Bitcoin Forum

It's a honest question: I plan to add a bitcoin faucet to my website to attract more traffic.

I'm brainstorming about it right now and I wonder how to display to the users what amount of bitcoin they'll receive.
The average payout will be smaller than 0.01$ in bitcoins.

I'm interested to hear your thoughts! :)

I voting for 1 bit  8)
Simple and Easy to remember and talk  8)

One microbit.

Agree.

lol, this is best answer there can be.

Yes, this one makes more sense.

I always use the "satoshi" or "sat" terms as I find uBTC and mBTC misleading and confusing.

Your customers will have a far better idea than me or you. I'd suggest providing a mechanism for them to choose what they're comfortable with - just like eCommerce sites offering users a choice of currency - and use a sensible default (either BTC or - probably better for small amounts - Satoshi).

Never use  mBTC or µBTC , I prefer use satoshi, and when 100k satoshi and up I always use 0.001 BTC.

Whatever unit you decide to adopt, I recommend appending the price in bitcoins in paretheses, perhaps in grey text or a smaller font.  If you find this too cluttered you might consider a tool-tip.

For example:
    35 µBTC  (0.000 035 BTC)

"Point Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh One Oh Oh Bee Tee Cee"

Satoshi.. or maybe dust

One Finney.

calling 1bit is easy then other options

vote for 100 satoshi, everyone already know satoshi :D

Is that a song?

Nah it was just phonetics. Slow day at the office. Typical monday for me. I write a bunch of code between 6 am and 10 am while i'm on my coffee high and then i have fulfilled my daily quota so i just take the day off and surf.

I use:

1 BTC: one bitcoin
0.1 BTC: ten bitcents or zero point one bitcoins
0.01 BTC: one bitcent
0.001 BTC: one millibit
0.0001 BTC: ten thousand satoshis (edit: or one pip (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentage_in_point))
0.00001 BTC: one thousand satoshis
0.000001 BTC: one hundred satoshis, one microbit or one mike
0.0000001 BTC: ten satoshis
0.00000001 BTC: one satoshi (obviously)

So I voted for "100 satoshis".

i think the well known term is 1 bit for 100 satoshi

Not many people agree with that.

Never heard the term myself. I did like a previous posters suggestion for referring to micro-btc as "mikes". kinda catchy.

Your average person should refer to it as "1 bit"; here's reasoning:

"100 satoshi" -- 6 syllables, sounds foreign to the english speaker.

"1 bit" -- 2 syllables, sounds like a small amount (which "a bit" is considered a small amount in the english language).

"1 microbitcoin" -- 5 syllables (only useful for starting or ending a haiku), and your average person (sadly) has no idea what unit size a "micro" is.

"mikes" as a nickname for microbitcoins is a fairly old suggestion.  Check out this nomenclature discussion from Feb 2011 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3574.0)?

What's the reasoning of using “bits” for 0.000001, rather than 0.00001 or 0.0000001?

Good point!


Although not perfect, I know this article summed it up pretty well. Basically, the idea is to have 2 digits "past the decimal point"; something that most people are already familiar. So if 1 bit ever becomes worth 1 USD (or even 0.1 bits becomes worth 1 USD), people can work with a currency unit that they are somewhat familiar with. I'm assuming that most currencies use 2 digits after the decimal point for real-world transactions, but I honestly don't know if this is the case. Sounds good :) Decide for yourself:

http://www.coindesk.com/breaking-down-btc-bit-by-bit/

I'm a happy user of "bits", and it's making sense to me to think of exchange rates as "I can get 2,500 bits for $1"

Here's the reasoning they shouldn't use 'bit' ------>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit

A bit is the basic unit of information in computing and digital communications.


and 'bit' is an International Electrotechnical Commission's standard unit -------> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_60027

This is probably one of the better answers on the thread, however I do think it still complicates things.

I personally think satoshis should be used for up to 1k satashis at which point you should use the decimal number worth of bitcoin. For example .0001 BTC is "point oh oh oh one". There is somewhat of an argument to use bitcents when dealing in amounts divisible by .01 (but not above 1 btc)

There is a poll on these forums where the "bit" won by a long shot. Let me track it down...

Here is one of them... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=594575.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=594575.0)
And another...https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=593705.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=593705.0)

Can't find the best poll. It had many choices and bit was the favorite. Can anyone find it?

I don't really get this short name stuff, I prefer to say 100 sats.

I think you're after this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=592691.0).

There it is. A little different than i remembered.

My thinking is that if we go with the bit, the satoshis become the "cents" to the bit. Bit just makes sense to me. Its easy to say, and its a "just a bit" of a bitcoin.

If we dont migrate down and make the 100 satoshi unit the new standard very soon, society will be forced to relearn the new unit of measure every few years because when the price doubles or triples we will start dropping decimal places.

If i go online and see a computer for sale for 4,600 satoshis, I can compare that to a tank of fuel that may cost 900 satoshis and get a sense of value. .00004600 is just difficult to compare to .00000900  because of all the decimal places.

Thanks for your comments!



Yes, in general, this would be the best idea.

However, my users won't sign-up: I want to remove this entry barrier.
Instead, I intend to integrate with microwallet.org, such that users' payouts are sent to microwallet, where they can accumulate.

No sign-up means that I'll have to find one choice that's accepted by everyone. :-\


Yes, I consider making a footnote or tool-tip.
A part of the purpose of this topic is to find out how far these units are understood and how much an explainer is needed.

---

I really like your ideas in this thread! :-*

Keep 'em comin'! ;D

That explains having a unit (whatever name the unit has) with two decimal places. However, I still can't see the connection with specifically “bits” with specifically “0.000001”.

Biased polls are biased. From all of them, “bits” is the least bad, not precisely the best.

The most biased of them all :(

In my opinion, the first of the two polls that you've quoted is not biased.


However, looking at the polls from that time, I'm now puzzled to see that none of them offered the option "100 satoshis".

...why did no one come up with that idea? ???

Ah ok, I think I can help you find that connection. Let's use all digits to describe an amount in "Bitcoin":

0.12345678

How many "bits" is this? Given that there are a *total* of this many currency units:

12,345,678

These are the actual (and current) non-divisible, *functional* amount of units -- described today as "satoshi". Therefore:

0.12345678 Bitcoin = 12,345,678 satoshi

Where do we get "bits"? Let's only allow a maximum of 2 digits past the decimal point. To do this, divide the smallest units by 100, and we will call this new decimal placement the "bit" unit. "bits" as the plural version:

12,345,678 satoshi / 100 = 123,456.78 bits

So you might ask yourself, "wait... how many bits is in a bitcoin then? :("

1.23456789 BTC = 1 million and 234,567.89 bits.

So basically, everything past the decimal point of the BTC unit is the "number of thousands" of bits. For example:

0.435 BTC = 435,000 bits.

I've only actually run through a process like this with maybe a couple dozen people: everyone gets it; however, 1 person sticks in my mind as very insecure about their math ability and skeptical to whether or not they'll figure it out on their own. Others could have felt this way, too. Anyhoo, I hope this explanation helps, and I hope it inspires others as a way to teach people about "Bitcoin" and "bits". I say we just use bits ... your common person rarely transactions 1 BTC worth in a single transaction (today about 340 USD) ... unless they're in the USA buying a new television that they saved up for :)

(edit: added unit amount missing)


this is hardly a reason not to use a unit called "bit" because it's all about context. (If you understand more than one language, you'll realize how important context is.) For example, if I ask you to pay me 2500 bits for a can of Coca Cola, you *know* I'm not asking you to send me 312.5 bytes of information. It's pretty obvious because of the context.

Besides, using the "bit" unit is all about interfacing with your *common* person. The reality is, your common person has no idea that 8 bits is 1 byte. Your common person has no idea what a byte is.... and people who *do* know what a bit (in the byte context) is, they're smart enough to figure out that "bit" can have a financial context.

To sum it up: what unit should we use to *help* the common person? After all, it is the entirety of the common people that will determine bitcoin's fate. I'll let my intellect take an ego stab *any* day if it means Bitcoin will be used by more people... so obviously, I vote "bits" :)

This explanation is still just about the benefits of using 0.000001 as the base unit. In all this explanation, there's no reason why the name couldn't be “mikes” with the same level of clarity.

in the dollar world no one says "zero point zero one dollars" thus the whole decimal system DOES need a common name for the small stuff.
some say penny some say cent.

after all small gold measures are not measures in millitonnes or microtonnes. they are measured in grams and ounces. so far the main buzz words are 'bit' and then 'finney'

i personally say 'bit', even though right now its still hard to do a single transaction of a 'bit' unless its part of a multisend. thus not everyone is using it as a common place name or decided their preference, due to their lack of personal need to. but as bitcoin continues to develop and coins begin to spread amongst more adopters the need for a small measure name will increase.

but one thing is for sure, seeing a faucet advertised as "giving free bitcoins" yet the reality being dust(random decimal) amounts is bad and i would have to say in that scenario it would be advantageous to use a term to describe smaller measure would benefit the OP now

i use the term dust(random decimal) or sats(precise decimal) if the amount is not exactly in increments of 0.00000100. just like people dont say that $0.56 is 11 nickels and 1 cent. or 5 dimes and 6 cent, they simply say 56cents.

so there is still a need for "satoshi's" but a name for 100 sats is also needed. and i think for long term understanding and future-proofing peoples comfort zones a bottom up (satoshi -> bitcoin) is easier to manage rather than a top down (bitcoin -> satoshi) as no one wants to be saying "Point Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh One Oh Oh Bee Tee Cee" as it sounds more like something you would say in bed, not a shop

so satoshi's, bits/finneys, other measures can all work happily together. alot better that the 'oh oh oh oh' orgasm screams, that people find harder to measure with so many zero's

It should be used the standard international prefix, which is:

deci   d   0.1
centi   c   0.01
milli   m   0.001
micro     μ   0.000001

thats top down.. people prefer bottom up
no one uses 'deci' dollar, instead thy use:

nickel=5cents
dime=10cents
quater=25cents

no one uses microtonnes, instead thy use:

ounces
grams

milli and micro are for th scienc and maths community, satoshi, bits, finneys would be for the social (average joe) community.

i am always using the satoshi term, rest are a little bit confusing for ppl who is not related to those terms, you know, those terms can be misleading and confusing.


so my vote is for 100 satoshis.

I'd like to coin Centoshi for 100 Satoshi.  :D

I agree with most of your posting. Except I don't understand the red part.

Would you care to elaborate: Do we really need a special name for 100 satoshis, instead of just calling it... "100 satoshis"?

It is because people are familiar with having a unit of currency that can be used for everyday purchases, but in some cases broken down even farther to be precise. $1 = 100 cents.

In the future bitcoin will be worth so much, that we will be buying items in stores with fractions of a bitcoin. .001 - .000001 range.  Imagine buying a new computer chair tomorrow and being asked for 20999 cents? No, the chair is 210 dollars. The cents are simply irrelevant in larger purchases. Because of this, we need an alternate unit to be used when satoshis don't matter.

We really do not need a special name. Having too many names for various units of measure for bitcoin will only confuse people and will likely slow adoption and slow down the time it takes for someone to pay from the time they are presented with a price to when a TX is sent as people will spend additional time calculating how much to send.

Remember that with dollars, there are only two units of measure, dollars and cents

I agree that we only need 2 units of measure, but in this case the decimal is placed 6 spots too far to the left.

a Big Mac meal costs about $7
At $325 per bitcoin that big mac meal costs .02153846 bitcoin.
Someday in the future, at $3250 per bitcoin it will cost .00215384
Our children might be paying .00021538

The more its worth, the less sense the curent system is going to make. We need to move the decimal.

There's no reason you cannot say, "that will be 2 bits and 53 cents". After all, "cent" refers to 100s and is in the common english vernacular.

And R2D221 I understand your point, and I completely agree. We could simply call it something else. Then the question is, does a unit of "mike" have a contextual reference in the world of "bitcoin"?

Per diction, these are my *personal* suggestions:

0.00000001 BTC = "1 bitcent", or even "1 satoshi" because the name is already established. Similar to how $0.01 is both referred to as "1 cent" or even "1 penny".

0.000000100 BTC = 1 bit = "1 bit"

1.00000000 BTC = "1 Bitcoin", or "1 coin", or "holy crap, an ENTIRE (bit)coin???"

And i'll agree once again, whether the name is "bits" or "mikes" or "r2d2's", whatever name it is should be related to, and contextually understood as being related to, bitcoin as the BTC (or XBT) currency.

If I was advertising to people who are new to Bitcoin I would say 100 satoshis because it sounds like a lot.

Sensible minimising barriers - but there's no reason why they'd need to sign up in order to pick a system! Their choice could persist beyond the initial session by cookies, for example. (To be honest I assumed you'd want them getting to "their currency" as quickly as possible, and even in a classic eCommerce system signing in is usually seen as being a near-final step).


Well, if you really are stuck with one system (and I don't think you are) then you should probably go with the  system Microwallet.org uses (Satoshis, IIRC?) - the principle of least surprise.

Okay, if we go to the moon, let's suppose the exchange rate is one million dollar per bitcoin. ;D


No, the chair is 21k satoshis. I don't see any problem with that. It rolls off my tongue perfectly.


We only need 1 unit of measure.


The decimal is placed 8 spots too far to the left.


Yes, we really need to move the decimal. But if we do it, we should do it wisely.

And if we move it 6 places, we could just as well move it 8 places, with the advantage that we already have a very well established name for 10^-8 bitcoins (i.e. "satoshi").

---

You are right, cookies are an option, but that makes the default value more important (when the site is used from multiple devices/computers).

I just won't get around choosing a reasonable default.


I've already glanced through the competitors, and literally no one uses what microwallet uses.

The reason: Microwallet uses whole BTC and decimal numbers, which is basically a no-go as the payouts would appear too tiny.

You're quite right - been a while since I used Microwallet. CoinBox.me also uses BTC - I guess when I used them both I mentally converted to Satoshis (which is only OK as long as they use a fixed number of decimal places). I guess then I'd still say Satoshi on the grounds that your users should be able to convert in their head once they reach Microwallet. And that excellent tool-tip suggestion from another user? Maybe use - or at least include - the BTC value so your users see what they'll see once they reach Microwallet.

Yes, this is what I'll probably do.


I think I'll do a (BTC-denominated) tool-tip for desktop and laptop, and/or a footnote for tablet and smartphone (I want to serve to both).


BTW: Thanks, this community is great - one can come here and ask and get excellent advise... for free! ;D

So now you want to get rid of bitcoin as well. What do you think would happen if you asked the general public to drop the dollars and only use cents?  

We need 2 units, only the bitcoin will not be one of them. A "bitcoin" will be so huge that only the wealthy will own them. It will be somewhat of a status symbol, kind of like being a "millionarie" in todays world. It will be more of a term to describe the protocol.


For the general public we need 2 units:

Bits/Mikes/Fins whichever we agree upon. This will be .000001 unit.
and Satoshis. 100 of which will fit into the above unit.

This is a sensible way to rollout bitcoin to the general public. As soon as you tell them that a bottle of coke costs 45 bits plus a handful of satoshis for tax, the 2 unit setup rings a bell as something familiar. If we tell them that bitcoin doesnt have a "cent" unit at all they will compare it to places like Zimbabwe that suffer from hyper inflation.

One yu-bit (µBTC)

winner winner, chicken dinner! i love it

Its good, but i think Centoshi will be easily confused with Satoshi because it sounds so similar.

Maybe if you had a Toshi and a Centoshi....

Ive always called it micro bit.!! no clue about others..!

But this isn't for the general public - it's for the users of one website. And there are plenty of sites that already use Satoshi exclusively. The OP has no power to abolish BTC/"bitcoin", and I'm quite certain has no desire either.

I can't vote  :-\

But my choice would be 100 satoshis. I just think it's easier to remember (for me at least) how much of a Bitcoin it is.

One micro for short.

anyone thinking that people cant understand more than 2 names for currency.

well:

a cent, penny,
5cents, nickel, jefferson, half-dime
10cents, dime, Roosevelt

blah blah blah

dollar, buck, greenbacks,  washington note, 1-note, a single, a bone
5 dollars, 5-note, 5-spot, 5-bucks, lincoln
10 dollars, 10-note, 10-spot, 10-bucks, hamilton,

blah blah blah

you getting the picture?

in most cases names are not given for micro amounts, gold fiat, commodity's in a top down perspective. they given names in a bottom up.

thus i think the accountants and nerds can stick with their "micro"/"ubit" rationale. whilst average joe public can cope with the "bit"/"finney" nicknames.

Of course 100 satoshis

I think satoshis / bits is good for less than 0.0001 BTC
And i think mBTC is good for 0.0001 BTC (0.1 mBTC) - 0.099 BTC ( 99 mBTC)

But, most people on this forum only use BTC, mBTC & satoshi  :)

You introduced the idea of going to small units entirely, and I merely adopted that notion for the shake of argument, to show you how we don't need a special word for 100 satoshis.


This comparision is invalid. You just can't equate satoshis and cents. Here's the reason:

• A cent (as in percent) implies being a fraction of something. Therefore, a cent is not a thing itself, but merely a fraction of an other thing. For example, a dollar cent is a fraction of a dollar, a euro cent is a fraction of a euro, and so on.
• A satoshi is a thing of its own. Satoshi is a proper noun. The word "satoshi", by itself, contains no reference to being a fraction of a bitcoin.

The term "satoshi" is on the same linguistic level as the terms "dollar" and "euro". One could even think of introducing a "satoshi cent", which would obviously be one 100th of a satoshi. (Currently, the blockchain doesn't allow transacting individual satoshi cents, yet the protocol could be extended to do so.)


So now you want to get rid of bitcoin as well?? ;)


My aim is not to make it sound as something familiar, but to find the least confusing way of quoting a price.

And yes: More units means more confusion. 4 567 satoshis is easier to understand than "45 bits and 67 satoshis".






Imagine you are a Japanese tourist on your first day in the USA. At home you were told that the US currency is dollars and cents.

Now people are suddenly talking about nickels, dimes, jeffersons, greenbacks and whatnot...
Wouldn't that be confusing to you?

My website is intended for people who are new to bitcoin. It's for people who just have their first day in bitcoinland.
Thus I want to use as few units as possible. I'm afraid that any additional units might be confusing to my site's users.

(Of course, geeks and insiders might still talk about micros, bits, finneys, ubits, and whatever.)

Just leave it , satoshi is good enough, do not make it more complicated ,because it already is for many people.

im saying that average joe will have DOZENS of names slang names.  and then the big whale scientific community will have their mili and micro names.

all im saying is that having just 1 or 2 names shouldn't be a declared rule where no common/slang names cant be used, as it is not helping anyone. but i think finding all possible universal and easy to understand, say, write names. and then whilst average joe uses their preferences depending on their smaller local communities and dialects. that we then find 2-4 universal language names.

at the moment. if a poll was done to say how much is "1bit" we all know from the other polls already done and the dozens of similar topics that well over 500 out of 700 will remember/recognize bit referred to 100sat.

at the moment. if a poll was done to say how much is "1finney" we all know from the other polls already done and the dozens of similar topics that well over 30 out of 700 will remember/recognise bit referred to 100sat.

so right now more people recognise 'bit' as a universal term. that does not mean that with the right PR a good few MEME's being posted in the right places and certain people talking about 'finney' in a certain context that 'finney' might take over.

at the moment 100sat is still common place followed by bit. but until people actually have huge need to spend things in actual 100 sat amounts and a symbol/icon as been adopted for it, safe bet is to stick with 100sat for now... unless you personally want to lead the path of an adoption of a proper name.

its still to early to shout that there can be only 1. and it will be declared 100sat. so be open to evolution when it happens

Most of your various names for various kinds of dollar bills have the number of dollars that the bill is worth (the names are also very rarely used). The other names simply have the name of the person who appears on the currency so anyone who has previously used it would know what you are referring to.

Fair enough.


The comparison is fine as this is still the wild west for bitcoin and we can do whatever we want. As for the dollars to cents idea, the general public would likely laugh at it because it is ass backwards from what they are used to.
If a cent is not a real thing and was merely a fraction of something larger, why would the US government mint a coin after it? They should have cut up 1 dollar bills. As for the Satoshi, it is a fraction is something because 8 places in front of it there is a decimal.



Yes but right now the value of bitcoin isn't high enough to change. In the future when the value it growing there will be a need for a new unit, and it will not be the Satoshi as it is too small.


Less confusing to newbies and more awkward for the general public to use in the future.

I like that one too.

Exactly. And that is why it is so easy to use it in everyday language. Than again this is not universal - I have seen bill nicknames mostly used in the US. This is what makes the previous poster's logic flawed. We need something plain and simple, not micro bits or ultra micro bits and whatever. Keep it plain and simple.

microbit is kinda cool to hear.  ;)

“Milli” and “micro” are SI units. Where did that “ultra” came from, did you make it up?

If “milli” and “micro” are not simple enough, then I don't know what can be.

Bits

It is a well known term among a small circle of hardcore crypto users, probably a few hundred people or less. You need a reality check.

Jimmy Zed

I was talking about linguistics, not minting. You may re-read my post.


Nope, it isn't.

• On my website I'll be quoting prices in satoshis. That means there'll be integers and no decimal point.
• The word "satoshi" (unlike "cent") doesn't contain any reference to being a fraction of something. Users won't be reminded that there's a larger unit.

Correct.


I want to have your crystal ball!! :D
How can you be so sure about what the bitcoin price is doing in ten years??


The future's general public will be old enough to care about themselves, no worries.
If future's general public will frequently have to deal with thousands of satoshis, then they'll find a word for it themselves (similiar to the grand in the dollar world).

What we should care about is today. Every day newbies come into bitcoin and have a hard time understanding it.

There's no need to make it additionally complicated when it comes to currency units.
Why should we confront them with a special name for 100 satoshis, if it isn't needed for understanding?


At this point, please try to imagine you were me and make a little fact check:

• FACT: I have to go to smaller denominations of bitcoin because that "point oh oh oh" crap would literally kill my business.
• FACT: There is a broad consensus that a hundred millionth of a bitcoin shall be called "satoshi". That means that my customers will figure it out quickly.
• FACT: There is no consensus about what a millionth of a bitcoin shall be called. That means that my customers might find contrary opinions and lots of discussion. Not good for business.

→ Logical conclusion: Use satoshis. Simple as that.
...and I'm not the only one whom above reasoning applies to.




The words "milli" and "micro" are not the problem itself. The problem is that this would introduce an additional, third unit to the two units we already have (satoshi & bitcoin).

Ofcourse these additional units can very well be used. But the question is whether they should be presented to users who just start out with bitcoin.


This isn't reddit. Pointless posts aren't getting upvoted here.

Maybe you want to contribute something to the discussion instead? :)

You don't see the point so you attack? How about doing a bit of thinking first next time?

oh, and

:)

Centoshi ! That's it - catchy and sophisticated at the same time ! You have nailed it man !!! This is it !

Jimmy Zed

Franky is right, I cannot remember the last time someone called a ten pound note "ten pounds". It's always 10 quid, or tenner, or Pavarotti (cause he's a tenor, tenner...get it?).  And...Plenty of Japanese tourist over here, not a problem.

Centoshi sounds like a joke. Bitcent is a good term.

common names that sound like slang/ normal words. work. trying to be scientific by going the milli/micro route causes confusion as that involves alot of decimals.

a bottom up approach is better with common names from 1sat - 100 sat - 10,000 sat going up to bitcoin is simple.

and i have seen a few people shout out centoshi.. umm thats a 100th of 1 satoshi(0.01sat), not 100 sat. so just to keep the scientific/math community happy, a HECToshi is 100sats, although it still sounds ugly(sound you make coughing up mucus)

I think staying away from bit might be a good idea as it is a commonly used term in other places.

100 Sats or Satoshis isnt a bad word or 100 Micro Bits

I'd just like to layer my own observations atop this, being as unbiased as I can manage.  I'm running with your implicit assumption that "bitcoin", "millibitcoin", and "microbitcoin" are distinct units.

The bitcoin is by far the most common unit in the Bitcoin system.  This was introduced by satoshi with the release of the code (early 2009).  It is the only unit sufficiently widely recognised that it has been entered into a number of reputable dictionaries (e.g. OED).  The symbol "BTC" is the most popular, but BTC and "XBT" are also frequently seen.

The millibitcoin is easily the second most widely used unit today.  This follows naturally from "bitcoin" and the SI prefix "milli-" (1795) and was first discussed on the forum in early 2011.  I doubt it's in any dictionaries but there is basically a consensus on the term.  The symbol used is almost always "mBTC".  Nicknames vary: "millibit", "mill", "millie".

The satoshi is the third most common unit.  It was introduced in early 2011 by bitcointalk (then bitcoin forum) user ribuck (originally as a name for 0.000 001 BTC but this quickly changed to 0.000 000 01 BTC, currently the smallest possible unit).  It is, as you observe, practically the only name for this unit.  "SAT"/"Sat"/"sat" is relatively common as a symbol and a nickname.

The infamous 0.000 001 BTC unit is more the subject of flamewars than anything else, not least because two of the most popular names, "bit" and "microbit", are in direct logical conflict.  It's possible both will become accepted (just as 1 calorie = 1 kilocalorie) but the issue is far from decided.  I've seen many proposed names for this unit; off the top of my head (alphabetically, lower case): "bit", "centoshi", "fin", "finney", "hectoshi", "mic", "microbit", "microbitcoin", "mike", "mubit", "ubit", "xub", "zib".  Selecting one name may well end up attracting negative attention to your platform so please tread carefully.

As I say, these are just my observations (reading something on Bitcoin roughly once a day for the past 4+ years).  I'm happy to accept corrections and provide some citations on request.

milli-litres, millimetres, micrograms, microwave ovens, microbes, microphones, microsoft

ull find micro and milli is used a hell of alot more in real conversations than bit.

though i like the term bit because its 3 digits of a BITcoin, same as 100 is 3 digits. im kind of leaning towards a 'finney'
after all no one says microtonnes of gold or millitones of gold.

I remember seeing  somebody saying "Centoshi" or "Bitcent"
sorry forgot who you were too lazy to find it.

I really liked that

btw you didn't attack any other succinct responses such as "one microbit" "one finney", so maybe you should also be questioning your own bias?

That was pars pro toto. I'm sorry if you feel attacked personally, but your post just happened to be the latest in a series of equally pointless posts, all of which should be equally addressed by this:

Just shouting out an one word response without a single sentence of reasoning is what I refer to as pointless post, and it doesn't bring the discussion any forward.

I hope that you can take that bit of critique and now contribute something to the discussion, for example a reasoning on why you think your stance to be the better one.

Agreed.

They say “ounces of gold”, but that's because of the flawed Imperial system. Just because the US is using it doesn't mean everyone should follow them.

Also, about the 3 letters of “bit”, that sounds more poetic than an actual logical reason to choose it.

If we have satoshis why can't we have nakamotos?

100 satoshis= 1 nakamoto

Why not? : )

Two units named after the same person doesn't seem good to me...

I usually call them 1 bit but then i have to explain how much 1 bit is in btc. Unfortunately the idea of bit isn't that widespread yet...

Thanks teukon: one word can be enough, and need not be characterised as 'shouting'.

yes. :)

1 µt = 1gram.
1 mt= 1kg

Tonne is weird: we call it a tonne instead of a Mega-gram (Mg).

I think the SI base-unit for mass is the kg, further adding to the confusion.

/tangent

Maybe we should rename the kilogram. What do you think, do we make a poll for it?

LOL !!! Yeah let's vote on it ! Omg , somethings you read on this forum are hilarious.

Back on topic, what do one word replies like "satoshi", "bit" etc add to the discussion? I assumed it was posters telling us how they voted (which I guess they might have thought other people would find useful). Since we're talking about it could you maybe fill in the gaps and explain why you voted for "bit"?

Why not? He would love it.

This is by far the best post on this topic, in my opinion. Sums it up pretty much.

It also helps me to nail down the choices for my website:

I will certainly not want to risk choosing one of the many names for a 100-satoshi-sized unit, which leads me to avoiding this unit entirely.
I'll also avoid the mBTC unit for similiar reasons as franky1: The word "millibitcoin" implies that it is just a fraction of something, and the human brain doesn't like to deal with fractions — we prefer integers!
Of the remaining two units, BTC and SAT, the former is simply too large to be useful on my site.

Anyone who has to deal with bitcoin micro-transactions and is faced with the current situation will probably come to the same conclusion and quote values in satoshis.
This will be the interim solution as long as a consensus for naming the 100-satoshi unit is not found.

However, given that this discussion didn't make any tangible progress in the last six months, I'd bet that a word for 100 satoshis will not become universally adopted any time soon. Thus the interim solution might very well become the permanent solution.

Personally, I think that this interim solution, i.e. quoting values in satoshis, is in no way inferior to using a 100-satoshi-sized unit. Prices do not intrinsically need to have two decimal places on the right side, and instead could equally well be quoted as integers with no decimal point whatsoever.
I believe that the only reason why people want to have two decimal places to the right of the point is familiarity with their current local fiat currencies, which is — in the grand scheme of things — irrelevant.

Ofcourse one might argue that similiarity with the current system could ease understanding the new system.
However, while this approach works in general, it doesn't apply to currency units: I argue that teaching two currency units to newbies is more difficult than teaching only one unit, even if the newbies are used to using two units in their local fiat currency. After all, whatever units you teach them are still new to them, i.e. it's not the monetary units they already have.

Last but not least, one might rightfully complain that quoting values in satoshis will frequently incur large numbers. Transactions in the thousands will be the norm. Consequently, I guess, people will find various nicknames for thousand satoshis, analogous to the grand in the dollar world.

Nathan is right. I don't like that at all

Centoshi is something like a Super Mario Character, bitcent sounds professional.

Yeah it does but that should be a good thing, no? Everyone loves Super Mario <3

Honestly, Bitcent sounds geeky and odd , whereas Centhoshi is a catchy fun name ,that's easy to remember - and most of the people will know what it stands for. Bitcent is just to vague.

Jimmy Zed

100 Satoshis is called 100 Satoshis

Keep it simple, Bitcoin is complex anyways, don't introduce additional complexity to confuse newbies.

That is basically how I say it, but I think the whole scheme is absolutely terrible.  Looks like a bunch of computer geeks made it up.

You are right. This whole discussion is completely pointless. Call it what you want - in the end if BTC ever makes it full mainstream, then the potential nicknames will or will not be adopted by the people using it. Simple as that.

Jimmy Zed

one of the reasons for 'bits'

short, sweet, simple, easy to say, easy to understand

Yeah the language will evolve by itself in a way no one is able to predict right now. That's why I said "I use", because that's all we can say. If "bits" wins over the other options then I'm not going to be the weird one who insists on using "mikes".

Use the same Bitcoin-qt is showing when you have to confirm payment, BTC, mBTC and µBTC. All together

Satoshibit is a good name..  ::)

but ridiculously confusing when you realize that a milibit now becomes a kbit.
It's absurd to use 'bit' to mean a bitcoin and also to mean a microbitcoin.
Not to say people  aren't absurd at times tho. lol.

I'll stick to bitcoins, millies and micros for clarity.

I'm guessing you don't genuinely find 1 btc = 1,000,000 bits 'ridiculously confusing'. But it's not really about you though is it? It's about the next billion adopters - what will be easy for them to use?

As a matter of fact, I do. The logical meaning would be “bits” = “bitcoins”. Just an abbreviation. Using a very similar word to mean something orders of magnitude smaller is very confusing, at least for me.

Sure; let's say you're in a 'we take bitcoin' coffee shop, and they charge 700 bits for a coffee. Would get confused and think it costs 700 btc?

Think of the average consumer here, not the crypto-electro-engineer in her microcomputer lab.

If someone charged me 700 bits for a coffee... I would ask them to repeat the price again.

Also, why do you think cryptoelectroengineers(?) are the only ones who can grasp the SI system?

Yes, in your utter confusion, I'm sure you would.

Where do I say 'only ones'? It looks like you can't understand English either.

Why choose?  I'd prefer to think of both groups.

"mikes" is just as good as "bits" for the average consumer and it's far better for crypto-electro-engineers.

My vote goes to 100 satoshis. It is easier because almost everyone understands it.

I'd agree, but OP is looking to make a choice for a website.

You're evading the question.  OP has already gathered the information they sought and has settled on "satoshi".

Again, why do you choose between alienating "common people" (with "μBTC = microbitcoins") and alienating "crypto-electro-engineers" (with "bits") when you can accommodate both so easily with "mikes"?

Mikes is not great either, it's still confusing.

100 satoshi is 100 satoshi and I call them 100 satoshi.

I didn't mean to evade the question; no sinister intent or ulterior motive - just noting the fact that there was a poll asking for a choice to be made. That was 'why choose'. Otherwise I tend to the anarchic over the dictatorial.

I'm advocating an easy to use system for general use by people, one without the psychological high price barrier, one that might help bridge the adoption chasm, but if some folk decide to stick with SI good on them, that's their choice, and I'm sure there will be situations where it will be necessary to use SI, just as there'll be crossover between the groups; sometimes SI may be more appropriate, other times, bits.

I confess I don't know what the 'mikes' solution is, maybe you can explain? Maybe mikes will become another widely used option, and maybe there'll be more options we haven't thought of yet, each offering advantages in certain situations, for certain groups of users; for example, SI would be a good choice for backend IoT transactions; bits for the aforementioned coffee shop example.

100 satoshi might be confusing for newbies, best is 0.000001 BTC

The 'mikes' solution is precisely the same as the 'bits' solution, only with a different name.  I believe 'mikes' predates 'bits' by nearly 3 years (or, about 2 years, if you count the older suggestion that we rename 'satoshi' to 'bit' (http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1bzwep/can_we_throw_out_the_word_satoshi_and_use_bit/)).

I completely agree that there's no single solution.  At a low level, satoshis are useful; for some applications, SI is good; for the coffee shop, I'd like a slang term.  I recall reading the reddit "it's bits" (http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rmto3/its_bits/) post almost a year ago now and thinking: "I very much agree with everything here except the term".

wut?
If someone told me a bit was also 1,000,000 bits, of course it's fkn confusing. Are you mad?
I'd never use number like 1,000,000 for that anyway. It would just be one bitcoin
I'm sure the other billion adopters would prefer that too. Lol.

No, it's not 1 bit = 1,000,000 bits, do you really think that is the suggestion here?

Ok, mikes is good, I'm glad we agree, apart from the actual name.

It doesn't help the SI purists who insist we all do mental arithmetic to 8 decimal places, but I am sure their days are 'numbered'.

The fact that the whole world except the US (and a few other countries) use the SI system surely means their days are numbered. Totally. Like, why aren't we all reversing to the Imperial system right now?

You have no idea of what we are talking about. Moving the decimal point is not the same as 'reversing' to an imperial system. Surely that's a very elementary concept?

In the bitcoin context, the 'SI purists" insist on the decimal point staying where it is, forcing everyone to deal with currency to 8 decimal places, making daily mental arithmetic impractical.

The 'bits' advocates want the decimal place moved 6 places right to a more standardised currency convention and format, it works better with financial software, and more importantly it better suits how our brains have evolved in dealing with 'counting numbers', it helps bridge bitcoins usability chasm. Having moved the decimal place, SI can operate as per normal. It's still a decimal system. It still has a decimal place.

Not only that but behind the user-interface level, the 'SI purists' can talk to each other in micro or milli all day long if they wish, so they have nothing to lose, and everything to gain.

I will provide a tool-tip that quotes the exact amount in BTC, for clarity.

However, it will certainly not be the main option as it is too inconvenient to pronounce ("oh point oh oh oh oh...") and carries the unwanted implication of being just a small fraction of something. People don't like to have small fractions of something.


You have a very good point about how using bits is better than using whole bitcoins or SI prefixes.
I especially agree with the green part. Many people underestimate the importance of these subconscious effects. The human brain prefers to use (positive) integers.

However, can you explain how using bits is superior to using sats? That's the part that I don't understand. ???

You do realize that if I talk about “100 mBTC” I've effectively MOVED the decimal place, right? Do you really think I would pronounce this “Oh point oh oh oh one bitcoins” when it clearly can be read “One hundred mikes”? (using “mike” as an abbreviation because obviously the word “microbitcoins” is too long)

Fixed that for you.

To understand the meaning of "µBTC" one has to understand the meaning of "BTC" first.
However, the whole point of moving the decimal (as far as I understand it) is about finding a setup that allows us to gradually phase out the unit "BTC" entirely. The eventual outcome would be that the term "bitcoin" refers to the currency system as a whole, not a unit.

The underlying problem is that µBTC is — and always will be — a subunit, not the base unit. I can understand that many people want to change the base unit, as it is too large. But I cannot understand why the new base unit should be 100 SAT instead of 1 SAT.

Anyhoo, I will sum up the future of Bitcoin. For any of you early adopters out there, consider this your cheat sheet to know where the future of Bitcoin develops:

* "Bitcoin" is still the technology.

* 1 bit will be the "base unit".

* the smallest unit will be "1 bit cent", also known as "1 satoshi" to honor Satoshi Nakamoto. (sort of like 0.01 USD is referred to as a "1 cent", and also its proper name "1 penny", respectively)

* Some people will understand that "1 bitcoin = very rich". The term "Bitcoinaire" may even come up.

* XBT is the abbreviation -- it fits beautifully with "Bitcoin" and "bits", even though that wouldn't be intellectually 100% correct.

* Exchanges, traders, accountants, etc. will understand the price of Bitcoin as "$400 / XBT"

* Laymen will look at the price of Bitcoin as "2500 bits / dollar" (US Dollar) ... bookkeepers and accountants will be familiar with this as well, if necessary.

In response to KingOfTrolls:
I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, it's hard for your average user, and your average adopter, to understand what a "SAT" is, especially in the world of Bitcoin. If you go ahead and tell them, "oh, it's short for Satoshi! The guy who worked a lot on Bitcoin in the beginning had the first name Satoshi. He's anonymous and stuff. But don't ask about that".

...well, that's just adding more confusion. (Even if you make the explanation shorter). I'm not saying this because it is what I believe, I am saying it because it is the reactions and feelings of the layman (and even very technically-minded people).

Will newbies and average users understand? Yes.

Will they remember that "1 sat" is the base unit for Bitcoin? As most people forgot things very quickly, my *intentional* interactions with the layman show that they just don't remember "Satoshi" or "Sat". They entirely remember "bits". Things I have heard include:

"Oh ya... a 'bit', right?"

"Um, it was 1 'yoshi' right?" (to which I reply: "no, 1 SA-toshi")

If you have recovered from shooting yourself in the foot yet again, perhaps you can address my other points. Is there anything there you can agree with?

You defeated me. You win. I have nothing more to comment. All hail 10111111.

Bits advocates a standardised, conventional, universal, currency format, accurate to 2 decimal places. Sats has merit, but getting the world to change to a new format is a big ask, it's probably not going to happen.

Other reasons are more subjective; imo it feels right, it sounds right, it looks right; it's a core feature of the Bitcoin technology; at this stage it's value is pretty small, not too big, just right for this stage of the adoption curve. It's easy to say. It sounds digital, and thus self-contextual. It's user friendly.

Well these are a few things that come to mind, I'm sure there's lots more.

edit grammar

Don't feel defeated, you're welcome to join the the winning team ;-)

Sarcastic comment was sarcastic.

You try to predict the future with a high degree of accuracy, and you state your prediction with a high degree of certainity.

This is what I call "hubris"... :D


On my website I have explainers about what a "bitcoin" is and what a "satoshi" is, and I'm in regular communication (via email, web-form, etc.) with my site's users.
As a matter of fact I haven't heard any such questions or understanding problems about "satoshi".
(The website has been running for two years, the faucet was added one week ago.)

Anyways, this isn't about "What is easier: sats or bits?" — this is about "What is easier: sats or bits&sats?"

Many "bits" adherents seem to forget that when using "bits" we still have to explain what a satoshi is, because sooner or later, the users will want to know what the smallest denomination of bitcoin is.
More specifically I'd have to add a third explainer about "bits" in addition to the two explainers that I already have (about satoshi and bitcoin).

Obviously I'm not too lazy to write up these explainers, but I'm rather worried that this would add unnecessary complexity to my website (which is targeted towards newbies) and bitcoin as a whole.

Thus I conclude, even if bits is easier to understand than sats (which I doubt), then adding this unit to the system would still make it more difficult for newbies to understand.


It is true that many world currencies use two decimal places. However, you shouldn't fall for the composition fallacy (https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division).

Humans are already used to the fact that different currencies have different divisibility, and the ISO 4217 standard even includes a mechanism to catalogue those using the "exponent" attribute.

Also, using plain integers to measure value is not a "new format" at all:
There is good evidence that the human brain prefers to use integers and intuitively uses integers even when presented with a decimal number. That's the reason why 2.34 $ is pronounced "two dollars and thirtyfour cents" and not "two point three four dollars".
Therefore, as humans already use integers to mentally visualise values, it will be easy to transition to "two hundred and thirtyfour sats" (given that the exchange rate is appropriate).

By the way, speaking about standardisation, are you aware of ISO/IEC 80000-13? ::)
The unit "bit" is already standardised!


That's right: The unit "bit" has some merits, and no one will prevent you from using it. I can see that a subset of the bitcoin community will use "bits".

However, we were talking about the base unit here. And it is a necessary condition for a unit to be universally accepted before it can become the base unit.

After nearly one year of discussion, the opposition against "bits" is as strong as ever, so I cannot see how it could become universally accepted in any foreseeable future.
On the other hand, the unit "satoshi" seems to be universally accepted, even by those who would actually prefer a different unit. Both "bits" advocates and "bits" opponents will agree that the smallest denomination of bitcoin should be called "satoshi".

Thus it stands a good chance to become the new base unit.

It is too confusing. How can a 50 year old man process this in their mind.

You have taken your position and are using sats on your website, great, good luck with that. You just don't seem to see how biased you are to that position you have made, biased, and deaf to any argument.

Just look at your statement "the opposition against "bits" is as strong as ever". Do you mean your own personal opposition? because it clearly isn't true for the community in general as there is a very clear and strong shift to bits.

You have also greatly over complicated things, (something the SI folks do so well). You bog yourself down and wonder how on earth you are going to explain that 1 bit = 100 satoshis. It's not rocket science. People get it.

Anyway no hard feelings, each to his own. Enjoy using sats, you're free to choose what you want, no need for all the BS to justify yourself.

Hey hey that's a very good point actually, we have to keep it simple!

100 satoshi will sound the most known, i recommend doing that  ;D

yes i also agree with 100 satoshi, memorable, and easy on the mention :)

sometimes the layman, they are always one mention as examples 10k satoshi and 10k  bitcoin. when what they mean is 10k satoshi :)
and I often heard them :)

He said on page 8 of a thread entitled "When quoting small amounts of bitcoin, how do you call 100 satoshis?"

Just no. The base unit for mass in the SI system is the gram. Defined as the mass of 1 ml of water at STP.

No, the SI base unit for mass is the kilogram (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_base_unit), and it's the only base unit not defined by a fundamental physical property - though that may change very soon. (http://eandt.theiet.org/news/2014/sep/kilogram-birthday.cfm)

1 bit = 100 satoshi.

Is "bit" the official term?

Mea culpa. my (mis)education has led me astray.

No, but it does appear to have some of the big players behind it.

• A June 9, 2011 reference to 1µBTC being equal to 1 bit (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=13495.msg188816#msg188816)
  
• Reddit post that appears to have started it all (ridiculing the Metric system) (http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rmto3/its_bits/)
  
• Bitpay backs the 'bits' term (while explaining why the 100 Satoshi unit is important) (http://blog.bitpay.com/2014/05/02/bitpay-bitcoin-and-where-to-put-that-decimal-point.html)
  
• Coinbase backs the 'bits' term (adding optional support) (http://blog.coinbase.com/post/89405189782/its-bits)
  

Since Coinbase adoption, I have mostly stopped following it. Apparently many wallets support it as well.

It is also apparent that Americans find the Metric system confusing for some reason. Though in grade 2, it was taught with props: 10 cubes make a stick of 10, 10 sticks make a sheet of 100. 10 sheets of 100 make a cube of 1000. Actually that is not explaining the Metric system per se: that was explaining how Arabic numerals work. I think all the metric names for orders of magnitude were covered in grade 3.

Edit: removed duplicate 2011 discussion link.

Ha, I never knew this.  Thanks.

Did you consider adding Gavin's recent endorsement (http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jw5pm/im_gavin_andresen_chief_scientist_at_the_bitcoin/clfqrlg) of "bits" to your list?

No, too lazy :D

I think http://zibcoin.org/ (http://zibcoin.org/) just converted me to "zib".

Lol, yeah, I remember commenting on that back in March (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=529301.msg5881718#msg5881718).

Good luck zibcoin! :)

I'd probably say 100 satoshis, and 0.000001 BTC in brackets or so.

I call it as it is 100 satoshi or the more common term now a days is "dust"

Good point phillipsjk...looks like bits "won" :) As teukon mentioned, Gavin (senior bitcoin developer) also adopted "bits". Other services I have found that entirely use "bits" as the smaller unit:

http://gambit.com -- tons of fun games, play for bits.
http://breadwallet.com -- best iOS wallet, hands down.
https://wallofcoins.com -- get cash for your bitcoin fast.

Good closing for this post, especially with all of the Bitcoin peeps understanding what "bits" is :)

No, idea. I usually just called it whatever they called it.

Are you blind? 100 satoshi won the poll ! Who cares about bits, and nits and tits, 100 satoshi is straightforward and no fancy mambo jumbo there. Simple and to the point.

If you are a user of a website, then the question is: "Which bitcoin units do you understand / want to use?"

If you are the owner of a website, then the question is: "What is the lowest common denominator that all of your users understand / want to use?"



This poll explicitly asked the second question, which I think is the more difficult, albeit more important one.

In your OP you state you want them to know how much they are receiving in bitcoin, so just display the amount in bitcoin.

"We have sent you 5 cents worth of bitcoin: BTC0.00014435"

Presumably they will be newbies, so KISS.

So Satoshi is a good name for the smallest unit.  But we do need a good name for 100 Satoshi.  It seems like momentum is going for "bit" and and I am okay. 

We then know that 1,000,000 bits equals one bitcoin. 

We need to figure this out because someday hopefully a Satoshi will be worth 0.01 USD.  A bit will equal $1.  And a million bits will be a bitcoin, "the whole coin". 

To me though these names of "bit" and "Satoshi" are a nerdy and weak. It would be much better if the community came up with better names.  Some kind of rebranding. 

That would also draw more interesting into Bitcoin as it would spark discussion.. 

I started another poll which explicitly asks the first question, or more precisely, its opposite:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=835215.0

I was taught to call those small btcs as Satoshis.. Other people are calling it millibit or bits. I dont know what's correct

All of the amounts in the poll question are equivalent.

Perhaps you are one of the people actually confused by the "bits" term being pushed. There is only one reason the "bits" term is equivalent to 1µBTC: we need convenient a name for that much Bitcoin.

You are quite right, I need to keep it simple and stupid.
But using whole BTC isn't an option because the payouts would appear too tiny.
"oh point oh oh oh" isn't something that people want to have.

So I had to find a bitcoin unit which is universally understood and small enough to avoid the decimal point, and I ended up using satoshi.

---

I disagree. Or at least: I'm not included in we.

My faucet is running since two weeks and payouts are quoted in satoshis.
I have received zero complaints, questions, or issues regarding the use of "satoshi".

I have a short explainer on my site which essentially says "100 million satoshis = 1 bitcoin". And that seems to do the trick.

Thus I have zero incentive to add any additional units to the system. I don't want to needlessly clutter up my website.
Actually, I'm rather worried that additional units could confuse newbies, for example, like this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=813167.msg9370564#msg9370564).