A proposal called BIP-177 is stirring heated debate within the Bitcoin community. It suggests renaming Bitcoin’s smallest unit, “satoshi,” to “bitcoin” in order to simplify user understanding and lower the entry barrier. However, more and more community members believe that abandoning the profound cultural and scientific meaning embedded in “satoshi” for the sake of superficial “simplification” is a trade-off not worth making.

Bitcoin’s vitality comes not only from its disruptive technology but also from the unique philosophy, culture, and community spirit behind it. The term “satoshi” is far from a randomly chosen numerical unit—it carries multiple layers of deep meaning:

• ‍A Symbol of Scientific Pinnacle: From a scientific perspective, “Sat” can be interpreted as referring to the Satisfiability Problem (SAT), a cornerstone of computational complexity theory. SAT is the first proven NP-complete problem and lies at the heart of the P vs NP issue—one of the seven Millennium Prize Problems, with a $1 million bounty in mathematics. Associating “satoshi” with this pinnacle of scientific inquiry endows Bitcoin’s smallest unit with significant academic symbolism, reflecting humanity’s spirit of exploring the boundaries of knowledge.

• Fusion with Eastern Philosophy: Culturally, “Oshi” is believed to originate from the Japanese Mount Fuji belief system, where “oshi” are priests who provide lodging and prayers for pilgrims. This adds a sacred, guiding, and service-oriented layer of Eastern cultural meaning to “satoshi.”
  

Thus, the term “satoshi” cleverly blends humanity’s pursuit of scientific truth with spiritual reverence. It is not merely a counting unit but a cultural symbol connecting scientific achievement and Eastern philosophy—a unique tribute to Bitcoin’s anonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto.

The proposal’s initiator may have had good intentions, aiming to reduce the learning curve by simplifying terminology. However, this “simplification” comes at the cost of erasing a name rich in history, culture, and scientific depth—one that has already been widely accepted. This not only diminishes its profound meaning but could also lead to a rupture between the community and its cultural foundations.

Bitcoin’s adoption should not rely solely on superficial “simplification.” Instead, education and outreach should help more people understand its technical principles, philosophical ideas, and unique cultural charm. Abandoning such a meaningful name in pursuit of possibly marginal “convenience” is undoubtedly a poor exchange. Protecting the cultural and scientific value of “satoshi” is preserving the uniqueness and deep heritage of the Bitcoin community.