Redomination mBTC, XBT, do nothing

[Peter Lambert]

Shoot, I voted XBT and then realized you are trying to change what XBT stands for. XBT should be 100 000 000 satoshis, it is an ISO compliant alternate to BTC.

For small values I like to use mB as the abbreviation for millibits. For places like exchanges they should use the XBT to fit in with USD and JPY and GBP and XAU. For websites selling small items they can use mB which is more casual and results in less leading zeros.

You claim that traditional currencies are limited to two decimal places, but there are at least a couple currencies which use three decimal places. USD used to go to three decimal places but has been inflated to the point where the third place is no longer used and the second decimal place is pretty meaningless.

[1715549404]

1715549404

[1715549404]

1715549404

[ArticMine]

I suggested XBT for mBTC in another thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=148229.msg1607892#msg1607892; however given the rise in the BTC / USD exchange rate XBT for µBTC so 1,000,000 XBT = 1 BTC or 100 satoshi = 1 XBT actually make even more sense.

The argument for XBT is ISO compatibility. The argument for the re-denomination is to have a unit of account that is  more in line with most fiat currencies after allowing for some further appreciation in the BTC / USD exchange rate in the future. There are many precedents for currency re-denomination as a result of inflation and the same arguments do apply for a currency re-denomination as a result of deflation.

I voted XBT for 100 satoshi. I do not support simply replacing BTC with XBT. Let us keep in mind that ISO-compatibility will only really matter if Bitcoin has more deflation.

[wachtwoord]

EDIT: The standard system is greatly loved here. The unfortunate thing is that some fields have a mix. Aviation for example uses feet, nautical and statute miles, knots, miles per hour, etc. but, of all things, chose the most useless aspect of the metric system, centigrade temperatures for measuring temperature.

1. Centrigrade isn't the SI standard it's Kelvin
2. Centigrade makes some sense as it's a simple displacement of the Kelvin temperature ([°C] = [K] − 273.15) to make 0 C the freezing point of water and 100 C the boiling point of water. Fahrenheit makes even less sense because it also requires a linear transformation ([°F] = [K] × 9⁄5 − 459.67)
3. Did you know the investor of Celcius was American and the inventor of Fahrenheit a Swede? (fun trivia)
4. The aviation standards don't seem to be universal either. Over the past years I've flown quite a lot and when flying with US Airlines or European airlines the unit of measures used to report height and speeds from the cockpit differs. I'm not sure what they use at the helm (though I'd advise SI standards, makes all calculations so much easier)

[Razick]

EDIT: The standard system is greatly loved here. The unfortunate thing is that some fields have a mix. Aviation for example uses feet, nautical and statute miles, knots, miles per hour, etc. but, of all things, chose the most useless aspect of the metric system, centigrade temperatures for measuring temperature.

1. Centrigrade isn't the SI standard it's Kelvin
2. Centigrade makes some sense as it's a simple displacement of the Kelvin temperature ([°C] = [K] − 273.15) to make 0 C the freezing point of water and 100 C the boiling point of water. Fahrenheit makes even less sense because it also requires a linear transformation ([°F] = [K] × 9⁄5 − 459.67)
3. Did you know the investor of Celcius was American and the inventor of Fahrenheit a Swede? (fun trivia)
4. The aviation standards don't seem to be universal either. Over the past years I've flown quite a lot and when flying with US Airlines or European airlines the unit of measures used to report height and speeds from the cockpit differs. I'm not sure what they use at the helm (though I'd advise SI standards, makes all calculations so much easier)

1. Kelvin is rarely used outside of specialized fields.
2. −459.67° F is absolute zero. Screw kelvin. My point about Centigrade/Celsius is based on the fact that it's not that hard to remember 32 and 212.
3. Interesting.  I thought Fahrenheit was German.
4. I'm an American student pilot, but I think that the measurements we use here are ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) standards, and should be universal. Ie. Altitude would be expressed in feet and speed in knots globally. In the passenger area they are going to use what the passengers are used to.

I think it's a matter of what you are used to, Standard is just so easy to me as I am sure Metric is to you.

[ArticMine]

EDIT: The standard system is greatly loved here. The unfortunate thing is that some fields have a mix. Aviation for example uses feet, nautical and statute miles, knots, miles per hour, etc. but, of all things, chose the most useless aspect of the metric system, centigrade temperatures for measuring temperature.

1. Centrigrade isn't the SI standard it's Kelvin
2. Centigrade makes some sense as it's a simple displacement of the Kelvin temperature ([°C] = [K] − 273.15) to make 0 C the freezing point of water and 100 C the boiling point of water. Fahrenheit makes even less sense because it also requires a linear transformation ([°F] = [K] × 9⁄5 − 459.67)
3. Did you know the investor of Celcius was American and the inventor of Fahrenheit a Swede? (fun trivia)
4. The aviation standards don't seem to be universal either. Over the past years I've flown quite a lot and when flying with US Airlines or European airlines the unit of measures used to report height and speeds from the cockpit differs. I'm not sure what they use at the helm (though I'd advise SI standards, makes all calculations so much easier)

1. Kelvin is rarely used outside of specialized fields.
2. −459.67° F is absolute zero. Screw kelvin. My point about Centigrade/Celsius is based on the fact that it's not that hard to remember 32 and 212.
3. Interesting.   I thought Fahrenheit was German.
4. I'm an American student pilot, but I think that the measurements we use here are ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) standards, and should be universal. Ie. Altitude would be expressed in feet and speed in knots globally. In the passenger area they are going to use what the passengers are used to.

I think it's a matter of what you are used to, Standard is just so easy to me as I am sure Metric is to you.

Of course here in Canada we used to have to deal with the difference between an Imperial gallon (4.54609 liters) and a US gallon (3.78541 liters). When buying gas I like the Imperial gallon when selling gas I like the US gallon. After switching to metric in Canada this source of confusion and the potential for consumer fraud was eliminated.

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

[firefop]

I would have voted "who do you think you are?" ... but it wasn't on the poll.

Seriously. People will call these units whatever they decide to call them. But a bitcoin is a bitcoin is a bitcoin...

when we start talking about this issue I just want to roll my eyes. Just leave it base 10 - that's easy to to understand and who cares about ISO. Honestly, nobody cares - at all.

[dillpicklechips]

I think the free market will determine what the redomination should be naturally. It's not something that can be voted on and socially enforced. In my opinion the best source of what people want to use when sending BTC is to watch the Reddit Bitcoin tip bot. I'd love to watch the usage stats as time progresses.

[grau]

I would have voted "who do you think you are?" ... but it wasn't on the poll.

Seriously. People will call these units whatever they decide to call them. But a bitcoin is a bitcoin is a bitcoin...

when we start talking about this issue I just want to roll my eyes. Just leave it base 10 - that's easy to to understand and who cares about ISO. Honestly, nobody cares - at all.

You are free to ignore both me and the standards until you do not have to deal with them. Let's do that.

[Quicker_777]

The naming convention and unit of measurement can be for larger than a fraction of the currency, but in general, the ordinary Joe will find it difficult to track down more than two levels of fractional currency.  I give you the extinct "half-penny" as an example. 

[Peter Lambert]

The naming convention and unit of measurement can be for larger than a fraction of the currency, but in general, the ordinary Joe will find it difficult to track down more than two levels of fractional currency.  I give you the extinct "half-penny" as an example. 

Half pennies were not discarded because three decimals are too hard, they were discarded because inflation made them worthless. Several of the middle eastern countries use three decimal places still today.

[Quicker_777]

The naming convention and unit of measurement can be for larger than a fraction of the currency, but in general, the ordinary Joe will find it difficult to track down more than two levels of fractional currency.  I give you the extinct "half-penny" as an example. 

Half pennies were not discarded because three decimals are too hard, they were discarded because inflation made them worthless. Several of the middle eastern countries use three decimal places still today.

I'm not saying the base currency unit should be the smallest denomination, I'm saying beyond two decimal places will be difficult for most folks.  Three, maybe, but four and five?  Uh-uh. 

[btcusr]

Voting is not always a good idea..

Just go ahead and change it to XBT (100 satoshi).

[elements]

If we had this discussion three years ago I would have voted XBT because it is true, that the X stands for supranational currencies in the ISO system. However, there have always been exceptions to the rule, the most recent and noteworthy one being the Euro which has the ISO code EUR instead of XEU which it should have following the rule.

Since BTC is a global currency there is no reason why there cannot be another 'exception'.
Furthermore today there are thousands upon thousands of articles, blog entries, videos, gimmicks/gadgets, t-shirts and whatnot
featuring BTC or the Bath symbol for Bitcoin.

Even though I never really liked the idea of using the Bath symbol for bitcoin because it was already taken,
today it is the de facto standard  alongside BTC.

Just because the dollar is getting worthless by the minute doesn't mean we have to rename it.

Stay with BTC, the Bath symbol, and mBTC, uBTC and satoshis as sub denominations if you like (they are established and work).

To get newbies and future newbies to learn about new symbols and new 'ISO' codes just makes an unnecessary fuss which will only confuse everyone. There is no good argument which would justify the potential confusion!
And more confusion is the last thing Bitcoin (and all the many other alt-cryptos) need(s) right now.

[Itcher]

Nr. 1

I think the eight digits after the point is one of the very greatest features of bitcoins. We shouldn't kill it.

[rudolfaxl]

redomination BTC to XBT is bad for bitcoin

[Grand_Voyageur]

I cast my vote for option 2 (mBTC and uBTC)!

It's both clear and simple. Anyone has to learn fiat money value and SI measures since they weren't coded into their brains; so, I think that learning that BTC is made of 1 BTC= 1000 mBTC, 1mBTC = 1000 uBTC, 1mBTC = 100,000 satoshis, 1uBTC = 100 satoshis isn't so bad.

[janbrel]

I vote for none of the above because they all confused me and put me off using any service denominated in them. I think it finished coinedup when they started up mBTC markets because they just confused people.

[vm_mpn]

Do not overthink it... Beauty in the simplicity... Bitcoin and Bit are the only two denominations we need.

[unamis76]

I voted BTC. I think both of the other two options are a bit difficult for newcomers and people knowing Bitcoin for the first time. It sure was more difficult to me fitting in mBTC and XBT than in BTC

But if we do have to change and adopt something that can be ISO compliant... Well, XBT would be the best option.