Bits as default unit?

[ajamez]

Is this feature going to be in a new version?

[1714186894]

1714186894

[1714186894]

1714186894

[dabura667]

It hasn't even been decided yet.

Adding the unit would be a trivial thing... but to avoid confusion, it will probably not be added until a consensus is reached.

[klabaki]

As far as I know, we are far away from consensus.

I have already heard all of the following proposals:

1 bit = 1 satoshi
1 bit = 100 satoshis
1 bit = 100 000 satoshis
1 bit = 100 000 000 satoshis
8 bit = 1 byte

So, when you say "bit", what do you actually mean?

And if it's added to a client,
how can you make sure that every user of the client will understand it in the same way that it is intended, and not as one of the other proposals??

If you want to add a new unit, you have to make sure that no one gets it wrong. There may be only one definition for the unit, not multiple, like with "bits".

[ajamez]

When I say bit I mean uBTC. That gives us 1000000.00 bits to a bitcoin with 2 decimal places, making it more compatible with fiat currency. uBTC is the best denomination in my opinion, even though I'm not 100% sold on the name "bits".

Looks like lots of people are in agreement with this:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=592691.0

http://www.coindesk.com/bitpay-announces-plan-display-btc-prices-bits/

If this denomination is added to a new version of the client, it doesn't have to be the default. The default denomination can be chosen at any time, or the user can be prompted to pick the default denomination upon running the client for the first time.

Your question; "How can you make sure that every user of the client will understand it in the same way that it is intended, and not as one of the other proposals?" is very valid. I suppose more time to reach consensus may be needed.

 

[klabaki]

ajamez,

I really agree with most of your post,
with only one exception:

even though I'm not 100% sold on the name "bits".

I very much oppose to use the word "bits", because, as you can see from our short conversation above, it is not clear what "bits" actually means.
There are multiple proposals for using "bits" to mean different things, and this is a clear No-Go for using it as a unit.

Units may not be ambiguous.
"Bits" is ambiguous.

Instead, I recommend using the word "zib":

1 zib = 100 satoshis = 1 µBTC

This was always communicated clearly, there was never a different meaning for the word "zib".
That's what makes "zib" suitable as a unit.

[ajamez]

I see what you mean klabaki.

Some people would know what a "bit" is from the context, but that doesn't help new users. Zib is unique and unmistakable, but what does it mean? I've heard "mics" or "mikes" proposed because it's short for micro.

The other way to do it is to use the symbol as much as possible. Like how we read BTC as bitcoins, we could read µ or ⓑ as "mics" or "bits" or "zibs" or whatever.

[btcven]

Gavin Andresen likes uBTC = mikes

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/24m3nb/disliking_the_word_bits_does_not_mean_favouring/ch8gw04?context=3

[klabaki]

ajamez, btcven,

yes, mics/mikes is definitely a good option. I would happily go with that if this is the consensus.

I'm just afraid that people will abbreviate "mic" as "m." instead of "µ",
because "m" is already taken for "milli" and then we would have real trouble.

I prefer "Z" because it's unique.

[btcven]

ajamez, btcven,

yes, mics/mikes is definitely a good option. I would happily go with that if this is the consensus.

I'm just afraid that people will abbreviate "mic" as "m." instead of "µ",
because "m" is already taken for "milli" and then we would have real trouble.

I prefer "Z" because it's unique.

µBTC = uBTC = mike(s)

Just like...

¢USD = cUSD = cent(s)

or...

USD = Dollars = bucks


There could not be a confusion as 'mikes' is an urban name for micro-bitcoins, not for uBTC; as 'bucks' is for Dollars and not for ¢

[bobdutica]

There could not be a confusion as 'mikes' is an urban name for micro-bitcoins, not for uBTC; as 'bucks' is for Dollars and not for ¢

There certainly could be confusion because 'mikes' is a vernacular expression that depends on a subset of the population for understanding, and therefore could be misunderstood by many.
I think it is essential to remove as much possibility for ambiguity as possible. Using a word like 'zibs', that currently has no other meaning, would avoid as much ambiguity as possible.