standard
helps give structure to how the term is used.

https://github.com/jimmysong/bips/blob/unit-bias/bip-unit-bias.mediawiki

Entire BIP included below (mediawiki format) for convenience.

Best,

Jimmy

Read the BIP here:

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-December/015399.html

Now.. if you think that a hardfork is a good idea, I think you are a bit delusional to think it would end up well. We would end up with 2 Bitcoins (not counting the existing forks) because once again, a lot of people would be against the idea, so the best way to do this is to standardize a smaller unit of value within interfaces and not change the actual protocol.

Personally im used to dealing with small amounts of satoshis and a lot of 0's.. after so many years I got used to it.

[leopard2]

Professional trader noticing what I have noticed in OP

https://www.coindesk.com/weathering-altcoin-shitstorm-investing-next-one/

"It seems ridiculous to say, but the cheaper the asset, the greater the chance of a return. And when I said cheap, I'm not referring to a fundamental measure of value like a value investor would (P/BV, P/E, etc). I'm referring to its price.

A chart of returns over the past seven days paints this picture. There's a direct negative correlation between the price of the token and return. It's scary, but it's unfortunately true."

"Investors trying to find fundamental value are ripping their eyes out. XRP, with legitimately zero fundamental usage (see below), just passed BTC in diluted market cap."

[leopard2]

Jimmy Song proposed a BIP that has to do with this issue:

Read the BIP here:

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-December/015399.html

could work but only if you can efficiently send individual bits. then and only then we could have the first line on CMC look like this

Bits $2.047.981.767.000    $0.14767    $160.241.500.000    16.792.400.000.000 BIT    +1000,99% 

[Nomad88]

Interestin way of thinking, however different blockchains can not represent same coins in the same time. Unless they can work as a side chain (maybe). As soon as you fork a coin, you end up with two different blockchains which have different values as well as security levels. This idea can be possible in the future with implementing a few extra technologies.

[crypt0heaven]

I wouldn't go as far as saying it has to be split into smaller units to survive, but it would most certainly help on the road to mass adoption.

It would be better if people end up sending fewer satoshis lets say 1000 instead of 10000 than more with all the 00000 before the real amount. It can become quite confusing and I know of people who have screwed up this way.

[erlnd]

I just think everyone who uses btc, should give the amount in satoshi or mBTC

[xsedivy]

We need Bitcoin Price Index showing price of other alts relative to Bitcoin supply - this must be displayed everywhere along with USD price. That could do the trick

[lifetimebitcoins]

we are thinking bitcoin to spilt but USD is losing its value every day because of bitcoin denomination sooner most of the purchases will happen in Bitcoin demonisation not in USD that is when Bitcoin really won the game

[Tonyfredzy]

Maybe, but splitting will surely lead to more confusion. I don't know much about the technical part of bitcoin but as a layman, I doubt it's going to solve the problem.

[andreasdope]

hoping this could happn

[micloop]

MAh, I don't think split it into smaller units will help it.
I've listen that everybody trying to solve BTC's problems, but I don't think it could be solved, unless LN could do some amazing job to BTC. If it don't solve the speed/fees problem, its domination will go lower and lower, until disappears.