They seek to redefine the way we calculate with bitcoin (BTC)
Satoshis (sats) are today called the smallest indivisible unit of bitcoin (BTC).
The motivation is to simplify user understanding and reduce confusion when doing calculations.
A new Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) created by John Carvallo, a currency maximalist, is underway with the goal of redefining the primary unit of account of bitcoin (BTC). This initiative proposes that the smallest indivisible unit, ‘1 satoshi’, be denoted and called ‘1 bitcoin’, eliminating the need to use decimals to make calculations with the currency. This proposal would be implemented in phases, with the redenomination transition taking at least 21 months.
Currently, as Carvallo comments, 1 bitcoin (BTC) is defined as 100 million satoshis. For the developer, This denotation is confusing since it requires dealing with eight decimal places, “and encourages the misconception that Bitcoin is inherently decimal.”
Later, he comments that “in reality, the Bitcoin ledger represents values as integers of a minimal unit, and the decimal point is merely a human-imposed abstraction.”
He then comments that the modification he wants to introduce aligns with the “true nature” of the Bitcoin protocol.
By redefining the smallest unit as “1 bitcoin,” this BIP aligns user perception with the true nature of the protocol. It reduces cognitive overload, ensures users understand that Bitcoin counts discrete units, and ultimately improves educational clarity and user experience.
John Carvallo, CEO of Synonym.
1 BTC would be 100 million bitcoins
The developer specifies your proposaland supports, to round out his argument, that “1 BTC would now correspond to 100 million bitcoins under the new definition.”
Example: Previous display: 0.00010000 BTC New display: 10,000 BTC (or ₿10,000)
John Carvallo, CEO of Synonym.
This bitcoin proposal also has other implications, such as The commonly used “informal terms” “satoshi” or “sat” would become obsolete.
If this BIP comes to fruition, “all references, interfaces and documentation should refer to the base unit simply as ‘bitcoin’, and applications should present values as integers without decimals.” This does not imply, he assures, any change in the protocol consensus or accounting, but rather it is a merely nominal redefinition of the way monetary value is written.
Recommendations for Bitcoin users and developers
The differences will arise only in the display formats, says Carvallo, who recommends that developers “update graphical user interfaces (GUIs), APIs and documentation to present values as integers and remove references to fractional BTC.”
This proposal to improve bitcoin, of which the developer does not mention its numeral identifier although it is common to express them in this way, as reported by CriptoNoticias, would cause a state of temporary confusion among users after the redenomination of the value of BTC. Carvallo talks about this topic that “there is a short-term risk of confusion while users adapt to the new representation (…). To mitigate this, dual screens and clear information can be offered.”
He assures that, over time, the confusion would diminish and give way to a “simpler and more intuitive understanding of the integral values of Bitcoin.”
It is necessary to clarify that the scriptural redenomination of bitcoin is only a proposal for improvementand not the announcement of an event that will necessarily happen on the network. For a proposal like this to be approved, its presentation and its adherence to technical standards must first be reviewed. Subsequently, it must be discussed and voted in favor by a large majority of the community.