Using a lower bitcoin denomination(bits/sats/millibits): Which side are you on?

[Darker45]

I am already very comfortable with Bitcoin and Sats. And I guess those are the units which are also very popular among Bitcoin fans.

Although when it comes to amounts which are not so small as to be quantified using Sats and not too big either as to be quantified with a single or two decimals I am good with mBTC. It's more of a hassle to say one hundred thousand Sats or point zero zero one Bitcoin. So I would prefer one mBTC. That's to be spoken as m B T C rather than millibitcoin as it sounds too geeky to me.

People don't even have to know the meaning of mBTC. It'll just make things sound too complicated. It means more Birthdays To Come.

[Upgrade00]

Sure. But is choosing a lower denomination really "lowering the standards"? I'm pretty sure pricing gold in grams instead of whole bars isn't really a bad thing.

It is all still considered to be gold, an ounce of gold or a gram of gold and anyone who gets confused can relate it to actual measurement metrics. This is quite different from using made up fractional equivalents which could be quite confusing for an average user especially when there are too much of them.

The idea has its merits and unit bias is an actual thing, as I've seen people choose to go for altcoins because they consider them cheaper than Bitcoin, and I'll have to explain how they can purchase fractions of it if they choose to. But for some reason some would rather have 1000 xcoin than 0.006 BTC, maybe cause they feel during a price increase the former could get them richer way quicker cause it's a significant number.

Maybe in the future when bitcoin atfains a very high fiat value new denominations would be absolutely necessary, but for now rotating between Bitcoin, mbtc and Satoshis seems to be working fine.

[mk4]

It is all still considered to be gold, an ounce of gold or a gram of gold and anyone who gets confused can relate it to actual measurement metrics. This is quite different from using made up fractional equivalents which could be quite confusing for an average user especially when there are too much of them.

We could also say that the 'cents' denomination of money is also a "made up" fractional equivalent right? But yet it's heavily used. I think as long as a certain smaller denomination is adopted early on(I think right now is still really early), it will end up fine in the end. But yea, deciding on a consensus is going to be a problem.

[Mejoress]

I like Bits, but i think the bit should be 1/20,000 btc, so 1 bit = $0,95 & 0,75€

[Upgrade00]

We could also say that the 'cents' denomination of money is also a "made up" fractional equivalent right?

I agree and I also recognize the need for such fractional denominations. If a consensus could be reached on what should be the universally accepted fractions of Bitcoin that would be a step in the right direction.

However my reservation is with this fractional equivalents being used as a default ticker on coin tracking sites like CMC or coingecko. Bitcoin should remain the staple and only means of identification in my opinion, any other should function as a means of avoiding numerous leading zeros.

[gabbie2010]

My preferred lower choice of  bitcoin denomination is bits, as a forex trader my broker adopted that denomination as a alternative source of trading thus allowing me to calculate my lot sizes and risk to be taken before taking any trade, while I used https://bitsusd.com/  to quickly glance through bits values in USD, e.g I used 525 bits equivalent to 10USD per trade, bits values has been very helpful in calculating my risk to reward ratio while trading based on amount of pips used as stop loss as well as numbers of pips to be taken as profits.

[Searing]

^[mBTC] or ^{[millibitcoin]} in fact, it can still be shortened to ^[millibits] which I find easier to understand and be remembered.

Not a good idea. "Millibit" would mean 1/1000th of a bit (see millimeter, milliliter, etc) when it's actually 1000 bits.


BTC and sat cover everything I ever need to do with bitcoins so all these made-up units just waste my time.

Well, someday IMHO, be it slang or something else. IF and or/when Bitcoin gets to say $100,000.00 per USD. Something undoubtedly will arise to the

occasion. Not sure what, but pretty sure something. Is there a term for 10th of a Bitcoin for example?  Just googled such. dBTC for example?

I know Litecoin back in the day folks use to say that Litecoin would be more or less pegged to Bitcoin and act like Silver (LTC) to Bitcoin's (BTC) gold.

Man, I'd really like that to go back to being so. I have a 'bit' of Litecoin and 1/10th would be just dandy. But that was the last serious talk of this

kinda thing way back in like 2015 or some such.

As you can tell from my previous post, MATH is not my greatest skill...nor definitions nor attempts at slang towards such. But it is gonna be damn

cumbersome in 10  years attempting to tell someone what I paid for my SpaceX ride and astronaut wings at $500,000.00 USD Bitcoin, don't ya know!

This however will be indeed the 'least' of my concerns in 10 years I hope by far, really, cumbersome is fine, I won't mind!

Brad

[mk4]

I know Litecoin back in the day folks use to say that Litecoin would be more or less pegged to Bitcoin and act like Silver (LTC) to Bitcoin's (BTC) gold.

Man, I'd really like that to go back to being so. I have a 'bit' of Litecoin and 1/10th would be just dandy. But that was the last serious talk of this

I honestly think that litecoin's "silver to bitcoin's gold" is one of the worst taglines I've seen that I'm really ashamed of myself for being convinced by it when I was first starting out lol. Litecoin's totally unnecessary besides to being a sort of Bitcoin testnet.

[Searing]

I know Litecoin back in the day folks use to say that Litecoin would be more or less pegged to Bitcoin and act like Silver (LTC) to Bitcoin's (BTC) gold.

Man, I'd really like that to go back to being so. I have a 'bit' of Litecoin and 1/10th would be just dandy. But that was the last serious talk of this

I honestly think that litecoin's "silver to bitcoin's gold" is one of the worst taglines I've seen that I'm really ashamed of myself for being convinced by it when I was first starting out lol. Litecoin's totally unnecessary besides to being a sort of Bitcoin testnet.

I was depressed I had mined 12,595 or so Litecoin on www.litecoinpool.org from like 2014 onward and not keeping them and

selling for Bitcoin and not at the peak price...I think I spent all of 2014 mining a shitload of them as the KNC Titan was pretty much ONLY big miner doing so
 
at like a $1.80 price or some such.

But the majority of them being xfered over that year and or year(s)  (with the tagline on bitcointalk.org along the lines of Never getting my ROI back on my f*cking KNC

Titan 8th grade science fair project...for crying out loud! and FU to KNC..or some such.

(I really, owe KNC an apology in hindsight..like a basket of fruit..that was  harsh!)

But recently I looked over time how I xfered over from LTC at stupid low LTC prices to BTC which luckily was also at stupid low and HODL'ing

thinking I'd screwed up but did the calculations and was like 10% difference.

Hell, I spent that 10% on dubious BTC tickers or dubious ASIC board fixes to Lightfoot on here at like 1/2 BTC lots or some such to cover that...so...because

even though LTC was low ..so was BTC so it all worked out before the BTC forks happened and displaced Litecoin.

So got lucky on timing and math with that.

So never really minded the slogan, UNTIL Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and Bitcoin SV (BSV) and now Bitcoin Cash ABC (BCHA) ...which with 51% attack don't think it will matter

much. But I'm still frigging confused on WHY BSV is at least 2+ times the price of Litecoin! The mind boggles!

I guess terms here really don't matter with all the sh*tcoins and forks now and in the future and other mental math gymnastics on what something is worth, and not

to mention besides BTC price the good old fiat price like USD.

I hope to re-visit this thread in 10 years and laugh at how STILL a poor newbie I was compared to those future years!

Hopefully, on the Yacht with the future 'young' Trophy Girlfriend, I can show this post so she too can chuckle at my naiveness!

I have this 'deluded' unproven theory that for some reason I will get more attractive the more BTC I have/HODL...I know it makes no sense..but there

ya have it!

Brad

[ralle14]

I still like using the main denomination but if i'll pick between the three then my next option would be millibits or mBTC since the casinos and wallets I use have these denominations by default. I think it's a good middle ground since we rarely use the other denominations overall or maybe that's just me. I have no hate for the other denominations though I enjoy using sats for fees and bits in some sites, mBTC is still my go to denomination.  

[witcher_sense]

To my way of thinking, the question of which one denomination is best suitable for bitcoin can be correctly answered neither by Adam Back, developers, miners, exchanges, nor ordinary users. Only through interactions between voluntary participants on the free market for bitcoin can such denomination emerge. And it will be the correct answer because it will have been found most naturally. By trying to define the correct denomination artificially, Adam Back and others not only go against the market but also against the very principles of bitcoin.

[mk4]

By trying to define the correct denomination artificially, Adam Back and others not only go against the market but also against the very principles of bitcoin.

Sure. But thankfully they aren't really enforcing anything despite their "authority"; but they're just merely voicing out their opinions, just like what every single one of us are doing in this very thread.

[Wind_FURY]

mBTC. Or simply still, use BTC and avoid confusion. I believe, never to take away the "Bitcoin brand" from Bitcoin by calling small denominations something else. Plus I know it's debatable, it's just a personal opinion/preference.

[Yogee]

Too many unnecessary debates. Just keep it that way and let people decide which denomination they prefer. It would be unfair to set a certain standard for all bitcoin users. I'm already used to BTC or sats and I'm slowly getting accustomed to mBTC.

[NeuroticFish]

I'll still vote for BTC for now. I think that's too early to change the standard. I see it pretty close to a rebranding, which we don't need yet.
At some point later, when it will be much more expensive too, we can go for another new standard, maybe mBTC, maybe something else.
But then we'll all have to discuss based on the same unit. Because if some will discuss BTC, some mBTC, bits, sats and so on, newcomers will be completely lost.
So let's wait at least one more market cycle until we maybe can discuss this as a real issue.

[pawanjain]

IMHO it would be wiser to use the denomination in Satoshis because that's the real unit for bitcoin.
Why should we use microbitcoin or millibitcoin when Satoshi is the actual unit for bitcoin.
Besides that, imagine bitcoin reaching $100000, at that time we could buy 1000 Satoshis for $1 and that's how the denomination Satoshi will be more valuable.

[oktana]

'Stick with Bitcoin' will definitely win this poll. Let's leave the argument. One man's food is another's poison. You prefer to call it bits? It's fine. But I would rather call it Bitcoin, and doesn't mean any of us is wrong. We just say it how we want to. The only concern should be if the person you're speaking to understands your preferred denomination.

I'm afraid as the price continues to go up, it is likely to be called Mbits, simply for ease of use. In other words, I spent 1 Mbit vs the usual 0.0001 sats

or whatever I say now. (sigh...math is hard on the fly in my head)

I am 'unclear' on how to get the math to work on the fly in one's head. It has to happen

in some manner and people will have to get used to such on the fly, using Mbits or whatever.

How to ease this process or make it less convoluted than the already fast math done in my head on bitcoin worth vs USD worth at the time..is maybe un-doable.

I mean in the USA we can't grasp Metric..this is along similar lines of thought on the fly in your head on converting from full Bitcoin price to whatever you spent

and playing 'mental gymnastics' to figure out price vs full bitcoin price vs USD, etc. Yech, it may just stay in the current format, this doesn't seem all that better.

Brad

I do understand you point. But, I feel it's better to use any denomination based on who you're talking to. Maybe your friends also call it bits. But in an offical situation, considering that not everyone may understand it, you may then see the need of calling bitcoin it's original name/denomibations.

[mk4]

IMHO it would be wiser to use the denomination in Satoshis because that's the real unit for bitcoin.
Why should we use microbitcoin or millibitcoin when Satoshi is the actual unit for bitcoin.
Besides that, imagine bitcoin reaching $100000, at that time we could buy 1000 Satoshis for $1 and that's how the denomination Satoshi will be more valuable.

Please explain what you mean by "real unit for bitcoin" and "the actual unit for bitcoin"? Because as far as I know "bitcoin" is the "real" unit for bitcoin; whereas every single one of these alternative denominations are just made up. There's just an ongoing topic for a smaller denomination for UX purposes.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Because as far as I know "bitcoin" is the "real" unit for bitcoin

If we are being pedantic, then actually satoshi is the real unit for bitcoin. At a protocol level everything is measured in satoshi. The denomination of "bitcoin", each being equal to 100,000,000 sats, is entirely used by humans to make things easier for us. Any time we transact in "bitcoin", the software converts it to satoshi.

You can see this most easily by decoding a raw transaction and seeing that the value of all your outputs is specified in satoshi.

[20kevin20]

It's confusing even for me today to use bits, millibits and all those other denominations. I think BTC is still the way to go and, as @o_e_l_e_o suggested, sats could be used for amounts under 10k sats. Bitcoin and Satoshis should be the most widely used ones, because otherwise it gets confusing. It already is quite confusing for newbies to understand the concept of Bitcoin and all that - we shouldn't make it worse by switching to another denomination now.

I have never used any denomination other than sats and BTC, and it's been going great for me. I have to admit that it is sometimes annoying that I have to count how many zeroes there are after the "." though, because 0.0005 BTC and 0.00005 BTC are obviously two different values. If we were to use sats instead, "50k sats" and "5k sats" would be way more clever.