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

[LMGTFY]

We already have an established smaller unit that everyone agrees on - Satoshi. Just build up from that, ksat = 1,000 sat, msat= 1,000,000 sat. People are already familiar with using thousands, and millions in relation to money, in many currencies everydays prices are already in 1000s (argentine peso, yen).

Using 'milli' and 'micro' for money is unfamiliar and confusing to ordinary people. especially micro with the added μ u confusion.

What's the problem with this approach?

Honestly? I suspect it's bikeshedding: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law_of_triviality. We want Bitcoin to succeed, we want to help it succeed, and we instinctively feel that the way we can make that happen is by "making it easier for other people". Tinkering with convention seems much easier than starting a BTC business, building an innovative platform on top of Bitcoin, etc. If I wanted to start a BTC business I'd have to come up with a business plan, find investors, purchase equipment etc. But this - all I need to do is have an opinion. I don't even need to research the demographic I believe I'm "helping".

This is my concern with this issue. I have no idea what works for anyone but me. None of us do (well, obviously some of us have some - limited - idea about our customers. But hopefully you get my point). Our preferences, or what we think others might prefer, won't work for many people - perhaps not even the people we think we're helping. My solution is to leave people alone, and give them the freedom to adopt whatever system works for them - Satoshis, kiloBTC, whatever.

[101111]

Honestly? I suspect it's bikeshedding

with all due respect, since you think it's trivial why do you keep posting?

[edmundedgar]

1 bit is also 1/8 of one USD.

Seeing all the hoopla over BTC versus XBT I would support the following:

1 BTC = 1 Bitcoin = same as it ever was

1 XBT = 1 Bit = 0.000001 BTC

1000000 XBT (Bit) = 1 BTC (Bitcoin)

I would be behind this 100% as it "fixes" the whole BTC/XBT issue and give those who have been worried about the size of the BTC something to use.

Too late to do that, people are already using XBT in systems.

Feel free to make a new code, though. XBI?

[LMGTFY]

Honestly? I suspect it's bikeshedding

with all due respect, since you think it's trivial why do you keep posting?

Because it has non-trivial ramifications.

The classic (at least in IT) example is of a nuclear power plant where the board comprises a few specialist (nuclear physicists) and many generalists (administrators, managers, etc). Discussion about important issues -  safety, etc - is edged out by discussion about less important issues. That's certainly a risk here, but far more importantly is - if the generalists succeed in forcing change it will impact on the specialists - and the community at large.

[gjeric]

Made some ideas for Bit symbol

[DennisD7]

[101111]

Honestly? I suspect it's bikeshedding

with all due respect, since you think it's trivial why do you keep posting?

Because it has non-trivial ramifications.

The classic (at least in IT) example is of a nuclear power plant where the board comprises a few specialist (nuclear physicists) and many generalists (administrators, managers, etc). Discussion about important issues -  safety, etc - is edged out by discussion about less important issues. That's certainly a risk here, but far more importantly is - if the generalists succeed in forcing change it will impact on the specialists - and the community at large.

Agreed, it's non-trivial.

The bitcoin situation here is rather different; it's not about specialists vs generalists, it's about money, something that should be readily understood and utilised by both specialists and generalists, for all age groups and nationalities and as many levels of numeracy as possible.

[101111]

@gjeric and @DennisD7 great work!

 

[blatchcorn]

This is just amazing to see: a community collective deciding on how to quantify a currency and how to brand it.  Imagine explaining this to someone 20 years ago.

[findftp]

I vote for @DennisD7
Very impressive, very easy to understand.

I very much like the circle and square difference.
A circle seems more valuable to me than a square.

[LMGTFY]

Agreed, it's non-trivial.

The bitcoin situation here is rather different; it's not about specialists vs generalists, it's about money, something that should be readily understood and utilised by both specialists and generalists, for all age groups and nationalities and as many levels of numeracy as possible.

We're all specialists and generalists - I an expert (at least I think I am) on what my neighbours and co-workers can understand; I know nothing about you, your neighbours or co-workers' preferences or abilities. My point is that we don't know - we can't know at anything other than a basic level - what will be most readily understood and utilised by everyone else. What's simple for you and me to understand will not necessarily be readily understood by someone else - 10^3 seems simple to me because I grew up with thousands, millions, and billions, with kilometres and millimetres and terabytes. But that's not universal; there are counting systems that use other exponents, even systems that mix their exponents. Even within the Bitcoin ecosystem there are already different systems, systems that in some cases have evolved organically. My way is not any more valid than their way. I'm (currently) free to use whatever system suits me (and, to be honest, the system that suits me most varies with whatever activity I'm engaged in - when (!) I buy an island I won't be using Satoshis or µBTC.

The OP's proposal may well lead to greater understanding of Bitcoin within a group of people. What concerns me is that this group is undefined and - more importantly - the disadvantages to other groups (of a change) are not being considered. I got involved in Bitcoin because it held out the promise of freedom from centralised control (this was a few years after centralised control over my finances became a major issue in the country I was living in). I see this issue as seeking to impose (by us) change over the wider community, in the name of convenience. Just because I have a chance to hold the whip doesn't make it any more palatable.

[Gyrsur]

we need the "bit" period!

[SelbyTsang]

I like Dennis07's work as well.
Btw, he made a thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=594069.0 for discussion about it.

[DennisD7]

I like Dennis07's work as well.
Btw, he made a thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=594069.0 for discussion about it.

Thanks

[DennisD7]

I vote for @DennisD7
Very impressive, very easy to understand.

I very much like the circle and square difference.
A circle seems more valuable to me than a square.

Thanks!
I think I read somewhere that pirate vikings sometimes cut up their gold coins to divide up their loot - it makes sense somehow.

[discobean]

Actually we have MicroBitcoin (μBTC) already. Why change it to Bits?

I prefer μBTC (spelled: uBit)

Why change it to bits?  Because you just explained the same thing in 3 different ways, μBTC, MicroBitcoin and uBit.

[Ekaros]

Just use the Satoshi... Bits is messy as it already have very common use case.

[Gyrsur]

for me it makes sense to use "bit" as a further meaning for the economic world.

we will have 21,000,000 bit-coins which consists of 21,000,000,000,000 bits which consits of 2,100,000,000,000,000 satoshis.

1 bit = 100 satoshis which are 0.00045$ at the moment.

nice!  

[00null]

1 bit is also 1/8 of one USD.

Seeing all the hoopla over BTC versus XBT I would support the following:

1 BTC = 1 Bitcoin = same as it ever was

1 XBT = 1 Bit = 0.000001 BTC

1000000 XBT (Bit) = 1 BTC (Bitcoin)

I would be behind this 100% as it "fixes" the whole BTC/XBT issue and give those who have been worried about the size of the BTC something to use.

Pure genius! A brilliant solution!

[frente]

Why can't we just rename 100 satoshis as 1 bitcoin?

This is the best solution to me also.

1 BTC = 100 satoshis (instead of 100M)
1 current BTC becomes 1 MBTC (megabitcoin) if needed in the adjustment period.

Exchanges might use rate for 1.000 BTC (1kBTC) = $0.444 or 1 MBTC = $444

What do you think about that? We can continue to use the existing name (bitcoin) and symbol.

1 coffee = 9,123 bitcoins


I don't see the need to introduce new names/symbols like bits. People will quickly adopt to the new meaning (value) of bitcoin.