halfawake (OP)
|
|
June 07, 2013, 06:22:42 AM |
|
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this topic - it's either here or the general Bitcoin discussion forum.
Personally, I find these micro bitcoin terms to be more confusing than useful. I mean, one of the fundamental features of bitcoin is that it goes out to eight decimal places. So why even use separate terms for smaller amounts? I think 0.0006 BTC is much more clear than x mBTC. Either way, you're working in decimals, so why create multiple units?
I just think it's much more clear to either say everything is 0.0006 BTC, or alternatively 6 satoshis, than to invent all these other units that one has to keep track of.
|
BTC: 13kJEpqhkW5MnQhWLvum7N5v8LbTAhzeWj
|
|
|
drakahn
|
|
June 07, 2013, 06:24:19 AM |
|
lol, bitcoin invented the metric system
|
14ga8dJ6NGpiwQkNTXg7KzwozasfaXNfEU
|
|
|
ThatDGuy
|
|
June 07, 2013, 06:39:01 AM |
|
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this topic - it's either here or the general Bitcoin discussion forum.
Personally, I find these micro bitcoin terms to be more confusing than useful. I mean, one of the fundamental features of bitcoin is that it goes out to eight decimal places. So why even use separate terms for smaller amounts? I think 0.0006 BTC is much more clear than x mBTC. Either way, you're working in decimals, so why create multiple units?
I just think it's much more clear to either say everything is 0.0006 BTC, or alternatively 6 satoshis, than to invent all these other units that one has to keep track of.
While I agree with you, I also think coming up with terms for the lower orders of magnitude could have a dramatic psychological effect in terms of increasing the userbase - especially over the next 2-4 years. To a brand new user, hearing they would have to spend $118 for a single BTC is slightly intimidating considering it's risk assessment. They would likely feel differently if they could drop $10 and get what they (initially) perceive as a "few" coins. This is also considering sentiment from a US perspective, where the term "coins" is used for values <$1.
|
|
|
|
lch
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
June 08, 2013, 02:14:30 AM |
|
While I agree with you, I also think coming up with terms for the lower orders of magnitude could have a dramatic psychological effect in terms of increasing the userbase - especially over the next 2-4 years. To a brand new user, hearing they would have to spend $118 for a single BTC is slightly intimidating considering it's risk assessment. They would likely feel differently if they could drop $10 and get what they (initially) perceive as a "few" coins.
This is also considering sentiment from a US perspective, where the term "coins" is used for values <$1.
Are there any experiments that show the effects of using these terms on people?
|
|
|
|
halfawake (OP)
|
|
June 08, 2013, 02:26:35 AM |
|
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this topic - it's either here or the general Bitcoin discussion forum.
Personally, I find these micro bitcoin terms to be more confusing than useful. I mean, one of the fundamental features of bitcoin is that it goes out to eight decimal places. So why even use separate terms for smaller amounts? I think 0.0006 BTC is much more clear than x mBTC. Either way, you're working in decimals, so why create multiple units?
I just think it's much more clear to either say everything is 0.0006 BTC, or alternatively 6 satoshis, than to invent all these other units that one has to keep track of.
While I agree with you, I also think coming up with terms for the lower orders of magnitude could have a dramatic psychological effect in terms of increasing the userbase - especially over the next 2-4 years. To a brand new user, hearing they would have to spend $118 for a single BTC is slightly intimidating considering it's risk assessment. They would likely feel differently if they could drop $10 and get what they (initially) perceive as a "few" coins. This is also considering sentiment from a US perspective, where the term "coins" is used for values <$1. I think you've got a good point here, but with bitcoin being over $100, the psychological barrier is already there. So unless someone successfully convinces all the exchanges to put the values in mBTC, which I don't think would be a good idea personally, my proposal wouldn't change the psychological effects here.
|
BTC: 13kJEpqhkW5MnQhWLvum7N5v8LbTAhzeWj
|
|
|
solex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1006
100 satoshis -> ISO code
|
|
June 08, 2013, 02:32:04 AM |
|
People are adaptable to this type of problem. Consider when the new millennium rolled around and confusing dates like 01/02/03 were commonly seen. So people got used to automatically adding the century in the date when it was normal to leave it out before. Bitcoin amounts will get learned and standardized. I think micro-bitcoin will become a common unit, eventually.
|
|
|
|
halfawake (OP)
|
|
June 08, 2013, 07:08:40 AM |
|
People are adaptable to this type of problem. Consider when the new millennium rolled around and confusing dates like 01/02/03 were commonly seen. So people got used to automatically adding the century in the date when it was normal to leave it out before. Bitcoin amounts will get learned and standardized. I think micro-bitcoin will become a common unit, eventually.
I don't think those dates are anywhere near as confusing as the microbitcoin terms that bitcoin has, personally. That's just a four digit year, there's always the option of just displaying the entire century, it wasn't really a big hassle for anyone who wasn't in the software development industry around the late 1990's.
|
BTC: 13kJEpqhkW5MnQhWLvum7N5v8LbTAhzeWj
|
|
|
drakahn
|
|
June 08, 2013, 07:10:26 AM |
|
Most people probably don't need to adapt, the metric system has been around for a while
|
14ga8dJ6NGpiwQkNTXg7KzwozasfaXNfEU
|
|
|
halfawake (OP)
|
|
June 08, 2013, 07:54:35 AM |
|
Most people probably don't need to adapt, the metric system has been around for a while
True, I'm one of those Americans who never had to learn the metric system, so I and us fellow Americans are probably more confused than the rest of the world would be.
|
BTC: 13kJEpqhkW5MnQhWLvum7N5v8LbTAhzeWj
|
|
|
niothor
|
|
June 08, 2013, 01:04:31 PM |
|
Most people probably don't need to adapt, the metric system has been around for a while
True, I'm one of those Americans who never had to learn the metric system, so I and us fellow Americans are probably more confused than the rest of the world would be. When I went with my father to England and visited a friend who owned a few race horses I had a real headacke with 5 furlongs , 7 furlongs , 5 furlong and 16 yards , 5 furlong and 182 yards. At that time I wondered why can't they just go with 1000m , 1200m , 1300m. But I bet a brit would be confused by the metric system as I am by theirs.
|
|
|
|
CurbsideProphet
|
|
June 08, 2013, 06:08:23 PM |
|
While I agree with you, I also think coming up with terms for the lower orders of magnitude could have a dramatic psychological effect in terms of increasing the userbase - especially over the next 2-4 years. To a brand new user, hearing they would have to spend $118 for a single BTC is slightly intimidating considering it's risk assessment. They would likely feel differently if they could drop $10 and get what they (initially) perceive as a "few" coins.
This is also considering sentiment from a US perspective, where the term "coins" is used for values <$1.
Are there any experiments that show the effects of using these terms on people? When a stock splits, it's typically a positive move on share price despite the fact that you aren't receiving a higher ownership %. It's purely psychological but it happens all the time.
|
1ProphetnvP8ju2SxxRvVvyzCtTXDgLPJV
|
|
|
nobbynobbynoob
|
|
June 09, 2013, 01:51:05 PM |
|
Most people probably don't need to adapt, the metric system has been around for a while
True, I'm one of those Americans who never had to learn the metric system, so I and us fellow Americans are probably more confused than the rest of the world would be. When I went with my father to England and visited a friend who owned a few race horses I had a real headacke with 5 furlongs , 7 furlongs , 5 furlong and 16 yards , 5 furlong and 182 yards. At that time I wondered why can't they just go with 1000m , 1200m , 1300m. But I bet a brit would be confused by the metric system as I am by theirs. Britain has used and educated peeps in metric since ~ 1975. Horse racing, road signs and cricket are the exception. I still make fairly frequent use of non-metric stuff mainly for the benefit of [some of] my American friends.
|
|
|
|
niothor
|
|
June 09, 2013, 02:05:36 PM Last edit: June 09, 2013, 05:13:37 PM by niothor |
|
Most people probably don't need to adapt, the metric system has been around for a while
True, I'm one of those Americans who never had to learn the metric system, so I and us fellow Americans are probably more confused than the rest of the world would be. When I went with my father to England and visited a friend who owned a few race horses I had a real headacke with 5 furlongs , 7 furlongs , 5 furlong and 16 yards , 5 furlong and 182 yards. At that time I wondered why can't they just go with 1000m , 1200m , 1300m. But I bet a brit would be confused by the metric system as I am by theirs. Britain has used and educated peeps in metric since ~ 1975. Horse racing, road signs and cricket are the exception. I still make fairly frequent use of non-metric stuff mainly for the benefit of [some of] my American friends. Hmm , I spent to little time there, so you might be right but I can clearly remember that the first two houses we checked to buy near the Kempton racecourse had their surface advertised in sq feet.
|
|
|
|
BitAddict
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1190
Merit: 1001
|
|
June 10, 2013, 12:13:03 AM |
|
I agree that all the micro BTC terms are confusing for the mayority. But we don't have easy solution.
Also telling I'm going to send you 0,00004356 is really hard and confusing when you're speaking, and is hard to remember.
|
|
|
|
Welsh
Staff
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3304
Merit: 4115
|
|
June 10, 2013, 12:16:29 AM |
|
I used to struggle with it a lot, until reading a very useful article which I can't remember the url for. I think a lot of people struggle with it, that's why I normally tell people how much it is in original terms.
|
|
|
|
Mike Christ
aka snapsunny
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
|
|
June 10, 2013, 12:24:37 AM |
|
It does take a lot of getting used to. We're coming from a currency where one dollar could get you enough sundaes for all your family and friends, and now $5 will only get you one. In the case of Bitcoin, it's going the exact opposite direction; 1 BTC might've gotten you a sundae (hypothetically), and later, 0.05 BTC would get you one. As the price for a single BTC rises, the amount of BTC you need to buy just one thing will always go lower, and so it requires getting used to alternative denominations such as mBTC and eventually uBTC, lest we use 0.001 BTC as the normal denomination. I believe it'll just take time, as 1 mBTC looks better than 0.001 BTC, and requires a lot less 0's.
|
|
|
|
bb999
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
|
|
June 10, 2013, 01:02:41 AM |
|
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this topic - it's either here or the general Bitcoin discussion forum.
Personally, I find these micro bitcoin terms to be more confusing than useful. I mean, one of the fundamental features of bitcoin is that it goes out to eight decimal places. So why even use separate terms for smaller amounts? I think 0.0006 BTC is much more clear than x mBTC. Either way, you're working in decimals, so why create multiple units?
I just think it's much more clear to either say everything is 0.0006 BTC, or alternatively 6 satoshis, than to invent all these other units that one has to keep track of.
This discussion is another example of a non centrally controlled market in action. If enough participants support one descriptor or another for sub bitcoin units then it will take off, if not it will simply remain .0000 whatever. Personally I think simplicity (fewer varieties) is better for widespread adoption but I love the fact that this has become significant enough to merit discussion.
|
|
|
|
halfawake (OP)
|
|
June 10, 2013, 02:35:24 AM |
|
I used to struggle with it a lot, until reading a very useful article which I can't remember the url for. I think a lot of people struggle with it, that's why I normally tell people how much it is in original terms.
If you ever think of the name of the article, let me know, I'd love to have an article that explains it pretty clearly.
|
BTC: 13kJEpqhkW5MnQhWLvum7N5v8LbTAhzeWj
|
|
|
AliceWonder
|
|
June 10, 2013, 06:42:05 AM |
|
Just don't switch in the same document / shopping cart and there shouldn't be problems.
US uses metric more than other countries give us credit for, only the most ignorant don't know what a mL vs L is.
|
|
|
|
Lethn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
|
|
June 10, 2013, 09:21:35 AM |
|
Honestly? I ignore it, it's a system made up by people who know nothing about maths, the only time I ever see this system being openly used is on those Bitcoin faucets and so on and I think it's just a way to disguise how much they're giving you. There's nothing difficult about writing or understanding 0.00005 BTC, this is coming from someone who scored an F in Maths.
|
|
|
|
|