Good news! Gavin Andresen: I think everybody should switch to talking in "bits"

[BTCIndia]

I suggest same to Gavin and community in Jan, 2013. Thereafter month back KnC and Bitpay accepted my suggestion.

Now, Gavin is saying same on AMA! But, didn't reply me anything. A**hole co-inventor!

http://www.coindesk.com/knc-wallet-bitcoin-price-bits/http://www.coindesk.com/knc-wallet-bitcoin-price-bits/


OP: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=420058.0

[Waramp22]

Why switch to bits when there is already "satoshi" as a unit?

The reason he wants to switch to bits is because it allows us to drop the confusing decimal places.
example:
.000386 bitcoin - 386 bits

This simplifies things for the time being, and lets us use satoshis when we need to be even more specific
example: instead of .00038619 bitcoin it will be 386 bits and 19 satoshis (or sats)

This will help in the adoption of bitcoin as it has the same familiar layout that the USD has. Dollars and cents.

[btckold24]

its a great idea in my opinion. My friend started getting into bitcoin and I explained it all. I sent him .02 to his cell phone wallet to get him started. He was like wow a whole .02 lol (not realizing that its around 8 bucks) using bits is much better and easier to understand.

[turvarya]

Why switch to bits when there is already "satoshi" as a unit?

The reason he wants to switch to bits is because it allows us to drop the confusing decimal places.
example:
.000386 bitcoin - 386 bits

This simplifies things for the time being, and lets us use satoshis when we need to be even more specific
example: instead of .00038619 bitcoin it will be 386 bits and 19 satoshis (or sats)

This will help in the adoption of bitcoin as it has the same familiar layout that the USD has. Dollars and cents.

I am just wondering if we really need 2 Units(bits and satoshi). I am not sure, if "the USD also has 2 units and people are used to it" is really a good argument.

yes , gavin is right , if we want more ppl use bitcoin , the unit(1 bitcoin) might be too large for normal users .
satoshi (10^-8) is too small , so changing to bits sounds a good idea .

Are you sarcastic or do you really think, that 1 bit=0.00038183 USD is better than 1 Satoshi=0.0000038183 respectively 1 USD= 2,618.97 bits is better than 1 USD= 261,897 Satoshi?

[PenAndPaper]

Maybe it's a little early but bits is the way to go for sure. Companies like coinbase etc. are already testing/using bits internally.

[pawel7777]

yes , gavin is right , if we want more ppl use bitcoin , the unit(1 bitcoin) might be too large for normal users .
satoshi (10^-8) is too small , so changing to bits sounds a good idea .

Are you sarcastic or do you really think, that 1 bit=0.00038183 USD is better than 1 Satoshi=0.0000038183 respectively 1 USD= 2,618.97 bits is better than 1 USD= 261,897 Satoshi?

Agree. If the goal is to make bitcoin easier for the masses to use it (especially new people), than 'bit' doesn't really do the trick. More intuitive would be something close (in value) to $1, therefore 1mBTC (BTC0.001) makes more sense.

[BADecker]

One important thing is that the language is agreed on. If we call it "bits," that's great, if we all agree.

The IMPORTANT thing is that we start to talk in millionths of a bitcoin. Why? Because the fiat system is about to crash, at least regarding the USD. Bitcoin will jump shortly after, and multitudes of folks attempting to get "in" after the crash, will cause the price to soar. And THAT on top of the reduction in the availability, or desirability, worldwide, of the dollar.

Sure, current bitcoin holders will be rich. But the use of Bitcoin will spread. Supply and demand will bring the price up so high that we will ALL need to start talking in "bits" just to use Bitcoin with the general public, because of the high price.

[bitcoinpiece]

Why switch to bits when there is already "satoshi" as a unit?

It is just the smallest unit. I think.

[twister]

I'll stick with satoshi.

Thank you.

[ab8989]

What about a completely different suggestion I have not heard before.

We clearly have a problem that nobody has been able to figure out how to fix well enough using traditional way of thinking. So thinking outside a box could be in order. We could start a completely different style to fit our needs and also to emphasize that bitcoins are really different from traditional money.

It is inspired by the european style of using SI suffixes when dealing with resistor values and wildly varying orders of magnitude on values of other electronic components. Pretty much the same problem that bitcoins are facing. 2200 ohm can be written as 2k2

We could start using format of xxxBTCxxxmxxxμ.

1 BTC in the new format is 1BTC.
0.1 BTC in the new format is BTC100m
0.01 BTC in the new format is BTC10m
0.001 BTC in the new format is BTC1m
0.0001 BTC in the new format is BTC100μ
0.00001 BTC in the new format is BTC10μ
0.000001 BTC in the new format is BTC1μ
1.234BTC in the new format is 1BTC234m
0.001234BTC in the new format is BTC1m234μ

The last shows the biggest improvent compared to any other scheme I have seen and it is the last one that probably is the one that faces the biggest need to have a good solution for in future years.

One of the advantages is that this really does not break anything. It is just a completely optional way of writing the values. All previous concepts of writing about bitcoins remain totally valid and unchanged.

[Billbags]

One important thing is that the language is agreed on. If we call it "bits," that's great, if we all agree.

The IMPORTANT thing is that we start to talk in millionths of a bitcoin. Why? Because the fiat system is about to crash, at least regarding the USD. Bitcoin will jump shortly after, and multitudes of folks attempting to get "in" after the crash, will cause the price to soar. And THAT on top of the reduction in the availability, or desirability, worldwide, of the dollar.

Sure, current bitcoin holders will be rich. But the use of Bitcoin will spread. Supply and demand will bring the price up so high that we will ALL need to start talking in "bits" just to use Bitcoin with the general public, because of the high price.

BINGO......that's how I took it also. Did you also notice the one year insinuation?

[novacn]

Yes. Bits are good... definitely
But if we shift to bits, how will altcoins like Dogecoin survive   ?
That will kill dogecoin for sure! That is so cruel, cos I also like dogecoin.

[turvarya]

Yes. Bits are good... definitely
But if we shift to bits, how will altcoins like Dogecoin survive   ?
That will kill dogecoin for sure! That is so cruel, cos I also like dogecoin.

shouldn't there be another Pump&Dump-Coin already?

[Klestin]

You might have reversed the logic. A switch to bits would remove the messy 0.000 etc. Eg a coffee might cost 1,000 bits.

4/10 of a cent? Clearly not Starbucks at that price.

[101111]

You might have reversed the logic. A switch to bits would remove the messy 0.000 etc. Eg a coffee might cost 1,000 bits.

4/10 of a cent? Clearly not Starbucks at that price.

lol, yeah might have to wait a few years for that!

[yayayo]

So what?

Gavin is an expert on technology, not language.


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

Nice try, but you need to brush up a bit. Gavin is one of the top thought leaders in the Bitcoin space; as well as Chief Scientist, he's also a published writer and entrepreneur.

Wow, Gavin gave himself a title. I'm sorry, but if this means anything it is that Gavin seems to be in need of admiration.
Frankly, I don't understand the hype about Gavin. There are other developers as well, who are not member of a highly questionable organization (The Bitcoin Foundation), don't receive pay, but still contribute significantly.

We don't need provisions on how to call Bitcoin's smaller units. Names will emerge naturally. I can't see any advantage of introducing "bits", because we already have Satoshi as a name for the smallest unit.

ya.ya.yo!

[RustyNomad]

You might have reversed the logic. A switch to bits would remove the messy 0.000 etc. Eg a coffee might cost 1,000 bits.

4/10 of a cent? Clearly not Starbucks at that price.

lol, yeah might have to wait a few years for that!

1,000 bits (0.001) is actually USD 0.385 (38 cents) at today's price. Still not enough for a coffee though.

[adamstgBit]

this needs to be thought out carefully

i think it would be appropriate to have both BTC and BITS

anything > 0.1BTC is expressed in BTC

anything < 0.1BTC is expressed in BITS

or maybe you can display price like   0.2BTC and 1726BITS , kinda like you say 26$ and 75cents, idk..

point is these standards to be though up, layout out clearly, and agreed upon, this is not an easy task.

if we can  layout out some clear standards, update some key wallets (qt , blockchain, etc..), get some websites to adopt this new way of working ,make some documentation, make some fancy pictures outlining theses standards. this BTC Vs BITS debate might be settled once and for all.


its imposible to get all sites to change how they display BTC prices. some use BTC some mBTC some uBTC, no one has a clue what to do so everyone is doing there own thing. this has to stop and we have to figure this out somehow.

this threads a start, but there have been 100 like it, all it does is show that everyone wants to see some changes in this aspect of bitcoin, but whats beening done to change it?

dose bitcoinstore display prices in BTC or BITS?
dose blockchine.info's wallet display balance as 1.3BTC 230579BITS

no!

lets make a new thread, lets figure out EXACTLY what we want the change to be and how it will be rolled out, and then lets put extreme pressure to get these sites to implement this new scheme

rant over,
sry for all the typos,
thank you.

[jbreher]

lets make a new thread, lets figure out EXACTLY what we want the change to be and how it will be rolled out, and then lets put extreme pressure to get these sites to implement this new scheme

Good freaking luck. I think there is a rough consensus that some units between Bitcoin and Satoshi might be useful. However, what units these will be seems to be quite contentious.

Frankly, I prefer 'mills' (mBTC) and 'mikes' (uBTC), as it reuses existing patterns well-known to anyone who has had a need to handle numbers of anything over a range of magnitudes (i.e. the SI system, used nearly universally in other areas of measurement). I may be in the minority. As such, I recognize the need to sit back and let consensus emerge. Trying to force the issue will not be resistant to whatever socially-selected solution eventually emerges.

[Walter Rothbard]

And what do you mean, 'so what'? That your own opinion counts for more than his? (That's what it sounds like). You think you can so easily dismiss his opinion? I got news for you, compared to him no one cares what you think.

The cool thing is that free people don't have to care what Gavin thinks if they don't want to.