We Need Terminology Between Satoshi and Bitcoin!

[BeerCoin.]

Hey folks. The current price of Bitcoin is currently around $36,000. A Satoshi is not even worth a twentieth of a penny. We need something in between!!! Right?

Up to this point, purchasing a coin, or several coins, has been accessible to many people. However, as the price grows higher, the purchase of a single coin will become out of reach for an increasing portion of the population (even those that save well). I think some people will be unenthusiastic on having to spend thousands of dollars for like a twelfth of a coin. It's also just a pain to think about trades and things in terms of .0285 Bitcoin or something like that. I'm trying to encourage terminology that gets rid of so many places after the decimal.

With Bitcoin likely to go up in price, there should probably be a term given to the 5th place after the decimal (1000 Satoshis). With a coin around 36k this decimal place would be worth around $0.36 (and might be about a dollar later this year...)


0.00001 Bitcoin  =  1  ___________   =  1000 Satoshis

Ideas on what it should be called? Has anyone already proposed a similar idea?


All the best,
Ben

[tinopener]

Hey folks. The current price of Bitcoin is currently around $36,000. A Satoshi is not even worth a twentieth of a penny. We need something in between!!! Right?

Absolutely! I have long been thinking this is the big psychological thing holding Bitcoin back for these reasons:

(1) It makes people realise that you can buy less than a Bitcoin
(2) People like the chance to get geeky with their knowledge e.g. in general knowledge quizzes people like to know the various sizes of champagne bottles such as Magnum, Jeroboam, Methuselah.

It would be great if some online organisation could organise this, i.e. ask for candidates for names and people could vote for them.

[20kevin20]

I personally think these things will come in time as and if we need them. We already have some terminology for smaller amounts of BTC (such as satoshi or mBTC), but I have never used anything besides sats and BTC tbh.

As I am not using BTC on a daily basis for my daily txs, it's way harder to get used to other kinds of terminologies and you don't want to get them mixed up in your mind. For example, mBTC confuses me every time so I'd rather not use it.

[avikz]

Good discussion point OP! Yes, the way bitcoin's price is increasing, we will probably need a new unit to define satoshi values of bitcoin. We already one such unit which is known as Millibitcoin or mBTC which is equivalent to 100,000 satoshi.

But with growing price, there will be a need to divide a single bitcoin to even smaller units for better understanding and calculation. But I think Thymos can organize a quiz or competition to name it officially. So please post your recommendation to him directly through a PM so the effort can fetch higher visibility.

[Charles-Tim]

A Satoshi is not even worth a twentieth of a penny. We need something in between!!! Right?

This should not be an issue for literates as literates are the one investing in bitcoin. But, the fact still remain that bitcoin can be in three forms, which are

1. Bitcoin
2. Million bitcoin
3. Satoshi

There are some sites that represent bitcoin in million satoshi. 1 btc is the same as 1000 mbtc or 100000000 satoshi. You can even make use of microbitcoin and theimes but the three known and common ones are btc, mbtc and satoshi which should not be an issue. Also, having the decimal is not a problem until bitcoin is more valuable in a way satoshi will be used to represent it.

[Ucy]

I think if the price grows moderately and continuously, purchasing coins to hold long-term will be fair for any kind of budget and for "late" long-term holders.
Well, I guess you want new smaller unit for Bitcoin...unit that accounts for future price increase and is more divisible?. I have thought about that too(assuming that's what you mean) and I have seen couple of interesting suggestions.
Will probably go through this and see if I will be able to come up with something that works well.

[cryptomaniac_xxx]

Maybe this thread can give us an idea, [Did you know?] Bitcoin Table of Units.

[dothebeats]

Isn't the metric system tagged together with bitcoin already enough for the said purpose? IMO adding another denomination together with the existing ones would just cause confusion even further. Also, the need isn't there yet, so I don't think this will be taken seriously given that other pressing issues are at hand atm. The metric system still handles the current scheme that we have for bitcoin's divisibility perfectly well, so maybe people just need to get used with that.

[tbct_mt2]

There are many units for bitcoin and you can check the unit table from Bitcoin Wiki. If you don't know that site, check it: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Units

I skip most of these units and only use Bitcoin, satoshi and milibitcoin (mBTC). They are my three most favorite units and I set up the default unit in my wallet as Bitcoin.

[lifeforcepools]

I don't quite understand why we need such a new terminology?

[hatshepsut93]

This has been proposed many times, making a smaller unit of Bitcoin the default one to encourage people buying more Bitcoin, because in that way it wouldn't seem overpriced. But most people understand that you don't have to buy one whole Bitcoin, and those who don't are probably better to stay away from it, because it means they are very tech illiterate and would likely do some serious mistakes in the process. So, a switch to a smaller unit won't be very useful. After all, it doesn't change Bitcoin's fundamentals in any way.

[serjent05]

@ OP you could have searched harder before stating an idea that is already around.  Thinking of terminology aside from Satoshi and Bitcoin had already been thought and had been frequently in use.

0.00001 Bitcoin  =  1  ___________   =  1000 Satoshis

You can call this 0.1mBTC or 10 μBTC  to define it you can check this article way back 2018

[Tstar]

I don't think that we need anything else than learning 5th-grade math! It's easier to work with satoshi's and mBTC than something new and I don't have any problems with calculations. Current terminology is enough!

[franky1]

short summary(tldr)
using ubtc('bits') 100sat does not break any code/transaction rules. as its just a GUI measure not a hard code measure. so go ahead use it. it harms no one

waffle
there has been talk to use 'bits'(100sat) as a new term for years.

the issue is the developers have other plans. they want to break bitcoin code which has always measured transactions in satoshis. by actaully adding 1000x more units of measure of a bitcoin.

yep bitcoins code is not measured in bitcoins(btc) but in satoshi's.
its hard coded into transaction/blockchain measure.satoshis are the base unit of bitcoin code.
imagine it like gold. on the surface. graphics say there are only 190,000 tonnes of gold. and so human graphic interfaces measure gold as tonnes. but at hard code ledgers/spreadsheet in code are measured in grams. always has been measured in grams.

and devs want to break that. but to do that they have to keep the idea of a btc(tonne) active. if people started using more friendly/useful satoshi multiple basket of 'bits' (100sat)(ounce) then it becomes harder for them to then mess around with the unit decimal basket of btc
in gold people dont care about tonnes. they prefer ounces/grams. and if one day they seen
190,000,000,000 grams of sharable gold. as the HARD LIMIT of sharable units of true value supply
and the next day able to trade in milligrams. suddenly people will see the supply of sharable units has multiplied

they basically want to denounce the importance of a satoshi. break the code of satoshi and turn satoshi into its own basket term of a lower unit of measure.(share dilution)

i find it disgusting that they want to do this as instead of 2.1quadrilian satoshis (bitcoin codes true supply limit)  of base units of measure. to be 2.1quintilion 'millisats' base sharable units
more sharable units=less scarcity

basically its share dilutions by allowing more shareable units. and is done under the deception of pretending there is still only 21mill btc basket terms

they could easily just use sats and modify the tx fee formulae(not hardcoded) to measure 1sat/24bytes or even 1sat/240bytes to keep a sat relevant and make fee's more affordable. but no. they kept the fee formulae as 1sat/byte for purposes of making a satoshi useless at GUI level utility. hiding satohis importance at user level/code level

again for emphasis. bitcoin hardcode rules and blockchain data is measured in satoshis. always has been. the basket terms of btc mbtc,ubtc are just arbitrary basket measures that people can choose to recognise at the human graphic level

it doesnt matter if people say there are
21mill btc (21m x 100000000sat)
2.1billion mbtc (2.1b x 1000000sat)
21trillion ubtc (21tx 100sat)
2.1quarillion sats

because the hard code still exists and nothing is broken
there are still 2.1 quadrilion smallest units of measure

blockchain data and hardcode is still measured in sats. as always.
the front end-graphic user interface then just makes it look easy to view by basketing it up into ubtc, mbtc, btc

..
however breaking the code and changing blockchain data and hard code into millisat. which they plan to, only works if they can debase the importance of satoshi by making the basket btc more user important to then slyly slip in more units of sharable units of a btc. and this can only be done by not letting people use friendly values of ubtc/mbtc that are more helpful to satoshi counting.not btc counting,

i now expect a pile of greyscale fangirls to start arguing my post showing off their desire to keep btc as an active measure just so they can push the share dilution game of breaking bitcoins hardcode and blockchain measures just to make bitcoin compatible with their non bitcoin networks of shadow chains shadow networks and ln

[Lorence.xD]

I personally think these things will come in time as and if we need them. We already have some terminology for smaller amounts of BTC (such as satoshi or mBTC), but I have never used anything besides sats and BTC tbh.

As I am not using BTC on a daily basis for my daily txs, it's way harder to get used to other kinds of terminologies and you don't want to get them mixed up in your mind. For example, mBTC confuses me every time so I'd rather not use it.

In my opinion, this terminology is enough to convey the meaning and the amount that it denotes. Adding another terminologies will be confusing, as the quote above says about getting mixed up with other things. Why not just call it like how you count money, 100 thousand dollars or 1 thousand satoshi.

[NeuroticFish]

i now expect a pile of greyscale fangirls to start arguing my post showing off their desire to keep btc as an active measure

Actually the only valid point behind keeping BTC as main unit in discussions/display would be to avoid overly confusing the newbies/newcomers.
Changing to a smaller unit would now be welcome ("nice to have"), but after current bull run/bubble/cycle it may become necessary because of the price impact, no matter who is saying what.
Just I'd prefer to have some sort of agreement and in a quite short (previously decided) time frame the major exchanges, wallets, services "migrate" to the new unit, to help avoid confusion.

[Ucy]

I don't think that we need anything else than learning 5th-grade math! It's easier to work with satoshi's and mBTC than something new and I don't have any problems with calculations. Current terminology is enough!

Simplicity actually really matters. A new unit has to be easy to understand and use by most users. The issue of lack of simplicity with the proposed/available units is one of the reasons I don't really consider them too much, even if I understand how they work.
They should be easy to work with (by most/all users) like you said

[yhiaali3]

This is a really good suggestion, this is similar to units of measurement such as km / m / cm, yes it is possible to find a term that everyone agrees on that is between Satoshi and BTC, this may be useful when Bitcoin is widely spread and its use becomes daily, but now that the use of Bitcoin is little, not on a daily basis, I think no one thinks about it.

[Argoo]

I personally think these things will come in time as and if we need them. We already have some terminology for smaller amounts of BTC (such as satoshi or mBTC), but I have never used anything besides sats and BTC tbh.

As I am not using BTC on a daily basis for my daily txs, it's way harder to get used to other kinds of terminologies and you don't want to get them mixed up in your mind. For example, mBTC confuses me every time so I'd rather not use it.

I don't think there is an urgent need for this already. In addition to the terms bitcoin and Satoshi, we use numbers that can also be expressed in various ways. If Bitcoin continues to rise in value, then Satoshi will gain value and may well be used to measure a small amount of a fraction of Bitcoin.
However, if this nevertheless becomes necessary, then for sure this problem will be solved by itself. With such a large number of users, the names of new terms will be found very quickly.

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

This is a really good suggestion, this is similar to units of measurement such as km / m / cm, yes it is possible to find a term that everyone agrees on that is between Satoshi and BTC, this may be useful when Bitcoin is widely spread and its use becomes daily, but now that the use of Bitcoin is little, not on a daily basis, I think no one thinks about it.

The lesser in my opinion, the better, its not that difficult to differentiate the amounts in bitcoin, I think that it can help that we are able to make learning bitcoin related terminologies when there is less to think of, and based on the replies on this thread, I can deduce the consensus that there isn't really a need for a specific distinction in between values of bitcoin.