public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Caldwell <mcaldwell@swipeclock•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 14:11:18 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1C408C12-B39B-46E4-B997-153D566158B1@swipeclock.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53540715.7050803@xylon.de>

It is a paradigm that is easy to explain and grasp for neurotypical people. 

The average mind has no problem overloading words and distinguishing the intended meaning from context. For most people, overloading a single syllable word with a new meaning is much less complicated than using a unique 3+ syllable word like satoshi or micro-anything.

Doing software development warps our minds to demand fully qualified names for everything. We know our compilers would say "bit? Fatal error 0xaaabbbbwtf, can't continue, not sure if you mean a Boolean or a dog bite".  But this peculiarity should not be projected onto the people we are trying to get bitcoin to appeal to, not if we want them to feel like we think about their experience. 

If I were to say "a Bitcoin can be divided into a million bits", less than 0.1% of average joes would think I was talking about German beers or the thing that goes in horses mouths. Really, most people are good at using context to relate this to "a dollar can be divided into 100 cents" and accepting it.  This requires much less of their mind resources than using SI prefixes correctly or learning 3 syllable words that (to them) have no instantly apparent relationship to Bitcoin. 

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 20, 2014, at 11:44 AM, "Arne Brutschy" <abrutschy@xylon•de> wrote:

>> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
>> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
>> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.
> 
> There have been many proposals for more or less arbitrary subunits. What
> would be the merit of your proposal? I don't really follow the reasoning
> that it's better if it's uncommon for everyone rather than just uncommon
> for people not used to metric units.
> 
> Regarding the label of a "bit": I have to agree with the others that bit
> is heavily overused as a unit, but I am a computer scientist, so I don't
> have the "average joe's" perspective on this. I find it weird to use as
> it's already in use in English - "a bit of work" etc



  reply	other threads:[~2014-04-20 18:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-20 12:35 Mike Gehl
2014-04-20 13:15 ` Rob Golding
2014-04-20 14:28   ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-20 14:52     ` Christophe Biocca
2014-04-21  8:52       ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-04-21  9:34         ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-22 14:55           ` Natanael
2014-04-20 14:53     ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-20 15:05       ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-20 15:50         ` Alan Reiner
2014-04-20 16:19           ` Chris Pacia
2014-04-20 16:27             ` Wladimir
2014-04-20 16:30               ` Chris Pacia
2014-04-22 13:51               ` Aaron Axvig
2014-04-23  9:44                 ` Danny Hamilton
2014-04-23  9:56                   ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-23 11:48                     ` Chris D'Costa
2014-04-20 16:23           ` Erik Garrison
2014-04-20 16:30             ` Alan Reiner
2014-04-20 16:56               ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-20 17:47                 ` Jannis Froese
2014-04-20 18:10                 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-04-20 17:42 ` Arne Brutschy
2014-04-20 18:11   ` Mike Caldwell [this message]
2014-04-20 18:22     ` Arne Brutschy
2014-04-20 18:34       ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-20 18:43     ` Oliver Egginger
2014-04-20 19:19       ` Christophe Biocca
2014-04-20 19:32         ` Gmail
2014-04-20 20:28         ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-21  0:16           ` Justin A
2014-04-21  1:18             ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-21  1:33               ` Un Ix
2014-04-21  3:34                 ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-21  4:08                   ` Christopher Paika
2014-04-21  5:41                 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-21  5:51                   ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-21  6:21                   ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-21 12:14                     ` Un Ix
2014-04-21 12:24                       ` Tamas Blummer
2014-05-01 22:35 Aaron Voisine
2014-05-03  2:06 ` Gordon Mohr
2014-05-03  5:41   ` Aaron Voisine
2014-05-03 15:48     ` Christophe Biocca
2014-05-03 16:02       ` slush
2014-05-03 16:10         ` Tamas Blummer
2014-05-03 16:27       ` Mike Caldwell
2014-05-04  1:04         ` Chris Pacia
2014-05-04  5:18           ` Drak
2014-05-04  6:15             ` Aaron Voisine
2014-05-04  6:23               ` Un Ix
2014-05-04  6:27               ` Wladimir
2014-05-04  6:36                 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-05-04  6:59                   ` Wladimir
2014-05-04 14:42               ` Mike Caldwell
2014-05-05 22:33     ` Gordon Mohr

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1C408C12-B39B-46E4-B997-153D566158B1@swipeclock.com \
    --to=mcaldwell@swipeclock$(echo .)com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox