Kill Satoshi Nakamoto's "Satoshi", BIP-177 ignites the Bitcoin unit war.

Written by: Golem (@web3_golem)

On the evening of May 18, Jack Dorsey, founder of the social platform X (formerly Twitter), posted a mention of "bip 177", a mysterious string that attracted widespread attention. It is reported that BIP is the abbreviation of "Bitcoin Improvement Proposal", which translates to Bitcoin Improvement Proposal; Instead of a mysterious meme symbol, Jack posted a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal with the number 177.

BIP-177: Making Bitcoin "More"

BIP-177 was proposed by Synonym CEO John Carvalho, and it aims to redefine the fundamental unit and representation of Bitcoin without modifying the core consensus protocol. The key points of the proposal are as follows:

Change the basic unit of Bitcoin from "satoshi" to "bitcoin", and discontinue the use of both satoshi and sat;

The currency code "BTC" is not affected by the changes and can continue to be used, 1 BTC = 100,000,000 bitcoins;

The basic unit Bitcoin can be represented by the symbol "₿", 0.345 BTC = 34, 500, 000 bitcoins = ₿ 34, 500, 000;

The application should allow users to switch between the traditional BTC format and the new integer format.

In simple terms, the BIP-177 proposal aims to make everyone's Bitcoin "appear more" from a display and formatting perspective, changing the total amount of Bitcoin displayed to 21 million trillion bitcoins, but it does not actually change the supply of Bitcoin.

The benefits of BIP-177

Although it is merely a change in display and format, John also believes that BIP-177 will have significant benefits:

Reduce cognitive load

Because of the appreciation of Bitcoin, whether it is daily payment or on-chain use, Bitcoin often appears in decimal form, and the cognitive burden on users can be reduced by redefining and displaying the basic unit of Bitcoin (BTC) as "one bitcoin". An integer-only interface simplifies mental arithmetic and reduces potential confusion or user error. For example, instead of spending 0.00002 BTC, it is more recognizable to spend 2000 BTC.

Eliminate unit fear

Currently, the price of one Bitcoin is about 104,000 USD, which can easily trigger unit fear in people, making them think the price is too expensive, but saying they can only afford 0.1 Bitcoin feels a bit embarrassing. At the same time, for newcomers who are just getting into Bitcoin, the perception of a high unit price can also easily trigger "ceiling anxiety," thinking that the price is too expensive and that further increases will be very difficult.

However, if displayed in the new format, one Bitcoin is only 0.00104 dollars, which compared to a price of 100,000 feels more likely to rise, eliminating unit fear.

Simplify user experience

Abandoning the original basic unit, satoshi, can simplify the user experience, and removing the artificial decimal format can help users understand that the Bitcoin protocol essentially counts discrete units. Satoshi is a secondary currency unit relative to Bitcoin, which increases the complexity of counting Bitcoin. Understanding bitcoin and satoshi has become two separate issues, which is not conducive to the easier dissemination of Bitcoin.

Voices of opposition

Of course, there are also opposing voices in the community regarding the BIP-177 proposal.

Destroyed "Smart Culture"

The strongest opposition to the BIP-177 proposal lies in its suggestion to abandon the basic unit named after "Bitcoin creator" Satoshi, which culturally creates a barrier.

Prone to confusion

For users who are accustomed to using BTC as a unit, confusion can easily arise, especially during verbal communication. At the same time, this poses a challenge for Chinese translation; if both BTC and the basic unit bitcoin are translated as "比特币", serious confusion will occur during expression, affecting consensus.

Impact on brand recognition of Bitcoin

This is a huge contradiction. Essentially, the reason Bitcoin can attract attention and go mainstream is that it is becoming increasingly expensive. However, if a new format is used, the price of one Bitcoin will subjectively feel "not expensive," which can easily affect newcomers' brand perception of Bitcoin.

What is the "show" work in a bull market?

In fact, during a bull market, as the price and purchasing power of Bitcoin increase, people will start discussing the basic units of Bitcoin.

In December 2017, when the price of Bitcoin surpassed $10,000, some community members proposed BIP-176, suggesting the introduction of a new Bitcoin unit called bits, with the conversion formula of 1 bit = 100 satoshis = 0.000001 BTC. The rationale for this proposal was similar to that of BIP-177, aimed at reducing cognitive burden and facilitating everyday use (no wonder these two proposals were compiled together), but this proposal ultimately did not pass.

Today, the price of one Bitcoin has surpassed $100,000, which is ten times more expensive than eight years ago, and the purchasing power of Bitcoin has significantly increased again. In the United States, one Bitcoin can buy a Tesla Model S Plaid, in China, one Bitcoin can easily acquire a Xiaomi SU 7 Ultra, and in El Salvador, one Bitcoin can buy an entire villa property.

These expenditures have become a luxury for ordinary people, so it is understandable that there is a renewed focus on the basic units and representations of Bitcoin. However, in essence, such upgrades have no practical effect on the Bitcoin network and are more like people trying to show off during a bull market. If the market falls into a bear phase again and the value of Bitcoin decreases, people's level of concern may diminish.

According to the implementation timeline projected by BIP-177, even if the proposal is passed, the entire process is expected to take 2 years from the introduction of the concept in the first stage to the mainstream service and media defaulting to displaying only integers in the second stage, and finally reaching the third stage where integer format representation becomes the standard. However, the enthusiasm for implementing this proposal may also change with market fluctuations.

Interestingly, Bitcoin Pizza Day is just around the corner. 15 years ago, someone bought two pizzas for 10,000 bitcoins, which was only worth $41 at the time, and now those 10,000 BTC are worth over $1 billion. Today, if BIP-177 passes, people would still need to spend 35,000 bitcoins to buy those two pizzas. How can this not be considered another cycle?

If I can't improve my life, then change the units of measurement.