ㅤ

[Symmetrick]

ㅤ

[johnsaributua]

that's good info sir, i just heard netcoin.org i thought it was a different forum, apparently not the name of bitcoin is easier to remember and simple to say, although its function is more important than a name

[KennyR]

Finally he have chosen the right name, because netcoin means it gets connected with internet connectivity whereas the bit means data. Probably we can soon see projects on this name, and promoting in the name of Satoshi.

[OgNasty]

This was an interesting development. I would agree that Bitcoin was the right choice. I think he probably figured people would eventually trade “bits” (instead of satoshis) which sounds a lot better than “nets.”

It does show where his mind was at though. Currency built to be used on the internet was clearly the goal.

[bittraffic]

It's too coincidental for this to happen. Assuming it's Satoshi who registered these domains. It's really possible to trace him with the information from the registrar because during that time, even if you want it to be anonymous the registrar will still need your data.

Would you say that BTC is planned not just by Satoshi alone, someone must have advised him what to name right?

[Sandra_hakeem]

Actually, no one will support any revamp ( I'm not saying that's what you mean tho).
  The current name gives the whole digital process,a kinda magnificent display honestly. BIT-coin ; okay someone could Vividly understand that those digital coins are made-up in BITS and apparently, those bits are called Satoshi.

Anyone who's interested , probably in owning 1 Bitcoin should havr stacked-up enough sats which are also known as bits.
The name alone is a BRAND to which it function lies and that makes it self explanatory. Maybe netcoin could've been an ordeal in today but, it wasn't chosen so I think it wasn't guaranteed.

Cheers ,
Sandra💇

[Kemarit]

For me it seems that he has not decided yet to the name of his project,

Netcoin - Internet coin, this is what we call bitcoin, magic internet coin

Bitcoin - more subtle, but it attracts attraction, bit = 0 or 1.

But I do agree that he make the right call to stick with Bitcoin, if he is the one who registered the name Netcoin as well.

[mk4]

In my opinion: Netcoin sounds better when talking about the network, while Bitcoin sounds better when talking about the asset/currency.

On the top of my head, what I'd probably prefer is something like "bitnet" when describing the network, and "bitcoin" when describing the asset/currency. "Bitcoin" for the network and "bitcoin" for the asset/currency can be quite confusing for some.

[DapanasFruit]

Our guy Satoshi Nakamoto made the right choice of using Bitcoin rather than Netcoin. The kind of impact that Bitcoin has so far delivered for the whole world to witness can partly be attributed to its name. In the world where brands are fighting for attention of the people or the market, having a good name is always important as we have seen many good products falling away because the name is lousy and has no power in itself to gain some good attention. With Bitcoin this is surely a a biting name.

[pooya87]

That is very interesting but a little odd to be honest because at that point the code must have been written and "bitcoin-qt" should have been at least 80% complete. This means that the name should have been already set and any change would have required significant changes in the code, comments on it, etc.

[romero121]

In my opinion: Netcoin sounds better when talking about the network, while Bitcoin sounds better when talking about the asset/currency.

On the top of my head, what I'd probably prefer is something like "bitnet" when describing the network, and "bitcoin" when describing the asset/currency. "Bitcoin" for the network and "bitcoin" for the asset/currency can be quite confusing for some.

From the very beginning if bitnet have been used to describe the network and bitcoin for the currency means this could've been better and people used to it. Now if we think of such a term it feels different and sounds like doesn't make a connect.

Also as pooya87 mentioned this name have been already done, because throughout the program bitcoin is added. Anyhow even if it was named "Bitten" the popularity and the growth would've never shrunk, as the technology is very strong.

[NeuroticFish]

While I do understand a developer may have difficulties to find the best name for his product, I also tend to agree with @pooya87 that some of his work should have been already done at that date.

But it's not so difficult to change even such late from one name to another, since the nothing was released publicly yet at that date (please correct me if I'm wrong).
So I think that it's probably the last two name candidates, not different "products".

From the dates I could even conclude that he first thought of Netcoin name and next day he got the idea of Bitcoin name.

[348Judah]

Today, information appeared that Satoshi Nakamoto, presumably, could call bitcoin a little differently:

Judging by this find, it is possible that Satoshi chose between the names "netcoin" and "bitcoin", but chose the second option, or he prepared absolutely two projects, but the first one was not released at all. What other options do you allow?

Well said, this actually could be an interesting research made upon but how are we going to know that this actually is from Satoshi decision or not, having the two names almost the same time doesn't give enough reasons that it maybe from Satoshi because things happens coincidentally also atimes, but if this isn't coming out from Satoshi himself or the whitepaper made then i think it's better to discard such, but also, am well pleased with this kind of research and findings that it may be actually the fact we all don't know, even though it lack the enough proofs to the fact.

[Pmalek]

Judging by this find, it is possible that Satoshi chose between the names "netcoin" and "bitcoin", but chose the second option, or he prepared absolutely two projects, but the first one was not released at all.

I don't think satoshi worked on a different project. He was probably just unsure about how to call the creation and that's why he registered two different domains. It seems unlikely that the person or group that though of something as good as Bitcoin would also work on a different project that was abandoned for whatever reason, and there is absolutely no mentions of it anywhere. 

[Z-tight]

apparently not *,* the name of bitcoin is easier to remember and simple to say, although its function is more important than a name

You can probably say that now because Satoshi went with the name bitcoin, and that's the one we've been using since they created their project, if they had selected "netcoin" rather, and this news had come out about 13 years later, you would say the same thing in favor of netcoin. Neither of them is difficult to remember or say.

Well said, this actually could be an interesting research made upon but how are we going to know that this actually is from Satoshi decision or not, having the two names almost the same time doesn't give enough reasons that it maybe from Satoshi because things happens coincidentally also atimes

The records show it was a single person that purchased the two domains, and Satoshi was the person who released one of the domains to the public.

[bitzizzix]

the creation of Netcoin.org on August 17, 2008 and Bitcoin.org, created on August 18, 2008 just a day before the creation of Bitcoin.org.
indeed to make a good name is often one of the most challenging decisions one has to make when launching a new service or business, and Satoshi Nakamoto chose the proper name Bitcoin even though it was the second name after Netcoin was created the day before. https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-was-almost-named-netcoin-by-satoshi-nakamoto-hints-domain-data

[mk4]

From the very beginning if bitnet have been used to describe the network and bitcoin for the currency means this could've been better and people used to it. Now if we think of such a term it feels different and sounds like doesn't make a connect.

I have no idea if it would've been better or worse, but it was just my personal preference(and I think some would agree as well). It's pretty much just a better naming convention thing when talking about programming and technical stuff, as differentiating 2 very different things(network and currency) by the capitalization of the first letter is simply just a bad practice.

[passwordnow]

Wow, great find. Little info but it's great to know such information and it's likely that satoshi was really thinking about what should be the name of his project release.
Just as everyone is saying, he chose the right now and we're all happy with bitcoin. What I'm impressed with is that he's got it ready and prepared it well and he's just on the verge of choosing which is going to be the name of this great piece of invention he's made.

[noorman0]

Looks like satoshi was thinking hard to choose between the two. Bitcoin is indeed a more comprehensive name for computing devices, and perhaps satoshi's main hope is that bitcoin in the future can be scaled up not only by relying on an internet network that is easily controlled by providers.

[coinerer]

Bitcoin was a right choice. The name Netcoin sounds familiar.  And it's not compatible with blockchain. Bitcoin was a unique name which is compatible with blockchain and sound soo cool. Choosing the name Bitcoin was a brilliant move.  In the case of netcoin, things did not go well. i support bitcoin name which is already choice Satoshi at the time of creating Bitcoin.

[adzino]

Everyone here saying that bitcoin was a better choice when naming would have said that netcoin was a better choice if the name of the currency was netcoin today. People are so used to the word bitcoin, if any other name was chosen, it would sound weird to the people.

Maybe the first one was a typo? B replaced with N while typing..?

Bitcoin is better name. We have experience in naming and Bitcoin really describe the goal of it.

What goal does the name "describe"?

[Bitstar_coin]

Bitcoin sounds better now because people are already familiar with the name, perhaps if netcoin was the first choice it will still sound like the right name.
As intelligent as satoshi is am pretty sure he already knew the name bitcoin was perfect for the first project but I would have love to see how the netcoin would have performed assuming he went through with it. Who knows it might have been another successful one like bitcoin.

[jcojci]

Maybe the first one was a typo? B replaced with N while typing..?

If the first one were a typo, we would call it Betcoin and that could mean a coin for gambling

But Satoshi chooses the right name for his project and we know it is Bitcoin. Getting a name that can be like a brand for the project is not easy but he did the right thing.

[pawanjain]

Today, information appeared that Satoshi Nakamoto, presumably, could call bitcoin a little differently:

snip

Judging by this find, it is possible that Satoshi chose between the names "netcoin" and "bitcoin", but chose the second option, or he prepared absolutely two projects, but the first one was not released at all. What other options do you allow?

After all these years, it is interesting to find out there was an alternative name to bitcoin but truly bitcoin is the name we all needed.
I think no other name would have made it better than bitcoin. Satoshi is truly a genius.

Also, upon doing the whois lookup it is showing that netcoin was last registered on 2010-05-05.
It may also mean that Satoshi eventually gave up the domain and someone else bought it.
Or may be Satoshi himself bought it again with some other account. Also, netcoin.org is going to expire next year.

[buwaytress]

Don't think he was fumbling for a name on the penultimate day.

Used to do domain hunting/buying back when it was really cheap and easy to do (mid to late 90s). Can easily see how a "same registrar" could be used to buy all kinds of domains.

You get suggested all kinds of names, bundles, free domains even (yeah until at least mid 2000s domains were even free if you signed up for web hosting supported by GeoCities style ad placements all over the place), can't remember the name of it but I had dozens of sites just signed up for free using that service. A main site, then many others with similar names because well, I thought they were cool to have.

[kryptqnick]

Oh wow, I've never heard of it. I love the name 'Bitcoin', and I feel like it's a bit easier to pronounce and to remember. I am happy it's not Netcoin, to be honest, even though perhaps the name itself makes more sense because 'net' is probably a part of 'network'. Then again, I'm sure that if it's been Netcoin all along, we wouldn't have questioned it or felt like it was bad in any way.
I wonder how I've never heard of this before and how, it seems, it only became common knowledge now, 14 years later... Makes me think what other little things we don't know about Bitcoin and Satoshi but might learn along the way.

[casinotester0001]

Bitcoin.org, the website domain linked to the original Bitcoin, was created on Aug. 18, 2008, under AnonymousSpeech, a service in Japan that allowed users to buy domain names anonymously. Domain purchases under AnonymousSpeech around similar timelines revealed the creation of Netcoin.org on Aug. 17, 2008 — just a day prior to the creation of Bitcoin.org.

source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-was-almost-named-netcoin-by-satoshi-nakamoto-hints-domain-data

日本国 

[Synchronice]

To be honest, there is a massive difference between the meaning of Bitcoin and Netcoin.
Netcoin sounds like a marketing tactic to divert some attention on the internet but at the same time I remember that the support for Netscape, one of the most famous web browser, was canceled in 2008. Also, there is one thing that makes me think twice and it's Javascript. Javascript was made for Netscape and the name Java inside it was Netscape's marketing tactic. Probably, Satoshi analyzed that people would see it as a product of Netscape and the drowning of Netscape and the possible association of Netcoin being a product of Netscape, would probably be a bad choice in 2008.
Maybe this sounds like a conspiracy but there is a logic behind this. What seems here strange is that things changed in a day.

Bitcoin on another hand, sounds like there is a very deep meaning in this name and actually there is. Bit means Binary Digit, which is a native counting system for computers because it has two symbols, 0 and 1 and is the easiest counting system. The whole mechanism of action of a computer is based on 0 and 1, bit is the origin of everything in the computer, bit is a life, bitcoin is the origin of digital coins.

[Stalker22]

We have seen nothing to confirm Satoshi's interest in using the netcoin name, but also nothing to rule it out. It is possible that there was a project that never left the planning stages, or that was abandoned after being fully developed. However, without additional evidence, Satoshi's possible intentions will ultimately remain a mystery.

[The Cryptovator]

Interesting facts I never have noticed. Definitely, the name becomes popular in the crypto space. But if I had the chance to choose then I would choose netcoin instead of Bitcoin. Don't get me wrong, it's just the name, not the blockchain or technology. It must exist the same. I know most of you will disagree with me, but that's what I choose. Then netcoin would popular like now, but who knows what was Satoshi's mind? But I am pretty sure he rejects Netcoin and choose Bitcoin which is the most popular name nowadays.

[DdmrDdmr]

<…> upon doing the whois lookup it is showing that netcoin was last registered on 2010-05-05. <…>

That’s been driving me nuts for a while now. Apparently, @Or Weinberger got his snapshot through a paid subscription to domaintools, where one can retrieve a record of the changes to the domain’s info (see https://twitter.com/orweinberger/status/1573337271394254850?cxt=HHwWhICy1bL6ztUrAAAA)

If we look at the tool, the page that would render us the history of changes should be this one:
https://domainreport.domaintools.com/netcoin.org

Now if we haven’t got a paid subscription, nor decide to pay the 49$ asked for the report, at least we can see that the page indicates that it bears historical data for 14 years, starting Aug 18, 2008, which is the key date that we can’t seem to find on current who is or alike.

Cointelegraph’s article indicates that:

The Netcoin.org domain was later deleted and re-registered to a subsidiary of Web.com in 2010.

I’m not fluent with the details behind domains, but I guess that the above justifies the date being misleading to the story in current who is scans.

[Stalker22]

Now if we haven’t got a paid subscription, nor decide to pay the 49$ asked for the report, at least we can see that the page indicates that it bears historical data for 14 years, starting Aug 18, 2008, which is the key date that we can’t seem to find on current who is or alike.

You can do a limited domain history search at: https://whoisrequest.com/history/

According to this tool, the domain was first created on September 1, 2008, which I think is close enough to what is stated in the article.

[GreatArkansas]

Bitcoin is better name. We have experience in naming and Bitcoin really describe the goal of it.

For sure if Netcoin was really the name of Bitcoin, people will also love it and say it is a better name.
If it was Netcoin, the "net" is came from Internet word for sure which that make sense also if Netcoin was successfully really the name instead of Bitcoin, Bitcoin, "bit" is more likely technical.
Overall, Bitcoin and Netcoin for me are all good.

[davis196]

That's some really interesting info.
What about the other info on the domain registrar. Nobody is saying anything about the city of Nakano in the province of Tokyo.
Is this Anonymousspeech LLC a company that was registered by Satoshi Nakamoto? I don't believe that Satoshi is Japanese. Perhaps he did this to fool everyone about being Japanese.
Netcoins sounds OK as a name, but Bitcoin is what we got used to in the last 12 years, so almost all the Bitcoiners would think that Bitcoin is a better name. The name doesn't matter that much. What matters is the concept. Would you still use Bitcoin, if it's name was Netcoin, Blockcoin or even Satoshicoin? 

[Kakmakr]

I think NetCoin would have worked a bit better for me.... just because everyone refer to the Internet as the Net.... and we know that Bitcoin consist of a Network of nodes. There are not a lot of people that knows about "Bits and Bytes" ...when you look at the general public, so association with a Network when it comes to a new digital currency, would just be easier to explain.

In the end it just boils down to "education" and building a "Brand" or recognizable symbol.... and that is up to all of us to do that for Bitcoin.   

[Davidvictorson]

Judging by this find, it is possible that Satoshi chose between the names "netcoin" and "bitcoin", but chose the second option, or he prepared absolutely two projects, but the first one was not released at all. What other options do you allow?

This is good info. Maybe he had a team cast a vote and there was a tie between bitcoin and netcoin. Well, we will never know.  In my estimation, netcoin would have sounded just as good as bitcoin. And would have been as successful too. Basically, my thoughts are that it seems the name was the last thing he choose after developing the idea into a formidable project.

[eaLiTy]

Judging by this find, it is possible that Satoshi chose between the names "netcoin" and "bitcoin", but chose the second option, or he prepared absolutely two projects, but the first one was not released at all. What other options do you allow?

Like pooya87 mentioned, i doubt whether Satoshi was having any confusion on the name especially when the domain was registered and i have read majority of his public post and i do not remember him talking about Netcoin anywhere.

There was a shady coin in 2013 by the same name which was run by Leroy Fodor and there was a battle by Bruno Kucinskas to expose them back in the day.

I checked their domain and it was registered on 2010-05-05 and not as mentioned in the tweet.

~
We have already established that the domain was registered for the first time in 2008, and that it was subsequently re-registered after it expired the following year.

Yes i saw that but other than the Sept 1 registry details we cannot see the details like it is shown by the OP, how OP got those details showing state code and country code etc to be precise.

[Little Mouse]

Judging by this find, it is possible that Satoshi chose between the names "netcoin" and "bitcoin", but chose the second option, or he prepared absolutely two projects, but the first one was not released at all. What other options do you allow?

I don't think there were two different projects at all. We don't know if satoshi had registered entcoin.org but assuming that he did, it's almost sure that both the domain was registered for this single project. Maybe he wanted to name the project netcoin. NET of netcoin is taken from the internet as bitcoin is the coin of the internet but later on he changed his decision for some reason. Netcoin doesn't sound good either, to be honest, it sounds like some money-making project lol.

[crwth]

I think the crypto currency community would have a different kind of feeling or something that makes you think, otherwise if it was called Netcoin or something else. I would’ve still preferred bitcoin rather than anything else.

A lot of companies that have bitcoin in their name would be kind of funny if it is netcoin. That’s just my take on it.

[Stalker22]

~
I checked their domain and it was registered on 2010-05-05 and not as mentioned in the tweet.

We have already established that the domain was registered for the first time in 2008, and that it was subsequently re-registered after it expired the following year.

[budi691]

new and in-depth information about the origin of the name Bitcoin, it is interesting because if only the name NETCOIN became possible today people would refer to Bitcoin as an internet coin not digital money, although maybe the name itself makes more sense, but in the end satoshi should prefer Bitcoin , which we have known all along and will continue to be Bitcoin forever

[Nrcewker]

that's good info sir, i just heard netcoin.org i thought it was a different forum, apparently not the name of bitcoin is easier to remember and simple to say, although its function is more important than a name

I guess Satoshi wanted to name it netcoin as “net” refers to internet and he wanted to create a coin based on internet?
But he choose Bitcoin as the name maybes because of “bit” is something related to coding, and actually behind bitcoin there is actually many open source codes, so he finally named it after it.
These all are assumptions, and don’t have solid proof to back it. So yes if Satoshi someday comes back and reveal the actual truth, then it will be apple’s pie for everyone.

[LUCKMCFLY]

All this is very interesting, the truth is I did not know that I had handled the Netcoin option, it is strange and it would feel strange if they said Netcoin, by pure convection Bitcoin sounds cooler, but it is interesting because there are records of it, and everything that took place From there, it has meant the entire history of more than 10 years fighting against the opinions of third parties, of governments where they attack Bitcoin as if it were the worst thing created by man, but it is the only one that can save man from a global economic disaster, for me it is, however when I repeat it in my head, Netcoin is also cool, however it seems excellent to me.

[EarnOnVictor]

The authenticity of that report can't be affirmed, so it might be true or not. Notwithstanding, Bitcoin is a perfect name because it's unique as nothing of such has been coined (named) before it. Nonetheless, Netcoin is not bad as well but it might not be a perfect name since "Net" is an acronym for the internet, so it might look too general. General in the sense that all the altcoins and shitcoins could be arguably regarded as Netcoin since they are coins on the internet. Even faits might name some online wallets similarly to that, which will make it even less unique.

[Moeda]

Today, information appeared that Satoshi Nakamoto, presumably, could call bitcoin a little differently:

Judging by this find, it is possible that Satoshi chose between the names "netcoin" and "bitcoin", but chose the second option, or he prepared absolutely two projects, but the first one was not released at all. What other options do you allow?

If we look at the two nodes that were developed, then Netcoin was developed one day before Bitcoin. Netcoin on the 17th and Bitcoin on the 18th of August. I assume that the Netcoin nodes are only for testing the main Bitcoin Core network system. But Bitcoin is also developed in a testnet version so it does not require Netcoin as a test network. Another assumption is that someone is trying to imitate Bitcoin with the same node but a different name, namely Netcoin.
If we check the netcoin.org site registration, the site registration year does not match what is stated in the code. One year after the code was developed, the website was registered.
Unlike Bitcoin, the year of registration of the website is 2008, while the launch of Bitcoin is 2009. This is more real than Netcoin.

[Stalker22]

If we look at the two nodes that were developed, then Netcoin was developed one day before Bitcoin. Netcoin on the 17th and Bitcoin on the 18th of August. I assume that the Netcoin nodes are only for testing the main Bitcoin Core network system. But Bitcoin is also developed in a testnet version so it does not require Netcoin as a test network. Another assumption is that someone is trying to imitate Bitcoin with the same node but a different name, namely Netcoin.

What the hell are you talking about? There is no "Netcoin node" or Netcoin test network. Where did you get that from?

If we check the netcoin.org site registration, the site registration year does not match what is stated in the code. One year after the code was developed, the website was registered.
Unlike Bitcoin, the year of registration of the website is 2008, while the launch of Bitcoin is 2009. This is more real than Netcoin.

There is nothing about the netcoin.org domain listed in the code. You got something wrong there. The only connection between the netcoin.org and bitcoin.org domains, as stated in the article, is that both domains were registered at the same time and with the same registry from Japan.

[CryptSafe]

I think Satoshi was contemplating on which name suits his goal and he did got it right using Bitcoin as it flows with the digital inclination. Come to talk of it, it's all about machine language which needs something of linking to the name and activities for which it is setup. Though the registration of both looks similar that and identities  were all the same.

[bocyaj]

Bitcoin is not a comparable one,you can’t compare the King to any pieces in th chess board.All the pieces in the board defend the King,likewise the bitcoin was defended by all the trusted nee cryptocurrency.All the new crypto emerging with the help of the bitcoin was defending the bitcoin.Bitcoin was safeguarding the other crypto currency in the past.Now the price of bitcoin will reflected in other crypto currency.

[Moeda]

There is nothing about the netcoin.org domain listed in the code. You got something wrong there. The only connection between the netcoin.org and bitcoin.org domains, as stated in the article, is that both domains were registered at the same time and with the same registry from Japan.

Yes. In the article it is mentioned that the Netcoin.org domain was listed one day before Bitcoin.org. But in the article does not show proof of registration. And they said that the domain was deleted, then re-registered in 2010. While I provide information based on what is presented on the Whois site.
Whereas in other statements, I only said "assume", which means that it may be true or it may be false. What is said with the word assumption does not have to be true.

[Stalker22]

There is nothing about the netcoin.org domain listed in the code. You got something wrong there. The only connection between the netcoin.org and bitcoin.org domains, as stated in the article, is that both domains were registered at the same time and with the same registry from Japan.

Yes. In the article it is mentioned that the Netcoin.org domain was listed one day before Bitcoin.org. But in the article does not show proof of registration. And they said that the domain was deleted, then re-registered in 2010. While I provide information based on what is presented on the Whois site.
Whereas in other statements, I only said "assume", which means that it may be true or it may be false. What is said with the word assumption does not have to be true.

I suggest you read this entire topic, you might find the information you are missing.

By the way, what did you even mean by this?

If we look at the two nodes that were developed, then Netcoin was developed one day before Bitcoin. Netcoin on the 17th and Bitcoin on the 18th of August. I assume that the Netcoin nodes are only for testing the main Bitcoin Core network system. But Bitcoin is also developed in a testnet version so it does not require Netcoin as a test network. Another assumption is that someone is trying to imitate Bitcoin with the same node but a different name, namely Netcoin.

Do you even know what the term "node" means? This is pure bullshit in my opinion and you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. So I suggest you stop spreading false information and spamming the forum. Or better yet, stick to the Altcoins board where your crap might be better received.