Talk:Bitcoin

Schoolboy error. Should read "Based on a free-market ideology, bitcoin was invented in 2008 by Satoshi Nakamoto, an unknown person or persons unknown." Covtom (talk) 13:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Fixed. JivanP (talk) 23:06, 27 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I'm not a crypto bro and have little interest in cryptocurrencies apart from in passing - like most people I would suspect. So, I came here to get a grasp, but I have no idea what this paragraph is saying - or trying to. This might be useful for someone with a knowledge of cryptocurrencies but trust me, for someone of any intelligence it's incomprehensible gobbledygook. And I say this with all respect to the authors

"Nodes in the peer-to-peer bitcoin network verify transactions through cryptography and record them in a public distributed ledger, called a blockchain, without central oversight. Consensus between nodes is achieved using a computationally intensive process based on proof of work, called mining, that secures the Bitcoin blockchain. Mining consumes large quantities of electricity and has been criticized for its environmental impact." PythagorasDyscalculia (talk) 21:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

You're right, and you're not the first person to comment on this issue. If anything, you're being too generous. The first paragraph is no gem of clarity, either, and the rest of the article follows. The article is bogged-down with misused buzzwords and jargon. Attempts to fix this have met with tedious resistance.

Obviously the article should explain the technical details of how this works, but there are much better ways to do this. The technical details should provide context for what it does and why it exists, which isn't ever really satisfactorily explained despite the article's length. This would be a much more useful approach for disinterested readers.

Any explanation which avoids providing this context is going to end up confusing and frustrating to readers. Grayfell (talk) 22:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

The paragraphs however do a good job of wikilink to the relevant articles that users can navigate to. Of course many of those topics are novel, but as long as we wikilink to them we are ok. We are not going to be able to explain everything in the first paragraphs. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 19:30, 17 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I have made an attempt to simplify the language and add some detail, whilst still trying to keep it succinct. The article does already have relevant sections that go into more detail on the mentioned concepts, such as the Mining section. Do note that it's not entirely reasonable for readers of Wikipedia to expect simplified explanations of things in the lead section of popular articles, or indeed in general — this is still an encyclopedia. In general, we do have the Simple English version of Wikipedia for that; please see simple:Bitcoin. JivanP (talk) 00:02, 28 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I would like to append an addition in the "Units and divisibility" section to include "Bits" or, secondarily and lesser-named, "μBTC". The text should be placed after millibitcoin and before sat (satoshi) because of the already present pattern of descending value. The Bit is becoming increasingly used as a denomination of Bitcoin in small-medium transactions and it is unfortunately absent on the Wikipedia page for Bitcoin. An "official" source can be found on Bitcoin.org here [1] and the excerpt reads:

"Bit is a common unit used to designate a sub-unit of a bitcoin - 1,000,000 bits is equal to 1 bitcoin (BTC). This unit is usually more convenient for pricing tips, goods and services."

Bits are already a unit in Bitcoin-Core and other wallets, mining software/websites, and exchanges.

EDIT: Clarification and typo.

Rhysb2102 (talk) 13:07, 31 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

 Not done:

Which reliable source says this is "increasingly used"? Bitcoin.org being 'official' is a distraction. The sources for "millibitcoin" and "satoshi" in the body of the article are reliable and independent. Please also review Bitcoin#Use for payments. Per that section, "prices are not usually quoted in bitcoin and trades involve conversions into fiat currencies." Adding yet another unit to the infobox would be adding bloat without adding clarity. Grayfell (talk) 23:08, 31 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

The redirect BTCUSD=X has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 31 § BTCUSD=X until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 22:45, 31 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? It’s a combination of corporations Samsung SA, Toshiba TOSHI, Nakamichi NAKA, Motorola MOTO. 2603:7081:5F0:950:B160:EE59:162A:584 (talk) 19:51, 3 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Source? Selfstudier (talk) 19:54, 3 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

In the "Recognition as a currency and legal status" section of the article, the second paragraph begins as follows:

"The legal status of bitcoin varies substantially from one jurisdiction to another."

I think the law has evolved in several important respects and, now, this sentence can be qualified. I would suggest the following edit:

"The legal status of bitcoin varies substantially from one jurisdiction to another. However, a growing number of jurisdictions have recognized that bitcoin constitutes personal property that can be owned, transferred, and used as collateral for legal purposes.^[1] " RomanLegalScholar (talk) 16:51, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

The legal status question is usually taken to mean the existence of a regulatory framework for cryptos, including bitcoin. See Legality of cryptocurrency by country or territory. Currently, although there is such a framework in the EU, the US and UK (for example) do not as yet have such a framework and other places have patchwork/ad hoc regulations in place so personally I think it is a bit early still to modify the sentence in general and specifically only in respect of property rights, which is just one element. Selfstudier (talk) 17:58, 26 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]