Bitcoin Forum

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jw5pm/im_gavin_andresen_chief_scientist_at_the_bitcoin/clfqrlg

So what?

Gavin is an expert on technology, not language.


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

If everyone does it it works... we need all trading sites to list in bits for starters but it gets awkward if you pricing alt coins in bits, everyone has to change.

Nice try, but you need to brush up a bit. Gavin is one of the top thought leaders in the Bitcoin space; as well as Chief Scientist, he's also a published writer and entrepreneur.

And what do you mean, 'so what'? That your own opinion counts for more than his? (That's what it sounds like). You think you can so easily dismiss his opinion? I got news for you, compared to him no one cares what you think.

Furthermore, this is not about something that is or is not true, it's about an opinion.

Appeal to Authority Fallacy: because an authority thinks something, it must therefore be true.

It's important to note that this fallacy should not be used to dismiss the claims of experts, or scientific consensus. Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding and/or access to empirical evidence. However it is, entirely possible that the opinion of a person or institution of authority is wrong; therefore the authority that such a person or institution holds does not have any intrinsic bearing upon whether their claims are true or not.

Consider yourself fortunate to get educated on something you did not know (I've got a soft spot for all bitcoiners no matter how recalcitrant), but by all means keep to your own opinion about bits if you wish.

I think every one else has to change to bits.

"bits" still have too low of a value in my opinion.

I really don't want to have to speak in units of $0.000386, that really just seems more messy than speaking in whole bitcoins for now.

You might have reversed the logic. A switch to bits would remove the messy 0.000 etc. Eg a coffee might cost 1,000 bits.

What part of
didn't you understand?

I like the idea of using bits. But i am french, and in french "bit" and "bits" are pronounced as "bite", which means "cock"

So how do you pronounce Bitcoins? Bitecoins, which means cockcoins?  :D

Using a 100 satoshi denomination might work, but I don't think it should be called "bits".

Avez-vous un bit à part?

What's your point?

When he says bits does he mean a satoshi or some other denomination. I really prefer just satoshi for the smallest amount.

Well it's ironic that i was reading through the topic talking about standardization with ISO. Adoption of bits will align with this requirement. Maybe that is what Gavin saw or trying to relate to

Why switch to bits when there is already "satoshi" as a unit?

satoshi
bit
millibit
bitcoin

I think the good news is that by switching to bits many of us become multi-millionaires instantly  ;D

 ::) yes , gavin is right , if we want more ppl use bitcoin , the unit(1 bitcoin) might be too large for normal users .
satoshi (10^-8) is too small , so changing to bits sounds a good idea .

satoshi
bit = mike
millibit
bitcoin

why have nickels and dimes if we have cents
why have grams and ounces when we can use microtonnes
why have babies toddlers and teenagers when we can use "biologically combined omni-clones at pre-mature status"

answer... because it makes life easier

I suggest same to Gavin and community in Jan, 2013. Thereafter month back KnC and Bitpay accepted my suggestion.

Now, Gavin is saying same on AMA! But, didn't reply me anything. A**hole co-inventor!

http://www.coindesk.com/knc-wallet-bitcoin-price-bits/http://www.coindesk.com/knc-wallet-bitcoin-price-bits/


OP: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=420058.0

The reason he wants to switch to bits is because it allows us to drop the confusing decimal places.
example:
.000386 bitcoin - 386 bits

This simplifies things for the time being, and lets us use satoshis when we need to be even more specific
example: instead of .00038619 bitcoin it will be 386 bits and 19 satoshis (or sats)

This will help in the adoption of bitcoin as it has the same familiar layout that the USD has. Dollars and cents.

its a great idea in my opinion. My friend started getting into bitcoin and I explained it all. I sent him .02 to his cell phone wallet to get him started. He was like wow a whole .02 lol (not realizing that its around 8 bucks) using bits is much better and easier to understand.

I am just wondering if we really need 2 Units(bits and satoshi). I am not sure, if "the USD also has 2 units and people are used to it" is really a good argument.

Are you sarcastic or do you really think, that 1 bit=0.00038183 USD is better than 1 Satoshi=0.0000038183 respectively 1 USD= 2,618.97 bits is better than 1 USD= 261,897 Satoshi?

Maybe it's a little early but bits is the way to go for sure. Companies like coinbase etc. are already testing/using bits internally.

Agree. If the goal is to make bitcoin easier for the masses to use it (especially new people), than 'bit' doesn't really do the trick. More intuitive would be something close (in value) to $1, therefore 1mBTC (BTC0.001) makes more sense.

One important thing is that the language is agreed on. If we call it "bits," that's great, if we all agree.

The IMPORTANT thing is that we start to talk in millionths of a bitcoin. Why? Because the fiat system is about to crash, at least regarding the USD. Bitcoin will jump shortly after, and multitudes of folks attempting to get "in" after the crash, will cause the price to soar. And THAT on top of the reduction in the availability, or desirability, worldwide, of the dollar.

Sure, current bitcoin holders will be rich. But the use of Bitcoin will spread. Supply and demand will bring the price up so high that we will ALL need to start talking in "bits" just to use Bitcoin with the general public, because of the high price.

:)

It is just the smallest unit. I think.

I'll stick with satoshi.

Thank you.

What about a completely different suggestion I have not heard before.

We clearly have a problem that nobody has been able to figure out how to fix well enough using traditional way of thinking. So thinking outside a box could be in order. We could start a completely different style to fit our needs and also to emphasize that bitcoins are really different from traditional money.

It is inspired by the european style of using SI suffixes when dealing with resistor values and wildly varying orders of magnitude on values of other electronic components. Pretty much the same problem that bitcoins are facing. 2200 ohm can be written as 2k2

We could start using format of xxxBTCxxxmxxxμ.

1 BTC in the new format is 1BTC.
0.1 BTC in the new format is BTC100m
0.01 BTC in the new format is BTC10m
0.001 BTC in the new format is BTC1m
0.0001 BTC in the new format is BTC100μ
0.00001 BTC in the new format is BTC10μ
0.000001 BTC in the new format is BTC1μ
1.234BTC in the new format is 1BTC234m
0.001234BTC in the new format is BTC1m234μ

The last shows the biggest improvent compared to any other scheme I have seen and it is the last one that probably is the one that faces the biggest need to have a good solution for in future years.

One of the advantages is that this really does not break anything. It is just a completely optional way of writing the values. All previous concepts of writing about bitcoins remain totally valid and unchanged.

BINGO......that's how I took it also. Did you also notice the one year insinuation?

Yes. Bits are good... definitely
But if we shift to bits, how will altcoins like Dogecoin survive  :o :o ;D?
That will kill dogecoin for sure! That is so cruel, cos I also like dogecoin.

shouldn't there be another Pump&Dump-Coin already?

4/10 of a cent? Clearly not Starbucks at that price. :D

lol, yeah might have to wait a few years for that!

Wow, Gavin gave himself a title. I'm sorry, but if this means anything it is that Gavin seems to be in need of admiration.
Frankly, I don't understand the hype about Gavin. There are other developers as well, who are not member of a highly questionable organization (The Bitcoin Foundation), don't receive pay, but still contribute significantly.

We don't need provisions on how to call Bitcoin's smaller units. Names will emerge naturally. I can't see any advantage of introducing "bits", because we already have Satoshi as a name for the smallest unit.

ya.ya.yo!

1,000 bits (0.001) is actually USD 0.385 (38 cents) at today's price. Still not enough for a coffee though.

this needs to be thought out carefully

i think it would be appropriate to have both BTC and BITS

anything > 0.1BTC is expressed in BTC

anything < 0.1BTC is expressed in BITS

or maybe you can display price like   0.2BTC and 1726BITS , kinda like you say 26$ and 75cents, idk..

point is these standards to be though up, layout out clearly, and agreed upon, this is not an easy task.

if we can  layout out some clear standards, update some key wallets (qt , blockchain, etc..), get some websites to adopt this new way of working ,make some documentation, make some fancy pictures outlining theses standards. this BTC Vs BITS debate might be settled once and for all.


its imposible to get all sites to change how they display BTC prices. some use BTC some mBTC some uBTC, no one has a clue what to do so everyone is doing there own thing. this has to stop and we have to figure this out somehow.

this threads a start, but there have been 100 like it, all it does is show that everyone wants to see some changes in this aspect of bitcoin, but whats beening done to change it?

dose bitcoinstore display prices in BTC or BITS?
dose blockchine.info's wallet display balance as 1.3BTC 230579BITS ???

no!

lets make a new thread, lets figure out EXACTLY what we want the change to be and how it will be rolled out, and then lets put extreme pressure to get these sites to implement this new scheme

rant over,
sry for all the typos,
thank you.

Good freaking luck. I think there is a rough consensus that some units between Bitcoin and Satoshi might be useful. However, what units these will be seems to be quite contentious.

Frankly, I prefer 'mills' (mBTC) and 'mikes' (uBTC), as it reuses existing patterns well-known to anyone who has had a need to handle numbers of anything over a range of magnitudes (i.e. the SI system, used nearly universally in other areas of measurement). I may be in the minority. As such, I recognize the need to sit back and let consensus emerge. Trying to force the issue will not be resistant to whatever socially-selected solution eventually emerges.

The cool thing is that free people don't have to care what Gavin thinks if they don't want to.

Redundant topics, ugh... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=830600.0

it will be satoshi.

Sadly agree, im not convinced to bits yet... maybe its too fast

I would like this too. Let's do it. It needs a few key players to switch over, all the exchanges mainly, then XE and then most of us.

And SR :)

Well I do admire Gavin, actually, but I'm still not interested in using "bit" as a unit at this time.  I'm content transacting in fractions of a Bitcoin - it's very analogous to a world where we might transact in milligrams of gold or something.

We will not be measuring the amount of bitcoin being transacted in terms of satoshi anytime soon. Another issue is that using Satoshi, makes satoshi (the creator of bitcoin) into a profit that he does not appear to want and creates a liability for bitcoin in general in the event that he is ever doxxed.

OP is the perfect example of the "appeal to authority" fallacy. Gavin is writing code, so his opinion about the best name is just the same as anyone else's.

I agree we have to name a new unit but definately not bits.

The term Bits is hated by about 50% of the community.

That's just pure BS.

There'll never be universal agreement over the name.

We need to move forward.

from trustless to personality cult, sleepy road... and frankly ounce, grams, what ever you want, as long as the weight is the same... the name doesn't change the weight. and it's btc, not xtc, stc... but who cares:D

With all due respect to Gavin, I very much disagree.  Even with his support I expect there will be significant resistance to the "bits" movement for a long time to come.  I've written about the merits and demerits of "bits" in several places but allow me to relay my key point:

• "mikes" is just like "bits" but it is much older and is backwards compatible with the unit "bitcoin".

I've heard no good, logical counter to "mikes" over "bits" up until now.  I can think of one myself, that "bits" is currently more popular than "mikes", but I do not feel that the current lead of "bits" is yet sufficient to pay for its drawbacks.  If "bits" continues to gain in popularity and support, then my support will eventually follow naturally.  I have tremendous respect for network effects and, after all, language is for communicating.

I would be willing to start using bits. I hear far too often..."I don't have enough money to buy any bitcoins"

https://i.imgur.com/xFqgnUR.png

This image is great and worth a lot of explanations. Keep displaying it everywhere you can.

Fuck's sake... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_%28money%29

We need a coin to come out with bits and see how it goes.

Yeah. Call it bitscoin.

It might be better to come up with a sliding scale based on the amount being discussed.

If I have $5 I don't say I have 500 cents. But if I have 50 cents I don't say I have .5 dollars.

So when discussing something like .1 bitcoins you might say you have 100 mBTC and if you have .1 mBTC you have 100 bits.

The obvious problem here is, that you have 3 words (bitcoin, mBTC, bits) where you just have 2 words in order currencies(dollar, cent). For a not techie person, that is a big turn off.
Another Problem is, that Bitcoins are just too expensive. If you are from USA or an EUR-country, you are just not used to exchange 1 USD/EUR for some cents in another currency. So from a psychological aspect, we should just stop using BTC when we are speaking to the mainstream. (Yeah I know, that is not really going to happen)

yes but on the other hand, that does speak to bitcoins massive superiority as a currency. It ISN'T like the other currencies that are worth relatively similar amounts to the USD.

Far from disagreeing with you, I just want to highlight that mBTC is not a word.  It seems people use it as if it were a word quite frequently and I'm wondering how many bitcoiners are reading this in their heads as "em-bee-tee-cee" *shudder*.  Here's a table of what are presently the most common and least controversial terms.

Name	Long symbol	Value
bitcoin	BTC	1 BTC
millibitcoin	mBTC	0.001 BTC
		0.000 001 BTC
satoshi		0.000 000 01 BTC

Notably: "XBT", "bit", and "uBTC" are quite common but can spark disagreements; "SAT" is not controversial but somewhat uncommon; "millibit" suffers slightly with respect to both metrics.

The 100 Satoshi unit needs to be the main unit, but "bits" is kind of a poor name.  It really lack originality.  mBTC is also just as weak. 

But yes, the whole community needs to move away from using the word Bitcoins to describe the currency.  "Bitcoin" can still be the software and the platform, but the currency needs a different name and that name should start at 100 Satoshi. 

Millies.

I live in Korea and if I buy a cup of coffee it costs, 5,000 won.  For me to switch to a cup of coffee being 15,000 bits is much much more natural that .015 bitcoins.  

A nice dinner on the town might cost 100,000 bits.  It is very natural.  Yes, it is big numbers, but lots of countries are already using big numbers.

110.99 bits is better than 0.00011099 BTC.

I'd also slightly prefer 'mikes', but consensus is for 'bits' among the people who will actually Make This So (the big merchants/exchanges).

Yeah, it seems there are quite a few nicknames for this unit.  I just started a poll (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=846011.0) to find out what people are saying these days.

Next time when walmart have buy1get1free deal why dont u call that a good news too. Wow this community looks silly now..

This is a year too late. When "Bitcoin was going to the moon", maybe it mattered. Now, not so much.