Who uses "bits"?

[rgenito]

"µBTC" is kind of unfriendly, as your common person just has no idea what that is.

I challenge you to ask 10 "common people" what a "bit" is.

I also claim that while "µBTC" is somewhat unfriendly, if it is useful it will be softened in a natural way.  People will write "uBTC" often because there is no "µ" on most keyboards.  People may drop pronunciations such as "microbitcoin" or "u-bee-tee-cee" in favour of abbreviations such as "mic" or "ubit".  Someone may invent a currency symbol, probably a "µ" with a bar through it, like ₥ (read: mill) which already exists and means a thousandth of a currency unit.  If the unit becomes really popular prices might be typed as "240 u" or "1500 u" where the "u" is pronounced "yew" or "mics".

If "kilograms" is often abbreviated to "kilos", "millilitres" to "mills", and "gigabytes" to "gigs", then why must we plan what people are going to do about "microbitcoins"?  Can't we simply let the decentralised system which is natural language do its job?

So no.  While I can order a takeaway for 34 mills, paying a transaction fee of 200 mics, I have no need or want to adopt extra terms such as "bits".

I've already asked 20 "common people" what a bit is, what a microbit is, etc. These people were *also* told what these units were. The one that made sense? "Bit" ... they remembered it, and they didn't even remember "microbit" despite the fact that they were basically told it was a "bit". So now.. I challenge YOU to go ask 10 "common people" what a "bit" is, and vice-verse

[rgenito]

Ah yes, and I just finished reading through these

. . . .
Since I've encountered MANY people that have shortened the word "microbitcoins" to "microbits" when talking about a millionth of a bitcoin, it just adds additional confusion to use the word "bits".

This does make sense.

Since “Bitcoin” is the name of the currency, calling a SUBdivision “bit” is confusing as hell. “Bit” should be the abbreviation of “Bitcoin” itself, and terms such as “millibit” and “microbit” as the subdivisions.

Why not keep calling the base-unit a 'Bitcoin' or simply a 'coin' - that way the smaller denomination could be called a bit. It is a catchy name, after all!

Agreed. A "coin" would be ambiguous to the core Bitcoin developer (but there are relatively few of those).

If Bitcoin ever needs more significant digits to express it's value (as in 16 digits of 0.0000 0000 0000 0000 rather than 8 digits of 0.0000 0000), the terms "milli bit", "micro bit", and "nano bit" can apply? It's still messy. Someone also mentioned Bread Wallet and I've got to say, Bread Wallet is what made me really see the usefulness of using "bits" in a real-world setting, as before it was only "theory" to use bits on a real-world basis.

Besides, if people are even *on* this forum, they're smart enough to figure out what a "bit" is -- as for your common person? We have to make sacrifices to help them and keep Bitcoin moving forward. I know I have made the sacrifice. I look forward to hearing what more people have to say, as I am very interested in this for my own services.

[ANTIcentralized]

"µBTC" is kind of unfriendly, as your common person just has no idea what that is.

Most computer/internet users have idea what mili and micro means. At least I hope 

Most people who can do advanced things with computers probably know what mili and micro means however this is not the case for much of the general population. In order for bitcoin's adoption to grow it mus be used by more of the population who do not work in IT/do very advanced things with computers.

It has been mentioned several times in this thread that these terms are too complicated. Also the fact that satashi is the smallest unit of measure of a bitcoin further complicates things because people do not know what the "base" 0 unit is

[dogtor]

Posted this in a different thread concerning 'bits':

Here's the reasoning they shouldn't use 'bit' ------>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit

A bit is the basic unit of information in computing and digital communications.


and 'bit' is an International Electrotechnical Commission's standard unit -------> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_60027

[KingOfTrolls]

Posted this in a different thread concerning 'bits':

Here's the reasoning they shouldn't use 'bit' ------>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit

A bit is the basic unit of information in computing and digital communications.


and 'bit' is an International Electrotechnical Commission's standard unit -------> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_60027

This is exactly the thing that bitcoin has been named after.

Satoshi wanted to show the importance of information sciences. Re-defining "bit" would kind-of defeat that purpose.

[twister]

No, I don't use it and I plan to never use it in future also. I use satoshi, mBtc and Btc.

[JeffDeChesare]

Wow, i barely got mbtc and ubtc but always makes mistakes with zeros but more with bits now.

[Dabs]

No one can mistake this number 1.12345678 BTC. It is as exact as needed, and if you want a buffer, go add the possible transaction fee. When I deal with people, I state all 8 decimal places, just so we have no misunderstanding, even if the least significant digit is zero, unless I am dealing with whole bitcoins.

[CryptoCarmen]

I like the name Mike for 100 satoshi.

[Welsh]

No one can mistake this number 1.12345678 BTC. It is as exact as needed, and if you want a buffer, go add the possible transaction fee. When I deal with people, I state all 8 decimal places, just so we have no misunderstanding, even if the least significant digit is zero, unless I am dealing with whole bitcoins.

I also do this to prevent the other party from misunderstanding, I don't think I've ever used "bits" or even satoshi when doing business. 1.12345678 is probably the easiest to follow and not much can go wrong as everyone is familar with it.

[rgenito]

No one can mistake this number 1.12345678 BTC. It is as exact as needed, and if you want a buffer, go add the possible transaction fee. When I deal with people, I state all 8 decimal places, just so we have no misunderstanding, even if the least significant digit is zero, unless I am dealing with whole bitcoins.

Dabs you definitely have a point. Here's the problem with units:

* People don't (even though they could) use commas to separate the numbers. This would make 1.12345678 much easier to read: 1.1234,5678 ... or 1.123,456,78

* Notice the "comma" grouping in our number system (arabic) separates every 3 digits: 1,432,235,439. You can read that number out loud because you can "visually" calculate the reading.

* Speaking of "visually" calculating the reading, this is where it becomes important: your average person cannot distinguish any more than a group of 5 items. When you see that 1 pill is on the ground, you calculate this quickly. When you see that 2 keys are on the ground, this is easy for you to mentally put together. When you see 3 lizards on your patio (or 3 bugs), your mind automatically connect with the fact that there are "3".

* Moving forward: if 4 pens are on the table, you can tell "at a glance" that there are 4 pens at the table. This is an important point, because when you group things by 4 or less, it reduces the possibility of human error.

Given these points above, the reason our number system separates numbers by commas is not accidental. You might be a super genius that can determine, at a glance, that an entire bag of M&M candies spilled onto the ground is 524 items, but the reality is your common person cannot do that. And that is what using "bits" is all about: for the common person to use with minimal error, and to understand.

My company is constantly dealing with and analyzing bitcoin transactional amounts. At the moment we're using Armory for business operations. And I'll say...it's a pain in the butt verifying numbers, but as long as we use our fingers to help us compare the accuracy of 0.43343433 being created for a transaction and that same amount listed on a spread sheet or contract, we're fine. It still leaves room for error, because after all we're human...

So to reply to your comment, while no one can mistake 1.12345678, there are surely many people who haven't memorized how many digits are past the decimal point--and cannot know at a glance! And there are many variations of numbers within the digits that many, many common people (even exceptionally talented minds) will and have mistaken.

[DannyHamilton]

And that is what using "bits" is all about

Nothing in your post explains why "bits" is a better name than microbitcoins, microbits, micros, mikes, micks, you-bee-tee-see, you-bits, mu-bits, mu-bee-tee-see, or mu's.

[cryptotraders]

very interesting

[voisine]

I would be willing to bet that every single person here who objects to 'bits' on the grounds of ambiguity is someone who knows at least one programming language. Remember *you* are not the audience this term is intended to cater to, it's for "normal" humans who are totally comfortable with resolving ambiguity from context. For them, being easy to remember and associate is far more important than being unambiguous. For normals, the word 'bit' has nothing to do with information science. The much, much more common meaning for this term is 'a small amount'.

Even though you think you hate ambiguity, you can determine from context when 'bit' means 1/8 of a byte, or when it means a small amount, or when it's an antiquated term for half a quarter as in 'no good 2-bit town', or when it refers to a piece of equipment that goes in a horse's mouth, or when it's what you put in the end of a drill. Humans are not computers. We effortlessly derive meaning from context. Route memorization of unambiguously unique terms is what requires effort. We don't have a lot of RAM to work with.

[marhjan]

No I don't use 'bits' it's 100sat to me.  I don't ever expect to use bits or microbitcoins as I simply don't see the need.

0.001btc = 1btm (anything between 0.001btc-1btc uses bitmill/btm as the unit)

0.306btc = 306btm

Amounts under 0.001btc are satoshis or sat/ksat

0.00095btc = 95ksat

0.000025btc = 2.5ksat

0.000005btc = 500sat

This is simple and makes sense to me - if you don't like it I really don't care and think WAY too much time has been devoted over the years worrying about what people will call the various units of btc.  Let the programmers talk in terms of microbitcoins and people who like their own colloquial terms use them as they please - we'll all be able to figure it out and eventually some set of terms will make it's way into common usage (assuming btc survives long enough.)   Those terms will NOT be determined by silly arguing on this forum however

[Jacobit]

I'm thinking of using it.will be very interesting if we all use it.

[teukon]

I would be willing to bet that every single person here who objects to 'bits' on the grounds of ambiguity is someone who knows at least one programming language. Remember *you* are not the audience this term is intended to cater to, it's for "normal" humans who are totally comfortable with resolving ambiguity from context. For them, being easy to remember and associate is far more important than being unambiguous.

Why do you all support "bits", being good only for "normal people" when you could support something like "mikes" which is good for both "normal people" and the technically minded.  Why outright try to alienate a good chunk of the existing Bitcoin community for no gain whatsoever.

"easy to remember and associate" or "unambiguous" is a false dichotomy.  Why choose between them when we can have both for free?

[sandykho47]

Why would you use bits
1 bit only equal as $0.0003905

Most people only use BTC / mBTC  when buy / sell something
But, most people will use it when bitcoin price is very high

And that is what using "bits" is all about

Nothing in your post explains why "bits" is a better name than microbitcoins, microbits, micros, mikes, micks, you-bee-tee-see, you-bits, mu-bits, mu-bee-tee-see, or mu's.

Because it's easier to say

[Stedsm]

I wouldn't use bits it confuses people. Sticking to satoshi and bitcoin and maybe mbtc is the best thing. Simple.

[RustyNomad]

No one can mistake this number 1.12345678 BTC. It is as exact as needed, and if you want a buffer, go add the possible transaction fee. When I deal with people, I state all 8 decimal places, just so we have no misunderstanding, even if the least significant digit is zero, unless I am dealing with whole bitcoins.

Dabs you definitely have a point. Here's the problem with units:

* People don't (even though they could) use commas to separate the numbers. This would make 1.12345678 much easier to read: 1.1234,5678 ... or 1.123,456,78

* Notice the "comma" grouping in our number system (arabic) separates every 3 digits: 1,432,235,439. You can read that number out loud because you can "visually" calculate the reading.

* Speaking of "visually" calculating the reading, this is where it becomes important: your average person cannot distinguish any more than a group of 5 items. When you see that 1 pill is on the ground, you calculate this quickly. When you see that 2 keys are on the ground, this is easy for you to mentally put together. When you see 3 lizards on your patio (or 3 bugs), your mind automatically connect with the fact that there are "3".

* Moving forward: if 4 pens are on the table, you can tell "at a glance" that there are 4 pens at the table. This is an important point, because when you group things by 4 or less, it reduces the possibility of human error.

Given these points above, the reason our number system separates numbers by commas is not accidental. You might be a super genius that can determine, at a glance, that an entire bag of M&M candies spilled onto the ground is 524 items, but the reality is your common person cannot do that. And that is what using "bits" is all about: for the common person to use with minimal error, and to understand.

My company is constantly dealing with and analyzing bitcoin transactional amounts. At the moment we're using Armory for business operations. And I'll say...it's a pain in the butt verifying numbers, but as long as we use our fingers to help us compare the accuracy of 0.43343433 being created for a transaction and that same amount listed on a spread sheet or contract, we're fine. It still leaves room for error, because after all we're human...

So to reply to your comment, while no one can mistake 1.12345678, there are surely many people who haven't memorized how many digits are past the decimal point--and cannot know at a glance! And there are many variations of numbers within the digits that many, many common people (even exceptionally talented minds) will and have mistaken.

+1

I think many are missing the point about 'bits'. Its not so much about the name 'bits' but rather about how the amount is expressed in order to make it more readable but also to make it more familiar in that there is only two decimal places just as with most currencies in use today.