millibitcoins

[2_Thumbs_Up]

We need to use the word 'bits' for a millionth of a bitcoin instead.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rmto3/its_bits/

I've been pushing for this kind of hard recently, but it's only because I think all the other naming schemes causes too much mental hiccups for some people. I've had plenty of conversations where people get confused by using the SI-system on currency. And their skepticism of it never seem to dissappear from that point forwards. Bits is the most intuitive name I've come across that seems to resolve this issue.

And I live in a country that uses the metric system.



Bits is so much more psychologically appealing as well. Imagine this conversation.

"Bitcoin is to expensive"

"You can buy bits of a bitcoin. 1 USD currently gets you 1000 bits."

"Oh"


Getting 1000 bits for your dollar sounds a lot better than getting a fraction of a bitcoin for your dollar, even if you call that fraction mBTC or uBTC. Logically it shouldn't matter much, but in order to get people to focus on the important parts, it seem to mather a lot.

Just my 2 bits.

I made a thread all about that. Not sure that "bit" is the best short name, though. One guy recommended bai.

Link to your thread?

I don't see a problem with "bit". The only objection I've seen is that it could be confused with informational bits, but those very rarely come up in the same context. British use pound for both currency and weight, and that doesn't seem to be a problem. I think bits is a very marketable name with a real chance to catch on.

[1714750079]

1714750079

[1714750079]

1714750079

[1714750079]

1714750079

[1714750079]

1714750079

[freakying99]

I don't see a problem with "bit". The only objection I've seen is that it could be confused with informational bits, but those very rarely come up in the same context. British use pound for both currency and weight, and that doesn't seem to be a problem. I think bits is a very marketable name with a real chance to catch on.

mBTC and uBTC are very easy to understand. Or do you think people using Bitcoin dont have idea what SI unit prefixes are ?

[2_Thumbs_Up]

I don't see a problem with "bit". The only objection I've seen is that it could be confused with informational bits, but those very rarely come up in the same context. British use pound for both currency and weight, and that doesn't seem to be a problem. I think bits is a very marketable name with a real chance to catch on.

mBTC and uBTC are very easy to understand. Or do you think people using Bitcoin dont have idea what SI unit prefixes are ?

have you actually talked with newcomers about bitcoin using the SI-prefixes? They shouldn't be hard to understand, but they sure seem to be.

I wouldn't personally object to the SI-prefixes, hell I was a proponent for them once. My problem with them is that they doesn't seem to work very well. I've had more than one conversations where the prefixes causes some sort of mental hiccup with people, shifting focus from the point I'm trying to get across. People aren't used to counting money in fractions, and this makes them very skeptical. Also, using too many different units is potentially a big problem as it could cause some huge fuck-ups. A currency needs as few names for different units as possible.

And as I said earlier, I live in a country that uses the metric system. If the SI-prefixes isn't very marketable for currency here, I don't think they are very usable anywhere.

Another user worded it perfectly in another thread.

+1 for 1 million bits in a coin. I feel like that would be perfect when 1 btc is in the ballpark of $10k, therefore a bit is in the ballpark of a cent. Its still workable now but its also looking forward to the future. With a 10k valuation, prices for things won't need decimal points, they'd look like dollar prices do today except without the dot which I think is very intuitive. Bits is easy to say and intuitively derives from bitcoin.

Too many names for things is confusing, especially when they can be confused with each other like milli and microbits. Now we'll have bitcoins for large sums, bits for small sums, and satoshis for the technically inclined (laymen need not worry about this term).

Bits also work if bitcoin ever reaches a valuation of a million $ each, then bits are equivalent to dollars and prices can reintroduce two numbers after a decimal point like we use now.

"Bits" is simple, intuitive, marketable and forward-looking. I really think this is our best bet.

[invisiblehand]

I don't like bits

I like bitcoins

[2_Thumbs_Up]

I don't like bits

I like bitcoins

I agree.

A bitcoin is 1 million times better than a bit.

[VinCeCream]

You can set mBTC in Bitcoin-qt, what is the deal?

Everything said.

[I_bitcoin]

I vote for mBTC, short and simple

It is inevitable

In spoken language perhaps "Mills" mBTC and "Mikes" uBTC would work best.   mBTC is great for the screen but perhaps not so good for spoken language.

[fred1111]

I vote for mBTC, short and simple

It is inevitable

In spoken language perhaps "Mills" mBTC and "Mikes" uBTC would work best.   mBTC is great for the screen but perhaps not so good for spoken language.

I think the debate is premature. Everyone could just use the local currency and "pay with bitcoins". People did that for many years in Europe when the old currencies were replaced by the Euro.

It's like $1000 in gold

[PenAndPaper]

I don't see a problem with "bit". The only objection I've seen is that it could be confused with informational bits, but those very rarely come up in the same context. British use pound for both currency and weight, and that doesn't seem to be a problem. I think bits is a very marketable name with a real chance to catch on.

mBTC and uBTC are very easy to understand. Or do you think people using Bitcoin dont have idea what SI unit prefixes are ?

I don't think that the change aims the super geeks that are among the early adopters. Those of course are familiar with those prefixes. The change is discussed with mass adoption being the big picture,

[hellfrozenow]

How can we initiate the change to mBTC?

Better is explaining to newcommers every Bitcoin consist of 100.000.000 Satoshis, lowest possible unit

[piramida]

How can we initiate the change to mBTC?

Better is explaining to newcommers every Bitcoin consist of 100.000.000 Satoshis, lowest possible unit

yep, I agree. people can still buy 100 thousand satoshies for only a dollar.

[hacknoid]

I don't see a problem with "bit". The only objection I've seen is that it could be confused with informational bits, but those very rarely come up in the same context. British use pound for both currency and weight, and that doesn't seem to be a problem. I think bits is a very marketable name with a real chance to catch on.

mBTC and uBTC are very easy to understand. Or do you think people using Bitcoin dont have idea what SI unit prefixes are ?

I don't think that the change aims the super geeks that are among the early adopters. Those of course are familiar with those prefixes. The change is discussed with mass adoption being the big picture,

I am used to the SI symbols, and wondered if it would cause confusion as well.  However, I just noticed the other day that reddit tips are displayed in mBTC or uBTC (depending on amount and/or exchange rate, I'm not exactly sure).  In any case, I personally found it immediately obvious and actually quite natural.  Using the term "millibitcoins" and "microbitcoins" in conversation may be a bit awkward, but written down I don't think mBTC or uBTC is a problems.  

Maybe we could use "microcoins" instead?  I've seen rpetiela using "minicoins" for a while now and, while not technically correct (should be "millicoins") it does flow much better.

That being said, I think people should be using uBTC as the base unit at this point; 1000 uBTC per dollar is a reasonable exchange rate to use when quoting prices.

[PenAndPaper]

I am used to the SI symbols, and wondered if it would cause confusion as well.  However, I just noticed the other day that reddit tips are displayed in mBTC or uBTC (depending on amount and/or exchange rate, I'm not exactly sure).

Thats an issue imho. I mean the fact that some people use mbtc while others use btc. That adds more confusion to newcomers. We need to decide as community to either use one or the other.

[Technomage]

Thats an issue imho. I mean the fact that some people use mbtc while others use btc. That adds more confusion to newcomers. We need to decide as community to either use one or the other.

I do agree with this. Anyone can start using mBTC or whatever, but there needs to be some sort of a concensus because we don't want to confuse the newcomers.

[bitcon]

you can change it to display mBTC in the client?

i would pull for the idea, but maybe after we get past the chances of going sub 1000/btc.

[keystroke]

I bet nanobucks wins just because it doesn't make sense.

[dnaleor]

I recently changed to mBTC in my client

I personally write since the recent jump in price mBTC and I talk about "millibit" ("billibitcoin" is too long).

I think "millibit" or "millies" and "microbit" or "micros" are good names for the currency; But maybe we should consider just moving the decimal point 3 places every 5 years

[eternaluniverse]

I prefer microbit to millibit, millibit for some reason makes me think its a millionth of a bitcoin...

[xDan]

+1 on the whole "bits" thing. Best solution I've heard yet.

And it's not just the 0.001 thing that confuses newcomers; this would solve the "there's only 21 million!?!" question too.

"Oh, but there's 21 trillion bits! That's more like it!"

[runam0k]

+1 on the whole "bits" thing. Best solution I've heard yet.

And it's not just the 0.001 thing that confuses newcomers; this would solve the "there's only 21 million!?!" question too.

"Oh, but there's 21 trillion bits! That's more like it!"

+1 for "bits".