Bitcoin Forum

Just use BTC or satoshi (0.00000001) like in:

I just bought a car for 10 BTC!
The new Final Fantasy game will cost only 15000 satoshi!

Using mBTC, uBTC, μBTC is just unnecessary, sounds like a different coin and it will confuse a lot of people.

Coinedup and a few other sites are guilty of using mBTC.

1 satoshi is the smallest unit of BTC that's all people should have to learn. If you want massive user adoption you have to simplify things.

And what about the idea to use BITS ?

Sounds like a whole new coin to me nothing to do with bitcoin.

I think sat or s short for satoshi is acceptable, but I don't make the rules. Just think it is unwise to continue with mBTC and alike.

I sure hope so. The sooner, the better.

Why?

What's next please send me 10 kilobyte? 1 byte = 8 bits = 0.00000008 BTC.

even worse, at least milli, micro and nano are SI units.

In the world of fiat we use cents and mills too. So why shouldn't we do the same with bitcoins?

For the 100000th time i will quote wiki on this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_prefix


Also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mill_(currency)



So, the terms milli- and micro- (and nano-, should we need them) bitcoins should come natural, and by extension the terms mill, and mic (or mike) should also be commonplace just like 'cent'.

What you say doesnt make sense, people will be more confused saying what they bought for cero point many ceros and some units(0.0004), they can even commit some mistakes.

Using mBTCs and uBTCS will not make any problem, people know its about bitcoin, its like talking about megabytes and gigabytes, its the same, people know they all mean an amount.
People barely know about other coins, what mostly are shitty coins, so if they see the word "BTC" they know its talking about bitcoin.

I just bought a sandwich for a centiBTC.

With satoshi being such a small unit I prefer bits being added as well. I agree that mBTC and Ubtc etc. are a little confusing. 

I know for a lot of us it may be pretty easy to use and switch between units but we need to have something solid if we want mass adoption

1 bit is 1 microBitcoin (0.000001), not 0.00000001.
And no, kilobyte and byte have nothing to do here.

And it is just a nickname, so you could say it is SI because it's just another word for microbitcoin.

I like this idea and actually think it would be easier for newcomers to deal in bits instead of Bitcoins.

P.S.: I'm a developer so I'm used to the other meaning of bit.
And I'm not from the US, so I'm more than used to the SI units.

dBTC cBTC mBTC uBTC (u remplaced by the greek letter mu sometimes is confusing with mBTC)...When you know it is simple to understand but like the idea of BITS or talking in satoshis

Why not just just them all?  The more ways to reference it and start a discussion the better if you ask me.  I'm starting to like the idea of bits but can't say it is a better system then mbtc so why not just incorporate both and explain the amount as a reference?

I think having several standards could be very confusing.

If somebody is used to satoshis and another person speaks in bits or uBTC, somebody could end up sending 100x times mores.

Anything we use in the future, I think it's best to have a single set of standards.
(And I don't mean a single unit, but a set, ex: BTC and bits)

For those that do not know the entire "bits" proposal, which I personally like because it solves three issues in one proposal is:


When adopted we can all look forward to the day when a shave and a haircut will, once again, cost two bits.

The winner will be decided by the free market

If you think microBitcoin sounds like a new coin I have doubts you finished high school :(

You do understand the concept of a centimeter right? You understand that it's the same as 0.01 M and not another unit of measurement? Come on, it's not rocket science.

I agree with OP, Bitcoin and Satoshi are the only reasonable units.

Both units naturally emerged from usage. There is no advantage in propagating other units, they only add confusion.

In addition there is absolutely no problem in expressing amounts below 0.01 BTC efficiently  in Satoshi: You can just use the common abbreviation for thousands: 'k'.
So for example 100k Satoshi are 0.001 BTC. Simple and intuitive.

For the record I did not realize a bit was not the same as 1 Satoshi...

Because of this I think it would not be the best idea to use if there is a chance it will confuse people.  I however think we should just call 1 Satoshi 1 Bit because it would makes sense for a single unit to be a bit IMO. 

The language does need to be tweaked but I don't think it is something worth fighting over is all.

Agree, just price everything in USD.

I agree, the only two standards that make sense for bitcoin prices are bitcoin and satoshi.  Although I'll be pricing everything I sell in bitcoins in USD since bitcoin is so volitaile anyway, but that volatility may change eventually.

Bits is already used elsewhere, I dont really agree with double usage here.   People can call it whatever like really, not saying otherwise but as a standard name it would conflict with computer sized bits.   Bits are most often used by the population to describe dsl speeds. Obviously bytes contains bits and so on.    

Sat and BTC works fine.   The main problem is the variation in value of BTC so we got these two extreme units of value and thats probably how it should be for now.    I hope value rises so I can get a drink for 100 sat or whatever, who knows and at that point we'll invent words ourselves as these transactions become common.
  Its been over a century since western economies regularly had deflation, falling prices.   We're unfamilar with the idea of the lowest value 'coinage' becoming greater but it could be the case for BTC and sat, we'll have to wait and see

Hey - I know everyone here is smart enough to convert between bitcoins, satoshis, microbits, mBTC, uBTC in their heads without even needing a scientific calculator, however - for Joe Public to adopt this it's gonna have to feel "easier" and more like "real money"... it's more of a psychological and marketing question than anything to do with what is technically the "correct answer" according to us forum folk and bitcoin developers...

Assuming bitcoin does reach mainstream adoption, then common usage will win the day.

I think it will depend somewhat on where/how bitcoin ends up being used. If it is indeed used for small-value transactions like buying coffee, sandwiches and gas in future, then there will be a unit of measure which is somewhat equivalent to a "dollar" and probably another that is somewhat equivalent to "cents". This is just how the average person on the street is used to dealing with money - and I expect people will continue to want to denominate their purchases in this way.

Which of the following seems more likely for your Grandmother to say:
"I just bought a sandwich for zero point zero, zero, zero, zero, one, two, five bitcoin", OR
"I just bought a sandwich for 125 satoshis", OR
"I just bought a sandwich for a bit and a quarter"?

Having "bits" as the common unit, leaves a convenient two decimal places for the "satoshis" or "microbits" - so a relatively easy change to existing accounting, cash registers and POS systems to switch to a new currency without having to suddenly cope with 8 decimal places.

And much as we early adopters, white paper readers and forum lurkers may revere the name of Satoshi, I suspect "satoshi" will end up being replaced by "microbits" as the smallest unit of currency.

Again - not saying any of this is "right" - it's just how I foresee it evolving...

My 2 satoshis worth! :)
Posted from Bitcointa.lk - #X5e7oCGnyRK8anmo

Bits are confusing and should be avoided at all costs, take your non-metric systems somewhere else Americans. I'm getting real tired of your made-up measurements.

I hate how everyone talks about bits as if it's a thing, without bringing up the countless topics against bits. Also there are many better names than bit.

The word bit should be avoided altogether, as when someone hears it for the first time he would never know whether it means 1 satoshi, 100 satoshi, 1 bitcoin, 0.125 bitcoin or something else entirely.

It has been discussed to death many times, but a handful of people spreads bits like a meme and it tends to stick around for that reason only. Some people just don't know when to quit.

What do we call 1/100th dollar?

A cent, from centi (meaning 1/100th)

Apply the same logic to 1/1000 and 1/1000000 and we have mills and mics

Problem solved. (FYI mills were also used in the past were 1/10 cent were still in common use, but obviously a cent is so worthless that 1/10 cent doesn't even make sense anymore).

I'm sure that they already will all become mainstream names for the same thing
Bits Mbtc Ubtc Finney's and all.
That said SI standard still seems the most logical to me

It's just there to confuse us brash Americans...we hate anything that even looks like the metric system!

I imagine those units are being used right now due the current low prices of Bitcoin.

Maybe with the time, and the rising of Bitcoin, only BTC and Satoshi will be used mainly and another Altcoin like LTC and DOGES will be secondary... as actually dollars, Eur rules and then remaining all badges...

I see you have 0 understanding of marketing, maybe you believe only smart people should use bitcoin.

You might check other replies and notice that most agree bitcoin and satoshi are enough and more terms will just confuse people.

Bitcoin is difficult to understand for people.
Satoshi is an unrelated term that a newbie can't understand the first time he reads it.

I actually prefer to use only "bitcoin" and "satoshi". It is official and no ambiguity. I am not against nicknames in conversations, that is very common in all currencies, but on exchanges and websites, official units please.

Currently, I just remember one rule, not too difficult once you get used to it:
0.0001 btc (transaction fee) = 10,000 satoshi

This is the 99th thread trying to stop this.

You cannot change what the public uses based upon your own opinion.
If "bits" is a better system , the public will start to use it.

Currently , mBTC (milli-bitcoin) is the most usable , as it is around a dollar and makes sense for general speak.
Satoshis are used often too , not because it is "official" , but because it makes even diminutive amounts seem huge , hence satoshis are the best unit for faucets and sites giving out rewards.

uBTC and bits are not too popular currently , but may become more popular once they reach parity with the current USD. ( ie : When 1 uBTC has the same buying power as 1 $ has today )

I was around then the idea of using "satoshi" to mean 0.00000001 BTC was just catching on.  Nothing official about it.  The community just started using it and liked it.  It is not any more "official" than "bits" it was a community accepted creation.

If "bits" catches on then it will catch on.

Gotta agree with this or just wrote the whole sum. I have problems with remembering rate or mBTC myself.

But you can remember that one satoshi is 0.0000064 dollars? wtf. Right now with the current value of a bitcoin being around $640, 1 mBTC is 0.64 aka 64 cents, which is pretty reasonable to remember.

When the purchasing power of a single bitcoin goes through the roof then we can start moving to smaller increments. For now, mBTC works just as well as talking in terms of a full coin.

Umm actually our "made up" measurements were "made up" by Europeans originally. Enjoy your "made up" technological advancements like cars, phones, computers etc. 

because you have to be smart to understand the metric system,

logic not found...

The issue is that there are so many unit's of measure for bitcoin that people could easily get confused. IMO it is best to stick with BTC

or just use big number

explain them that there are 100 millions satoshi for 1 btc therefore 0.01 is 1M satoshi 0.001(mbtc) is 100k satoshy and so on

how is that different from using the metric system?

in fact, you are using the metric system backwards (you go from satoshi instead of from bitcoin).

Either way works for me, but it think it's even better to use bitcoin.

I don't even care anymore. I just wish people would stop trying to engineer language like it makes any damn difference in adoption. I'm half-expecting actual, funded organizations to pop up campaigning on something as stupid as the nomenclature of currency denominations. People'll call it what they want based on need and really don't need us telling them what to call it with any unified voice of arrogant progress retardation from self-declared we-know-betters.

It makes a huge difference...It is one of the single biggest hurdles to mainstream adoption....

Anyone who is depending on the use of the word 'satoshi' to be used in everyday trading value in anglo-saxen based countries might as well sell their bitcoins right now... Its not going to happen...

Bitcoin suffers from marketing, which is a common problem with advanced technology because just like doctors, usually people skilled in the creation or adaptation of advance technology are terrible with marketing....reason being, their brains are far more advanced and they don't relate to the average public in the same way....

Bitcoin has some serious nomenclature issues....bitcoin is a very catchy name, but with mass adaptation will useless in all but a handfull of transactions...I wish we could just 'split' the price of a bitcoin and adjust it for what would be used in daily transactional values, but thus I know this is virtually impossible...

For those that suggest using bitcoin and satoshi as the two values, I say you are crazy....the average person does not understand numbers that go to the right of the decimal point, which is why with USD, we only go 2 digits past... I mean hell, trying to get someone to understand that $5.10 and  $5.1 are the same number is a feat in itself...thats exactly why USD are always 2 digits to the right, because people don't under that the last zero is meaningless...and now you want to take them 3,4,5 digits past that??? Implossible for the average person to adapt to...

The best idea from a marketing standpoint is the bit...If people can relate a 'bit' to a 'dollar' and 'centibit to a 'cent', then we have a chance of adaptation...and as for worry or confusion of the computer term, you wont have to worry about that with the general population, and the people out there that actually use computer 'bits' will be smart enough to figure out the difference...

Most people dont know what their internet speed is or how its rated, or the speed of their computers, or hard drives etc etc...
This is evident in ISP's rating everything in Gb to make it some super high number, and then people looking at GB and thinking thats how fast their internet download speeds are...99.99% of people don't even know to take that number and divide by 8 if they really want to know what speed they are really paying for....

I vote the 'bit'....the centibit can also be the satoshi equivalent in other countries that choose to adopt it or use that nomenclature...

If bitcoin reaches more than four figures again, it will be even more uncomfortable to use bitcoin unit, so i dont know where do you see the advantage over mbtc.

If the "average person" can't comprehend satoshis and BTC, they're probably best-suited to determine what they should be called, not someone who calls them an "average person." If they're not redefining the units, "average people" are probably smarter than we think and can handle numbers with zeros. I deal with zeros and radix points all the time. My electric bill is $326.32, not three Bens, twenty-six Big Georges, and thirty-two Abes. That's just about impossible to even put into a usable form (hint: usable form is $326.32).

thread winner.

I don't mind mBTC.

BITS sounds stupid. Like it is a hole other coin.. not mBTC etc.. least it has BTC in it...

I am an 'average person'....my IQ is slightly above average but probably no where near most of the IQ's on this forum...which is why I have lurked here for about a year and only felt comfortable making my first post about a week ago...

I got an 1180 on my SAT, not dumb, but not brilliant, but probably above the national average....I also scored a 780 on the math side of it which is probably fairly higher then the norm...well, from my own person experience with bitcoin, I find myself constantly looking at the zero's and trying to figure out how much bitcoin I actually have and what it's value is in USD since its the only way I can truly comprehend its value...I have to decrease from 600 to 60 to 6 with each move over and then approximate what my value is... Owning a nightclub (like a big one, 17k+ plus sq ft), I can tell you that I am around 1,000's and 1,000's of 'average' people that I can relate to, on a weekly basis...and most of them look at me like I am some kind of math genius and when I try to explain bitcoin to them and what the values are for each wallet (example given, showing them a coinbase wallet on my phone)...its beyond their comprehension with all the zeros...

The way to make the technology work is to make things 'easy' to understand....something that is difficult to adapt to has to face that barrier to entry right from the start...

That is totally correct, anyone in advertising or really any normal kind of industry can relate to making a product as easy as possible to pick up.     Bitcoin is nowhere easy enough yet.   The stupidly long hash codes and so on, that cannot be the face of this product not if its really going mainstream.   6 zeroes for a value doesnt work either.
     When that kind of mechanical working to btc is kept in the cupboard where it belongs and nobody need have a clue what it is to use btc then thats when I see wider success possible.

Theres QR codes and thats a great time saver.   Dont want presidents heads for values, it could lit up red when sending 1 btc from a wallet, yellow for ten times less, green hundred, blue thousandth of a btc, grey for the degrees down to 1 sat.  Thats a simple enough grading to help stop accidentally entering the wrong number of zeroes, basically btc has to pass the drunk test :p  I doubt a colour is it but thats how simple any grading to value has to be for global everyday use.    whatever system has to more disposable, liquid and accepting to its users in its approach

http://satoshivalue.com/

Alright. Sorry to be a combative asshole. I guess you've probably dealt with a few, heh. I guess I can't even imagine any kind of system adding "label granularity" between basically "1" (a satoshi) and "100,000,000" (a bitcoin) without it pissing me off just because it's different.

This guy gets it! And all the Tech-snobs who sneer at those who don't, won't or can't deal with figures more than 2 places to the right of the decimal point, don't. It's about marketing, not scientific correctness. It's about ergonomic ease of use.

Sure, your car's speedometer COULD be calibrated in inches per second. It's not incorrect. But it's the wrong unit for ease of use. It's ergonomically sub-optimal. Having a unit where we have to use 6 or 7 places to the right of the decimal point is also ergonomically sub-optimal. It will lead to mistakes, maybe not by you, but by the would-be non-technical users, and you know it. That's why it's also the wrong unit. Correct or not, 'bits' makes sense. Assuming you do want general adoption.

This guy also gets it! The color coding is brilliant. A redundant check which doesn't take up any time. Excellent thinking. Superior ergonomics.

"btc has to pass the drunk test" Exactly. You have to make it idiot proof. Because even smart people can do dumb things, when they are distracted, or nervous.

I never encounter yet any mBTC, BITS, uBTC or whatever. Neither seen any leader companies adopting them (like it was stated far above). I thought only some pretentious people uses them to show off.

If a client would write me request with mBTC amount I even won't bother myself to guess or search on net information how much it is. I would kick him back with his bird language demanding amount in BTC or fuck off at all.

it is not important
 mBTC, microBTC  can't change  bitcoin
like cut  1 dollar   to  10000  piece

I prefer BTC, mBTC, uBTC, s
's' is for satoshi

uBTC will be perfect once BTC hits $1 million.   I just hope it isn't hyper-inflation that gets it there.

Most people don't have a clue about how many widely accepted things work.   Easy to understand just isn't that important.   Easy to use is important. 

I either misspoke or miscommunicated...easy to use is what I mean't to say or convey...

but you are correct...its like the old saying about the easier something is for someone to use, usually the more complex it is on the backend...

Sorry, I misunderstood.   

Unit naming discussion resurrected - this means new users - bullish!

So?  Bitcoin does not have an adoption problem.  If anything, it's being adopted too quickly already and minor hurdles to mainstream adoption could well be a good thing!


Bitcoin is not a company trying to sell a product, it's an experiment in p2p money.  I do not market; I think, criticise, share, debate, and learn.

Some years ago, bitcoiners would primarily lead others into understanding.  Today it is considered proper to mislead others into buying.

That is quite funny that you say "bit" sounds like a whole new coin and "satoshi" does not.  ::)

Most people won't even know the connection between Bitcoin and Satoshi.

Corrected that for you


So you are saying that you think it is good to keep an inferior product so that it doesn't see mass adoption? I would think now would be the time to figure out ways to smooth over those minor hurdles, one of them being a great nomenclature and products that will make it easy to use...


Bitcoin is not a company trying to sell a product, its people trying to sell a better way to transact in order to get away from the broken system of corruption and greed that is controllned by the few and for the benefit of the few ....but to say that great concepts and ideas don't need a great marketing plan is naive... You can think, criticise, share, debate, and learn ways to make bitcoin more appealing and easier to use just like any other attribute of bitcoin that could be improved upon...


I mislead people everyday into buying bitcoin...because I think it will improve their way of life down the road... I explain to them the fundamentals of the economy that they currently participate in and how 'fractional reserves' and 'licenses to print money' are just ways to devalue the wealth that everyone else has...and how bitcoin takes the power away from the few, and secures through the power of many...

I could simply show them charts and show how much bitcoin has gone up and value, and then show them how much it will continue to go up (imo) and tell them to jump on the bandwagon for that reason, but then I would be no better then the crooks on wall street who do the same thing without having any legit reason of 'why' it is going to go up... I believe providing the 'why' is more important then providing the 'when', and I believe that's the difference between the bitcoin backers and the alternate choices...

I like satoshi now too.  Everything else is just confusing.  It took awhile but it is a lot easier to keep track of now, especially as the new unit people keep advocating for us all to use keeps changing.  Forget it, just use satoshi, feel rich!

It makes sense to use Satoshi as long as it is not more then 100 satoshi, otherwise you should just use BTC and use decimal places to the right.

It's true that too many divisions can be confusing.
But we need something between satoshis and bitcoins.

In third world countries, bitcoin has fresh field, but you have to introduce it to them like mBTCs, seeing that every unit is less than a dollar, it will get sold like hot bread.
People cant afford the idea of buying some currency thats more expensive that his weekly income.

Why do we need something between satoshis and bitcoins? What is so bad about looking to the right of the decimal 6 places and counting 6 zeros?

i agree with OP. burn the metric system!

lol the entire world uses the metric system.

What do you want us to do?  Go back to memorizing how many xx is in yy?  Throw away the base 10 (fingers) model?

That is why mBTC, uBTC and Satoshi make sense.  Well Satoshi isn't metric but it sounds better than "bits".   However I'm in Japan which is mostly in the rest of the world, except cars drive on the left hand side of the road here.  

It all just seems unnecessary, and tied to pegging BTC to the value of fiat. Why? Maybe it's because I'll always count my bitcoins in whole numbers, being somewhat of an early adopter. I don't price things (fiat value) in cents, either -- I use dollars...

back to measuring with your thumbs, legs, elbows and feet.

oh wait that's what they are still doing in america aren't they?

Yeah they are. And then they complain when a sane alternative is suggested ...

how is that simpler than 1 bitcoin is 1 million BITS?

Actually you mean 100 million BITS?   

BTC, mBTC, uBTC & Satoshi are all we need.

If bitcoin is going to grow 100x as many of you desire/predict, doesn't it make sense to develop a denomination now that reflects this future value?

It is easier to view a world where a coffee costs 500 coins instead of 0.000005 coins.  The latter is just nonsensical.

Exactly...glad to hear that someone else actually understands the issue...

No, the "bits" proposal is to use "bits" as a shorthand for microBitcoins.

For those that missed it or misunderstood it, the entire "bits" proposal is as follows:


When adopted we can all look forward to the day when a shave and a haircut will, once again, cost two bits.

Actually no. 0.01 BITS = 1 satoshi

Argh! I stand corrected and BITS is the same a uBTC ... I much prefer uBTC as that is something I can EASILY understand.  u = micro = 10^-6.  

"bits" is just the proposed short name for 10^-6 BTC in exactly the same way that "satoshi" was at one time the proposed short name, and is now generally accepted as the short name, for 10^-8 BTC.

10<sup>-8 doesn't have a well known name in the metric system. That combined with the fact it's the smallest unit in the original system I understand the need for a different name (plus Satoshi deserves to be honored).

Bits, however, is just retarded. 10-6 is micro, something which everyone who completed high school should know.

That this is even being discussed makes me sad  :(</sup>

Yeah, BIT is just another name for uBTC. Initially I was opposed to "bits", because, well, we had the much more cleanly derived uBTC (and also mBTC). Then it dawned on me that "micro-bee-tee-cee" just had too many syllables and not everyone would value a clean derivation using metric prefixing. So I fell in love with "bits". 1 syllable, easy to pronounce, connotations with the digital world and money, future-proof, simple enough to handle / understand.

I acknowledge there can be confusion (you are a good example), but it can be overcome. I'll continue supporting the "bits" proposal.

I think 'bit's is catchy and easy to use...
And how is retarded when we are talking about 'bit' coin....

I think running around calling them micro's would be uhhumm.....'not fun'....

mark my words, and we'll pull up this time stamped post as proof down the road....if .000001BTC (not sure if I used the correct amount of zero's) becomes the general unit of use similar to the dollar...we will be calling them 'bits'....

Please share with the community


1 Naka = 0.0001 BTC

10 Naka = 0.001 BTC

100 Naka = 0.01 BTC

1,000 Naka = 0.1 BTC

1 BTC = 10,000 Naka



1 Naka = 10,000 Satoshi

10 Naka = 100,000 Satoshi

100 Naka = 1,000,000 Satoshi

1,000 Naka = 10,000,000 Satoshi

10,000 Naka = 100,000,000 Satoshi

The problem that I have with the term "bit" is that it is part of the word "bitcoin" and I would think that people could get confused as to the difference between a "bitcoin" and a "bit" as they could think that something is either massively over or under priced.

On the other hand it makes sense that bitcoins are made up of bits.

In other words a small bit of a bitcoin is called a bit.

Indeed, and look at the current prices, now imagine if the Winklevoss prediction of 70,000 each by 2017 comes to reality  ::) those mBTCs

will be uBTCs... personally i don't like that, the Satoshi measurement seems easier to me.

One consistent denomination seems ideal. No confusion, uniformity, simplicity. Question is, what denomination? The "dollar" works for USD.

I see this as an issue for metric applications to bitcoin.

It was unfortunate that the currency code for bitcoin became btc. It should have been bic. Can be pronounced.

Then we have bics mills mikes and satoshis. The market will eventually decide.

I guess BITS isn't so bad as it just maps to micro-BTC.

Social wallet quickcoin.co use BITS already
 :)

I guess this kind of issues will be solved with time and use of people, my advice would be use a denomination which is more easier and convenient for yourself...

Most people in the world do know milli (10^-3) and micro (10^-6).  These are standard in SI units.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI  Now if you talking about USA, maybe you have a point, but the USA is has less than 4% of the world's population.     

4% of population? Indeed. But in this industry two things count: money and innovations. In both of them USA are among the world leaders.

My two cents: are "bits" a good name? Nope.

Are SI prefixes a better way? Not at all. Bear in mind, that most of the world currencies use two syllables at most.  mBTC is already 4 syllables. Way too many to be used outside of the internet.

I am also not a fan of satoshis - this is also too long. And too unfamiliar for western speakers. Already mentioned "nakas" would be better, or something similliar.

Well the US Dollar is 4 syllables and even the brief form USD is three.   So much for that theory.   In Japan the "yen" is pretty unique and only one syllable.   I asked my 10 year old and she knew what milli and micro meant.   Japanese education includes that at least.  

For trading you can just use Bitcoin.   The other forms are for shopping.   

Oh and Japan is amongst the world leaders in money and innovations.   In fact Europe is too.   Although the US might be the undisputed king of McJobs that don't pay enough to live on.    Maybe "Mc" should be a unit?

It annoys me too OP, I won't ever use this system until I absolutely have to, I also think there are a determined group of spammers out there who don't really provide any arguments for it but want to make sure other people are using it instead, I've noticed it tends to be these faucets and PPC system operators that use it the most to mislead people.

There is nothing difficult about writing 0.0005BTC for example, granted, it's difficult to say it but that's really the only time when I'd say it's a good idea to do use those units.

Easy to make mistakes with lots of zeros too.    ;D

Learn fucking mathematics like I am and stop being lazy lol :p that's basically all this is, it pisses me off that I'm re-learning everything so I understand it correctly and then these fuckers just come along and make shit up.

Wow butthurt much? Silicon valley is the world center of IT innovations, whether you agree with that or not.

Also, Dollar is 2 syllables. I've never been to USA, but I do not think that in shop you can often hear: "This will be 2 US Dollars" unless you live at the Canada border.

No butthurt (whatever that means.)   But there is a vast amount of innovation outside of Silicon valley.   I never said US innovation isn't important, it is just by far from the whole story.   For the record the Silicon valley accounts only for a small part of US innovation.   It is far from being the center of innovation in the US. 

As for "Dollar", that by itself doesn't mean USD, or US Dollar unless you happen to be in the US, then the term dollars is used by itself.   Dollar is used for many world currencies.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar  The confusion isn't just for those living at the Canadian border.   I have traveled a lot, and term dollar is ambiguous.    Bitcoin is clear though, unless you are taking about both the network and BTC.
 
For the record I actually happen to be a US citizen and I work in the high tech world.   I currently live in Japan.   In many ways the US is very backwards and even primitive.   For example broadband in the states is overpriced, slow and often hard to get.     

Tom Smykowski: Well... well look. I already told you: I deal with the god damn customers so the engineers don't have to. I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people! Can't you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people? :)

- Lethn's BFF

We should just call them dollars then! Just don't call them virtual dollars...because then people will be bragging about how many VD's they have...

So using mBTC or uBTC would be using math skills.   Or you could use 1.3x10^-7 instead of 13 satoshi, that would be using math skills, not writing out 0.00000013 BTC which is fine for computers but not for humans.   

You are correct.  I've just forgotten all of this reasons why certain terms are best not to be used.  Kind of surprised this issue still being debated but I also can see why at the same time.  Leaning towards just calling any amount under a bitcoin "x" amount of Satoshis and being done with it simply because the issue is annoying me(just joking), even though I feel the discussion is warranted at this point.  I think the more the discussion the more there is confusion for those looking in trying to understand.

Until there is something better to use instead of mBTC, uBTC and so on we are stuck with those, that is my opinion at least. Even thought it would be better now to come up with something since it would be easier to implement.

'bits'...                            ...what?

yeah, let's change the standard denomination every couple years!!! ::)

I agree with this. In a way, I feel like you can use mBTC/ bits/whatever if you want. Just stop trying to make it a standard. I want to say 0.00001 BTC. Why is that a problem? We aren't dealing with 5 year olds, any teenager+ knows what a decimal is.

Yes, with the number of zeros after the decimal point is really a mess. Why all journalists repeated the false truth that Bitcoin can be divided to six decimal places. Satoshi is the same 7 characters.

totally -- we already have standards that have been decided by the market! :)

Yes, I appreciate your purpose, but satoshi is too much low, maybe uBTC is good ;)

Well using mBTC and uBTC is following the SI standard.   In fact that is probably the widely followed standard in the world.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI

Using lots of zeros isn't standard.   While you can do it in general it is too error prone and inconvenient.  World wide any teenager+ knows what mBTC or uBTC means, even if they don't know what BTC is.  That is probably even true in the USA, so maybe it is time to learn the prefixes.

How would anyone at all know what mBTC or uBTC means if they don't know what BTC is? That is a baseless assumption and simply untrue.

If you were to use decimals then it would be very clear as to exactly how much BTC would be in question.

mBTC - 1/1000th of a BTC
uBTC - 1/1,000,000 of a BTC

Even my 10 year old knows that.   She doesn't have any clue or even care what a BTC is right now.   She is only interested in money that she can cram in her pocket.   

Okay you have successfully explained what mBTC and uBTC is, but you have not explained how some random person would know what these measurements mean.

The person insterested in bitcoin will get google and will know what does that mean, if someone is not buying or using bitcoin its useless if they know that or not.

The whole point of using standards is people understand the fraction that is represented.   Most of the world buys liquids in mL, for example 200 mL.   "m" - milli is completely standard.   

m => 1/1000, nothing hard about it.   

One may have to explain BTC but not mBTC.   

But this example is of someone who is not interest in bitcoin and just somehow knows that mBTC and uBTC mean with no prior knowledge.

Then it doesn't matter what units or names are used!  For any unit of measurement some knowledge is necessary. 

That is exactly my point is that it would be impossible to know that mBTC or uBTC means without some prior knowledge.

So?  How does that have anything to so with what the unit should be?   Following a standard is easiest for learning new units.  The SI standard is by far the best choice because it will be used no matter what other units are put out to use.   

For example if BITs were used then people would use KBITs because BIT becomes just like a gram.  (Kg) 
Now KBITs is just bad because it is overloaded and confusing.   

A lot of you all are missing the point. You are making assumptions that the average person has a higher intelligence then what they really do...Watch Jay Leno's "Jaywalking" excerpts and you will see what we are dealing with...

If you want to use 6 places past the decimal for daily transacting then bitcoin will either stay where it is, as a niche currency, or it will fail....because it is impossible to use by average people within those constraints....

I don't think people realize how easy it is to make mistakes and miss a zero and pay 10x the amount you should have...

what really needs to happen is to split bitcoin and essentially rename btc to whatever denomination will properly suit the times....that's how bitcoin becomes worth a million bucks....multiple splits were people forget what the old valuation of it was....

Thats also where an exchange like the Winklevoss one could spearhead moves like this. Its just nomenclature, but its important....

it BTC were to split right now and sell for 6 dollars each, people would buy a lot more of them and the price would creep back up to 600 again in no time....thus essentially be worth 3600 now (im rounding)....

splitting is the answer to everything, its just a matter of 'how' to implement such a system...

PS - when i say splitting essentially what i am saying is use a lower denomination of BTC as the BTC nomenclature, not actually ADDING bitcoins to the network...I know there is a finite amount....but right now we have room to move those decimal points to the right to make everything more user friendly...

Your point about too many zeros causing problems is valid.   That is why people will use SI prefixes to avoid zeros.

The rest?  You really sound like you are just out of the loony bin.   Let's see if I just take a gold bar and split it I'll soon have 2x the value ... Yea right.

You misunderstand what I say...And there is no need for the personal attack.

What I am saying is from a consumer standpoint call it 'a split'...but in reality it would just be a renaming of the nomenclature so that whereas right now a BTC=BTC but after the split a mBTC would become the new BTC...

And your gold bar example makes no sense...I did not say that a BTC would automatically double...what I said is that the value would reset to $6 and you would have 100x times more of the $6 valued BTC...same numbers....but (and this is IMO), it would be easier for the value of the $6 to go to $10 then the value of a $600 to go to a $1000....Why do you think the stock market uses splitting so much...no value is actually increased, but it allows the continual rise by keeping the values within a range of numbers that are easier for people to work with and that are more appealing....

Renaming something has little to no impact on the value.   It isn't easier for the value to change if it is smaller or larger.   Especially something that can be handled in fractions.   Claiming renaming bitcoin will have an impact on value isn't rational or even logical.

With stocks sometimes a stock split helps a small amount because stocks typically can only be bought and sold in whole units.   However any effect is typically short lived.    Typically only stocks that are growing a lot are split.  The reason they go up after the split isn't related to the split. 

Youre looking at it from a very narrow point of view, not the view of the average joe shmoe making 30k a year...they are not going to buy a 600 BTC and play around with it...and buying a .1 BTC is a very foreign concept to most people....

You're looking at it from too logical point of view...People are not logical...

I'm also with OP. I see a lot of talk about hey guys let's make a new name and let's call such and such this new name. Guys I'll be honest when I first started it took forever just to understand what a satoshi was and  fairly intelligent and tec Davy and I couldn't find the answer. Just keep it simple for now. If BTC price goes to $1,000,000 then I'm sure due to common usage a new nickname will emerge and we won't have to "vote" on it

I think satoshi are totally the way to go.  I'd much rather say 100,000 satoshi than one-thousandth of a bitcoin.  Looking through this tread and seeing people not even agree on what bits are further reinforces this.  Simple is good and satoshi are simple.  Zeros to the left of the decimal place are easier for most people than zeros to the right even if it denotes exactly the same thing.

The vast majority of BTC owners only own a small fraction of a whole bitcoin.   It isn't a foreign concept at all.   A main selling point of bitcoin is that it is easily to divide down to any size you want.  Thinking that you have to have a whole unit and a label to go with it is the narrow point of view.   

If you use satoshi when referring to this high of a percentage of a bitcoin, it makes it seem like, to an outsider, that bitcoin is not worth very much. Kind of like how one DOGE is worth very little and the fact that DOGE is not really worth anything as a coin.

well, i certainly see the merit in using an international standard like the metric system over some made-up denomination like "bits", but generally i agree. it's BTC, and i'm quite used to calculating in that denomination...

some people are used to measuring distances in inches, feet and miles.

Only a small percent of the world's population.   Even they aren't supposed to be using those absurd units anymore.   

The vast majority of BTC owners are tech conscience or savvy and constitute an extremely tiny percent of the population. It's probably not a foreign concept at all...

Can I ask what you do for a living that would make you an expert on dealing with the general population? Because I meet hundreds and hundreds of people from all walks of life and 99% of them have never even heard of bitcoin...and the 1% that have are fairly intelligent.... I can tell you that most people can't even understand the concept let alone use math properly to understand zeros on the right side...

but the minute I explain to them the concept of a digital dollar they seem to grasp the concept much better....

I have lived and worked in the USA and I'm currently living in Japan.   I believe I have a much broader view of the world than the typical American.   I have actually also lived in Egypt and spent considerable time in multiple countries beside America, Japan and Egypt.   For the record my children are bilingual and go to normal Japanese schools.   (As in they also read and write Japanese as well as English.)  We have high educational standards.

You seem to be the one throwing out generalities, mostly which would only apply to Americans.  While it is true that bitcoin is easier for the tech savvy it isn't limited to them.   That is really true of younger people.   Bitcoin isn't an American thing, it is international and that is what it needs to be to survive than thrive.

The real problem of adaption have nothing to do with the name or units, they are fine.   BTC or Satoshi work fine with SI units.   The real problems are the complexity of wallets and security related to bitcoin storage.   Those are the issues that need to be easy to handle.   A new name does nothing but add confusion.   That is my view, but probably one largely shared.  

So may anyone explain me...1mBTC= 0.01 btc or 0.001 btc?

0.001 (1/1000th, milli = 1000)

but hey: 1 satoshi = 0.01 bits and 1 million bits is a bitcoin. All you need to know ;-)

I believe you have a much broader view of a similar socio-economic class people...Different cultures, different people, but still higher functioning then the average...but these are just assumptions I am making based on your perceptions and things that you state, like one for instance being that your children are very high functioning and well educated...A lot of that explains your outlook....

My situation is different...I am around very very low functioning people all the way up to people that are intelligent enough to crack online federal security systems (and yes I do know one person, and while he would never do it because he is very moralistic, he possesses the capability to do so)... I have homeless people that work for, people that grew up with broken homes, as well as kids that have parents that are CEO's of Fortune 500 companies, and even children of celebrities and sports celebrities...so your probably right, I probably am making my generalizations based on American observations and not looking from a world standpoint...but I can tell you I am looking at from all facets of mental capabilities and thats where I see the flaws with the nomenclature....

I would also agree that the complexity of the wallets and security issues are major issues and the issues that affect me personally the most...but there is no point in building the perfect system if it entails use math that is too difficult for the average person to navigate effectively...and thats why I think the nomenclature is so important...not for you, not for me, but for the average IQ person and below average IQ person...because those people make up the largest portion of the world's populations and bitcoin can't succeed without them...and they need an easy name, with few to no zeros....

I agree...either SPLIT BTC or use BIT for BTC...

That's the new campaign...SPLIT or BIT :)

Thank you, i will remember it by that mili=1000 it just got me confused as there is also microBTC in name of the topic.

That is the point, the math is very easy for most of the world.  The metric system and the prefixes used are very easy.   The USA is literally the backwater of the world in that regard.   Americans just need to buckle down and learn some simple concepts.   You can't help the people that won't help themselves, so don't worry about them.   They will wake up someday and join the rest of the world.   These people aren't the drivers that will cause bitcoin to secede.   They are the followers who will adapt to it when they don't have a choice anymore.  

  

  

m - milli = 1/1000
u - micro = 1/1,000,000  (one millionth)

These are standard SI terms.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI

I know, i'm just pointing on that by topic name it seems that mBTC is meant to be microBTC but in reality it's mBTC and uBTC and it just got me confused.   

Ugh.

I think I'm going bald.

bit is already used in many money systems, e.g. in the US it was an eigth of a dollar. I believe because of Spanish coins.
It's also currently an 8th of a byte but that's coincidence, not because bit means eigth.

Calling a mBTC or anything else a "bit" is moronic and only serves to cause confusion. We have SI units and everyone, even us dumb 'mericans that use a measure of force to define mass, know what SI units are.

It is simply retarded to take an SI unit and call it something else.

-=-

As far as only using BTC and Satoshi - let me give some examples:

Teaspoon Tablespoon Cup Quart Gallon
Ounce Pound Ton
Inch Foot Yard Mile

It is not confusing to have more than one unit of measure.

The Metric system makes the math easier, and applies across all types of measurement.

There is nothing confusing about micro BTC, milli BTC, BTC, kilo BTC, mega BTC.

Someone who has never heard of bitcoin can see those and know how they relate to each other. Even us dumb backwards Americans that refuse to see the benefits of single payer health care, the metric system, and reduction of carbon-based energy.

Alice Out.

Leave BTC alone.  It's already simple.  .001BTC today is .629 dollars or 62.9 cents.
A change in divisor is an endeavor to make it palatable to hoards who like and can deal in multiples and
and shun percentages. But who would ever use BTC without finding out first what it's worth?
The day BTC price becomes so stable that we don't need to think about that is a day
I don't look forward to. :'(

This is very well said. If you change the way that bitcoin is written then it will only confuse people that are just getting started in using bitcoin as they will have to figure out multiple ways of how much things cost.

1 mBTC = .001 BTC
Same thing, standard SI units.   BTC is still BTC, so I agree just use BTC

So BTC is fine
     Satoshi is fine as 100 MSatoshi = 1 BTC
     mBTC is fine as .001 BTC = 1 mBTC = 100,000 Satoshi
     uBTC is fine as .000001 BTC = 1 uBTC  = 100 Satoshi

A SI prefix doesn't change the unit, just the amount of zeros that has to be written. 

Good points!

In computer terms a bit is the smallest unit in binary storage.  A bit only has the value 0 or 1, or "False" and "True", it is binary.   Now if Quantum computing ever works a bit may end up having another meaning but that is in the future still.   I agree, using BITS is just lame and confusing. 

For what it is worth, when I started trading, stock prices were still trading in eights of a US dollar.   That was painful.   Good riddance to the ancient Spanish system.

i'm not sure what confuses you. Along with the full prefixes (milli, micro, kilo, etc) each prefix also has a unique 'one-letter' prefix, m for milli (always lower case, because upper case would be Mega) and µ (mu, u can substitude) for micro. Using mBTC or mXBT is perfectly normal. Just like on food they often use kg, mg and µg for weights. (kilogram, milligram and microgram respectively).

SI system is not bad at all. But there is a problem. In everyday life we never used to convert one units to another. Room we measure in meters, dress in centimeters. Whatever better match. Nobody thinks how many centimeters in the room. All visible and tangible.

With Bitcoin it is different. It is virtual and not clear what ruler better to use. Yes we all in school leaned decimal prefixes. But counting in the head, making mistakes may be costly.

Agree with thesis above that when will be time when new term appear (if satoshi not take over). For example currently my clients buy not less then 0.00X BTC. Don't see any reason for higher division.

You gave one example but there are many that don't follow that pattern.   Sign say 200m or 500m to some location and we also use kilometers.  (At least in Japan.)   We buy food by grams or kilograms and liquids by liters or milliliters.  It is simple to convert.   Centimeters is one of the oddball measurements, but even it is a conversion.   Centi means to divide by 100.   So when even you use Centimeters you are really converting, it is just so simple you don't think about it.

I always get confused with mBTC. I can keep up with satoshis but get real lost when someone mentions mBTC and uBTC.

Not a good thing to advertise on an international forum.   ;D

Seriously, take 5 minutes and learn to how to divide and multiple by 1000.   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2dZZxfAYsg

do you need a video on how to breathe, or a video on how to watch a video as well?

this is kindergarten material, really.

1 bitcoin = 1,000,000 bits

It's a clear and obvious choice, and that's why it's being adopted by some of the larger players.

I've yet to see an argument against it that doesn't inadvertently argue for it.

It is nonsense, but that doesn't mean it won't be used.   "bits" doesn't imply 1000000 and if you saw it without a key you couldn't figure it out.

1 BTC = 1,000,000 uBTC

That is clear and obvious to most people in the world.  Many will use the metric system but it is so simple to use.

Can't believe this debate is still going on  :D

This kind of discussions pops up every few months and there has never been any sort of resolution. I have seen a prized contest, a few votes, and it is ALWAYS split between standard SI units and "bit". I honestly don't have a problem having them both. Standard SI units for contracts and "official" use and "bit" for day to day use, like we call 1 pound (GBP) a "quid".

Aren't you supposed to be using Euros?

This remind me on school days with conversion units, there is a lot of them with different calculations.
Or for example you can write it like this 2*10^-1 BTC  =   0.2 BTC

not a bad idea....we call twenties....'dubs' :D

Why wouldn't you be able to figure it out?

And why does adding a 'u' in front of BTC mean you would....is that how you talk in your daily life?


"hey honey, i just ran 1000000000 uMETERS today"....

The use of terms like mBTC and uBTC does put me off of using BTC more widely in my day to day life as I can never understand what these terms mean.I always preferred just using Bitcoins or BTC (eg if an item costs me 0.30 Bitcoins,I'd prefer to be told in terms of 0.30BTC,not any of this mBTC stuff as I just can't understand how much things actually cost otherwise and I would feel misled/overcharged in a transaction with BTC otherwise).

The use of such terms im my view should be curbed completely if we are to improve adoption among the wider public and clean up BTC's image (any thing that seems to mislead end users due to uncertainties will cause further problems on top of all the previous scandals BTC has had.)

:)

Frankly you are taking like a 13 year old.   (I know I have one.)   Most people in the world understand SI units and prefixes. 

So imagine the govt says yeah bitcoin is cool there's some features we especially like, such as the SI units. So we're adopting that 'feature' to the dollar.

The old dollar is now worth 0.0000001 new dollars. 1 old cent is now 0.00000001 new dollars. There'll be milli and micro new dollars. Changeover at end of year so you all have time to learn it.

How well do you think that's going to go down with the general population?

Maybe I am 13yrs old...which means you better stop sending me pornography requests since that is illegal in this country...

Rutt Rohhh....

dyask, will be the only one with his .0000001 dollars converting them to .0000004324213 yen and making fun of everyone else for not being able to do so while using those converted funds to buy kiddie porn on the internet...

The rest of us, aka the general population, will be screwed because micro and milli dollar conversion will be ridiculous to use on a regular basis...
Most of us have come to the common sense rationale (except Dyask), that the less zeros and the more we clean up BTC, the better it will be in the long run...

I hate mbtc. Still haven't figured out what people mean when they use that unit. I wish they would stick to btc. I'm used to the decimal point and the zeroes. It's actually quite easy. You just count the number of zeroes right after the dot to get some semblance of the value.

The problem is that you have to count, with mBtc you get some semblance of the value faster.

You only have to count up to 3 zeroes. Take the default transaction fee for example. It's 0.0001. So anything with more than 3 zeroes is just too small to care about.

right now...but what about when bitcoins are 100k a pop, then we will be using 6 zeros and it will be insane...and if we dont fix it now, it will never get to 6 zeros....

Using SI units it would .1 uUSD to .99 uYen ... but that would be silly.   I gave my son .1 BTC for playing around with bitcoin, what have you done?   He by the way doesn't have any issues with using SI units in English or in Japanese.   Anyway don't you think it is time to stop with the insults?     

Sooo, you are the first to insult, but then when someone insults you back you wan't to complain....sounds like someone that can dish it but can't take it...Quick piece of advice, if you don't want to be insulted, don't insult people!


Anyway, back on topic....

Bits are the way to go...and I think that's what will become commonplace...

Huh? You have been attacking everything I said for pages and trying to make fun of it, probably because you don't have a valid argument. 

Anyway "Bits" is bad.  We already have BTC & Satoshi which is already one too many terms.   All is needed is SI prefixes.   If Bits were to be adopted then BTC & Satoshi would have to fad away.   You would then have kBits, MBits, GBits and so forth.   SI prefixes go both directions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_prefix

Also "Bits" is bad because it conflicts with other meanings.    For example network speed is often measured in bits/second. 

BTC & Satoshi are already in use.  However Satoshi may change in the future if the number of decimal places is increased for BTC.   It is time for everyone to learn the metric system.  Over 90% of the world is on board with it. 

Agree with BTC going away, also "Bitcoin" or "bitcoin" as a unit of measure would probably fade as price goes up.  However "satoshi" could still remain in use in the same way "cents" are used today.  Anyway, the full proposal is:

That is crazy.  Adding more terms doesn't make it simple.   Just stick and "XBT" is a totally different term again. 

kBTC  = 1000 BTC
BTC
mBTC  = .001 BTC
uBTC   = .000001 BTC

Now that is easy and simple and follows SI standards.   It can also easily extended in either direction.   One term and stardard prefixes.

I totally understand where you are coming from.  The XBT thing is important because it would/will be the standard symbol for Bitcoin in the forex markets.  X = not from a specific country like XAG for silver and XAU for gold and "BT" for an obvious choice for BiTcoin (could also be XBC probably).  "BTC" does not follow the standardized naming conventions, it was just made up out of thin air a long time ago - here in these forums actually.

And I don't think it will ever end, lol. That's how I stand behind this debate. I have no problem with either. Say bits. Say mBTC. Say ubits. Whatever you desire, I'll know what you're talking about.

It isn't a problem when everyone understands what is being talked about.   Trading is even less of a concern because traders are used to different symbols.   My concern is that if "Bits" becomes wide spread, it will only be a matter of time before it doesn't work anymore because of changes in BTC exchange rate or something else.   Someone will come up with yet another term!  The fix isn't creating new terms, the fix is learning how to work with the units we have.  Bitcoin isn't American and it should be pulled in the same unit morass used for common measurements in USA.   

 

Before people listen to the voices from the USA much they should look at just how insane the US system of units is.

For example:
There is a measurement called a dry pint.  16 dry pints = 1 peck.  4 pecks = 1 bushel.  But 1 bushel = 9.30917749 US gallons.  
Okay but a bushel is mass so lets convert it to oz.  Oh 1 US dry pint = 18.618355 US fluid ounces!  And these are the people complaining that mBTC is confusing?  In all fairness most Americans don't have a clue what a peck is, but they are the ones crying for more units.

Make it simple, just use the units we have!  Use SI prefixes and let most of the Americans learn something useful for change.  

For the record I'm a US citizen, but I'm not proud of the messed system of units used in the US.   Pretty absurd if you ask me.

Finally you just have to love how people plan to map "bits" to the USD.   Like the USD is the only currency in the world that people care about.   Wake up people, look at the calendar, it isn't 1969 anymore.  

Video about US distance measurements:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7x-RGfd0Yk

There is already a preexisting definition of 8 bits to one dollar.  This definition predated Bitcoin, me and you.  That is not a proposal that is a fact.

The proposal is to reuse the same word, a word that has already been used in the past as a unit of money, as a shorthand or shortcut for writing or saying 0.000001 BTC.  Yes that is 1 microBitcoin, 100 satoshis, 1 uBTC, or 1 bit - use whatever floats your boat.

However, bitcoin doesn't have anything to do with the dollar.  There is no reason to reuse an old term that is already been reused multiple times.  In fact there is no need for another term

0.000001 BTC is 1 uBTC.   That is clear, easy and actually follows already excepted standards.   

I understand your opinion.  If you feel that way don't use bits as proposed.  Use you favorite nomenclature.

That is pretty much what everyone will do.  I see bits was listed on a bitcoin wiki too.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBTC

yep. and my feeling is that most people won't use it. and it will then die off. :)

i generally agree with the OP.... BTC is an established denomination. but metric is better than "bits"...

You are a powerful and mighty prognosticator ;)

I never thought the whole "satoshis = 10^-8 BTC" thing would ever catch on.  I thought that it was stupid, just use 0.01 uBTC or 10 nBTC I said, that is why we have a metric system I said, but there it is - all over the place and accepted as specified fact.

We shall see.

I feel like metric/SI prefixes help establish the infinite divisibility possible in Bitcoin. That being said, all I've used for calculations are BTC and mBTC (since mBTC is somewhat of a convenience at current BTC/USD exchange prices, and a denomination I deal with frequently)

But it's difficult to count the decimal place of Satoshi

It is interesting to me how we use ',' (or '.' in some places in the world) for large numbers but we do not do that for small numbers.  For example we write "there are 100,000,000 satoshis in one BTC".  The ','s make it easy to read but we write "one satoshi is 0.00000001 BTC".  I wonder why we don't write "one satoshi is 0.000,000,01 BTC"?  That would help but I just have never seen it done.

I was just thinking the same thing lol...

Because most people don't write all the zeros in the first place, they use prefixes or scientific notation.   In the world of computer programming it is common to using spacing in very large numbers.   Well that isn't always the case, it isn't unusual to be able to break numbers up into many parts.   

Thats exactly how it should be done.     I dont use the zeros, its only the silly exchanges which force people to look at it this way.
When can already describe 1 million sats, why is there need for other inventions like bits.     It should be entirely optional and maybe thats fine but nothing further is actually required now

The main reason for "something other than satoshis" is because satoshis is not a nice "round" 10^-3x SI division.  It is a bit off being 10^-8 and is it not a number of microBitcoins or nanoBitcoins - it is between them.

So "bits" is proposed as a shorcut for 100 satoshis, the nearest SI prefix.

Get your point, but the nearest one would be nanoBTC: 0.1 satoshis.

Thinking the same thing!   

nBTC would be very confusing since there is no way to currently represent/transact/buy/sell 1 nBTC.

So yes you could represent amounts in nBTC but only in steps of 10 (for now):  10 nBTC, 20 nBTC, 30 nBTC etc.

That's the one parameter satoshi got wrong. To make it compliant with the scientific notation, it should really be 1 BCT = 10⁹ satoshi, or 1 BTC = 10⁶ satoshi.

Anyway, that's not going to be changed.

At some point we'll stop using Bitcoin as a unit altogether and just use Satoshi or metric derivations of it (KiloSatoshi, MegaSatoshi etc.).

He didn't get it wrong.

It is compliant with metric notation.

1 satoshi = .01 uBTC.

With respect to scientific notation, you pick one and use it throughout.

e.g. if you are using mks like physics often does - you represent a thousandth of a meter as 10^(-3) m and not as mm.

If you are using cgs like chemists often do - you represent a thousandth of a meter as 10^(-1) cm and not as mm

People keep confusing scientific with metric.

Scientific notation is fine with metric (SI), one is a unit and one is a multiplier.   The two can be used together without issue.   

yeah i agree with this
mBTC, uBTC are too hard to remember
i'm not familiar with that
i prefer to use 0.000005 BTC :P

i think cBTC, mBTC, bits, XBC, uBTC, nBTC is very hard to remember and to convert to BTC

1 cBTC = 0.01 = 6 USD
1 mBTC = 0.001 = 0.6 USD
1 bits = 0.000001 = 0.0006 USD
1 uBTC = 0.000001 = 0.0006 USD
1 satoshi = 0.00000001 = 0.000006 USD
1 nBTC = 0.000000001 = 0.0000006 USD

all of them are confusing me
but i think we should use BTC & mBTC ONLY
who would buy something with 0.000001 BTC (1 uBTC / 1 bits)

and most exhcange that i see, only use BTC / mBTC

In my opinion, ALL engineering notation prefixes should be fair game. I should be able to talk about milliBTC, or microBTC.
BTC and mBTC are used for purchases, while μBTC can be used to discuss fees.


nanoBTC is not of much use. When talking about the network as a whole, it could be worthwhile to discuss kilo- or mega-BTC.

Some altcoin could have a use for kiloFOO, or even megaFOO for transactions themselves.

I'm actually using BTC and Satoshi, and this is enough for me.
Hoewer, people like to add complexity.

Complexity can make a product more familiar to various parts of society.   Depends if the detail is required or ends up like lawyer speak, alot of trouble and confusion.   My experience recently of using btc was its slower, more expensive and fiddly then just transferring funds from my bank account via paypal which is instant and 2 mouse clicks as Ive already set it up


I was just setting up coinbase which has the wallet listed in Bits and I dont think its helping really.    I still get a long number with decimal point and comma, the BTC amount is actually simpler apart from the extra zeroes in there.
It might be all redundant if BTC value rises properly it will make the sat argument far more viable

I think we're finally on a good way to findin a consensus here...

With all those terms coming around, it gets very confusing - but this confusion only appears when you need to convert say nBTC to uBTC
or nBTC to bits. BTC is also a great unit.. I think everyone on this forum knows the current BTC market price.
I think overtime a lot of these units will be abandoned.

As long as BTC is used, mBTC, uBTC, nBTC ... are all natural terms.   If BTC is abandoned, then I hope we don't fall into a system like the unit miss-mash insane confusing system used in the USA.   Fewer units is better than more units.  We already have BTC and satoshi, that should be enough.  "bits" is just uBTC so it can be used those that really need another unit. 

 I'll stick to  BTC and satoshi.
 

I think the OP is quite off the mark on this one.  Using SI prefixes is a really normal thing to do.  Do you say "I'm going to visit my friend in the next town, he lives just 25000 meters away", or do you say "25km"?  It's really the same thing.  Similarly, most likely you talk about the size of your hard drive in GigaBytes, not 1000000000s of Bytes.

I would, however, agree with you about these proposals for other funky named units "BITS", etc, that stuff does sound like some other coin and it's weird.

SI prefixes are quite standard, however, and they are very useful.

I get confused by all the different names, even satoshis. I just like it when people use a big decimal in standard BTC pricing.

Very soon, only Satoshis will be required for regular transactions (I wish  :))

It is this way normally.

and yes, would be nice to have a kiloBTC   ::)

It's all about preference, I personally think mBTC is confusing to start off with but makes sense as you get use to it. It's just like $ and Cents, it makes sense
uBTC on the other hand can be dropped.

Though I guess as value rises, mBTC and uBTC will be more common terms and in which then I agree satoshi is a better use of measuring Bitcoins rather than mBTC and uBTC (uBTC is darn confusing)

Even people that are on the metric system will not be used to using terms that signify a small percentage of something. Using these terms will cause confusion and will likely cause sellers to get scammed out of their product when they are offered a price that is a small fraction of what their product is worth.

I think that's pretty unlikely, personally, or if it does happen then I'd say that Dawin's laws have to apply.  I mean, if someone measuring seconds can't keep track of micro vs milli seconds, how is that the fault of transparently using nearly universal abbreviations (the SI!).  If someone measuring money can't keep track of the decimal point, I think it's sorta the same situation.

1 satoshi is a good enough unit...
BTC and Sat(s) are fine, the others can be dropped. My opinion

Huh?  It seems it is only the bonehead Americans that refuse to learn a sane system that are at risked of getting scammed.   There isn't any confusion in the metric system.   For example a meter is the measurement of length.  It doesn't matter if you are talking about the distance to the moon or size of a blood cell.  There isn't any confusion because SI prefixes are standard and the meter is a standard length.  

I don't think being american has anything to do with it.  Even americans use kilo/mega/giga/terabytes and milli/micro/nanoseconds.  There are many, many other examples.  I agree with you that the SI prefixes are completly standard and non-confusing.  The thing that americans refuse to adopt (overall) is the base units of meter/liter, etc.  But even Americans use the metric prefixes in the standard way as multipliers.

The Americans using SI prefixes already won't have an issue.  (I'm one of them.)   However many Americans cling to the multiple unit systems that are still commonly used.  (mile, yard, foot, inch / gallon, quart, pint, cup, oz etc.)   It seems to be largely this group pushing for more bitcoin units like "bits" even though those terms don't make any sense.   All that is needed is one unit and prefixes.   I don't have a problem with satoshi because at least there is a reason for it.   

There are a few vendors that support use of "bits" so there is a chance it will catch on, but I seriously hope it just fades away.   

I wish I had a link but I can't find it now.  It seems to me that the absolute bat-shit craziest idea on this topic that some people are apparantly pushing is calling 100satoshi a "bit".  I can't imagine anything more confusing that confounding an atomic unit of computer storage (1 bit) with 100 atomic units of btc.  Have you guys heard of this?

It is mentioned several times in this very thread:

I agree, we need to keep it simple.

Question, if we ended up using satoshi (in the future) as a normal payment, maybe even up to a dollar or a cent, then what would the transaction fees be. If for example a coffee costed 2 satoshi, the lowest possible fee could be 1 satoshi since that is the smallest BTC amount possible. Would we create more decimals?

A satoshi being worth more than a few cents is so unlikely as to not even be something to worry about. If a satoshi = $1 then 1 BTC = $100,000,000 and the Bitcoin money supply would be $2.1 quadrillion (many multiples of all the money in the world).   Even under the most dubiously optimistic scenarios (i.e. Bitcoin replaces most or all national currencies) a saotshi would still be worth no more than a few pennies (circa 2014 USD in purchasing power).

Ok, so then a satoshi being worth a cent would be extremely likely. That means a bitcoin would be worth 1 million dollars, which would be very likely and it would be a good number, and that means a satoshi would be worth a cent, which perfectly matches up to the USD, making it easy to estimate conversions. Also bitcoin being worth a total of 2.1 trillion dollars is very likely, because currently the amount of fiat in the US is around that, probably a bit more, but right away bitcoin wouldn't replace fiat fully.

If 1 satoshi = $0.01 then 1 BTC = $1M USD and the coin supply would be worth $21T not $2.1T.  I also wouldn't call that likely, Bitcoin's long term success isn't a certainty. Also even if it is successful there are a lot of potential scenarios where the total coin supply is valued at a lot less than $21T.   

A $21T money supply would make it the largest supply in the world.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2215rank.html

In a not so distant future we may have this situation:

- an average miner couldn't mine more than few mBTC / uBTC / μBTC per day because of the growing diff
- the price of 1 BTC will be out of the range of large masses, so the introduction of mBTC, uBTC, μBTC has sense.

Already steps on this direction are made: http://www.coindesk.com/coinbase-announces-pricing-bits-bitcoin-buyback-option/

I agree with tspacepilot.  This seems crazy.  As I said elsewhere, it's like saying that I'm gonna call a new unit of currency the meter, because somehow bringing meters into currency is supposed to alieviate confusion?!  A bit is already a unit of information, to confound a computer unit of information with a unit of currency which is calculated by computers seems like a terrible idea.

Also, in the quote above, I can't identify what the "the issues" are that this solves.  The person quoted seems to think that there's a problem with confusing the bitcoin protocol with the bitcoin unit.  But what are the other "issues"?

1/8th of a dollar is also a bit.  A quarter is two bits and 8 bits is a dollar.  That is leftover the an old Spanish system.   Now that is confusing!

Still, I have to wonder if that isn't partly why a byte has 8 bits?

Anyway overloading the term bit again, just brings more confusion. 

A byte is 2 to the power of 3 as computers process everything in binary which is a base of 2 I think that is mostly why.  Ascii was 128 characters or 2 to the power of 7 for printer codes and now they use 1 byte for each character

  Someone should look at the history of currency and how bitcoin relates. Deci is ten but originally currency was not with a base of ten.  The dollar was originally a silver piece and could be cut up into pieces of eight?

Bit was a monetary unit before it was a unit of information.

In information "bit" is a contraction of the term "binary digit".

It might be a bit confusing, I like the proposal a little bit but we might have bit off a bit more than we can chew at this time.  We might have to wait a bit for it to catch on but I will bet you two bits that in a bit we could not only measure the size of the block chain in bits but also measure our net worth in bits.  Finally I hope to someday buy a drill bit with bits.

I think your point here is the massive homophony for the string "bit".  With respect to your usages, I see the adverb meaning "a little", the adverbial noun meaning "a little amount" (x4), the past of "bite", the obscure, erstwhile monetary unit, and then the computer atomic unit of storage, then this weird bitcoin fraction, then a piece of a drill.

As cute as that is, I think the only relevant ones are the modern usages related to information and computers.  No one is going to confuse a fraction of a bitcoin with a drill bit.  However, given that bitcoin transactions can indeed be measured in bits (although kilobytes would be more typical way to express it), there is a real confusion.  For me it seems crazy pick out odd decimal points along the bitcoin unit and then put overloaded terms as names for those amounts.

Really? Lets put aside the argument if you do or do not like "bits" as a unit.  You honestly would be confused.  You can't determine the meaning of the word from the context even though you do it for thousands of other words every single day.

My internet connection is blazing fast, it is 50 Megabits per second. Would you honestly believe he was saying his internet connection generating 50 million bits of currency a second?  Really?

The tickets are 5,000 bits.  Would you honestly be trying to figure out how they compressed the concert tickets to be less than 1KB?  Really?

Ok, I think you're trying to get me to address whether or not I would be confused.  And I think you're right to put it into context.  If you say "my internet connection is fast, 50megabits per second" then there's very little chance for confusion because you primed me with the adjective "fast".  However, in your second example, you use the semantically bleached "are" which is interpretable in many different ways, so I like this example.  Now imagine these are etickets, you say "tickets are 4096 bits".  Are you talking about the price of the tickets in bitcoins or are you talking about the size of the tickets as a network packet?  Presumably, in whatever context our conversation occurs, we can disambiguate this.  However, I think it's clumsy to use a unit of size on a network to indicate an arbitrarily placed decimal amount of a currency that's basically transmitted in packets over a network.  I really do think this is a lot like saying, I have a new name for price of 3 bottles of soda water, we're going to call it a "litre".  So, yes you can now buy 6 litres for 1 litre.  :(

So, looking at the OP, we are really being asked to stop using metric prefixes on BTC rather than simply sticking to BTC and satoshi.  This idea of "bits" must have another thread elsewhere I guess.  I agree with sed that the "bits" thing seems weird.

Personally, I have no problem with the metrix prefixes and I have my own bias because I played a lot of dragons tale casino.  In that game, mBTC is commonly used and below mBTC we usually see kSAT.  So, we go from millibtc to kilosatoshis, then, obviously, just plain satoshis.   My own opinion is that if you were going to pick out a special decimal place to name, it should probably be somewhere around 0.00001, something between mBTC and uBTC because that's on the order of magnitude to the value of a USD penny.  Well that's my opinion anyway.  Naming it something other than kSAT seems unmotivated to me, and naming it something like "bits" or "meters" seems outlandish.

Yes, there are several threads.

As for those darn tickets they are 512 bytes and cost 4,096.00 bits.

Randomly generated bits?  Good thing its X.00, I wouldn't know how to split a bit into 100ths.  :)

I know what you mean by 512 bytes though, that has to be the weight of the thing, right?

I'm just teasing, I can see that by 4,096.00 bits you obviously mean 4.096mBTC :)

I'm not sure about the dollar, but Spanish coins were used before that and they cut into eights.   For a very long time the stock market used 1/8th of a dollar for the tick size.  (It is a penny now.)   There was a long term use of "bits" even when it was no longer really being used.   However now a bit is the simplest storage element, 0 or 1.   That is an important meaning and it is used in many places.   Using "Bits" for bitcoin doesn't make sense. 

FTFY

Bits make sense for a lot of other people and causes them no confusion. Bits are far more like a familiar currency system to the average person, and using them means dealing with natural numbers which, eg according to wikipedia, "the natural numbers are those used for counting".

[edit Maybe I should have said integers, however the meaning should be clear to all but the most anally retentive, or retarded]
 
It is more aligned with how people think and could be strategic to higher adoption rates.

Of course you can continue calling them whatever you want, and that's good. Other naming conventions may eventually arise, and that's good too.

What do you mean when you say that "Bits are far more like a familiar currency system to the average person"?  Who is this average person who thinks of currency system upon hearing "Bits"?  Crucially, natural numbers refers to non-negative integers.  Does this mean that you can't talk about a negative number of Bits?  Most "average" people as I conceive of them don't mind using negative numbers.  Above, someone quoted to me a price in "Bits" that included a decimal fraction...is there some miscommunication the "Bits" supporters. Presumably Satoshi is the only undividable unit at this present time.

No, bits doesn't make sense.  It changes the meaning of a bit and dealing with 1,000,000 bits is lame.   Look at any annual report from a traded company.   All the values are listed in thousands or millions.   People typically don't write out very large numbers.   Besides that it would be a very HUGE climb in BTC price before 1 bit is even worth a penny.   Currently a .000001 transaction won't confirm.   Sure that may be different in 10 or 20 years, but we will have uBTC when we need it.  

The other very real problem is that if BTC were ever worth a huge amount you would then be faced with the number of digits being used in BTC changing.  (Mining awards would get too small for 8 digits)  For example it could go from 8 to 12.   Then where would the "bits" be?   The problem with it is that is doesn't solve any problem.   It only creates more problems down the road.

SI prefixes solve the issues.   They will be used no matter what, so the best bet is to get used to them.

Couldn't agree more.  I'm especially curious to hear what the problem is that people think that "bits" solves.  I can see all sorts of weird problems, but who would this help?

Maybe you should be asking yourself what is it you can't understand about bits that a lot of other people can; coinbase, bitpay, and many others are using bits, for good reasons.

Not worried, it won't last.   The unit has too many built in problems.   Also I use coinbase a lot and have never seen bits.   Probably an option or something country based, anyway it would be totally useless to me.   I mean would you want your coffee drink priced as: .0067 BTC or 6700 Bits, or 6.7 mBTS?   Bits is clearly the oddball.   Besides what happens if price of BTC really climbs?   Then you will have fractional Bits.   Totally lame.  

I won't reply now, but I have to start an overseas pain in the butt trip to the states.  So I guess you get the last word this time!  :)

Um, except that instead I'm asking you what you're talking about when you say "more familiar currency system to the average person".  I'm asking you about your confusion with natural numbers and fractions ("Bits" don't allow subdivision?!  That would intuitively fit with the familar notion of a bit as a 'binary digit' but then you just took away two decimal places from BTC?!).  I'm asking you what problems this solves.  I'm asking you to enumerate some of those putative "good reasons".

Cheers!

I don't think that coinbase actually uses bits. I don't think that I have actually bought something using bitpay, but IIRC bitpay lists the price of an item in both terms of fiat and BTC so it would be obvious as to the exact amount they would be paying (someone could just use the exchange rate of bitcoin)

c'mon a simple google first next time? http://blog.coinbase.com/post/89405189782/its-bits

I think it doesn't sound like a different coin and it won't confuse a lot of people, if we know the formula

0.000 000 01 BTC = 1 satoshi
0.000 001 00 BTC = 100 satoshi = 1 uBTC
0.001 000 00 BTC = 100k satoshi = 1 mBTC
1.000 000 00 BTC = 100M satoshi = 1 BTC

maybe you can check this website : http://bitblah.com/
hopefully you can satisfied with this formula ...

lets call them BOLLARS, and SENTS

10 satoshi = 1 SENT
100 SENTS = 1 BOLLAR

something lika dat

Personaly all of this gives me an headache.

Naah. Confusing bitcoins with USD, that is the last thing we should do.
That was one of the key arguments used to shut down liberty dollars - People were confusing it with the original.

Is it me or is this much easier to read and digest if laid out like this?

0.00 000 001 BTC = 1 satoshi
0.00 000 100 BTC = 100 satoshi = 1 uBTC
0.00 100 000 BTC = 100k satoshi = 1 mBTC
1.00 000 000 BTC = 100M satoshi = 1 BTC

One thing comes to mind: ENIAC programming.

We've got a long way to go.

Never seen that before but it sure looks cool, makes sense, easy to read, you should start the process to make it an international standard!

I total agree with OP! I find hard to understand prices in mBTC and those things!
I prefer to see prices in BTC it's soo easy! Satoshi may be used just for faucets

isn't just better to write it with decimals? 0.001, 0.000001 ecc... or 10^-8, 10^7 ecc...

We need to find new ways, its not very marketeable as it is right now  :'(

I think your post is so vague it's hard to reply to.

The best I can say is that I think the people who find mBTC or uBTC to be a problem are really, really dense.  You simply can't stop the reality of the decimal system and most folks with more than 1 or 2 years of primary school understand how a number subdivides into parts of 10 as represented by a decimal point.

I support you mate!!!!!

I want only to use BTC and satoshies!

BTC and satoshi's are fine.  However, I note that the metric prefixes are defined independently of any unit.  They already exist whether or not you use them.  Talking about a kilometer or a millimeter is not introducing another unit beside the meter, it's simply an abbreviation of a multiplication of that unit.  People who use mBTC and uBTC or Ksat at their convenience are not introducing new units.

I don't know if you guys have heard of this nonsense where some people want to call 100satoshis a "bit" and then give prices in "bits".  Now, talk about confusing, talk about something that sounds like a new coin.  I'm totally against this "bits" thing.  But using metric prefixes is always going to exist whether you're talking about time, money, distance, anything.

Unfortunately innumeracy is a huge problem. A lot of people in the US for instance think 1/4 is bigger than 1/3, (because '4' is bigger than '3'). Dollars and cents are confusing enough for them. The move to bits is a step in the direction but bitcoin still has a huge marketing challenge, that's widely acknowledged and only the really really dense would dismiss it, or can't even see or understand it. Wake up to the challenge/opportunity. Like I alluded to earlier (with the ENIAC reference), bitcoin for many people is akin to a 1st generation programming language, binary; even assembler would be a step up.

I couldn't disagree more about the "bits" thing.  How does introducing another named unit at an arbitrary decimal point make things simpler or easier?  Especially with a name like "bits" which can refer to a bunch of confusingly related topics: data storage, information, cryptography.

I agree (with your disagreement) in that adding additional ways to measure bitcoin is only going to confuse people. I think we should stick with bitcoin and allow people to use decimal places when pricing goods/services that are less then $600. When the price of bitcoin exceeds 5 digits then this conversation can be revisited. 

Those issues have been addressed ad-nauseum. However I am curious what kind of people have no problem operating with an 8 decimal place currency, and yet get confused by such a simple concept as 'bits'? Is there a name for this disorder? Maybe it's related to aspergers or something? Serious question.

I see a great arbitrage opportunity to serve the people who think a 1/4 BTC is more than 1/3 BTC!

Buy 1/4 BTC, only 1/3 BTC each! Free money!

If you are confused by the simple idea of using "bits" as a shorthand for microBitcoins then you must be totally confounded by all the following terms (in order so as not to confuse you too much):  penny, cents, nickel, dime, bit, quarter, buck, a nickel bag, a dime bag, a Jackson and a Benjamin.

I am sorry if the previous sentence left you drooling on the floor in total mind numbing confusion.

I honestly have no idea what a nickel bag , a dime bag , a Jackson or a Benjamin is...

I find it easier to use mBTC or uBTC than Bits, as those are SI units. (easier for everyone not using the Imperial system)

When discussing Bitcoin, I usually refer to amounts 0.01 BTC or more in BTC itself, everything between 0.01 mBTC (0.00001 BTC) to 10 mBTC in mBTC and anything lower in Satoshis.

This is really not an up and coming problem. For the time being, 0.01 mBTC is easy enough to say and is half a cent, so Bitcoins and milli Bitcoins are enough.
Talking in uBTC and Satoshis don't really make sense at the present time to me. I can understand how much they are, but 1 uBTC is lesser than a thousandth of cent, too less to need to use currently.

I think you are really disconnected from the real world and doesn't have a clue about how the average person thinks.

See this simple example:

A&W introduced a burger that was bigger and less expensive than McDonald's Quarter Pounder, but it failed because customers assumed 1/3 was less than 1/4.
http://factually.gizmodo.com/whats-bigger-1-3-pound-burgers-or-1-4-pound-burgers-1611118517

The thing about, pennies, nickels, dimes, and quarters is that these are actual coins that have actual value. People do not look at 5 pennies and think of it as a nickel, they look at 5 pennies and think of it as 5 cents.

I prefer bits.

1BTC = 1 million bits
1 bit = 100 satoshi

6 places to the right of the decimal is bits
8 places to the right of the decimal is satoshi

0.00005000 = 50 bits or 5000 satoshi


Seems easy enough to me

exactly what i have been saying over and over again, sadly though, due to all the retards pushing for the use of bits, it seems many services are using 'bits' to mean µBTC, which is in my opinion completely ridiculous and backwards. If anything, it only makes things more confusing.

There are international standards for a reason.

using 'bits' as an abbreviation for microbitcoin is like using meter as an abbreviation for micrometer.

it just doesn't make sense, and for that reason the abbreviation for micrometer is micron.

just like the abbreviation for dollarcent is cent, and not dollar.

A bit is an abbreviation for bitcoin, if any. And a microbitcoin can be abbreviated or nicknamed to a lot of things, as long as it's not bit. Microbitcoin or microbit work fine in my opinion, since at least the meaning is clear the moment you hear it.

also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7x-RGfd0Yk


no offense, but it wouldn't have failed in any country using the metric system,

in other words, it would have worked in any country except the US of retarded A

Rightly so. It needs to stop, its too confusing. We need Something.

For those that do not know the entire "bits" proposal, which I personally like because it solves three issues in one proposal is:


When adopted we can all look forward to the day when a shave and a haircut will, once again, cost two bits.

I think we are a very long way away from bitcoin reaching these levels. I think we should stick to BTC until bitcoin reaches a price so that mBTC and/or uBTC would be a more appropriate way to price something worth ~$100

When we reach 1 BTC = $1000, we can start using mBTC for normal purchases. It would effectively replace the dollar.

Yea that is just how it is.  You cant expect people to think, people dont go for a burger to do maths.    I know its so silly people would rank 3 below the 4 but thats the general standard of education now, I would guess most people know the right answer but not when they are not even thinking.

The whole 99,999.99 sales tags are also stupid but they work!     Could get a long list of stupid advertising tricks that should not work but they make alot of money combined for those that know how to use them.      Anything BTC does has to be paint by numbers simple in its implementation and just maybe it'll take off properly one day.   The whole hash code thing we got now should be relegated to the background mechanics, just like most people likely do not know their own registration plate on a car

Two years ago it would have been irrelevant to even think about mBtc or uBtc
Right now 0.001 BTC is worth about $0.50, i don't mind calling it 1mBTC, it makes sense today but it might be obsolete in a couple of years from now so why bother today ?

maybe switching to mbtc now would reassure people that want to get into bitcoin thinking they have to buy a whole BTC, not sure its the good way to go though.

I think by hashcode thing you're talking about bitcoin addresses.  And there definitely *are* people working to move those more to the background.  However, I'm happy enough about addresses, I have some btc in cold storage and I'm glad I have the key on paper not in a computer.  I think you're right to divide the actual bitcoin implementation and protocol from what advertizers might try to do.

I agree. There is no reason to price items in terms of mBTC and uBTC now because the result will be that the displayed price would contain a large figure which makes bitcoin look less valuable to the average person.

I see exactly the opposite when selling BTC.  People complaining about how "expensive" they are and how they cannot afford them:  You mean to tell me they are 500 bucks a piece?  I cannot afford that!

But when they see 1 mBTC is only 50 cents then they think:  I can easily afford a few of those!

It is stupid, I know, but I have seen it in action.

Also if you have something that costs $1 then is is much easier to read the number 2.00 mBTC than the number 0.002 BTC.

Do we need a new standard? Im used to a lot of 0's but clueless people aren't. is not very nice to look at tbh

I have never seen or heard anything say anything like this. That is kind of like someone saying that a $100 bill is too expensive for them to buy dollars.

that's not an argument to use the word 'bit'

i agree with using the unit of mBTC and i wouldn't even mind naming it, i just don't think 'bit' is a suitable name.

i still think using the SI units is the most efficient because everyone understands it.

Indeed, its really confusing, we need an inbuilt calculator in the wallet or some shit.

it is really confusing, why not just stay with btc

Agree that bits is a terribly confusing thing to try to do.  About the poster who said it solves three problems in one, I didn't see what the problems were?  He mentioned using bitcoins and satoshis, but what is the problem solved by introducing a weird unit name somewhere in the middle of the decimal space.  Eventually everyone will know what a bitcoin is and how to divide it.  At that point, you can call 100 bitcoins a carrot or a kilobyte if you want to but you're just being strange, not helpful.

I guess the term satoshi make it more clear than the other uBTC or fuckBTC thing.I don't understand what does that mean

I understand perfectly what BTC, mBTC, uBTC, μBTC means, but I am used to the metric system.

l(liter), ml(mililiter) is the same thing.

Most of the world understands it.   The few that don't need to learn it.  It is about as basic as tying your shoes.

I think you're one of these guys (below):

I guess America is an exception.  ;D

It looks and sounds really bad to be honest, btc is still the cool name but too many 000000

How many zero numbers would you like to see?