ㅤ

[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"?

[1714480343]

1714480343

[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.