Bitcoin BIP-177: The mainstreaming game of 1 sat = 1 Bitcoin

Source: Lighting Network

Imagine if one day, the 0.001 Bitcoin you hold suddenly turned into 100,000 "bitcoin", how would you feel? This is precisely the change that the BIP-177 proposal hopes to achieve. Initiated by Synonym CEO John Carvalho, this proposal is quietly becoming one of the most controversial topics in the Bitcoin community.

Core Content of BIP-177 Proposal

1. Redefine the smallest unit of Bitcoin "satoshi" as "bitcoin"

Current relation: 1 BTC = 100,000,000 satoshis

After the proposal relationship: 1 BTC = 100,000,000 bitcoins

2. Use integers instead of decimals

Example: 0.0001 BTC → 10,000 bitcoins

This proposal only suggests changing the way Bitcoin is displayed, without altering the underlying technology, consensus rules, or total supply of Bitcoin, and does not require any changes to the BTC code.

A Revolution That Begins with a Name

The discussion quickly heated up after Jack Dorsey, the founder of social platform X, posted a brief tweet about "BIP-177" on May 18, sparking intense debate among community members.

Why is change needed now?

As the price of Bitcoin soars, the difficulties of its use in the real world become increasingly apparent:

"Good morning, your coffee is 0.00001830 BTC."

This way of expressing is not only unintuitive but also prone to errors. More importantly, psychologists point out that people are naturally more inclined to understand and process whole numbers rather than decimals. When new users see a price tag of over $100,000 for Bitcoin, their first reaction is often "This is too expensive for me," rather than "I can buy a fraction of a Bitcoin."

The core concept of BIP-177 is to eliminate this cognitive barrier. According to the proposal, the situation today will change to:

"Good morning, your coffee is 1,830 bitcoins."

Does it sound more reasonable or more strange?

Deep Motivation: Paving the way for mainstream adoption

BIP-177 reflects a deeper community shift beneath the surface change - Bitcoin is transitioning from an asset for early technology enthusiasts and investors to a practical currency in everyday life.

The motivation section of the BIP-177 proposal clearly states: "The current convention defines 1 Bitcoin as 100,000,000 base units. This representation requires handling 8 simulated decimal places, which can lead to confusion and reinforce the misconception that Bitcoin is essentially decimal-based. In reality, the Bitcoin ledger represents value as whole integer base units. The decimal point is merely an artificially imposed abstract concept." In fact, this shift has already manifested in the cutting-edge Bitcoin application ecosystem. For example, in El Salvador, locals have become accustomed to using tiny satoshi units for everyday payments; the number of users of the Lightning Network wallet Wallet of Satoshi has grown by over 300% in the past year, primarily for small, instant cross-border payments.

Polarized Reactions in the Community

Naturally, such a fundamental change has sparked intense reactions. Debates quickly heated up on Reddit, Twitter, and Bitcoin forums.

supporter opinions

This is a key step for Bitcoin towards mainstream adoption. One hot comment said: "Imagine if every American saw that Bitcoin was only selling for $0.001 when they read the news, instead of $100,000, how fast the adoption rate would be."

Opponent's Opinion

This will create confusion and weaken the cultural foundation of Bitcoin. The comment from user Internet_is_tough received the most upvotes: "Don't split, don't change anything. Maybe the name 'satoshi' could be changed."

Another user, GeeEyeDoe, expressed concerns: "If people are confused about the supply cap, decimal points, and Bitcoin, imagine the chaos when the price of Bitcoin changes from $103K to 0.001 cents/bitcoin. The supply cap changes from 21 million to 2.1 trillion trillion."

Market Experiment: Existing Attempts

The BIP-177 proposal document mentions that some wallets, such as Bitkit, have begun to experimentally adopt integer display methods. The "reference implementation" section of the proposal states: "Some wallets, like Bitkit, have successfully adopted a purely integer display, proving the feasibility of this method without any incidents. Transitional features (such as side-by-side display of new and old formats) can help facilitate a smooth transition." However, there is currently no large-scale data showing the effectiveness and user acceptance of this representation in actual use. ## Beyond Numerical Visual Identity: The Battle of the Satoshi Symbol

The heated discussion about the visual representation of satoshi( and the unit is occurring simultaneously with the debate. As second-layer solutions like the Lighting Network make microtransactions feasible, users are increasingly using the satoshi unit directly, creating a demand for a dedicated graphic symbol.

"Not just the unit, but the symbol is also important," a popular tweet stated, "Imagine a world where the dollar has no $ symbol and the yuan has no ¥ symbol."

!)[d8ec5d6e7d0cf104a5f46fdc6be4b9eb]https://img.gateio.im/social/moments-a2611371de387cdf27707a96ded8db00 "7370366"(

Several popular design schemes currently include:

1. Lightning sat symbol: combines the lightning shape with a lowercase "s", symbolizing speed and small value.
2. "Feng" character design: Simplified from the Bitcoin logo ₿
3. Geometric Fractals: Representing the divisible nature of Bitcoin
4. Improved ₿ symbol: Slight adjustments made based on ₿ to maintain visual consistency with Bitcoin.

On one side is the proposal to abandon the name satoshi, while on the other side is the discussion aimed at building a stronger consensus for this unit. Both topics are hotly debated within the community, reflecting the community's efforts to prepare more thoroughly for the larger mainstream adoption of Bitcoin.

Will you support BIP-177?

This proposal touches on a key issue in the development of Bitcoin: should we adhere to tradition and maintain the term "satoshi" as a tribute to Satoshi Nakamoto, or should we look to the future and make Bitcoin's expression more in line with the public's cognitive habits? This is not only a technical issue but also a choice of values and development vision. Do you think that whole number representations (like 10,000 bitcoins) are more intuitive than decimal representations (like 0.0001 BTC)? Would abandoning the term "satoshi" damage Bitcoin's cultural heritage?