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

[zimmah]

you are probably american to think only engineers and scientists use the METRIC system.

Newsflash! the whole world except america uses the metric system, daily.

No, I'm not. But I'm all for making it so simple that as few people as absolutely possible will get confused by it. And for that purpose µBTC oe uBTC is a big fail... I'm not saying that it has to be "bit", but that is the best proposal so far - and the majority of bitcoin users seem to think so too.

well then what's wrong with 'ubit/unit/µbit'?

it's only 1 letter longer and seems to be the most popular option in the naming poll and it's not nearly as confusing as bit and i'm pretty sure a majority could accept this name.

See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=592691.msg6912898#msg6912898

apparently, i don't have to https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#What_do_I_call_the_various_denominations_of_bitcoin.3F and http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1ffgon/btc_mbit_ubit_satoshi/

also, in an actually fair poll, 'bit' lost from the other options: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=349579.0

note, they already listed mbit and ubit

in my opinion that's the most userfriendly and acceptable name, it still sounds like bit, it uses the metric system in a non-complex way and it sounds nice. While at the same time 1 bit = 1 bitcoin like one would logically expect.

so:

1 BTC = 1 bit
0.01 BTC = 1 cbit (or bitcent) (pronounced See-bit)
0.001 BTC = 1 mbit (pronounced ém-bit)
0.000001 BTC= 1 ubit (or µbit if you can be bothered to type it that way, although i'm pretty sure ubit would win in popularity) (pronounced You-bit)
0.00000001 BTC = satoshi

[1714009825]

1714009825

[1714009825]

1714009825

[1714009825]

1714009825

[bananaControl]

apparently, i don't have to https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#What_do_I_call_the_various_denominations_of_bitcoin.3F and http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1ffgon/btc_mbit_ubit_satoshi/

Well, apparently you kinda have to, because there is this movement in the community towards a consensus that μBTC is horrible and confusing and something better is needed before bitcoin goes mainstream.

also, in an actually fair poll, 'bit' lost from the other options: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=349579.0

So now you're linking to an old poll that took place before the idea of using bit really took off. Beautiful argument.

so:

1 BTC = 1 bit
0.01 BTC = 1 cbit (or bitcent) (pronounced See-bit)
0.001 BTC = 1 mbit (pronounced ém-bit)
0.000001 BTC= 1 ubit (or µbit if you can be bothered to type it that way, although i'm pretty sure ubit would win in popularity) (pronounced You-bit)
0.00000001 BTC = satoshi

And why not make a system that behaves like every other currency used in the world now? You are fighting an uphill battle, like trying to convince people that we should use a 10-hour clock to keep track of time instead of 12 or 24. It might make sense technically, but because of historical baggage, it just doesn't make sense to most normal people.

[SirChiko]

Big NO on this...bit is totally someting else bit=0 or 1 not anything else!

[zimmah]

And why not make a system that behaves like every other currency used in the world now? You are fighting an uphill battle, like trying to convince people that we should use a 10-hour clock to keep track of time instead of 12 or 24. It might make technically sense, but because of historical baggage, it just doesn't make sense to most people.

if we would, we would be going with MILL short for MILLI and MIC/MIKE short for MICRO, because every other currency in the world uses CENTS which is short for CENTI

no other currency uses bits, oh wait, in fact they do, and a bit is 12.5 cent

oh in fact, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mill_(currency)

bam, schooled, defeated by your own 'logic'


by the way the articles i quoted were about naming them 'ubits' and 'mbits' which are both still 100 times better than just bits.

[bananaControl]

And why not make a system that behaves like every other currency used in the world now? You are fighting an uphill battle, like trying to convince people that we should use a 10-hour clock to keep track of time instead of 12 or 24. It might make technically sense, but because of historical baggage, it just doesn't make sense to most people.

if we would, we would be going with MILL short for MILLI and MIC/MIKE short for MICRO, because every other currency in the world uses CENTS which is short for CENTI

You don't seem to be willing to understand my point... The point is that in order to make sense for ordinary people it needs to be a decimal currency, meaning there should be ONE base-unit that can be divided into 100 sub-units.

bam, schooled, defeated by your own 'logic'

Not really, see above.

[bananaControl]

Big NO on this...bit is totally someting else bit=0 or 1 not anything else!

"bit" was used for other things before it was put to use in that way. Normal people don't care or know about computer science, so they will not be confused, and people smart enough to know other meanings of "bit" will also be able to distinguish between the various use cases.

[ranlo]

Big NO on this...bit is totally someting else bit=0 or 1 not anything else!

"bit" was used for other things before it was put to use in that way. Normal people don't care or know about computer science, so they will not be confused, and people smart enough to know other meanings of "bit" will also be able to distinguish between the various use cases.

My thought exactly. When someone says "I need to go for a bit," I don't ask "a 1 or a 0?" It's got an implied meaning (small amount of time).

[zimmah]

And why not make a system that behaves like every other currency used in the world now? You are fighting an uphill battle, like trying to convince people that we should use a 10-hour clock to keep track of time instead of 12 or 24. It might make technically sense, but because of historical baggage, it just doesn't make sense to most people.

if we would, we would be going with MILL short for MILLI and MIC/MIKE short for MICRO, because every other currency in the world uses CENTS which is short for CENTI

You don't seem to be willing to understand my point... The point is that in order to make sense for ordinary people it needs to be a decimal currency, meaning there should be ONE base-unit that can be divided into 100 sub-units.

bam, schooled, defeated by your own 'logic'

Not really, see above.

that's not even the point of discussion, the point of discussion is what that unit should be named. Not if it should exist.

It's kind of annoying having to constantly remind people that those are two completely different topics.

Topic 1: Should there be a base unit worth 100 satoshi? - A majority votes yes.

Topic 2: What should we name that base unit? - NOT a majority for any name except the semi-officiall µBTC, which for obvious reason will not be a popular unofficial name.

What i'm saying is that on topic 2, we should have a name like ubit or mike or finney, instead of bit. Because bit is confusing and if we continue to use bit i can guarantee you that for the next couple of years you will keep seeing threads like this, and trust me, i won't even need to start them, because newcomers will.

Big NO on this...bit is totally someting else bit=0 or 1 not anything else!

"bit" was used for other things before it was put to use in that way. Normal people don't care or know about computer science, so they will not be confused, and people smart enough to know other meanings of "bit" will also be able to distinguish between the various use cases.

My thought exactly. When someone says "I need to go for a bit," I don't ask "a 1 or a 0?" It's got an implied meaning (small amount of time).

but the implied meaning of bit is an abbreviation of bitcoin, as well as any arbitrary fraction of a bitcoin. Therefore, it's a big no-no to use it. A name should not cause confusion as to how many it is worth.

[bananaControl]

Big NO on this...bit is totally someting else bit=0 or 1 not anything else!

"bit" was used for other things before it was put to use in that way. Normal people don't care or know about computer science, so they will not be confused, and people smart enough to know other meanings of "bit" will also be able to distinguish between the various use cases.

My thought exactly. When someone says "I need to go for a bit," I don't ask "a 1 or a 0?" It's got an implied meaning (small amount of time).

And on top of that, to use zimmah's own argument, not everyone in this world is from the US and speaks English. For instance In my native language the only use for "bit" is in computer science.

But again, it could be something else than "bit", but it needs to fit into the decimal currency format, so μBTC or uBTC (besides being horrible for all the previous mentioned reasons) is out of the question.

[zimmah]

Big NO on this...bit is totally someting else bit=0 or 1 not anything else!

"bit" was used for other things before it was put to use in that way. Normal people don't care or know about computer science, so they will not be confused, and people smart enough to know other meanings of "bit" will also be able to distinguish between the various use cases.

My thought exactly. When someone says "I need to go for a bit," I don't ask "a 1 or a 0?" It's got an implied meaning (small amount of time).

And on top of that, to use zimmah's own argument, not everyone in this world is from the US and speaks English. For instance In my native language the only use for "bit" is in computer science.

But again, it could be something else than "bit", but it needs to fit into the decimal currency format, so μBTC or uBTC (besides being horrible for all the previous mentioned reasons) is out of the question.

aside from bit having a thousand other meanings in everyday live, the worst thing is that a bit can be worth many amounts:

• 1 bit = 1 bitcoin -> mostly because 1000 millibit = 1bitcoin, therefore 1bit =/= 1 µBTC, also it's most natural to use bit as an abbreviation for bitcoin (many new users will do this, i guarantee it)
• 1 bit = µBTC -> because some guys on reddit thought this was a good idea (newsflash, it's not)
• 1 bit = 1 satoshi -> because 1 bit is the smallest possible unit
• 1 bit = 12.5 cents (which could either be bitcents or dollar cents) -> because this is an old currency name
• 1 bit = smaller than a satoshi -> in case there is ever a smaller unit

therefore:

either use mills and mikes OR
use mbits and ubits

problem solved.

is that so hard?

[ranlo]

but the implied meaning of bit is an abbreviation of bitcoin, as well as any arbitrary fraction of a bitcoin. Therefore, it's a big no-no to use it. A name should not cause confusion as to how many it is worth.

It meaning Bitcoin is only relevant to those of us who are already in-the-know. We are arguably less than 0.1% of the people who will use it in the future (assuming it goes mainstream), so making changes like this not is not going to cause issues with the vast majority of the people.

[zimmah]

but the implied meaning of bit is an abbreviation of bitcoin, as well as any arbitrary fraction of a bitcoin. Therefore, it's a big no-no to use it. A name should not cause confusion as to how many it is worth.

It meaning Bitcoin is only relevant to those of us who are already in-the-know. We are arguably less than 0.1% of the people who will use it in the future (assuming it goes mainstream), so making changes like this not is not going to cause issues with the vast majority of the people.

it's the other way around, if you are going to use 'bit' to mean anything else than the most LOGICAL meaning (which is by default an abbreviation of bitcoin) you will need to CONSTANTLY explain to all newcomers that 1 bit = 1 µBTC because you say so.

What will you do when 1 million new users join every day?

exactly.

[bananaControl]

And why not make a system that behaves like every other currency used in the world now? You are fighting an uphill battle, like trying to convince people that we should use a 10-hour clock to keep track of time instead of 12 or 24. It might make technically sense, but because of historical baggage, it just doesn't make sense to most people.

if we would, we would be going with MILL short for MILLI and MIC/MIKE short for MICRO, because every other currency in the world uses CENTS which is short for CENTI

You don't seem to be willing to understand my point... The point is that in order to make sense for ordinary people it needs to be a decimal currency, meaning there should be ONE base-unit that can be divided into 100 sub-units.

bam, schooled, defeated by your own 'logic'

Not really, see above.

that's not even the point of discussion, the point of discussion is what that unit should be named. Not if it should exist.

It's kind of annoying having to constantly remind people that those are two completely different topics.

But they are very well bloody linked! you can't name it microBTC (µBTC) because besides the fact that it will not stand the mother-test (TM), it implies that there is a forest of other metric units too (deca/deci/centi/milli/micro/nano/pico) while there should only be TWO, a base and a sub-unit, in a decimal currency.

What i'm saying is that on topic 2, we should have a name like ubit or mike or finney, instead of bit. Because bit is confusing and if we continue to use bit i can guarantee you that for the next couple of years you will keep seeing threads like this, and trust me, i won't even need to start them, because newcomers will.

Mike or finney is still a lot better than µBTC, while of course , most names would be.

[phillipsjk]

This is essentially a re-hash of a discussion going back to 2011.

It was decided that trying to move the decimal place (while keeping the same name) would lead to nothing but confusion.

Using "bits" is actually worse than moving the decimal place for "Bitcoin" because it apparently now has 3 (rather than 2) common interpretations. We really need a new word.

Edit: OMG: A June 9, 2011 reference to 1µBTC being equal to 1 bit

[bananaControl]

it's the other way around, if you are going to use 'bit' to mean anything else than the most LOGICAL meaning (which is by default an abbreviation of bitcoin)

Like "car" is a well know abbreviation of "carrot".

I have NEVER talked to or heard about anyone else making that mistake. Honestly.

[bananaControl]

We really need a new word.

While I tend to agree, this springs to mind:

[ranlo]

it's the other way around, if you are going to use 'bit' to mean anything else than the most LOGICAL meaning (which is by default an abbreviation of bitcoin)

Like "car" is a well know abbreviation of "carrot".

I have NEVER talked to or heard about anyone else making that mistake. Honestly.

Exactly my point as well. I've never heard a single person refer to a Bitcoin as a "bit." Or confuse the word "bit" for being a Bitcoin.

"The dog bit me!"
"Wait, he Bitcoined you?"
"Wtfaux?"

[singularity]

Your arguments are week Zimmah. Stop twisting the facts.

I cannot wait until the people who have a large vested interest in bringing bitcoin to the masses (i.e. the bitcoin businesses) move to the standard "bit". Your pathetic attempts a forcing the community into your terrible choice of "mike" will have been for nothing. Any person who has the ability to put themselves in other people's shoes (e.g. successful business people and designers, among others) understand the importance of having a name that provides the least resistance to getting into bitcoin for as many people as possible.

[Biodom]

It is now clear that this poll misrepresented all options, so results presented here are skewed.
Another poll shows small minority approval of bitcoin/bits/satoshi naming convention vs much more for other options.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=349579.0

[nahtnam]

I agree with your statements BUT, right now I much prefer decimal fractions. Its just what im used to.