1,000,000 bits = 1 bitcoin. Future-proofing Bitcoin for common usage? VOTE

[argov]

I'm more for mBTC. The value (now) is very usefull. I think it would be good if the name mBTC would be changed to something better (like for example bits   )

[Dalmar]

I'm more for mBTC. The value (now) is very usefull. I think it would be good if the name mBTC would be changed to something better (like for example bits   )

That would only lead to more confusion in the future as the bit name has to be changed again and again...

Better just go super low from the get go. Also, it would give bitcoin the dogecoin ´millionaire´ effect making people use bitcoin more often.

[franky1]

I'm more for mBTC. The value (now) is very usefull. I think it would be good if the name mBTC would be changed to something better (like for example bits   )

by the time mBTC becomes commonly used, it will become obsolete and people will then have to go through the process of changing it again. basically double annoyance.

much easier to go for a scale that wont need to be changed, then one that needs to be changed often

[spazzdla]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE,  satoshies that is what we will use.

[MegaHustlr]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE,  satoshies that is what we will use.

It is wayyy too soon to be using satoshis at the price of $440 a bitcoin.

[spazzdla]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE,  satoshies that is what we will use.

It is wayyy too soon to be using satoshis at the price of $440 a bitcoin.

So would the use of bits....  mbtc has already won IMO most people know what milibtc means, like computer challanged people.

[101111]

User 101111 on reddit made this mock-up wallet.

I wish I could take credit for that mock-up. I can't remember who made it but it was someone on reddit.

[LMGTFY]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE,  satoshies that is what we will use.

It is wayyy too soon to be using satoshis at the price of $440 a bitcoin.

Well, people are already using "Satoshi" (when I - guilty secret time! - trawl the faucets, it's "Satoshi" that's used by the faucets and - presumably - by the "fauceteers").

Which brings me to... I have no idea - none of us have much of an idea - how other people are using Bitcoin. It seems to me bizarre to assume that how I use Bitcoin is necessarily equivalent to how other people use it. I trawl the faucets, and "Satoshi" is a useful concept. I buy BTC, and BTC is a useful concept. I make purchases with BTC, and mBTC is a useful concept. I imagine there are wealthy BTC-holders who would find mBTC, µBTC and Satoshis irrelevant. Likewise, for someone who only ever works with Satoshis any xBTC is largely irrelevant.

How merchants, exchanges etc price BTC is entirely up to them. They know their user-base far better than us. If an exchange, say, believes that some users have psychological barriers in buying "less" than a whole BTC then that exchange can - already - choose to price BTC in mBTC or µBTC (or even Satoshis - as the faucets already choose to do). But other exchanges should have the freedom to make their own decisions, decisions that reflect the needs of their own user-bases.

Right now there's a belief that mBTC is preferable to BTC. But we have no idea what price (strictly speaking, prices) BTC will be at in a few years. It could well be that the psychological barriers people currently believe exist will change or reform (we could well be arguing that mBTC is a barrier because - at USD450 per mBTC - people are deterred from purchasing part of a mBTC. Or we might find that - with 1 mBTC at USD0.01 it's all too confusing...)

tl;dr - we already have a wealth of options. Why would I want to limit someone else's options?

PS.  spazzdla, MegaHustlr - apologies for hijacking your discussion! I saw the word "Satoshi" and jumped too quick

[btcbug]

21 million bitcoins FOREVER!

Satoshi recognized that 21 million currency units are not enough for a global currency. His solution was to support eight decimal places on amounts, which also allows the reward halving process to continue for about 140 years. Internally the Bitcoin software recognizes 2,100 million million currency units (now known as satoshis) but they are divided by 100 million before presentation to users. So the block reward is currently 2,500 million satoshis or 25 bitcoins. Bitcoin units were fine for the first few years, but during the last 12 months the question keeps arising "Is another unit best for common usage?"

Inertia of existing systems

All modern fiat currencies have a major currency unit which has 100 minor units: e.g. $1 = 100 cents.
Everyone is used to this system from childhood. Many people are not comfortable with scientific notation or with small decimals such as 0.001234 which will be seen more and more often as the unit value of 1 bitcoin rises. Most people are happier dealing with 100,000 than 0.00001

Further, 99.99% of the world's financial and accounting systems do not support more than 2 decimal places on currencies, let alone as many as eight. It is arguable that Bitcoin has a very real handicap upon its growth by disregarding modern conventions in currencies.

Enter the "bit"

1 bitcoin = 1,000,000 bits
1 bit = 100 satoshis

User 101111 on reddit made this mock-up wallet. The current Bitcoin Core wallet does allow the selection of millibitcoins and microbitcoins but not with such a user friendly presentation, and not by default.

Is it time to consider using "bits" as standard? All balances become 1 million times larger, the block reward as 25 million bits, the exchange rate as 0.04 cents to a bit, a cup of coffee as 7000 bits instead of 0.007 BTC
Is this an improvement?  If the bitcoin value increases into the thousands of dollars which unit is easiest to use for pricing goods and services?

I like this idea! mBtc, uBtc and Satoshi are all silly sounding, awkward names for currency units that only nerds would appreciate Bits is much more mainstream friendly, which is exactly what is needed for continued growth.

[spazzdla]

My dollar is called the loonie and $2 coin the toonie.. money can be named stupied things and people will accept it.

[Natanael]

xbit

Because the sourceforge mailing list archive seems broken:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04918.html

[StevenS]

From Wikipedia:

The word bit is a colloquial expression referring to specific coins in various coinages throughout the world.

[BurtW]

Vote on this:

How many threads do we need on exactly this topic?

1,000 ?  (one kilothread)
10,000 ? (ten kilothreads)
100,000 ?  (one hundred kilothreads OR 0.1 megathread)
1,000,000 ?  (one megathread)

[prezbo]

Microbitcoins are best.

[Accordus]

I for one AGREE with "bit" to be used.

Then, 7000 bits for a coffee will be very expensive to "look at" and "bits" will increase in value.
I am not saying this is meaningful thing, but such strange are people.


But this is only my two centsbits.

[Joshuar]

I think it'd be better if it was 1,000 bits=1 bitcoin and bits sound better than millibiit..Much easier and serious than 1million.....

Anyone who doesn't know about bitcoin and sees 1,000,000 bits would think it's a joke and some sort of monopoly play money...Seriously 1,000 is the best..not 1million, that's gonna destroy bitcoin.

[BurtW]

that's gonna destroy bitcoin.

No it won't.  Silly polls like this have come and gone for years.  Nothing happens, ever.

[ThickAsThieves]

Why not go all the way down to satoshis?

[Offthechain]

Lets have Bits, it is the way forward

[BurtW]

Why not go all the way down to satoshis?

/thread