Bitcoin Forum

Hi,

before BTC will get accepted by "normal" humans (not only by the active community) we need names for BTC values which are smaller than 1 BTC. The most users don't like values with many zeros (e.g. 0,0005 BTC).

My offer:


1 BTC        = BitCoin
0,01 BTC     = 1 cB or 1 cBTC (BitCoinCent)
0,001 BTC    = 1 mB or 1 mBTC (MilliBitCoin)
0,000001 BTC = 1 μB or 1 μBTC (MicroBitCoin)


The most characters can write with normal keyboard layout. This is importend because nobody would search for characters on his keybord.

Than we can offer goods or micropayment with human readable values:

e.g. Show this videos cost : 0,0001 BTC  (not readable)  or 100 μB  (readable)

1 BTC        = BitCoin
0.01 BTC     = 1 cB or 1 cBTC (bitcent)
0.001 BTC    = 1 mB or 1 mBTC (bitmill)
0.000001 BTC = 1 μB or 1 μBTC (mike)
0.00000001 BTC = Satoshi

I didn't make these up, and I'm sure there's still room to disagree, but these terms seem to be in at least moderate usage by the community.

they are nice, but it's not "regular". I would propose to use the -cent postfix for every SI power prefix of base 3:

1 btc = 100 BTCc ("bitcent")

1 btc = 1,000 mBTC = 10,000 mBTCc
i.e.
"millibit" and "millibitcent"

1 mBTC = 1,000 µBTC = 10,000 µBTCc
i.e.
"microbit" and "bicrobitcent"/aka Satoshi.

and there is still room for nBTC and nBTCc (nano/nanocent)

It's millie (10^-3) and mike (10^-6).

Complicated.
Just drop the bitcent altogether and you have "regular" scale. We don't need to use the same divisions as fiat currencies. milli bitcoins / millies is just fine. Then micro bitcoins / mikes or whatever.

- My 20 millies.

0.001 BTC = "mbit" [em-bit]
0.000 001 BTC = "ubit" [yu-bit]
0.000 000 001 BTC = "nbit" [en-bit]

There is no intrinsic value in having a 1e-2 denomination (i.e. bitcent), this will just add unnecessary confusion to an SI-style system which has the convenience of using SI prefixes milli-, micro-, nano-, etc.. If there is an 1e-3 denomination (i.e. mbit), it is easy to express the equivalent of a "bitcent" as 10 mbit, e.g. That is to say, there is no advantage of efficiency in adopting a bitcent. If you were to adopt a bitcent/centibit, why not a decibit (i.e. 0.1 BTC?) - things become very mushy.

PS. There should be no problem with representing subdivisions of BTC with "bit" (i.e. mbit) in terms of confusion with data bits, as data bits are atomic (i.e. non-divisible: there is no such thing as 0.001 bits (microbits) in computing). [That said, data-rates could be expressed which might invoke "microbit", such as 100 microbits per second, but such a slow data-rate would be uncommon; and this practice is not done "in the wild".]

Agreed, too complicated. 


"Send me 0.0001 Bitcoin(s)" sounds fine and is simple to use and remember. 

It's fine to write that down, but it isn't easy to express that verbally. You'd have to say "zero-point-zero-zero-zero-one bitcoins". This would be very easy to confuse with, for example, "zero-point-zero-zero-one bitcoins" (0.001 bitcoins). An appreviation such as "mbit"/microbit/microbitcoin encodes that information (relating to order of magnitude) in a way that is much more easy express and remember.

I like this approach because:

1) it promotes open standards (SI units)
2) it is easy to say ("I'll buy that for an mbit") but there is a possible confusion between "em" and "en" phonemes though
3) the rapid deflation of a bitcoin is such that 0.01BTC is going to be arbitrary in the near term so call it 10mbits instead

Is there a page on the Bitcoin Wiki to promote this as the proposed standard?

Don't forget BitNickle - 0.05Btc's
           or a BitDime  - 0.10Btc's

0.01 is a BitCent  (centi - prefix for 100)
0.001 is a BitMil   (milli - prefix for 1000)
0.0001 Btc, BitMyr  (Myr for Myrio or 1/10000th)
0.00001 is a BitMic or BitMicro  (micro being 1/100000th of milli)
0.000001 is a BitNano

What you think?

http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8282.0
http://gobarbra.com/hit/new-e3911045c62c35ace3732c5dc91fff6f

Thank you. You mention that this topic is discussed from march of 2011.

Good point about possible confusion between "mbit" and "nbit", but since they are very different in value (1 million times), the intended one could be inferred from context. That said, it isn't much harder (1 syllable) to say "millibit" or "nanobit", if one seeks clarity. Also, "millibit" and "nanobit" don't sound clunky, compared to some of the other suggestions for naming subdivisions of BTC.

I propose 10000 BTC = 1 laszlo (lzBTC or simply lzB)

http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=137.0 (http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=137.0)

(I'm not trying to make fun of anyone, I honestly respect the guy and honoring him, hopefully)

Someone start a new thread.  "Poll:  When will a Milli = $1"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"When I was your age, transaction fees were 10Millis and a pizza was 1 Laszlo."
"You're pulling my leg, Grandpa"

I like Millie and Mike. :)

The Wiki now has some information on this subject: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#What_do_I_call_the_various_denominations_of_Bitcoins? (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#What_do_I_call_the_various_denominations_of_Bitcoins?)

These are pretty good for names but I would simply say.

1 BTC is one Barter Token or Bitcoin.
0.00000001 is a Satoshi
100 Satoshi is a Nakamoto or a Nak (pronounced "Knock") 0.00000100 BTC
A bitcoin is 1 million Naks.
It is 4/23/2013 and $1.00 gets you 7143 Naks. Some people are afraid to buy at $140 per Bitcoin because the number scares them.  The Nak could calm people down.

Think of a movie of the Zimbabwe economy or the Weimar Republic RUNNING BACKWARDS.
Play money in 2009 is now a substantial global currency.

Some day the Nak will reach parity with the Dollar as the penny and Satoshi head toward each other in value.

Ron.

I'm all for honoring Hal Finney (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155054.0). I think 100 Satoshi's or 1 milliBitcoin to be called a Finney or "Fin" would be appropriate.

bitus50 = 0.34127363 bitcoin
bitus5 = 0.03412736 bitcoin
bitusdollar = 0.00682547 bitcoin
bitusdime = 0.00068255 bitcoin
bituspenny = 0.00006826 bitcoin

Easy to remember numbers that Americans (and other USD users) will immediately understand.

Agreed.  mBTC is probably the only fractional denomination that will ever be needed in practical application, but mikes allow room for extra precision when necessary.  Both are easily expressed using existing character encodings (mBTC / uBTC) and prevent the absurdities of trying to verbally communicate small fractions in decimal format.  I think it would be wise to dispense with BTC "cents".  They aren't really any better than millies in my opinion, and not having them sets BTC apart from most other currencies.

+1

Wow.  Those are some seriously nerdy names. 

Here's a few to add to the nerd fest...   8)

.1 (deci, tenths) BitTenthly, BitDeci, petoshi
.01 (centi, hundreds) bit-centi, BitCenti, BitCent, terra-oshi
.001 (mili, thousanths) bit-thou, BitTao, BitTaoy, tawa-oshi, giga-oshi
.0001(ten thoussandths), zen-tao-oshi, mega-oshi
.00001 (hundred thousands) - kila-oshi
.000001 (millions) bit-milli, hect-oshi
.0000001 (ten millionths) deca-oshi
.00000001 - satoshi

Can't remember where I read someone else post that everything should be quoted in Satoshis for consistency and eliminate confusion. I agree. Thus all 1 BTC holders already sBTC billionaires.

So my suggestion is:


0.00000001 BTC = 1 sBTC = 1 sBTC = 1 Satoshi (bit) or 1 sbit


Throw away all the other denominations except 1 BTC = 1 BTC = 1 Bitcoin.

Alternatively you could call them "cents":


0.00000001 BTC = 1 cBTC = 1 cBTC or 1 BTCent = 1 Bitcoin cent

There's a poll on it over here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=349579.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=349579.0)

yes it will help n00bs to understand bitcoin better  ;D

edit: vouted