Bitcoin Forum
May 20, 2022, 11:59:33 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 23.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: One (future) bitcoin should be equivalent to one (current) µBTC  (Read 534 times)
SeeBettor
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 24
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 15, 2014, 06:07:19 PM
 #1

I know it's been a topic going back for a while now; basically where the decimal point is. This whole debate over deciding what everyone should call a µBTC is, of course, driven by the fact that the decimal is in a poor location when it comes to easing the adoption of more-and-more not-so-mathematically-inclined people.

I think the two following points are givens for anyone pondering this issue: 1) Even for a decently mathematical person, it takes a few moments longer to double-check things when working on the right side of the decimal. There is more potential for human error when not working with a smaller base unit. 2) The silly perception that "one bitcoin is so expensive" is, no doubt, also hurting the adoption rate.

For a while there, it seemed that many were focusing on "what should we call 1 mBTC". I think it is wise that we are looking potentially even further ahead, and attempting to decide "what should we call 1 µBTC".

I think most agree that the best name we have for any unit of Bitcoin is "bitcoin". And by "best", I mean the name that even people who have maybe just begun to hear "Bitcoin", or what a cryptocurrency is, can very easily relate to. The problem is that the name "bitcoin" is already taken (widely accepted) by what is a relatively large unit (1/13,000,000 of all in existence, 1/21,000,000 of all that will ever be). Yes, one-thirteen-millionth is a very large unit in this case; too large for the majority of practical discussions for buying and selling goods or services.

I realize that all that I have said so-far is fairly elementary for most of you concerned about this. I'm just attempting to summarize what is driving this whole "naming" issue we face. I do believe that it is a problem, and I do believe it is hindering the potential further adoption of Bitcoin.

As far as naming a µBTC, I'm all-in-favor of simply what will roll off the tongue best, and so I lean towards "bit", regardless of the concern that it is already a unit of measurement for data. However, I still do not think this is ideal. I think that, ideally, "bits" would just be the slang term people would use instead of saying the more proper word, "bitcoins", and that they would be of equivalent size to one-another.

Because of the great decentralization of Bitcoin, we face a huge problem in implementing any sort of change to what has become the current standards. The only real current standards being the metric prefix system of naming. This metric system of naming is great and fine to have for formal use, it is universal, and should and will remain. But it is really very poor for actual practical casual usage and discussion (the like-minded goal we all have).

The potential way of attempting to implement any naming change (or naming addition), that I heard discussed, would be to attempt to name a future date, such as Jan 1, 2015, and see if by then we could get enough of the players on-board to work the name change into the GUI of much of the supporting software out there; the exchange fronts, merchant sites, etc. I'm not too savvy on it, but I don't think this involves changing the actual calculations that go on in the backend, just the unit in which things are displayed. It is still a huge challenge to get towards any consensus, this I do realize.

In my opinion, we should acknowledge what we preach; that we are still in the relative infancy of Bitcoin. And that we should shoot for what really is ideal.

Conclusion (and for TL;DR)
Ideally (IMO) one current µBTC should be one BTC. One current (2014) micro-bitcoin should be equal to one (2015) bitcoin. The market cap should be (effectively) 13 trillion BTC (rather than 13 million BTC).

A) Ignoring the difficulty of implementation, is this not ideal? If it is not ideal, explain why.

B) Is it just too difficult, approaching impossible, to really implement?
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1653047973
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1653047973

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1653047973
Reply with quote  #2

1653047973
Report to moderator
1653047973
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1653047973

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1653047973
Reply with quote  #2

1653047973
Report to moderator
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3486
Merit: 2568



View Profile
May 15, 2014, 06:52:19 PM
 #2

this has been done to death..
(analogy)
your belief is that one ounce of gold should be called 1 tonne. simply because everyone would love 1 tonne of gold.
let me guess, next you will want 1 gram of gold to be called 1 tonne.


how about fiat(swapping deflation for inflation). years ago you could buy a pack of gum for a few pennies. now its a dollar/pound. so let me guess you want to call a dollar/cents purely so people can easily buy chewing gum for cents again.

so drop any beleif that 0.00000100 will be called a bitcoin. instead new names will come out to cover smaller amounts

EG gold is not measured in micro amounts of tonnes anymore even if everyone would love a tonne of gold. now we have bars ingots coins. ounce grams.

get with the program and have a nice day




I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
Aswan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1735
Merit: 1015



View Profile
May 15, 2014, 06:56:32 PM
 #3

this has been done to death..
(analogy)
your belief is that one ounce of gold should be called 1 tonne. simply because everyone would love 1 tonne of gold.
let me guess, next you will want 1 gram of gold to be called 1 tonne.


how about fiat(swapping deflation for inflation). years ago you could buy a pack of gum for a few pennies. now its a dollar/pound. so let me guess you want to call a dollar/cents purely so people can easily buy chewing gum for cents again.

so drop any beleif that 0.00000100 will be called a bitcoin. instead new names will come out to cover smaller amounts

EG gold is not measured in micro amounts of tonnes anymore even if everyone would love a tonne of gold. now we have bars ingots coins. ounce grams.

get with the program and have a nice day

Not quite as a tonne is a weight measurement, but he should get the point!
Ron~Popeil
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250



View Profile
May 15, 2014, 06:58:51 PM
 #4

Maybe a bit cent or something along those lines. Someone will start using something and it will catch on organically. I like to keep my wallet in ubtc because it makes me feel rich.  Tongue   

franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3486
Merit: 2568



View Profile
May 15, 2014, 07:07:22 PM
 #5

human nature is this
we all have our own ideals but the general consensus is that we always want more, and desire what we cant have. so leaving bitcoins as it is will giv people the drive and push to want a bitcoin.

handing a bitcoin to them on a plate for the price of under a penny, helps no one.

after all whats exciting about shouting to th rooftops "i have a bitcoin" when its only worth a penny.

so leave bitcoin where it is and people will want to aim their future goals towards getting a bitcoin so that when they show off to their friends that they have a whole bitcoin, they can be proud, and have a sense of achievement

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!