Let's get the denominations of BTC straight

[earnabit]

I think this is something that a lot of merchants are wondering. My site uses bits. I like that it allows for two decimal places if bitcoin go way up in value and will probably work well until we need to subdivide satoshi's further. What are your thoughts?

[DannyHamilton]

I think this is something that a lot of merchants are wondering. My site uses bits. I like that it allows for two decimal places if bitcoin go way up in value and will probably work well until we need to subdivide satoshi's further. What are your thoughts?

microbitcoins (or microbits, or mikes, or mickeys, or mics, or µbits, or µBTC, or µBitcoins, or you-bees, or youbits, or you-bee-tea-seas, or mu-bits, or mu-BTC, or mu-bitcoins, or bits, or whatever nickname you want to use) are a good choice. It's great that they allow two decimal places and that most of the digits are to the left of the decimal point where a separator such as a comma can be used to improve visual clarity.

I'm just a bit confused why people like the nickname "bits" for microbitcoins?

It seems confusing and misleading.  Bits?  Is that regular bits (Bitcoins), or millibits (millibitcoins), or microbits (microbitcoins)?

I say, stick with the a representation where 1 satoshi is 0.01, but use a nickname for microbitcoins that is less confusing and misleading than "bits".

Note:  I can't believe we're having this discussion yet again.  This has to be the 15th poll I've seen just on this site about this issue, and the 50th time I've seen discussions about it.  I'd think that by now people would realize that there is no official organization that can decree what the name will be.  Everyone is going to use whatever the heck name they want.  There will be some confusion for a while, and eventually popular nicknames will form organically just like they do with everything else in life.  There was no official organization that declared that dollars should be called "bucks", and yet we all understand when someone says, "that'll be 6 bucks".

[earnabit]

EDIT: I'm wrong

a bit is 1/100,000 of a bitcoin so a 'bit' is 10ubit. This just makes the decision harder

I think this is something that a lot of merchants are wondering. My site uses bits. I like that it allows for two decimal places if bitcoin go way up in value and will probably work well until we need to subdivide satoshi's further. What are your thoughts?

microbitcoins (or microbits, or mikes, or mickeys, or mics, or µbits, or µBTC, or µBitcoins, or you-bees, or youbits, or you-bee-tea-seas, or mu-bits, or mu-BTC, or mu-bitcoins, or bits, or whatever nickname you want to use) are a good choice. It's great that they allow two decimal places and that most of the digits are to the left of the decimal point where a separator such as a comma can be used to improve visual clarity.

I'm just a bit confused why people like the nickname "bits" for microbitcoins?

It seems confusing and misleading.  Bits?  Is that regular bits (Bitcoins), or millibits (millibitcoins), or microbits (microbitcoins)?

I say, stick with the a representation where 1 satoshi is 0.01, but use a nickname for microbitcoins that is less confusing and misleading than "bits".

[DannyHamilton]

a bit is 1/100,000 of a bitcoin so a 'bit' is 10ubit. This just makes the decision harder

You are mistaken.

A "bit" is 1/1,000,000 of a bitcoin.
A "microbitcoin" is 1/1,000,000 of a bitcoin.

They are two different nicknames for the exact same value.

0.1 = 1/10 of a bitcoin
0.01 = 1/100 of a bitcoin
0.001 = 1/1,000 of a bitcoin (also known as a millibitcoin, or 1,000 microbits, or 1,000 "bits")
0.0001 = 1/10,000 of a bitcoin
0.00001 = 1/100,000 of a bitcoin
0.000001 = 1/1,000,000 of a bitcoin (also known as a microbits, or "bits", or 100 satoshi)
0.0000001 = 1/10,000,000 of a bitcoin
0.00000001 = 1/100,000,000 of a bitcoin (also known as a satoshi, or 0.01 microbits, or 0.01 "bits")

So, 1 "bit" = 1 microbit.

a millibit = 1,000 "bits", or a kilo"bit"
Wait, a millibit = a kilo"bit"?
How is that not confusing?

[Lauda]

Way too many polls for this. Just use whatever other people have been using, satoshi and such.

[phillipsjk]

a bit is 1/100,000 of a bitcoin so a 'bit' is 10ubit. This just makes the decision harder

You are mistaken.

1 bit is 1/100,000,000 of a bitcoin, so a 'bit' is 10 nBTC.

I am not sure why this needs yet another thread.

Edit: I recently learned that Bitcoinj used to call that unit a "nano coin"... such an off-by-10 error makes me think less of the software.

[jjc326]

Honestly I don't think there is a big issue about using the wrong/right terminology.  Most people who use BTC are familiar with the lingo.  Sure when BTC gets more used and more widely used then maybe there can be an "official" change in certain terms but it's not like the community needs to get together and "decide" or "vote" on changing terms etc.

[earnabit]

Thanks for that, I always defined a bit as 100 satoshi's and erroneously thought btc having eight decimal places meant 1 satoshi was 1/10^8 or 1/10,000,000 making a bit 1/100,000.

[odolvlobo]

Someday, there will be nicknames for fractional bitcoins. It is doubtful that the names that arise through consensus will be any of the names that have been championed and argued over so far.

[Tron]

I wasn't sure about 'bits' at first, as I felt that mBTC might be a better transition, and more in parity with the dollar.

But, I've changed my mind.  Jumping straight to bits now seems like a good idea.

It will be one transition.  The original QT client already supports it, but calls it uBTC (micro-bitcoins).

All the legacy accounting systems will work with bits because it has two places after the decimal point.  So any accounting system can then store all the way to the 'satoshi' level by using the standard two places to the right of the decimal.

It's pretty easy to remember that $1.00 is in the ballpark of 1500 bits, so a $3.00 coffee should be around 4500 bits instead of 0.004838.  This seems a little easier to me than making sure I have the right number of zeros after the decimal place so I'm not overpaying (or underpaying) by a factor of 10.   I have a pretty good head for numbers, but when I'm sending bitcoin that isn't coming back, I usually feel safer double-checking with a calculator before hitting send.   Moving to bits would solve this for me and make the mental math easier, so I would not feel the need to double-check with a calculator -- at least for amounts under $100.

It also solves the problem of 'unit bias'.  It's already a problem that potential new bitcoin users don't want to buy bitcoin either because they think they have to buy a 'whole' one, or because they are buying such a small fraction of one that it seems insignificant.  Mathematically it makes no difference, but psychologically it matters.  Warren Buffet doesn't split Berkshire Hathaway A shares because mathematically it doesn't matter and it doesn't add value, but most shares are split to keep them in a psychologically attainable $10 to $1000 range.  It's just more satisfying to own 100,000 bits rather than 0.1 bitcoin.   It also seems more generous to give someone 5000 bits bits to get them started, rather than 0.005 BTC.

CoinCPA will make an option to display bitcoin balances in bits.

Just my 33 bits ($0.02).  

Tron

[DeathAndTaxes]

You are mistaken.
1 bit is 1/100,000,000 of a bitcoin, so a 'bit' is 10 nBTC.

Well first of all there is no "mistaken".   You can call "a bi"t whatever you want and so can Danny and so can anyone else.  There is no international standards body to act as a body of trusted elders to lay down the definition by decree.  Still I have NEVER see anyone refer to 1E-8 BTC as a "bit".  Of all the possible subunits the only two which have almost universal consensus are "1 Bitcoin" (1BTC or 1E8 satoshis) and "1 satoshi" (1 discrete unit or 1E-8 BTC).

I am not sure why this needs yet another thread.

I think that it is self evident.  You assume everyone else believes 1E-8 BTC = "1 bit" while the reality is (I am guessing here) >99% of the population would disagree with the assessment.

[phillipsjk]

You are mistaken.
1 bit is 1/100,000,000 of a bitcoin, so a 'bit' is 10 nBTC.

Well first of all there is no "mistaken".   You can call "a bi"t whatever you want and so can Danny and so can anyone else.  

I wasn't explicitly trying to say danny was mistaken, I was trying to say the 1bit= 1/100,000 of  BTC was mistaken. I was trying to echo danny's response to show that "bit" is not a universally agreed-upon standard.

I am not sure why this needs yet another thread.

I think that it is self evident.  You assume everyone else believes 1E-8 BTC = "1 bit" while the reality is (I am guessing here) >99% of the population would disagree with the assessment.

Technically, satosies are represented by bits. The software uses integers.

[Mowcore]

I think this is something that a lot of merchants are wondering. My site uses bits. I like that it allows for two decimal places if bitcoin go way up in value and will probably work well until we need to subdivide satoshi's further. What are your thoughts?

 or you-bee-tea-seas

I think we found a winner.

[BTFjmwn]

mBTC is here to stay. 1 BTC = 1000 mBTC. People remember and use what's simple e.g. KIS.

[Tron]

I would like to clarify my understanding of 'bits'.

0.000001 = 1/1,000,000 of a bitcoin (also known as a microbits, micro-bitcoin, or "bits", or 100 satoshi).

I agree with DannyHamiliton and earnabit's original view.

I also agree with DannyHamilton that it doesn't much matter what we call 1 millionth of a bitcoin as long as the terminology uniformly means the same thing worldwide.

There are two posts above that get it 'wrong' in my view.  It is critically important that everyone settles on the same definition of a bit.

[DeathAndTaxes]

Technically, satosies are represented by bits. The software uses integers.

So is the letter "A", this entire forum, all floating point numbers, and whole Bitcoins.  They all use more than one bit and hence are represented by bits of data.  Still I have never once heard anyone refer to 1E-8 BTC as "1 bit" until you just did.  Even if some people do it certainly wouldn't be a majority and thus saying Danny is "wrong" is kinda silly right?

[phillipsjk]

Technically, satosies are represented by bits. The software uses integers.

So is the letter "A", this entire forum, all floating point numbers, and whole Bitcoins.  They are use more than one bit.  Once again I have never once heard anyone refer to 1E-8 BTC as "1 bit" until you just did.  Even if some people do it certainly wouldn't be a majority and thus saying Danny is "wrong" because his view isn't universal when yours is even less adopted is kinda silly right?

I use satoshies to refer to the base-unit. 1 µBTC to refer to 1 millionth of a Bitcoin.

I think using "bits" to refer to any denomination of Bitcoin is silly myself.

[infested999]

1 BTC = 1.000 mBTC = 1.000.000 uBTC = 100.000.000 satoshis

[joshraban76]

satoshi seems the simplest to me. It would be easy if each decimal place had a name. for example 8 places after the decimal is a satoshi. 7 places after the decimal could be another name. Maybe once we learned the names it would be easier to understand and calculate on the fly.
 

[minerpumpkin]

Haven't we had this discussion already quite a lot of times? I'm quite puzzled though, what are SI units when it comes to bitcoin? Anyways, how heavy is a single bitcoin at normal atmospheric pressure and a temperature of 24 degrees celsius?