formatting small numbers

[mountie]

let me propose formatting small number.

see

0.08063888
0.080,638,88

which one is better to read?

currently no standard to display small numbers.

I know we use mBTC, uBTC

but not good for newbies.

let me propose using commas at each 3 digits under decimal point.

[DannyHamilton]

You can propose anything you like, but you are just shouting into to the wind unless you have some way to get the whole world to agree with you.

The world has been using numbers (and very small numbers) for hundreds of years.

You come into some random discussion forum and say: "Hey everyone, lets change the way we represent small numbers!"

Do you actually expect that will result in a major change in the way the world represents numbers?

[DebitMe]

First one is easier to read.  Commas get in the way and are confusing when looking at the number.  Makes me think we are talking millions instead of decimal places of bitcoin.

[groll]

It will give more confusion to Bitcoin enthusiasts. The old style must be maintained. It was already the standard format and users are already used to it. If you want to put commas then you dont have to put "0." in the beginning. Just state satoshi and put like this for example 80,000,000 satoshi (0.8 btc). That way it is much clearer and easy to understand.

[pooya87]

that will never work because you are changing the rules of showing numbers which is defined in math and it is not something you can just say lets use this way to see it better.

besides you are not talking about a community of small number of people, you should think globally. all over the world people want to see this number and adding a "," after the decimal point is only confusing.

there are still many people who don't even know m=10e-3 and u=10e-6 which is pretty common and obvious, so adding a new thing that is also wrong will only create further confusion.

[Pro Gamers]

let me propose formatting small number.

see

0.08063888
0.080,638,88

which one is better to read?

currently no standard to display small numbers.

I know we use mBTC, uBTC

but not good for newbies.

let me propose using commas at each 3 digits under decimal point.

If newbies are your concerned dont worry they not be newbies in a long run and i believe those numbers are part of what they will understand first like me. And in my opinion the first one looks better than the second one and too easy to type lol.

[helloeverybody]

I prefer the original format without the comas, Ive been using biotcoin for a fair while now so i wouldn't really categorise me as a newbie  but the mbtc and ubtc still confuse me since ive never really read into it too much. The quickest and easiest way for me and im guessing most others is just to use the full amount shown like so 0.111111111 or whatever amount.

[jukka]

using commas in decimals are based on standards. if btc would start using its own formats people would be very confused.

[NorrisK]

How about just using the SI metrix system?

0.080 638 88

Easiest to read imo as the spaces clearly show how many digits before the zero you have and there are no commas which may confuse people from parts of the world where they use a comma instead of the dot after the first zero.

[7788bitcoin]

0.08063888
0.080,638,88

The first one is easier to read, because we are all taught to express the number this way. If there is other ways, it will be using the m, µ and so on... If you are an engineer or a scientist, may using 10e-3, 10e-6 etc could make it even easier.

Adding the commas will definitely confuse everyone.

[franky1]

let me propose formatting small number.

see

0.08063888
0.080,638,88

which one is better to read?

currently no standard to display small numbers.

I know we use mBTC, uBTC

but not good for newbies.

let me propose using commas at each 3 digits under decimal point.

people prefer bits or sats..
80,638.88 bits
8,063,888 sats

if you did not realise it. at code level everything is measured at satoshi level up(8063888 sats).. its only the front end GUI that shows things at bitcoin level down (0.08063888).. due to the fact that bitcoins fiat value increases, it makes sense to start thinking about amounts in small denominations of bits and sats up (with or without comma for display purposes), as oppose to thinking of it from the bitcoin level down involving nearly all amounts being underneath a decimal

[~Bitcoin~]

I think formatting without any commas in middle will give better sense and also it will be not hard to read number if there is no any commas. However  mBtc and satoshi are enough for newbies to understand bitcoin value.

[Joel_Jantsen]

let me propose formatting small number.

see

0.08063888
0.080,638,88

which one is better to read?

currently no standard to display small numbers.

I know we use mBTC, uBTC

but not good for newbies.

let me propose using commas at each 3 digits under decimal point.

How does that make any difference ? I understand adding commas in your currency digits helps us separate hundreds from the thousands/lakhs either for reading it out or quick understanding but won't make any sense in case of bitcoins.0.08963522 could simply be called as 0.089 instead of reading the whole number.The approximate value of the remaining digits would be less than 0.01 anyway.

[jhenfelipe]

The first one for me, since I'm not a newbie anymore. Your intention is good since you're thinking what's best for newbies. However, I think it would be better if we use the original format, if it's mBTC, uBTC or in different units. Newbies will get used to it also as time goes on, as long as they apply those units. All of us here (those who are not new to bitcoin) came from there, and now we can deal with it. And there are online converters too, if newbies got confused.

[Kakmakr]

let me propose formatting small number.

see

0.08063888
0.080,638,88

which one is better to read?

currently no standard to display small numbers.

I know we use mBTC, uBTC

but not good for newbies.

let me propose using commas at each 3 digits under decimal point.

How does that make any difference ? I understand adding commas in your currency digits helps us separate hundreds from the thousands/lakhs either for reading it out or quick understanding but won't make any sense in case of bitcoins.0.08963522 could simply be called as 0.089 instead of reading the whole number.The approximate value of the remaining digits would be less than 0.01 anyway.

I agree with that, as in your example this is a 0.24 cents difference between 0.08963522 and say rounding it off to 0.09. Why would that break your bank, if you lost 0.24 cents on a single transaction, if you rounded it off. I do this with fiat too, because I try to avoid hoarding loads of coins in my purse or stored in a bottle.

Just round it off, it is less confusing. ^smile^

[MyBTT]

The first one's better. The second one uses commas, which I personally feel should only be used with integers. But it's all a matter of personal preference, I could be biased as all my time with bitcoin I havent been using decimals.

[Vinz24]

let me propose formatting small number.

see

0.08063888
0.080,638,88

which one is better to read?

currently no standard to display small numbers.

I know we use mBTC, uBTC

but not good for newbies.

let me propose using commas at each 3 digits under decimal point.

For newbies the first one is better and easier to read amd also the satoshi without the 0 point something. It easier when you read 8,063,888 satoshi. The mBTC and uBTC are not for begginers.

[serjent05]

let me propose formatting small number.

see

0.08063888
0.080,638,88

which one is better to read?

currently no standard to display small numbers.

I know we use mBTC, uBTC

but not good for newbies.

let me propose using commas at each 3 digits under decimal point.

Never change the standard or decimal rule.  If you do all will be confusing.  imagine if you use the second format in a rational number,  1,000,000.000,100,1 .  Isn't it confusing?  You  might missed the dot (.) there.  So that is the reason why they never use comma on the right  after the decimal point.  1,000,000.0001001  see how neat it is LOL

[safari88]

I think using the current format it looks good as 0.08063888, compared to using "," and it makes me quite dizzy to read.