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

[harrymmmm]

A. "That'll be 0.00005 BTC please."
B. "That'll be 0.05 mBTC please."
C. "That'll be 50 uBTC please."
D. "That'll be 50 bits please."

A and B are eliminated right off the bat because nobody wants to recall how many zeroes they've put after the decimal.

This leaves us with reasonable C and D, but the word "bit" is far more marketable than "micro-BTC". Micro-BTC just doesn't roll off the tongue like bits does.

I agree that "microbitcoin" is cumbersome to say.  However, the natural way of dealing with a long, frequently used word is to shorten it, not replace it.  Some examples:

• application -> app
• information -> info
• laboratory -> lab
• maximum -> max
• university -> uni

"That'll be 50 microbitcoins please." -> "That'll be 50 mics please."

Left alone, this is what will happen automatically and all will be right with the world

If there's a push to rename ubtc to 'bit', we're just setting ourselves up for confusion.

[gtraah]

I agree with Bits but I think its taken, but we don't have to always use bits, the idea of bits may be good to have ready for the future. And maybe implement it in the wallet, I believe we should still have the denomination of 1 Bitcoin showing in the wallet but ALSO showing the mBTC Amount & THEN Bits or what ever name amount.

This give the people to choose what denomination they would like to call their Bitcoin.
  

[Biontic]

Left alone, this is what will happen automatically and all will be right with the world

Agreed. Currently, despite whatever official moniker has been assigned to a local currency unit, the vernacular inevitably coins it's own phraseology. _{(unintentional pun)}

In my corner of the world, and elsewhere too, I'm sure,  the following colloquialisms are commonplace
Grand = 1000
Monkey = 500
Ton = 100

I think bit, is suitably optimistic that the btc/fiat exchange rate will rise sufficiently, so that a division this small will be appropriate.
But in reality, it will vary geographically.

[Natoshi Sakamoto]

The solution is obvious: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=526012.msg5853431#msg5853431

[Toxonaut]

Yeah really it's obvious, just shift the damn comma. Everybody's always like "oh no, that would be too confusing".

The thing is: Any other proposed solution is at least as if not more confusing!

[boumalo]

Yeah really it's obvious, just shift the damn comma. Everybody's always like "oh no, that would be too confusing".

The thing is: Any other proposed solution is at least as if not more confusing!

I don't agree, I think 1bitcoin=100,000,000satoshis should be kept and using bits with 1bitcoin=1,000,000 is less confusing

[chamme]

So, it seems that most of us are content with bits. Can't wait to use it. When shall we start our new movement?

[bit1075]

For those recommending anything else you are not thinking about the people who make up the total potential bitcoin market. In emerging markets some people just make over a dollar a day to survive. Telling them 1 bitcoin costs over a year's salary simply will put them off right away. Even if you explain to them they can buy smaller portion of it.

Second, the education level and intelligence of people vary. We can't expect everyone to understand what .000123 represents. If a poll was conducted with people off the street and you asked them to name the places after the decimal, i.e. one-hundredth - the results would be shocking.

We need to make bitcoin future proof and also make it SIMPLE! When a business designs a product/service they design it to the needs and expectations of their target consumers/segments. Who do we want the users of bitcoins to be in the future? If we expect users to be the profile of everyone on this forum, then decimals are fine. For mass world adoption bitcoin needs to be designed ease of use that a child can understand and use it.

[phelix]

What about this:

1 Bitcoin = 1 MegaBit

e-0 MegaBit
e-1
e-2
e-3 KiloBit
e-4
e-5
e-6 Bit
e-7
e-8 Satoshi
e-9 MilliBit (not currently dividable but maybe in the future)

People are much more used to the large prefixes than to the small ones.

fixed that for ya

point is to have a name for a unit where we have maximal 2 decimal digits. this is neccessary for a lot of software which are in use already.

1.00 --> 1 bit = 100 sats and that is it. Bitcoin is the protocol and one bit is the base unit which you can divide in 100 satoshis.

1 Satoshi = 1 BitCent. Check.

From the poll it looks like there is a pretty strong consensus. But in the mockup in the OP there are too many digits. 10023.04 Bits ? This is 10 kiloBit for me.

Yeah really it's obvious, just shift the damn comma. Everybody's always like "oh no, that would be too confusing".

The thing is: Any other proposed solution is at least as if not more confusing!

Don't worry, the comma shift will follow naturally in a couple of years. Simply because an actual Bitcoin will be a hell lot of money 

[5flags]

I think it would certainly be nicer to have Bitcoin's main unit as the same order of value as EUR/USD/GBP.

The problem is, Bitcoin's value in 5 years will probably be 10 times what it is now. So whatever we use has to scale. I like "bits", "cents" etc.

[DrBitcoin]

Ok...so the people have spoken.  Most people like bits better than mBTC and uBTC which is way too nerdy.

HOW DO WE VOTE THIS INTO IMPLEMENTATION?

Perhaps we could start a big BTC fund, and when it gets to a certain point we pay off the major wallet and exchanges to implement bits.  Eventually it will reach critical mass and will grow organically.

[teukon]

From the poll it looks like there is a pretty strong consensus. But in the mockup in the OP there are too many digits. 10023.04 Bits ? This is 10 kiloBit for me.

Or "10 mills".  If we're going to use SI prefixes anyway, why bother changing from bitcoin to "bit" at all?

For those recommending anything else you are not thinking about the people who make up the total potential bitcoin market.

A common false dichotomy: Either you support "bit" or you want all prices to look like ".000123".

When a business designs a product/service they design it to the needs and expectations of their target consumers/segments.

Ok...so the people have spoken.  Most people like bits better than mBTC and uBTC which is way too nerdy.

HOW DO WE VOTE THIS INTO IMPLEMENTATION?

Fortunately, Bitcoin is neither a business nor a democracy.

Perhaps we could start a big BTC fund, and when it gets to a certain point we pay off the major wallet and exchanges to implement bits.  Eventually it will reach critical mass and will grow organically.

That's more like it.

[IIOII]

I think using bit as a smaller denomination is a very silly idea.

First it is confusing, because "bit" is already used to denominate binary data sizes. In that case a "bit" is the smallest possible unit.
But in the case of bitcoin a "bit" does neither denominate a binary data size (it is decimal), nor does it respresent the smallest possible unit (which is Satoshi).

Secondly it is an artificially chosen name, that has no preexisting usage (like Satoshi). This will not facilitate an automatic and accurate perception of the unit's value.

Thirdly it is not in any way more practical to write for example 10,000 bits than 0.01 bitcoin (note that the latter case is also much easier to interprete in regard to value).


Solution: Use Satoshi as the smallest unit with an added "k" (thousand) for higher denominations. Use bitcoin for denominations higher than 0.00999999 bitcoin.

Examples:

0.00000001 =     1 S
0.00000010 =   10 S
0.00000100 = 100 S
0.00001000 =      1 k S or 1000 S
0.00010000 =    10 k S
0.00100000 =  100 k S
0.01000000 =  0.01 BTC

Further decimal places can be added if greater precision is needed. However for most applications it is generally not necessary to add multiple decimal places, because the value is negligible.

You could also combine both bitcoin and Satoshi in certain cases where you really want maximum precision:

0.01000678 = 0.01 BTC + 678 S

Satoshi is an already established unit and the smallest denomination of bitcoin. "k" is a widely known denominator for "thousand(s)". So this is far more user friendly and intuitive than messing around with very large numbers.

[findftp]

Satoshi is an already established unit and the smallest denomination of bitcoin. "k" is a widely known denominator for "thousand(s)". So this is far more user friendly and intuitive than messing around with very large numbers.

We really should make a new poll with all the new suggestions included.
I think kS would score very high.
I really like it, especially because 'Satoshi' (our god ;-) is involved in the name.
And like you said, we already use k€ and k$ for larger amounts.

[franky1]

its official

voting is over.. main stream has decided...

100sat= bit

the hit TV show Almost human which uses bitcoin as their legal tender in the future.. also uses bits as the small denominations

"windscreen wash 10bits"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHOFR5yXKYk

[DeathAndTaxes]

HOW DO WE VOTE THIS INTO IMPLEMENTATION?

There is no voting.  You convince people to change.  Think decentralized.  Your idea on a fund is the right one but there is no reason to give money to exchanges making a million dollars a week in trading fees to start using what their customers want them to use.  Convince them their customers want (demand) they support "bits".

Convince developers to put a "bits" (or maybe initially "bits (uBTC)") option in the Bitcoin client.  
Convince charting sites to offer exchange rate in bits (reversed rate works well, it is right now about 2200 bits = 1 USD).
Convince blockchain.info, or blockr.io to show amounts in bits (at least as an option)
Convince your local exchange and/or web wallet to show balances in bits.
Convince someone who makes physical bitcoins or paper wallets to make one showing balances in bits (i.e. a coin with a face value of 10,000 bits)
Start or contribute to a public awareness campaign.  Maybe a wesbite like "onemillionbits.org" (or a catchier name).

If your are waiting for the general bitcoin elections where the bits unit memorandum will be voted on well you are going to wait forever.  

Does that seem harder than a simple we vote and it is done?  Well, welcome to the revolution, it is decentralized.

BitSimple will be adding bits denomination to its exchange rates and buy/sell pages in reverse notation as a test (but keeping normal notation as well).

[DeathAndTaxes]

the hit TV show Almost human which uses bitcoin as their legal tender in the future.. also uses bits as the small denominations

"windscreen wash 10bits"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHOFR5yXKYk

Sadly fox canceled Almost Human, then again they canceled firefly and futurama so I didn't have much hope.  I like how they just incorporated it into the world as if it didn't need much explaining.  People used or at least knew about Bitcoins enough that there was no need to explain it, it just was. 

Sometimes TV gets that kind of immersion wrong.  If Bitcoins were common then the characters wouldn't need to be spending lots of time explaining it to each other.  Can you imagine two cops in real life doing that.

Cop1: It looks like he had a couple hundred dollars in his wallet.
Cop2: Is that some kind of currency people use to buy goods and services?
Cop1: The original dollar was a gold coin containing 123 grains of gold minted by the early United States but these notes are more accurately called federal reserve notes as they are issued by the private cartel of banks known as the federal reserve.
Cop2: Interesting you telling me these facts that I would have to already at least be partially aware of.  Is a couple hundred dollars a small or large amount of funds?


Ok most TV shows aren't that bad but it annoys me when writers have characters explaining things to each other that they would have to be mentally challenged to not already know.

[lumierre]

It will be easier to read and calculate when we have commas so I like bits.

[franky1]

the hit TV show Almost human which uses bitcoin as their legal tender in the future.. also uses bits as the small denominations

"windscreen wash 10bits"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHOFR5yXKYk

Sadly fox canceled Almost Human, then again they canceled firefly and futurama so I didn't have much hope.  I like how they just incorporated it into the world as if it didn't need much explaining.  People used or at least knew about Bitcoins enough that there was no need to explain it, it just was. 

Sometimes TV gets that kind of immersion wrong.  If Bitcoins were common then the characters wouldn't need to be spending lots of time explaining it to each other.  Can you imagine two cops in real life doing that.

Cop1: It looks like he had a couple hundred dollars in his wallet.
Cop2: Is that some kind of currency people use to buy goods and services?
Cop1: The original dollar was a gold coin containing 123 grains of gold minted by the early United States but these notes are more accurately called federal reserve notes as they are issued by the private cartel of banks known as the federal reserve.
Cop2: Interesting you telling me these facts that I would have to already at least be partially aware of.  Is a couple hundred dollars a small or large amount of funds?


Ok most TV shows aren't that bad but it annoys me when writers have characters explaining things to each other that they would have to be mentally challenged to not already know.

the latest episode of "the goodwife" S5E20 was more subtle with bitcoin this time, pretty much talking about how it can be used.. unlike the episode 2 years ago S3E16 which went into details about what it is how its traded, is it a currency, asset or commodity blah blah blah...  

[lijiaren]

It would get rid of this annoying bitcoin is ´too expensive´ argument