* [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
@ 2014-04-20 12:35 Mike Gehl
2014-04-20 13:15 ` Rob Golding
2014-04-20 17:42 ` Arne Brutschy
0 siblings, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Mike Gehl @ 2014-04-20 12:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
The usefulness of a "bitcoin" unit will decrease as the value of the
network increases. Today, a majority of transactions are denominated
in fractions of a bitcoin. As a consequence, millibitcoin (mBTC) and
microbitcoin (uBTC) units have been introduced to alleviate the
decimal problem.
While SI units are great for people well versed in them, there is a
very good reason people aren't asking for 100 micro dollars in change.
The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
are using is the correct one, people WILL send 1000x more or less than
intended if we go down this road, and these mistakes will happen
frequently. Labeling should be easy enough for kindergarten kids.
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.
For a user discussion on the topic see:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/23flcn/bits_instead_of_%CE%BCbtc/
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rmto3/its_bits/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 12:35 [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account Mike Gehl
@ 2014-04-20 13:15 ` Rob Golding
2014-04-20 14:28 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-20 17:42 ` Arne Brutschy
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Rob Golding @ 2014-04-20 13:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one,
The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
to use such things.
> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road,
Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
> 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.
I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
Rob
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 13:15 ` Rob Golding
@ 2014-04-20 14:28 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-20 14:52 ` Christophe Biocca
2014-04-20 14:53 ` Pieter Wuille
0 siblings, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Tamas Blummer @ 2014-04-20 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rob Golding; +Cc: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2341 bytes --]
People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem with them.
They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not need to care of finance’s or people’s current customs.
The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people already use wallets other than the core.
Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff Garzik’s.
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding <rob.golding@astutium•com> wrote:
>> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
>> are using is the correct one,
>
> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
> to use such things.
>
>> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
>> intended if we go down this road,
>
> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>
>> 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.
>
> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>
> Rob
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 5604 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 14:28 ` Tamas Blummer
@ 2014-04-20 14:52 ` Christophe Biocca
2014-04-21 8:52 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-04-20 14:53 ` Pieter Wuille
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Christophe Biocca @ 2014-04-20 14:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
If you absolutely want a name for some small unit (which may be
valuable, not knocking that part of the idea), please use anything
other than "bits", which is already a massively overloaded term that
will confuse the hell out of people:
Harddrive costs measured in "bits per gigabyte"?
An itunes movie download that costs 200,000 bits and takes 804.2
megabytes of space?
Or a 10-megabit internet connection costing 10,000,000 bits per month?
It's especially bad given that bitcoin will likely be adopted first
for online use, where the competing (and more recognized) meaning of
"bit" is most prevalent.
Not to mention the overlap within bitcoin itself, with people already
using "millibits" in conversation as a shorthand for mBTC. Hence one
new "bit" is exactly 1/1000 of the old "millibit".
Make something up if you have to, or just use satoshis.
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof•com> wrote:
> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
> with them.
> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not
> need to care of finance’s or people’s current customs.
>
> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
> already use wallets other than the core.
>
> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>
> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff
> Garzik’s.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding <rob.golding@astutium•com> wrote:
>
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one,
>
>
> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
> to use such things.
>
> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road,
>
>
> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>
> 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.
>
>
> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>
> Rob
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 14:28 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-20 14:52 ` Christophe Biocca
@ 2014-04-20 14:53 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-20 15:05 ` Tamas Blummer
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Pieter Wuille @ 2014-04-20 14:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tamas Blummer; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
to just one client.
I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof•com> wrote:
> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
> with them.
> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not
> need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
>
> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
> already use wallets other than the core.
>
> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>
> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff
> Garzik's.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding <rob.golding@astutium•com> wrote:
>
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one,
>
>
> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
> to use such things.
>
> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road,
>
>
> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>
> 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.
>
>
> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>
> Rob
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 14:53 ` Pieter Wuille
@ 2014-04-20 15:05 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-20 15:50 ` Alan Reiner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Tamas Blummer @ 2014-04-20 15:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pieter Wuille; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4001 bytes --]
Here is an earlier reference to bits:
https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html
I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :
https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html
and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time pushing for XBT being 1 bit
https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com> wrote:
> I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
> Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
> to just one client.
>
> I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
>
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof•com> wrote:
>> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
>> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
>> with them.
>> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not
>> need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
>>
>> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
>> already use wallets other than the core.
>>
>> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>>
>> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff
>> Garzik's.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tamas Blummer
>> http://bitsofproof.com
>>
>> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding <rob.golding@astutium•com> wrote:
>>
>> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
>> are using is the correct one,
>>
>>
>> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
>> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
>> to use such things.
>>
>> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
>> intended if we go down this road,
>>
>>
>> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
>> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
>> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
>> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
>> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 7734 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 15:05 ` Tamas Blummer
@ 2014-04-20 15:50 ` Alan Reiner
2014-04-20 16:19 ` Chris Pacia
2014-04-20 16:23 ` Erik Garrison
0 siblings, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Alan Reiner @ 2014-04-20 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6135 bytes --]
I've been a staunch supporter of "microbitcoin" and would like to do
anything I can to make sure that we jump directly to it if we're going
to promote changing the default units. And I'm happy to integrate it
into Armory as a default (with appropriate explanations and
settings/options). I'm not so convinced about the "bits" name though --
I do like it, but I do also think that word is too overloaded. Though,
I think we could get away with it.
(Sadly, I still use "microbes" occasionally (as in *microb*itcoin) when
I'm talking to coworkers, because it slips off the tongue and is
actually a good combination of brevity and self-explanatory -- it just
doesn't instill the right visuals...)
We started integrating alternative units into Armory. But, of course,
there were a few more loose ends than I expected, which will require
some work. We want to put it in but not necessarily change the default
right away. I'd /prefer/ we get some commitments from some other wallet
developers, so we can make a unified push for it. I'm happy to lead
that and make it default as long as I'm not the only one in the world
doing it.
-Alan
On 04/20/2014 11:05 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> Here is an earlier reference to bits:
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html
> <https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html>
>
> I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html
> <https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html>
>
> and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time
> pushing for XBT being 1 bit
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html
> <https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html>
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
> On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com
> <mailto:pieter.wuille@gmail•com>> wrote:
>
>> I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
>> Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
>> to just one client.
>>
>> I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof•com
>> <mailto:tamas@bitsofproof•com>> wrote:
>>> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing
>>> with
>>> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
>>> with them.
>>> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they
>>> would not
>>> need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
>>>
>>> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
>>> already use wallets other than the core.
>>>
>>> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>>>
>>> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support
>>> and Jeff
>>> Garzik's.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Tamas Blummer
>>> http://bitsofproof.com
>>>
>>> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding <rob.golding@astutium•com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
>>> are using is the correct one,
>>>
>>>
>>> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary,
>>> and there
>>> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel
>>> they need
>>> to use such things.
>>>
>>> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
>>> intended if we go down this road,
>>>
>>>
>>> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2
>>> and 3
>>> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of
>>> thousands - Not
>>> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
>>> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is,
>>> they can
>>> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>>> their
>>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>>> their
>>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 13261 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 15:50 ` Alan Reiner
@ 2014-04-20 16:19 ` Chris Pacia
2014-04-20 16:27 ` Wladimir
2014-04-20 16:23 ` Erik Garrison
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Chris Pacia @ 2014-04-20 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Reiner; +Cc: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6900 bytes --]
The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of the
population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I doubt most
could even name one use of the term.
Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.
On Apr 20, 2014 11:52 AM, "Alan Reiner" <etotheipi@gmail•com> wrote:
> I've been a staunch supporter of "microbitcoin" and would like to do
> anything I can to make sure that we jump directly to it if we're going to
> promote changing the default units. And I'm happy to integrate it into
> Armory as a default (with appropriate explanations and settings/options).
> I'm not so convinced about the "bits" name though -- I do like it, but I do
> also think that word is too overloaded. Though, I think we could get away
> with it.
>
> (Sadly, I still use "microbes" occasionally (as in *microb*itcoin) when
> I'm talking to coworkers, because it slips off the tongue and is actually a
> good combination of brevity and self-explanatory -- it just doesn't instill
> the right visuals...)
>
> We started integrating alternative units into Armory. But, of course,
> there were a few more loose ends than I expected, which will require some
> work. We want to put it in but not necessarily change the default right
> away. I'd *prefer* we get some commitments from some other wallet
> developers, so we can make a unified push for it. I'm happy to lead that
> and make it default as long as I'm not the only one in the world doing it.
>
> -Alan
>
>
>
> On 04/20/2014 11:05 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>
> Here is an earlier reference to bits:
>
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html<https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html>
>
> I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :
>
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html<https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html>
>
> and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time
> pushing for XBT being 1 bit
>
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html<https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html>
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
> On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
> Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
> to just one client.
>
> I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
>
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof•com>
> wrote:
>
> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
> with them.
> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would
> not
> need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
>
> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
> already use wallets other than the core.
>
> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>
> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and
> Jeff
> Garzik's.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding <rob.golding@astutium.com><rob.golding@astutium•com>wrote:
>
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one,
>
>
> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and
> there
> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
> to use such things.
>
> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road,
>
>
> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>
> 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.
>
>
> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing listBitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 13017 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 15:50 ` Alan Reiner
2014-04-20 16:19 ` Chris Pacia
@ 2014-04-20 16:23 ` Erik Garrison
2014-04-20 16:30 ` Alan Reiner
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Erik Garrison @ 2014-04-20 16:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Reiner; +Cc: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7042 bytes --]
The world is rapidly becoming a place in which a solid grasp of orders of
magnitude could be considered a basic mathematical skill. People are very
likely to learn what mBTC and µBTC are simply because they risk their money
if they do not. This is not a bad thing and I think stands only to help
people who learn about these monikers for orders of magnitude this way.
Any appropriate nicknames for these denominations is sure to develop in due
course. Promoting an already-overloaded term that could just as easily be
applied colloquially to refer to a small amount of value in any currency
seems problematic.
I've been a staunch supporter of "microbitcoin" and would like to do
anything I can to make sure that we jump directly to it if we're going to
promote changing the default units. And I'm happy to integrate it into
Armory as a default (with appropriate explanations and settings/options).
I'm not so convinced about the "bits" name though -- I do like it, but I do
also think that word is too overloaded. Though, I think we could get away
with it.
(Sadly, I still use "microbes" occasionally (as in *microb*itcoin) when I'm
talking to coworkers, because it slips off the tongue and is actually a
good combination of brevity and self-explanatory -- it just doesn't instill
the right visuals...)
We started integrating alternative units into Armory. But, of course,
there were a few more loose ends than I expected, which will require some
work. We want to put it in but not necessarily change the default right
away. I'd *prefer* we get some commitments from some other wallet
developers, so we can make a unified push for it. I'm happy to lead that
and make it default as long as I'm not the only one in the world doing it.
-Alan
On 04/20/2014 11:05 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
Here is an earlier reference to bits:
https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html<https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html>
I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :
https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html<https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html>
and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time
pushing for XBT being 1 bit
https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html<https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html>
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com> wrote:
I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
to just one client.
I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof•com>
wrote:
People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
with them.
They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not
need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
already use wallets other than the core.
Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff
Garzik's.
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding
<rob.golding@astutium.com><rob.golding@astutium•com>wrote:
The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
are using is the correct one,
The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
to use such things.
people WILL send 1000x more or less than
intended if we go down this road,
Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
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.
I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book
today!http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing
listBitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 13175 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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
0 siblings, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Wladimir @ 2014-04-20 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Pacia; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
> The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of the
> population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I doubt most
> could even name one use of the term.
> Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
> reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.
That's a very anglocentric way of thinking.
Here in the Netherlands, a "bit" is something you put in a horses's
mouth. It's also used as imported word (in the information sense).
We've never used the term for money.
Wladimir
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 16:27 ` Wladimir
@ 2014-04-20 16:30 ` Chris Pacia
2014-04-22 13:51 ` Aaron Axvig
1 sibling, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Chris Pacia @ 2014-04-20 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wladimir; +Cc: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 858 bytes --]
You're correct, my impression of the term is based of what I experience in
the US. If it is more widely used in other cultures that should be a
consideration.
On Apr 20, 2014 12:27 PM, "Wladimir" <laanwj@gmail•com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
> > The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of
> the
> > population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I doubt most
> > could even name one use of the term.
> > Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
> > reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.
>
> That's a very anglocentric way of thinking.
>
> Here in the Netherlands, a "bit" is something you put in a horses's
> mouth. It's also used as imported word (in the information sense).
> We've never used the term for money.
>
> Wladimir
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1236 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 16:23 ` Erik Garrison
@ 2014-04-20 16:30 ` Alan Reiner
2014-04-20 16:56 ` Mike Caldwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Alan Reiner @ 2014-04-20 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Erik Garrison; +Cc: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8637 bytes --]
Btw, I should clarify my email: I'm a staunch supporter of moving to
1e-6 BTC as the default unit for wallet applications, not necessarily
any particular name. I would be fine with "bits" as I think this
context is sufficiently different that it won't be confused by regular
consumers. But it wouldn't be my first choice. I don't know what my
first choice would be.
While writing this email, I asked my wife (who's been tired of hearing
about Bitcoin for two years), what she thinks of "bits", "microbes",
"micros". She said she is fine with any of them. Apparently microbes
reminders her of biology, not "germs". But she's also well-educated, so
she fine with milli, micro, kilo, etc... and apparently biology...
Whatever we call it. I'm happy to support it as long as it's 1e-6.
On 04/20/2014 12:23 PM, Erik Garrison wrote:
>
> The world is rapidly becoming a place in which a solid grasp of orders
> of magnitude could be considered a basic mathematical skill. People
> are very likely to learn what mBTC and µBTC are simply because they
> risk their money if they do not. This is not a bad thing and I think
> stands only to help people who learn about these monikers for orders
> of magnitude this way.
>
> Any appropriate nicknames for these denominations is sure to develop
> in due course. Promoting an already-overloaded term that could just
> as easily be applied colloquially to refer to a small amount of value
> in any currency seems problematic.
>
> I've been a staunch supporter of "microbitcoin" and would like to do
> anything I can to make sure that we jump directly to it if we're going
> to promote changing the default units. And I'm happy to integrate it
> into Armory as a default (with appropriate explanations and
> settings/options). I'm not so convinced about the "bits" name though
> -- I do like it, but I do also think that word is too overloaded.
> Though, I think we could get away with it.
>
> (Sadly, I still use "microbes" occasionally (as in *microb*itcoin)
> when I'm talking to coworkers, because it slips off the tongue and is
> actually a good combination of brevity and self-explanatory -- it just
> doesn't instill the right visuals...)
>
> We started integrating alternative units into Armory. But, of course,
> there were a few more loose ends than I expected, which will require
> some work. We want to put it in but not necessarily change the
> default right away. I'd /prefer/ we get some commitments from some
> other wallet developers, so we can make a unified push for it. I'm
> happy to lead that and make it default as long as I'm not the only one
> in the world doing it.
>
> -Alan
>
>
>
> On 04/20/2014 11:05 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>> Here is an earlier reference to bits:
>>
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html
>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html>
>>
>> I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :
>>
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html
>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html>
>>
>> and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time
>> pushing for XBT being 1 bit
>>
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html
>> <https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tamas Blummer
>> http://bitsofproof.com
>>
>> On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com
>> <mailto:pieter.wuille@gmail•com>> wrote:
>>
>>> I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
>>> Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
>>> to just one client.
>>>
>>> I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer
>>> <tamas@bitsofproof•com <mailto:tamas@bitsofproof•com>> wrote:
>>>> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem
>>>> dealing with
>>>> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a
>>>> problem
>>>> with them.
>>>> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they
>>>> would not
>>>> need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
>>>>
>>>> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as
>>>> people
>>>> already use wallets other than the core.
>>>>
>>>> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>>>>
>>>> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support
>>>> and Jeff
>>>> Garzik's.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Tamas Blummer
>>>> http://bitsofproof.com
>>>>
>>>> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding <rob.golding@astutium•com>
>>>> <mailto:rob.golding@astutium•com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
>>>> are using is the correct one,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary,
>>>> and there
>>>> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel
>>>> they need
>>>> to use such things.
>>>>
>>>> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
>>>> intended if we go down this road,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2
>>>> and 3
>>>> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of
>>>> thousands - Not
>>>> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended
>>>> - oh,
>>>> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is,
>>>> they can
>>>> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>>>>
>>>> Rob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases
>>>> and their
>>>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>>> <mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases
>>>> and their
>>>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>>> <mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net <mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> <mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 16316 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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
0 siblings, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Mike Caldwell @ 2014-04-20 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: bitcoin-development
As someone who has put a lot of thought into how to best help typical everyday people understand bitcoin, I strongly favor 1 bit = 1e-6 BTC as being very straightforward to explain to non technical types, and also XBT as one "bit". "There are a million bits in a bit coin" is highly intelligible to average people.
I consider overload/conflict with existing meanings of "bit" as a non-issue for typical population at large.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 10:31 AM, "Alan Reiner" <etotheipi@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> Whatever we call it. I'm happy to support it as long as it's 1e-6.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 12:35 [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account Mike Gehl
2014-04-20 13:15 ` Rob Golding
@ 2014-04-20 17:42 ` Arne Brutschy
2014-04-20 18:11 ` Mike Caldwell
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Arne Brutschy @ 2014-04-20 17:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Gehl; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
Hello,
> While SI units are great for people well versed in them, there is a
> very good reason people aren't asking for 100 micro dollars in change.
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one, people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road, and these mistakes will happen
> frequently. Labeling should be easy enough for kindergarten kids.
Agree - but why do you propose not only a new label but also a different
subunit?
Also, everybody in the metric world is used to the milli- prefix due to
meters and millimeters. It's not such a stretch to expect people to
master that; but I agree that most people would struggle with microbitcoins.
> 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
I don't really see the advantage of a "bit" - it is part of "bitcoin"
and it's short, but that's about it. I think we are free to pick
anything we want for a label, so why not avoid ambiguities?
See this thread for many creative ideas for labels (and another
arbitrary subunit proposal:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=396522.0
Arne
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 16:56 ` Mike Caldwell
@ 2014-04-20 17:47 ` Jannis Froese
2014-04-20 18:10 ` Pavol Rusnak
1 sibling, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Jannis Froese @ 2014-04-20 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I agree that a unit based on 1e-6 BTC is easier to use in practice
than BTC. The name microbitcoin is ok-ish. Nearly all countries
officially use the SI-system, but that doesn't mean that the average
citizen knows all the SI prefixes. Mega, kilo and milli are
universally understood, micro not so much. This is a serious
accessibility concern.
But I dislike the term bit for the already stated reasons: It's
already used in various languages for various things. Simply using
Satoshis may be easier and is universally understood.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/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=EPvS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 16:56 ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-20 17:47 ` Jannis Froese
@ 2014-04-20 18:10 ` Pavol Rusnak
1 sibling, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Pavol Rusnak @ 2014-04-20 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
On 04/20/2014 06:56 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
> I consider overload/conflict with existing meanings of "bit" as a non-issue for typical population at large.
So far I have not seen any reasonable name except for "bit". I also
tried to come up with something else (e.g.naka, toshi, etc.) to avoid
the confusion with bits used in computing, but I was not satisfied with
neither of them.
Then I though about "credit", which is more-or-less established in video
games and sci-fi literature and people are already used to sentences
like "Not enough credits" or "This item costs 10000 credits", because of
this. Also it would be particularly funny if these sci-fi pieces
predicted the future by actually defining it. ;-)
Another options might be "cubit" or "crebit", but the latter is
sometimes used as a compound word meaning both "credit" and "debit" such
as in "You can use crebit cards here".
Also this Wikipedia source is a list of sometimes rather funny
possibilites: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_currencies
--
Best Regards / S pozdravom,
Pavol Rusnak <stick@gk2•sk>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 17:42 ` Arne Brutschy
@ 2014-04-20 18:11 ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-20 18:22 ` Arne Brutschy
2014-04-20 18:43 ` Oliver Egginger
0 siblings, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Mike Caldwell @ 2014-04-20 18:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Bitcoin Dev
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 18:11 ` Mike Caldwell
@ 2014-04-20 18:22 ` Arne Brutschy
2014-04-20 18:34 ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-20 18:43 ` Oliver Egginger
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Arne Brutschy @ 2014-04-20 18:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Caldwell; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
I agree that overloading isn't an issue when necessary, but my point was
that the necessity is lacking. If we're free to pick anything, why pick
something that is overloaded?
Moreover, "bit" is an abbreviation of bitcoin and might be confused with
it. Most currencies use a work that is phonetically very different and
short, so why not do the same?
Pluk, or cred, or finney (as proposed the thread I posted), or
whichever. We could call it "unsp" for unspent ;)
Arne
On 20/04/14 20:11, Mike Caldwell wrote:
> 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
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development
> mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 18:22 ` Arne Brutschy
@ 2014-04-20 18:34 ` Mike Caldwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Mike Caldwell @ 2014-04-20 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arne Brutschy; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
Mainly because it is short, memorable, effectively leads the listener to infer the proper meaning, is culturally neutral, is easy to say by speakers of just about any language, and many other reasons.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 12:23 PM, "Arne Brutschy" <abrutschy@xylon•de> wrote:
>
> agree that overloading isn't an issue when necessary, but my point was
> that the necessity is lacking. If we're free to pick anything, why pick
> something that is overloaded?
>
> Moreover, "bit" is an abbreviation of bitcoin and might be confused with
> it. Most currencies use a work that is phonetically very different and
> short, so why not do the same?
>
> Pluk, or cred, or finney (as proposed the thread I posted), or
> whichever. We could call it "unsp" for unspent ;)
>
> Arne
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 18:11 ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-20 18:22 ` Arne Brutschy
@ 2014-04-20 18:43 ` Oliver Egginger
2014-04-20 19:19 ` Christophe Biocca
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Oliver Egginger @ 2014-04-20 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bitcoin Development
Hello,
just my two 'cents':
Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
- oliver
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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
0 siblings, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Christophe Biocca @ 2014-04-20 19:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bitcoin Development
Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
in Turkish as well.
Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger <bitcoin@olivere•de> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> just my two 'cents':
>
> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>
> - oliver
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 19:19 ` Christophe Biocca
@ 2014-04-20 19:32 ` Gmail
2014-04-20 20:28 ` Mike Caldwell
1 sibling, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Gmail @ 2014-04-20 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 533 bytes --]
People in the Bitcoin community are sometimes resistant to the idea of using the word "credit" as a unit of Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is not a credit-based system.
However, given that the average person has close to no understanding of what "credit" means, and probably no concern for the distinction even if they do know, it may be wise to use the futuristic and easily understandable "credit" as our human-friendly unit.
Do others agree that "credits" as a unit of account has a desirable futuristic connotation?
Will
[-- Attachment #2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 1593 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Mike Caldwell @ 2014-04-20 20:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christophe Biocca; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural reference in the name. For example "satoshi" would be a reference to Japanese culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who Satoshi turns out to be.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" <christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
> for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
> in Turkish as well.
>
> Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
> short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
>
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger <bitcoin@olivere•de> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> just my two 'cents':
>>
>> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>>
>> - oliver
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 20:28 ` Mike Caldwell
@ 2014-04-21 0:16 ` Justin A
2014-04-21 1:18 ` Mike Caldwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Justin A @ 2014-04-21 0:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Caldwell; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3342 bytes --]
<delurk>
What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy to
say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2
decimal places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?
</delurk>
Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere
winter if I can learn enough.
On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell" <mcaldwell@swipeclock•com> wrote:
> By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural
> reference in the name. For example "satoshi" would be a reference to
> Japanese culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who
> Satoshi turns out to be.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" <
> christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
> >
> > Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
> > for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
> > in Turkish as well.
> >
> > Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
> > short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
> >
> >> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger <bitcoin@olivere•de>
> wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> just my two 'cents':
> >>
> >> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
> >> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
> >> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
> >> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
> >>
> >> - oliver
> >>
> >>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their
> >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> >> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their
> > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4903 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-21 0:16 ` Justin A
@ 2014-04-21 1:18 ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-21 1:33 ` Un Ix
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Mike Caldwell @ 2014-04-21 1:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Justin A; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4150 bytes --]
My impression:
Good because it is short, memorable, and pronounceable by speakers of most languages (though to most of the world that would be oo-bit, as "u" being "yu" is mostly an English thing)
Downsides include the fact that μ is not a U, it just resembles one. It is a lowercase M in Greek, a live spoken language also studied by many, and calling it a U conveys a notion of global unawareness. And the potential for "XBT" to be 1e-6 BTC on the world stage would be huge, worth pursuing.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 20, 2014, at 6:16 PM, "Justin A" <allport@gmail.com<mailto:allport@gmail•com>> wrote:
<delurk>
What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy to say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2 decimal places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?
</delurk>
Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere winter if I can learn enough.
On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell" <mcaldwell@swipeclock.com<mailto:mcaldwell@swipeclock•com>> wrote:
By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural reference in the name. For example "satoshi" would be a reference to Japanese culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who Satoshi turns out to be.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" <christophe.biocca@gmail.com<mailto:christophe.biocca@gmail•com>> wrote:
>
> Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
> for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
> in Turkish as well.
>
> Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
> short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
>
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger <bitcoin@olivere.de<mailto:bitcoin@olivere•de>> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> just my two 'cents':
>>
>> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>>
>> - oliver
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5679 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-21 1:18 ` Mike Caldwell
@ 2014-04-21 1:33 ` Un Ix
2014-04-21 3:34 ` Mike Caldwell
2014-04-21 5:41 ` Pieter Wuille
0 siblings, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Un Ix @ 2014-04-21 1:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Caldwell; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5193 bytes --]
Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common usage I.e. bit.
My 2 cents goes for "bit".
Because: Bitcoin is a digital currency, BTC starts with "bit", "bit" refers to a small amount of something in its regular english usage and lastly 99.9876543% of people on the planet don't know what a digital "bit" is yet ...
Gavin
> On 21/04/2014, at 9:20 am, "Mike Caldwell" <mcaldwell@swipeclock•com> wrote:
>
> My impression:
>
> Good because it is short, memorable, and pronounceable by speakers of most languages (though to most of the world that would be oo-bit, as "u" being "yu" is mostly an English thing)
>
> Downsides include the fact that μ is not a U, it just resembles one. It is a lowercase M in Greek, a live spoken language also studied by many, and calling it a U conveys a notion of global unawareness. And the potential for "XBT" to be 1e-6 BTC on the world stage would be huge, worth pursuing.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Apr 20, 2014, at 6:16 PM, "Justin A" <allport@gmail•com> wrote:
>>
>> <delurk>
>>
>> What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy to say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2 decimal places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?
>>
>> </delurk>
>>
>> Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere winter if I can learn enough.
>>
>>> On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell" <mcaldwell@swipeclock•com> wrote:
>>> By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural reference in the name. For example "satoshi" would be a reference to Japanese culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who Satoshi turns out to be.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> > On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" <christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
>>> > for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
>>> > in Turkish as well.
>>> >
>>> > Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
>>> > short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
>>> >
>>> >> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger <bitcoin@olivere•de> wrote:
>>> >> Hello,
>>> >>
>>> >> just my two 'cents':
>>> >>
>>> >> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>>> >> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>>> >> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>>> >> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>>> >>
>>> >> - oliver
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>>> >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>> >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> >> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>> >
>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>>> > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>> > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 7371 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 359 bytes --]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 188 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Mike Caldwell @ 2014-04-21 3:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Un Ix; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6329 bytes --]
If bit had to be preceded by a letter I would nominate "ebit" or "xbit" (which could still be XBT)
Those needing a definition for x could define it as "coin/1000000".
That said, I am still more in favor of "bit". Xbit would just solve the problems others cite about ambiguity if they had to be solved without the resulting name being too long.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 20, 2014, at 7:33 PM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@hotmail.com<mailto:slashdevnull@hotmail•com>> wrote:
Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common usage I.e. bit.
My 2 cents goes for "bit".
Because: Bitcoin is a digital currency, BTC starts with "bit", "bit" refers to a small amount of something in its regular english usage and lastly 99.9876543% of people on the planet don't know what a digital "bit" is yet ...
Gavin
On 21/04/2014, at 9:20 am, "Mike Caldwell" <mcaldwell@swipeclock.com<mailto:mcaldwell@swipeclock•com>> wrote:
My impression:
Good because it is short, memorable, and pronounceable by speakers of most languages (though to most of the world that would be oo-bit, as "u" being "yu" is mostly an English thing)
Downsides include the fact that μ is not a U, it just resembles one. It is a lowercase M in Greek, a live spoken language also studied by many, and calling it a U conveys a notion of global unawareness. And the potential for "XBT" to be 1e-6 BTC on the world stage would be huge, worth pursuing.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 20, 2014, at 6:16 PM, "Justin A" <allport@gmail.com<mailto:allport@gmail•com>> wrote:
<delurk>
What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy to say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2 decimal places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?
</delurk>
Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere winter if I can learn enough.
On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell" <mcaldwell@swipeclock.com<mailto:mcaldwell@swipeclock•com>> wrote:
By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural reference in the name. For example "satoshi" would be a reference to Japanese culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who Satoshi turns out to be.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" <christophe.biocca@gmail.com<mailto:christophe.biocca@gmail•com>> wrote:
>
> Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
> for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
> in Turkish as well.
>
> Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
> short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
>
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger <bitcoin@olivere.de<mailto:bitcoin@olivere•de>> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> just my two 'cents':
>>
>> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>>
>> - oliver
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8959 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-21 3:34 ` Mike Caldwell
@ 2014-04-21 4:08 ` Christopher Paika
0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Christopher Paika @ 2014-04-21 4:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6999 bytes --]
Bit is simple phonetically, I'm for it.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Mike Caldwell <mcaldwell@swipeclock•com>wrote:
> If bit had to be preceded by a letter I would nominate "ebit" or "xbit"
> (which could still be XBT)
>
> Those needing a definition for x could define it as "coin/1000000".
>
> That said, I am still more in favor of "bit". Xbit would just solve the
> problems others cite about ambiguity if they had to be solved without the
> resulting name being too long.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 7:33 PM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@hotmail•com> wrote:
>
> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common
> usage I.e. bit.
>
> My 2 cents goes for "bit".
>
> Because: Bitcoin is a digital currency, BTC starts with "bit", "bit"
> refers to a small amount of something in its regular english usage and
> lastly 99.9876543% of people on the planet don't know what a digital "bit"
> is yet ...
>
> Gavin
>
> On 21/04/2014, at 9:20 am, "Mike Caldwell" <mcaldwell@swipeclock•com>
> wrote:
>
> My impression:
>
> Good because it is short, memorable, and pronounceable by speakers of most
> languages (though to most of the world that would be oo-bit, as "u" being
> "yu" is mostly an English thing)
>
> Downsides include the fact that μ is not a U, it just resembles one. It is
> a lowercase M in Greek, a live spoken language also studied by many, and
> calling it a U conveys a notion of global unawareness. And the potential
> for "XBT" to be 1e-6 BTC on the world stage would be huge, worth pursuing.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 6:16 PM, "Justin A" <allport@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> <delurk>
>
> What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy
> to say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2
> decimal places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?
>
> </delurk>
>
> Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere
> winter if I can learn enough.
> On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell" <mcaldwell@swipeclock•com> wrote:
>
>> By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural
>> reference in the name. For example "satoshi" would be a reference to
>> Japanese culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who
>> Satoshi turns out to be.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" <
>> christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
>> > for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
>> > in Turkish as well.
>> >
>> > Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
>> > short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
>> >
>> >> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger <bitcoin@olivere•de>
>> wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> just my two 'cents':
>> >>
>> >> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>> >> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>> >> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>> >> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>> >>
>> >> - oliver
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their
>> >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> >> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>> >
>> >
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their
>> > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 10725 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-21 1:33 ` Un Ix
2014-04-21 3:34 ` Mike Caldwell
@ 2014-04-21 5:41 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-04-21 5:51 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-21 6:21 ` Tamas Blummer
1 sibling, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Pieter Wuille @ 2014-04-21 5:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Un Ix; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 852 bytes --]
On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@hotmail•com> wrote:
>
> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common
usage I.e. bit.
What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will
determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not
relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up
(or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as
"official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing
in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling
dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with
having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous
than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
--
Pieter
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1082 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-21 5:41 ` Pieter Wuille
@ 2014-04-21 5:51 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-21 6:21 ` Tamas Blummer
1 sibling, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Tamas Blummer @ 2014-04-21 5:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pieter Wuille; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1929 bytes --]
I think we have two very good candidates both substantiated with arguments for their use in their context:
bit - the word for everyday use
XBT - the acronym to fit into the ISO currency set.
both meaning 100 satoshis or 1e-6 Bitcoin.
I am glad that I erred, and this list finaly cares of finance customs and average Joe’s.
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 21.04.2014, at 07:41, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@hotmail•com> wrote:
> >
> > Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common usage I.e. bit.
>
> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
>
> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
>
> --
> Pieter
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform_______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 5487 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Tamas Blummer @ 2014-04-21 6:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pieter Wuille; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2059 bytes --]
Here is one to please those looking for a “fully qualified” slang word, that links with the official XBT:
xbit (spoken: ex-bit) would rationalise XBT (where X comes from supranational use) and is unique.
I personally associate from x to six also supporting the 1e-6 divisor of Bitcoin.
Regarding XBT: No matter who used it for what. The way Bloomberg will use it will define its use in finance,
and since that did not happen yet, we are not late to shape.
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 21.04.2014, at 07:41, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@hotmail•com> wrote:
> >
> > Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common usage I.e. bit.
>
> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
>
> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
>
> --
> Pieter
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform_______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 5807 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-20 14:52 ` Christophe Biocca
@ 2014-04-21 8:52 ` Thomas Voegtlin
2014-04-21 9:34 ` Tamas Blummer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Voegtlin @ 2014-04-21 8:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
Let me make a sacrilegious proposal: keep using the name "bitcoin", and
shift the decimal point.
There would be a short adaption period, where people will need to talk
about "new bitcoins" and "old bitcoins" in order to disambiguate them.
However, Bitcoin users are techies, so I don't think that the ambiguity
will be a big issue. I don't think lots of people will mistakenly send
1000 times more than the amount they intended.
The name "bitcoin" has a huge advantage over any other proposal, because
it is already established. No marketing is needed.
This kind of renaming has already taken place many times in history,
because the currency was debased. Bitcoin would be the first time it
happens in the other direction.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-21 8:52 ` Thomas Voegtlin
@ 2014-04-21 9:34 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-22 14:55 ` Natanael
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Tamas Blummer @ 2014-04-21 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Voegtlin; +Cc: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 635 bytes --]
Thomas V:
Your proposal misses the points that:
- this is about a unit with 1e-6 Bitcoins or 100 satoshis.
- it is not about people who know Bitcoin and are techies, but about those who don’t and aren’t.
The reasons for such a unit are more than shifting the comma some places for convinience,
but to align Bitcoin with capabilities of existing financial software and customs of finance and average people,
and ISO standard of currency abbreviations.
bit and XBT seems to check the boxes.
I would love to have some feedback on xbit as per my previous mail.
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 4005 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-21 6:21 ` Tamas Blummer
@ 2014-04-21 12:14 ` Un Ix
2014-04-21 12:24 ` Tamas Blummer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Un Ix @ 2014-04-21 12:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tamas Blummer; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2626 bytes --]
Tamas,
"xbit" is only a typo or spelling error away from "XBT", and some folks may assume they refer to the same unit of measure, not knowing the new currency system as developers here do.
From your email, I got the idea of using "x" as a suffix at the end of a number of bits e.g. 17500x, like cents or centavos. I guess this might clash with formal S.I. notation but it's easy to read and has less ambiguity, IMHO.
> On 21/04/2014, at 2:21 pm, "Tamas Blummer" <tamas@bitsofproof•com> wrote:
>
> Here is one to please those looking for a “fully qualified” slang word, that links with the official XBT:
>
> xbit (spoken: ex-bit) would rationalise XBT (where X comes from supranational use) and is unique.
>
> I personally associate from x to six also supporting the 1e-6 divisor of Bitcoin.
>
> Regarding XBT: No matter who used it for what. The way Bloomberg will use it will define its use in finance,
> and since that did not happen yet, we are not late to shape.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
>> On 21.04.2014, at 07:41, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@hotmail•com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common usage I.e. bit.
>>
>> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
>>
>> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
>>
>> --
>> Pieter
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
>> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
>> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
>> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform_______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6605 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-21 12:14 ` Un Ix
@ 2014-04-21 12:24 ` Tamas Blummer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Tamas Blummer @ 2014-04-21 12:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Un Ix; +Cc: Bitcoin Dev
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 634 bytes --]
xbit is close to XBT because it would be the same unit, both would mean 100 satoshi or 1e-6 Bitcoin.
xbit would be for everyday use, XBT for ISO.
I know, the XBT was used by some sites to be a synonym for BTC that is however in my opinion not yet graved in stone until it is used by e.g. Bloomberg.
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com
On 21.04.2014, at 14:14, Un Ix <slashdevnull@hotmail•com> wrote:
> Tamas,
>
> "xbit" is only a typo or spelling error away from "XBT", and some folks may assume they refer to the same unit of measure, not knowing the new currency system as developers here do.
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 4242 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Axvig @ 2014-04-22 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Wladimir', 'Chris Pacia'; +Cc: 'Bitcoin Dev'
That piece of horse equipment is called a bit in the US too. But the point
stands: most people don't use "bit" on a daily basis other than referring to
"a little bit of <something>."
-----Original Message-----
From: Wladimir [mailto:laanwj@gmail•com]
Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 11:27 AM
To: Chris Pacia
Cc: Bitcoin Dev
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
> The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of
> the population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I
> doubt most could even name one use of the term.
> Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
> reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.
That's a very anglocentric way of thinking.
Here in the Netherlands, a "bit" is something you put in a horses's mouth.
It's also used as imported word (in the information sense).
We've never used the term for money.
Wladimir
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is the
definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. Written by
three acclaimed leaders in the field, this first edition is now available.
Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-21 9:34 ` Tamas Blummer
@ 2014-04-22 14:55 ` Natanael
0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Natanael @ 2014-04-22 14:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tamas Blummer; +Cc: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1751 bytes --]
I am in favor of xbit, my only concern is if average Joes will consider
that name "stupid" (like various attempts at "cool" branding with unusual
letters like Q, X, Z, etc). We should see if we can get support for it in
the community and if there would be any notable opposition against it or
not. If there's no significant opposition and most people are in favor, I'd
say go ahead.
- Sent from my phone
Den 21 apr 2014 11:38 skrev "Tamas Blummer" <tamas@bitsofproof•com>:
> Thomas V:
>
> Your proposal misses the points that:
>
> - this is about a unit with 1e-6 Bitcoins or 100 satoshis.
> - it is not about people who know Bitcoin and are techies, but about those
> who don’t and aren’t.
>
> The reasons for such a unit are more than shifting the comma some places
> for convinience,
> but to align Bitcoin with capabilities of existing financial software and
> customs of finance and average people,
> and ISO standard of currency abbreviations.
>
> bit and XBT seems to check the boxes.
>
> I would love to have some feedback on xbit as per my previous mail.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4601 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-22 13:51 ` Aaron Axvig
@ 2014-04-23 9:44 ` Danny Hamilton
2014-04-23 9:56 ` Tamas Blummer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Danny Hamilton @ 2014-04-23 9:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3841 bytes --]
It seems to me that xbit is no more distinct or intuitive than µbit. In
either case it's simply an arbitrary character in front of the word "bit".
Of course, for the majority of the world familiar with SI, the µ actually
adds additional meaning that is lost with the x.
Furthermore, given the multiple concerns voiced about the overuse of the
word "bit", µBTC seems to solve the problem.
Since we are talking about how it would be displayed in software, we don't
need to be concerned about how people will pronounce it, or what the
nickname will be. If most of the wallets start displaying amounts in µBTC
quantities, it will be obvious that a µBTC is a different magnitude than a
BTC. Nobody is going to look at their 100,000 µBTC balance and think they
have 100,000 BTC. People will immediately make the mental adjustment to the
new order of magnitude even if they don't specifically know that µ means
micro, or that micro means 1e-6.
Nicknames will form organically (much like buck, fin, large, k, grand, and
benny for U.S. currency), I've always been partial to milly (or millie) and
mike (or micky) as nicknames for mBTC and µBTC. I've personally used those
when speaking with people, and they seem to catch on pretty quickly.
As has already been mentioned, you're going to be hard pressed to find
software that denotes U.S. balances in "bucks". There isn't any good
reason to be coding a nickname like "bit", "xbit", or "mike" into wallet
software.
- Danny Hamilton
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Aaron Axvig <aaron@axvigs•com> wrote:
> That piece of horse equipment is called a bit in the US too. But the point
> stands: most people don't use "bit" on a daily basis other than referring
> to
> "a little bit of <something>."
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wladimir [mailto:laanwj@gmail•com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 11:27 AM
> To: Chris Pacia
> Cc: Bitcoin Dev
> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
>
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
> > The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of
> > the population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I
> > doubt most could even name one use of the term.
> > Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
> > reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.
>
> That's a very anglocentric way of thinking.
>
> Here in the Netherlands, a "bit" is something you put in a horses's mouth.
> It's also used as imported word (in the information sense).
> We've never used the term for money.
>
> Wladimir
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is
> the
> definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. Written by
> three acclaimed leaders in the field, this first edition is now available.
> Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5139 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-23 9:44 ` Danny Hamilton
@ 2014-04-23 9:56 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-04-23 11:48 ` Chris D'Costa
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Tamas Blummer @ 2014-04-23 9:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Danny Hamilton; +Cc: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4886 bytes --]
The problem is µBTC that bit tries to solve.
BTC, mBTC and µBTC are just too similiar for enyone else than engineers. The mixed use of them leads to misunderstanding.
I think adoption would benefit of a single unit with easily remembered and associated name that has no smaller than 1/100 fractions called satoshis.
Regards,
Tamás Blummer
Founder, CEO
http://bitsofproof.com
On 23.04.2014, at 11:44, Danny Hamilton <danny.hamilton@gmail•com> wrote:
> It seems to me that xbit is no more distinct or intuitive than µbit. In either case it's simply an arbitrary character in front of the word "bit". Of course, for the majority of the world familiar with SI, the µ actually adds additional meaning that is lost with the x.
>
> Furthermore, given the multiple concerns voiced about the overuse of the word "bit", µBTC seems to solve the problem.
>
> Since we are talking about how it would be displayed in software, we don't need to be concerned about how people will pronounce it, or what the nickname will be. If most of the wallets start displaying amounts in µBTC quantities, it will be obvious that a µBTC is a different magnitude than a BTC. Nobody is going to look at their 100,000 µBTC balance and think they have 100,000 BTC. People will immediately make the mental adjustment to the new order of magnitude even if they don't specifically know that µ means micro, or that micro means 1e-6.
>
> Nicknames will form organically (much like buck, fin, large, k, grand, and benny for U.S. currency), I've always been partial to milly (or millie) and mike (or micky) as nicknames for mBTC and µBTC. I've personally used those when speaking with people, and they seem to catch on pretty quickly.
>
> As has already been mentioned, you're going to be hard pressed to find software that denotes U.S. balances in "bucks". There isn't any good reason to be coding a nickname like "bit", "xbit", or "mike" into wallet software.
>
> - Danny Hamilton
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Aaron Axvig <aaron@axvigs•com> wrote:
> That piece of horse equipment is called a bit in the US too. But the point
> stands: most people don't use "bit" on a daily basis other than referring to
> "a little bit of <something>."
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wladimir [mailto:laanwj@gmail•com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 11:27 AM
> To: Chris Pacia
> Cc: Bitcoin Dev
> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
>
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
> > The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of
> > the population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I
> > doubt most could even name one use of the term.
> > Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
> > reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.
>
> That's a very anglocentric way of thinking.
>
> Here in the Netherlands, a "bit" is something you put in a horses's mouth.
> It's also used as imported word (in the information sense).
> We've never used the term for money.
>
> Wladimir
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is the
> definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. Written by
> three acclaimed leaders in the field, this first edition is now available.
> Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform_______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1.2.1: Type: text/html, Size: 10770 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #1.2.2: email.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 7120 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-04-23 9:56 ` Tamas Blummer
@ 2014-04-23 11:48 ` Chris D'Costa
0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Chris D'Costa @ 2014-04-23 11:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6491 bytes --]
I have a rather off-beat suggestion. Perhaps decimal was not satoshi's intention.
In old English money 1 guinea is 21 shillings. I wonder if 1 million guineas is more or less the total number of bitcoins = 21 million shillings. There was also the notion of bits (two bob bits = 1 florin = 2 shillings). I quite like the idea as it's absolutely not expected.
Old English money is a funny mix of decimal and imperial (base12) measures but may have some interesting properties, one of which would be to have multiple names for overlapping "layers" not just the 2 or 3 that has been mentioned here and elsewhere.
I wonder in the long run if this will not just naturally occur anyway.
Regards
Chris D'Costa
Email: chris_dcosta@meek•io
Sent from my iPhone
> On 23 Apr 2014, at 11:56, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof•com> wrote:
>
> The problem is µBTC that bit tries to solve.
>
> BTC, mBTC and µBTC are just too similiar for enyone else than engineers. The mixed use of them leads to misunderstanding.
> I think adoption would benefit of a single unit with easily remembered and associated name that has no smaller than 1/100 fractions called satoshis.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamás Blummer
> Founder, CEO
> <email.png>
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
>> On 23.04.2014, at 11:44, Danny Hamilton <danny.hamilton@gmail•com> wrote:
>>
>> It seems to me that xbit is no more distinct or intuitive than µbit. In either case it's simply an arbitrary character in front of the word "bit". Of course, for the majority of the world familiar with SI, the µ actually adds additional meaning that is lost with the x.
>>
>> Furthermore, given the multiple concerns voiced about the overuse of the word "bit", µBTC seems to solve the problem.
>>
>> Since we are talking about how it would be displayed in software, we don't need to be concerned about how people will pronounce it, or what the nickname will be. If most of the wallets start displaying amounts in µBTC quantities, it will be obvious that a µBTC is a different magnitude than a BTC. Nobody is going to look at their 100,000 µBTC balance and think they have 100,000 BTC. People will immediately make the mental adjustment to the new order of magnitude even if they don't specifically know that µ means micro, or that micro means 1e-6.
>>
>> Nicknames will form organically (much like buck, fin, large, k, grand, and benny for U.S. currency), I've always been partial to milly (or millie) and mike (or micky) as nicknames for mBTC and µBTC. I've personally used those when speaking with people, and they seem to catch on pretty quickly.
>>
>> As has already been mentioned, you're going to be hard pressed to find software that denotes U.S. balances in "bucks". There isn't any good reason to be coding a nickname like "bit", "xbit", or "mike" into wallet software.
>>
>> - Danny Hamilton
>>
>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Aaron Axvig <aaron@axvigs•com> wrote:
>>> That piece of horse equipment is called a bit in the US too. But the point
>>> stands: most people don't use "bit" on a daily basis other than referring to
>>> "a little bit of <something>."
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Wladimir [mailto:laanwj@gmail•com]
>>> Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 11:27 AM
>>> To: Chris Pacia
>>> Cc: Bitcoin Dev
>>> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
>>> > The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of
>>> > the population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I
>>> > doubt most could even name one use of the term.
>>> > Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
>>> > reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.
>>>
>>> That's a very anglocentric way of thinking.
>>>
>>> Here in the Netherlands, a "bit" is something you put in a horses's mouth.
>>> It's also used as imported word (in the information sense).
>>> We've never used the term for money.
>>>
>>> Wladimir
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> --
>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is the
>>> definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. Written by
>>> three acclaimed leaders in the field, this first edition is now available.
>>> Download your free book today!
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
>>> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
>>> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
>>> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
>> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
>> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
>> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform_______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 14252 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-03 5:41 ` Aaron Voisine
2014-05-03 15:48 ` Christophe Biocca
@ 2014-05-05 22:33 ` Gordon Mohr
1 sibling, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Gordon Mohr @ 2014-05-05 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: Bitcoin Development
On 5/2/14, 10:41 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> I have to agree with Mike. Human language is surprisingly tolerant of
> overloading and inference from context. Neurotypical people have no
> problem with it and perceive a software engineer's aversion to it as
> being pedantic and strange. Note that "bits" was a term for a unit of
> money long before the invention of digital computers.
Of course people *can* manage, when they need to; natural language is
full of such overloading. But the clashes are not costless, they add
mental load for first-time learners and low-context users.
So the concern is, when there's a free choice, why not bootstrap words
that are less fragile and context-dependent? Why add extra comprehension
gotchas into what is already a challenging domain?
And it's exactly the aspect that makes 'bit' attractive – "it's right
there in the name _Bit_coin!" – that equally presents the clash –
because the sense of 'bit' honored in the "Bitcoin" name, and central to
the systems' essential properties, is the binary digit.
It's like intentionally introducing a 'false friend' word-correlation
between the vernacular of the casual Bitcoin user, and the language of
Bitcoin experts. And the word pair is nearly auto-antonymic in some
essential dimensions: indivisible vs. divisible, base-2 vs. base-10,
composed-geometrically vs. composed-arithmetically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_friend - interferes w/ lang learning
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-antonym
In naming amounts, there's no desperate need to stay in the shallow
crowded pool of words just derived from "bit" and "coin". Real
currencies have many names for their units, including subunits with
highly-unrelated sounds. The contrasting words help create more shades
of meaning for different purposes. Some examples:
dollars/bucks - bits (1/8ths) - dimes (1/10ths) - cents (1/100ths)
pounds/quid - shillings (1/20ths) - pence (1/100th; formerly 1/240th)
yuan/kuai - jiao (1/10ths) - fen (1/100ths)
Regarding the cute example of contextual disambiguation...
On 5/3/14, 11:15 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> Bit by bit, it's become clear that it's a bit much to worry even a
> little bit that overloading the word "bit" would be every bit as bad
> as a two bit horse with the bit between it's teeth that bit the hand
> that feeds it, or a drill bit broken to bits after just a bit of use.
That there are many existing definitions doesn't reassure that one
*extra* definition will still be costless, especially for
low-literacy/low-context/low-numeracy users or learners.
Note that this example *doesn't* showcase the new proposed
'100-satoshi-value' usage, nor activate the 'binary digit' meaning. (It
does activate the "part/quantity, usually small or imprecise" sense of
'bit', 7 times depending on how you classify the idioms.)
Try instead this mash of concepts, which someone deciding whether to
trust 'bits' will face:
"Bitcoin uses the digital science of bits, the indivisible 1s and 0s of
computer logic, to create a networked money measured in bits, which
split into 100 indivisible cents called satoshis. Bit amounts are
represented as 64-bit integer counts of 1/100th of a bit, so 64-bit
integers can represent any balance from the smallest positive bit total,
0.01 bits (integer 1), up to a number over 92 quintillion bits (2^63-1,
integer 9,223,372,036,854,775,808).
That max value won't be needed, though, because a crucial bit of the
original Satoshi design is a maximum issuance of 21,000,000,000,000.00
bits (21 trillion bits, 21 terabits). These new bits are awarded to
computers racing to complete a digital verification task on an
algorithmic schedule: currently 25 million bits (25 megabits) arrive
about every 10 minutes. That is, the total number of Bitcoin bits is
increasing at 6.33 Kbps, though that arrival slows to 0 bps by around
the year 2140.
The most important bit to remember is that your ability to spend bits is
controlled by secret 256-bit numbers, called private keys, bits of info
that only you know. The fact that these keys are 256-bits long is what
makes them practically unguessable, even if someone had a computing
budget of all the bits in the world, or built a computer out of all the
bits in the universe. (That is, even though the network can create 25
million bits every 10 minutes, it can't guess your secret 256 bits in
the lifetime of the universe!)
Watch out, though: human-chosen passwords and 4-8 word phrases typically
provide much less than 128 bits of security, far too little to create a
256-bit key. And in the math of bits, having half as many bits doesn't
mean half the security, it means the square-root as much security. (For
a 128-bit shortfall, that's 2^128 or 340 billion billion billion billion
times less strength.)
If your secret has enough bits, though, you can be confident that you
can put millions of dollars into bits, because of the cryptographic
power of hundreds of bits. The current value of a bit is 1/20th of a US
cent, so 256 bits has the purchasing power of about 11¢.
If you say you've got a bit of bitcoin in your wallet, I'll need you to
be a bit more specific. If you've got one bit of bitcoin, you've got
1/20th of a cent worth, an insignificant bit. But if you've got one
bitcoin, you've got about $440 worth, quite a bit! Now you know a bit
about Bitcoin, where your highly-valuable bits are protected by the
science of bits. Get some bits now, they're small and still cheap, what
is there to lose?"
Now, most people may never need to understand binary digits and
information science. But if a future of widespread cryptocurrency
success comes to pass, more people than ever before will want (and need)
to understand the basics, and we can help them with clear terminology.
I'd also point out to those who've built their brands around the word
'bit' that while it may seem grand to have the currency's most-common
unit in your name/logo, you might wind up snake-bit. How?
*If* 'bit' is effectively bootstrapped to mean a tangible amount that
people understand intuitively for everyday commerce, that amount is
currently tiny (1/20th of a USD cent) and would still be tiny (10¢) if
bitcoin appreciates in value over 200x to USD$100K per bitcoin.
So "bitpay" starts reading as "penny-pay" – and under an optimistic
appreciation scenario might someday read as "dime-pay".
"bitsofproof" reads as "pennies-of-proof" or someday "dimes-of-proof".
- Gordon
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-04 6:15 ` Aaron Voisine
2014-05-04 6:23 ` Un Ix
2014-05-04 6:27 ` Wladimir
@ 2014-05-04 14:42 ` Mike Caldwell
2 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Mike Caldwell @ 2014-05-04 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Aaron Voisine; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
I will drink to that!
Bitte ein Bit! (A Bit please - aka Bitburger Beer)
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 4, 2014, at 12:17 AM, "Aaron Voisine" <voisine@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> Bit by bit, it's become clear that it's a bit much to worry even a
> little bit that overloading the word "bit" would be every bit as bad
> as a two bit horse with the bit between it's teeth that bit the hand
> that feeds it, or a drill bit broken to bits after just a bit of use.
>
> Aaron
>
> There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
> government working for you -- Will Rodgers
>
>
>> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Drak <drak@zikula•org> wrote:
>> +1
>>
>>> On 4 May 2014 02:06, "Chris Pacia" <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Absent a concerted effort to move to something else other than 'bits', I
>>> would be willing to bet the nomenclature moves in that direction anyway.
>>> 'Bits' is just a shorten word for 'millibits' (or microbits, if you
>>> will). It's easier to say and my guess is people would tend to use it
>>> naturally own their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.
>>>
>>> The other synergies are:
>>> -bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
>>> whole bitcoin.
>>> -bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
>>> -bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
>>> -when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
>>> The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
>>> standard in the protocol rules.
>>>
>>> All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
>>> confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
>>> uses of the word.
>>>
>>>> On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
>>>> I agree with the sentiment that most people don't understand either
>>>> computer science or Bitcoin. The goal of getting people to understand
>>>> enough about Bitcoin to use it is achievable and a goal that is "in scope"
>>>> of our efforts. Getting them to understand computer science at large at the
>>>> same time, less so.
>>>>
>>>> The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much
>>>> to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to
>>>> prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront. They don't get
>>>> "horribly" confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks to
>>>> them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes that
>>>> everyone should be an expert at computer science. The average joe may
>>>> assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't
>>>> important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified
>>>> in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
>>>>
>>>> Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would
>>>> be to avoid. It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of
>>>> language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible target
>>>> audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in light of
>>>> our objectives. It's marketing.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, "Christophe Biocca"
>>>>> <christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
>>>>> understand the topics they're talking about.
>>>>> Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
>>>>> confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
>>>>> units (not that that can be helped, as the units are supposed to be
>>>>> the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
>>>>>
>>>>> Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
>>>>> deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
>>>>> are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
>>>>> understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
>>>>> understanding of either.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Mining (for transaction validation).
>>>>> - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
>>>>> exist at the network level).
>>>>> - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
>>>>> backups can be stolen from equally).
>>>>>
>>>>> I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
>>>>> Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
>>>>> because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
>>>>> concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
>>>>> the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
>>>>> pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
>>>>> protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
>>>>> definitiely seen average people get confused between "the blockchain"
>>>>> and "blockchain.info" (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
>>>>> come up in beginner explanations).
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems downright masochistic to add
>>>>> yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
>>>>> for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
>>>>> people?
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>>>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>>>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
>>>> available.
>>>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
>>> available.
>>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-04 6:36 ` Tamas Blummer
@ 2014-05-04 6:59 ` Wladimir
0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Wladimir @ 2014-05-04 6:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tamas Blummer; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof•com> wrote:
> Wladimir,
>
> what is missing is a decision to pull for the reference client.
> Or did I missed that bit?
No opinion - we'll follow whatever the rest does.
Wladimir
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-04 6:27 ` Wladimir
@ 2014-05-04 6:36 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-05-04 6:59 ` Wladimir
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Tamas Blummer @ 2014-05-04 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Wladimir; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 102 bytes --]
Wladimir,
what is missing is a decision to pull for the reference client.
Or did I missed that bit?
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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 14:42 ` Mike Caldwell
2 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Wladimir @ 2014-05-04 6:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Aaron Voisine; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Aaron Voisine <voisine@gmail•com> wrote:
> Bit by bit, it's become clear that it's a bit much to worry even a
> little bit that overloading the word "bit" would be every bit as bad
> as a two bit horse with the bit between it's teeth that bit the hand
> that feeds it, or a drill bit broken to bits after just a bit of use.
+1 good summary
And I think that's a good conclusion to this discussion about unit
names on the development mailing list. Everything has been said now.
Wladimir
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-04 6:15 ` Aaron Voisine
@ 2014-05-04 6:23 ` Un Ix
2014-05-04 6:27 ` Wladimir
2014-05-04 14:42 ` Mike Caldwell
2 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Un Ix @ 2014-05-04 6:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Aaron Voisine; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
+1(bit) for your bit on bits.
> On 4/05/2014, at 2:18 pm, "Aaron Voisine" <voisine@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> Bit by bit, it's become clear that it's a bit much to worry even a
> little bit that overloading the word "bit" would be every bit as bad
> as a two bit horse with the bit between it's teeth that bit the hand
> that feeds it, or a drill bit broken to bits after just a bit of use.
>
> Aaron
>
> There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
> government working for you -- Will Rodgers
>
>
>> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Drak <drak@zikula•org> wrote:
>> +1
>>
>>> On 4 May 2014 02:06, "Chris Pacia" <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Absent a concerted effort to move to something else other than 'bits', I
>>> would be willing to bet the nomenclature moves in that direction anyway.
>>> 'Bits' is just a shorten word for 'millibits' (or microbits, if you
>>> will). It's easier to say and my guess is people would tend to use it
>>> naturally own their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.
>>>
>>> The other synergies are:
>>> -bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
>>> whole bitcoin.
>>> -bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
>>> -bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
>>> -when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
>>> The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
>>> standard in the protocol rules.
>>>
>>> All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
>>> confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
>>> uses of the word.
>>>
>>>> On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
>>>> I agree with the sentiment that most people don't understand either
>>>> computer science or Bitcoin. The goal of getting people to understand
>>>> enough about Bitcoin to use it is achievable and a goal that is "in scope"
>>>> of our efforts. Getting them to understand computer science at large at the
>>>> same time, less so.
>>>>
>>>> The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much
>>>> to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to
>>>> prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront. They don't get
>>>> "horribly" confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks to
>>>> them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes that
>>>> everyone should be an expert at computer science. The average joe may
>>>> assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't
>>>> important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified
>>>> in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
>>>>
>>>> Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would
>>>> be to avoid. It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of
>>>> language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible target
>>>> audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in light of
>>>> our objectives. It's marketing.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, "Christophe Biocca"
>>>>> <christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
>>>>> understand the topics they're talking about.
>>>>> Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
>>>>> confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
>>>>> units (not that that can be helped, as the units are supposed to be
>>>>> the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
>>>>>
>>>>> Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
>>>>> deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
>>>>> are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
>>>>> understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
>>>>> understanding of either.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Mining (for transaction validation).
>>>>> - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
>>>>> exist at the network level).
>>>>> - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
>>>>> backups can be stolen from equally).
>>>>>
>>>>> I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
>>>>> Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
>>>>> because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
>>>>> concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
>>>>> the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
>>>>> pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
>>>>> protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
>>>>> definitiely seen average people get confused between "the blockchain"
>>>>> and "blockchain.info" (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
>>>>> come up in beginner explanations).
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems downright masochistic to add
>>>>> yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
>>>>> for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
>>>>> people?
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>>>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>>>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
>>>> available.
>>>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
>>> available.
>>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-04 5:18 ` Drak
@ 2014-05-04 6:15 ` Aaron Voisine
2014-05-04 6:23 ` Un Ix
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Voisine @ 2014-05-04 6:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drak; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
Bit by bit, it's become clear that it's a bit much to worry even a
little bit that overloading the word "bit" would be every bit as bad
as a two bit horse with the bit between it's teeth that bit the hand
that feeds it, or a drill bit broken to bits after just a bit of use.
Aaron
There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
government working for you -- Will Rodgers
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Drak <drak@zikula•org> wrote:
> +1
>
> On 4 May 2014 02:06, "Chris Pacia" <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
>>
>> Absent a concerted effort to move to something else other than 'bits', I
>> would be willing to bet the nomenclature moves in that direction anyway.
>> 'Bits' is just a shorten word for 'millibits' (or microbits, if you
>> will). It's easier to say and my guess is people would tend to use it
>> naturally own their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.
>>
>> The other synergies are:
>> -bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
>> whole bitcoin.
>> -bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
>> -bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
>> -when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
>> The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
>> standard in the protocol rules.
>>
>> All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
>> confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
>> uses of the word.
>>
>> On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
>> > I agree with the sentiment that most people don't understand either
>> > computer science or Bitcoin. The goal of getting people to understand
>> > enough about Bitcoin to use it is achievable and a goal that is "in scope"
>> > of our efforts. Getting them to understand computer science at large at the
>> > same time, less so.
>> >
>> > The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much
>> > to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to
>> > prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront. They don't get
>> > "horribly" confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks to
>> > them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes that
>> > everyone should be an expert at computer science. The average joe may
>> > assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't
>> > important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified
>> > in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
>> >
>> > Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would
>> > be to avoid. It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of
>> > language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible target
>> > audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in light of
>> > our objectives. It's marketing.
>> >
>> > Mike
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> >> On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, "Christophe Biocca"
>> >> <christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
>> >> understand the topics they're talking about.
>> >> Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
>> >> confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
>> >> units (not that that can be helped, as the units are supposed to be
>> >> the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
>> >>
>> >> Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
>> >> deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
>> >> are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
>> >> understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
>> >> understanding of either.
>> >>
>> >> Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
>> >>
>> >> - Mining (for transaction validation).
>> >> - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
>> >> exist at the network level).
>> >> - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
>> >> backups can be stolen from equally).
>> >>
>> >> I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
>> >> Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
>> >> because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
>> >> concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
>> >> the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
>> >> pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
>> >> protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
>> >> definitiely seen average people get confused between "the blockchain"
>> >> and "blockchain.info" (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
>> >> come up in beginner explanations).
>> >>
>> >> It seems downright masochistic to add
>> >> yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
>> >> for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
>> >> people?
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>> > Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>> > unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
>> > available.
>> > Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
>> available.
>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-04 1:04 ` Chris Pacia
@ 2014-05-04 5:18 ` Drak
2014-05-04 6:15 ` Aaron Voisine
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Drak @ 2014-05-04 5:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Pacia; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5774 bytes --]
+1
On 4 May 2014 02:06, "Chris Pacia" <ctpacia@gmail•com> wrote:
> Absent a concerted effort to move to something else other than 'bits', I
> would be willing to bet the nomenclature moves in that direction anyway.
> 'Bits' is just a shorten word for 'millibits' (or microbits, if you
> will). It's easier to say and my guess is people would tend to use it
> naturally own their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.
>
> The other synergies are:
> -bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
> whole bitcoin.
> -bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
> -bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
> -when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
> The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
> standard in the protocol rules.
>
> All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
> confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
> uses of the word.
>
> On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
> > I agree with the sentiment that most people don't understand either
> computer science or Bitcoin. The goal of getting people to understand
> enough about Bitcoin to use it is achievable and a goal that is "in scope"
> of our efforts. Getting them to understand computer science at large at the
> same time, less so.
> >
> > The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much
> to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to
> prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront. They don't get
> "horribly" confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks
> to them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes
> that everyone should be an expert at computer science. The average joe may
> assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't
> important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified
> in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
> >
> > Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would
> be to avoid. It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of
> language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible
> target audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in
> light of our objectives. It's marketing.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, "Christophe Biocca" <
> christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
> >> understand the topics they're talking about.
> >> Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
> >> confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
> >> units (not that that can be helped, as the units are supposed to be
> >> the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
> >>
> >> Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
> >> deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
> >> are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
> >> understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
> >> understanding of either.
> >>
> >> Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
> >>
> >> - Mining (for transaction validation).
> >> - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
> >> exist at the network level).
> >> - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
> >> backups can be stolen from equally).
> >>
> >> I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
> >> Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
> >> because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
> >> concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
> >> the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
> >> pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
> >> protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
> >> definitiely seen average people get confused between "the blockchain"
> >> and "blockchain.info" (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
> >> come up in beginner explanations).
> >>
> >> It seems downright masochistic to add
> >> yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
> >> for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
> >> people?
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> > Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> > unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
> available.
> > Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7293 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-03 16:27 ` Mike Caldwell
@ 2014-05-04 1:04 ` Chris Pacia
2014-05-04 5:18 ` Drak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Chris Pacia @ 2014-05-04 1:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christophe Biocca; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
Absent a concerted effort to move to something else other than 'bits', I
would be willing to bet the nomenclature moves in that direction anyway.
'Bits' is just a shorten word for 'millibits' (or microbits, if you
will). It's easier to say and my guess is people would tend to use it
naturally own their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.
The other synergies are:
-bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
whole bitcoin.
-bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
-bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
-when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
standard in the protocol rules.
All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
uses of the word.
On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
> I agree with the sentiment that most people don't understand either computer science or Bitcoin. The goal of getting people to understand enough about Bitcoin to use it is achievable and a goal that is "in scope" of our efforts. Getting them to understand computer science at large at the same time, less so.
>
> The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront. They don't get "horribly" confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks to them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes that everyone should be an expert at computer science. The average joe may assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
>
> Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would be to avoid. It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible target audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in light of our objectives. It's marketing.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, "Christophe Biocca" <christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
>>
>> Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
>> understand the topics they're talking about.
>> Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
>> confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
>> units (not that that can be helped, as the units are supposed to be
>> the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
>>
>> Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
>> deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
>> are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
>> understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
>> understanding of either.
>>
>> Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
>>
>> - Mining (for transaction validation).
>> - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
>> exist at the network level).
>> - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
>> backups can be stolen from equally).
>>
>> I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
>> Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
>> because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
>> concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
>> the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
>> pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
>> protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
>> definitiely seen average people get confused between "the blockchain"
>> and "blockchain.info" (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
>> come up in beginner explanations).
>>
>> It seems downright masochistic to add
>> yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
>> for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
>> people?
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-03 15:48 ` Christophe Biocca
2014-05-03 16:02 ` slush
@ 2014-05-03 16:27 ` Mike Caldwell
2014-05-04 1:04 ` Chris Pacia
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Mike Caldwell @ 2014-05-03 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christophe Biocca; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
I agree with the sentiment that most people don't understand either computer science or Bitcoin. The goal of getting people to understand enough about Bitcoin to use it is achievable and a goal that is "in scope" of our efforts. Getting them to understand computer science at large at the same time, less so.
The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront. They don't get "horribly" confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks to them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes that everyone should be an expert at computer science. The average joe may assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would be to avoid. It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible target audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in light of our objectives. It's marketing.
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, "Christophe Biocca" <christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
> understand the topics they're talking about.
> Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
> confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
> units (not that that can be helped, as the units are supposed to be
> the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
>
> Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
> deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
> are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
> understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
> understanding of either.
>
> Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
>
> - Mining (for transaction validation).
> - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
> exist at the network level).
> - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
> backups can be stolen from equally).
>
> I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
> Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
> because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
> concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
> the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
> pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
> protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
> definitiely seen average people get confused between "the blockchain"
> and "blockchain.info" (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
> come up in beginner explanations).
>
> It seems downright masochistic to add
> yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
> for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
> people?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-03 16:02 ` slush
@ 2014-05-03 16:10 ` Tamas Blummer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Tamas Blummer @ 2014-05-03 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: slush; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10787 bytes --]
bit has a lot of meanings to geeks, so what.
bit means for average people:
- something very small, that 100 satoshi is.
- part of the name Bitcoin
- easy to get conversion 1 coin = 1 million bits = 1 Bitcoin
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
Founder, CEO
http://bitsofproof.com
On 03.05.2014, at 18:02, slush <slush@centrum•cz> wrote:
> Excellent points Christophe!
>
> Although moving to 1e-6 units is fine for me and I see advantages of doing this, I don't get that people on this mailing list are fine with calling such unit "bit". It's geeky as hell, ambiguous and confusing.
>
> slush
>
>
> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Christophe Biocca <christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
> Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
> understand the topics they're talking about.
> Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
> confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
> units (not that that can be helped, as the units are supposed to be
> the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
>
> Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
> deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
> are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
> understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
> understanding of either.
>
> Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
>
> - Mining (for transaction validation).
> - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
> exist at the network level).
> - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
> backups can be stolen from equally).
>
> I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
> Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
> because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
> concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
> the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
> pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
> protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
> definitiely seen average people get confused between "the blockchain"
> and "blockchain.info" (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
> come up in beginner explanations).
>
> It seems downright masochistic to add
> yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
> for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
> people?
>
> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:41 AM, Aaron Voisine <voisine@gmail•com> wrote:
> > I have to agree with Mike. Human language is surprisingly tolerant of
> > overloading and inference from context. Neurotypical people have no
> > problem with it and perceive a software engineer's aversion to it as
> > being pedantic and strange. Note that "bits" was a term for a unit of
> > money long before the invention of digital computers.
> >
> > Aaron
> >
> > There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
> > government working for you -- Will Rodgers
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Gordon Mohr <gojomo@gmail•com> wrote:
> >> [resend - apologies if duplicate]
> >>
> >> Microbitcoin is a good-sized unit, workable for everyday transaction
> >> values, with room-to-grow, and a nice relationship to satoshis as 'cents'.
> >>
> >> But "bits" has problems as a unit name.
> >>
> >> "Bits" will be especially problematic whenever people try to graduate
> >> from informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when
> >> the real "bits" of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs
> >> become important. The "bit" as "binary digit" was important enough that
> >> Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is
> >> muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.
> >>
> >> Some examples of possible problems:
> >>
> >> * If "bit" equals "100 satoshis", then the natural-language unpacking of
> >> "bit-coin" is "100 satoshi coin", which runs against all prior usage.
> >>
> >> * If people are informed that a "256-bit private key" is what ultimately
> >> controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, "if each key
> >> has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?"
> >>
> >> * When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think,
> >> "OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10 kilobytes".
> >>
> >> * When people naturally extend "bit" into "kilobits" to mean "1000
> >> bits", then the new coinage "kilobits" will mean the exact same amount
> >> (100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling "millibits".
> >>
> >> I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a
> >> synonym for "microbitcoin", and I've laid out the case for "zib" as that
> >> word at <http://zibcoin.org>.
> >>
> >> 'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ'
> >> (Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or
> >> gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for
> >> data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts
> >> where subtleties of casing/stroking are lost.)
> >>
> >> (There's summary of more problems with "bit" in the zibcoin.org FAQ at:
> >> <http://zibcoin.org/faq#why-not-bits-to-mean-microbitcoins>.)
> >>
> >> - Gordon
> >>
> >> On 5/1/14, 3:35 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> >>> I'm also a big fan of standardizing on microBTC as the standard unit.
> >>> I didn't like the name "bits" at first, but the more I think about it,
> >>> the more I like it. The main thing going for it is the fact that it's
> >>> part of the name bitcoin. If Bitcoin is the protocol and network, bits
> >>> are an obvious choice for the currency unit.
> >>>
> >>> I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
> >>> with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
> >>> whether we call bits or something else:
> >>> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/0180/index.htm
> >>>
> >>> Another candidate is Unicode character U+2422, the blank symbol, but I
> >>> prefer stroke b.
> >>> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2422/index.htm
> >>>
> >>> Aaron
> >>>
> >>> There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
> >>> government working for you -- Will Rodgers
> >>>
> >>>> On Apr 21, 2014 5:41 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <pieter.wuille@gm•..> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@...> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common
> >>>>> usage I.e. bit.
> >>>>
> >>>> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will
> >>>> determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not
> >>>> relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
> >>>>
> >>>> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up
> >>>> (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as
> >>>> "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing
> >>>> in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling
> >>>> dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with
> >>>> having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous
> >>>> than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Pieter
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> >>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> >>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> >>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> >>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >>>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> >> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> >> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> >> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> >> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> > Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> > unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> > Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs_______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 18589 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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
1 sibling, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: slush @ 2014-05-03 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christophe Biocca; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 9869 bytes --]
Excellent points Christophe!
Although moving to 1e-6 units is fine for me and I see advantages of doing
this, I don't get that people on this mailing list are fine with calling
such unit "bit". It's geeky as hell, ambiguous and confusing.
slush
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Christophe Biocca <
christophe.biocca@gmail•com> wrote:
> Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
> understand the topics they're talking about.
> Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
> confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
> units (not that that can be helped, as the units are supposed to be
> the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
>
> Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
> deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
> are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
> understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
> understanding of either.
>
> Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
>
> - Mining (for transaction validation).
> - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
> exist at the network level).
> - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
> backups can be stolen from equally).
>
> I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
> Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
> because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
> concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
> the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
> pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
> protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
> definitiely seen average people get confused between "the blockchain"
> and "blockchain.info" (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
> come up in beginner explanations).
>
> It seems downright masochistic to add
> yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
> for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
> people?
>
> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:41 AM, Aaron Voisine <voisine@gmail•com> wrote:
> > I have to agree with Mike. Human language is surprisingly tolerant of
> > overloading and inference from context. Neurotypical people have no
> > problem with it and perceive a software engineer's aversion to it as
> > being pedantic and strange. Note that "bits" was a term for a unit of
> > money long before the invention of digital computers.
> >
> > Aaron
> >
> > There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
> > government working for you -- Will Rodgers
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Gordon Mohr <gojomo@gmail•com> wrote:
> >> [resend - apologies if duplicate]
> >>
> >> Microbitcoin is a good-sized unit, workable for everyday transaction
> >> values, with room-to-grow, and a nice relationship to satoshis as
> 'cents'.
> >>
> >> But "bits" has problems as a unit name.
> >>
> >> "Bits" will be especially problematic whenever people try to graduate
> >> from informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when
> >> the real "bits" of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs
> >> become important. The "bit" as "binary digit" was important enough that
> >> Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is
> >> muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.
> >>
> >> Some examples of possible problems:
> >>
> >> * If "bit" equals "100 satoshis", then the natural-language unpacking of
> >> "bit-coin" is "100 satoshi coin", which runs against all prior usage.
> >>
> >> * If people are informed that a "256-bit private key" is what ultimately
> >> controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, "if each key
> >> has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?"
> >>
> >> * When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think,
> >> "OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10
> kilobytes".
> >>
> >> * When people naturally extend "bit" into "kilobits" to mean "1000
> >> bits", then the new coinage "kilobits" will mean the exact same amount
> >> (100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling "millibits".
> >>
> >> I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a
> >> synonym for "microbitcoin", and I've laid out the case for "zib" as that
> >> word at <http://zibcoin.org>.
> >>
> >> 'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ'
> >> (Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or
> >> gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for
> >> data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts
> >> where subtleties of casing/stroking are lost.)
> >>
> >> (There's summary of more problems with "bit" in the zibcoin.org FAQ
> at:
> >> <http://zibcoin.org/faq#why-not-bits-to-mean-microbitcoins>.)
> >>
> >> - Gordon
> >>
> >> On 5/1/14, 3:35 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> >>> I'm also a big fan of standardizing on microBTC as the standard unit.
> >>> I didn't like the name "bits" at first, but the more I think about it,
> >>> the more I like it. The main thing going for it is the fact that it's
> >>> part of the name bitcoin. If Bitcoin is the protocol and network, bits
> >>> are an obvious choice for the currency unit.
> >>>
> >>> I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
> >>> with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
> >>> whether we call bits or something else:
> >>> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/0180/index.htm
> >>>
> >>> Another candidate is Unicode character U+2422, the blank symbol, but I
> >>> prefer stroke b.
> >>> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2422/index.htm
> >>>
> >>> Aaron
> >>>
> >>> There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
> >>> government working for you -- Will Rodgers
> >>>
> >>>> On Apr 21, 2014 5:41 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <pieter.wuille@gm•..> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@...> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in
> common
> >>>>> usage I.e. bit.
> >>>>
> >>>> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers
> will
> >>>> determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not
> >>>> relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
> >>>>
> >>>> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will
> end up
> >>>> (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using
> that as
> >>>> "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially
> confusing
> >>>> in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like
> calling
> >>>> dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with
> >>>> having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less
> ambiguous
> >>>> than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Pieter
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> >>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> >>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
> available.
> >>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> >>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> >> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> >> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
> available.
> >> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> >> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> > Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> > unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
> available.
> > Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 13474 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-03 5:41 ` Aaron Voisine
@ 2014-05-03 15:48 ` Christophe Biocca
2014-05-03 16:02 ` slush
2014-05-03 16:27 ` Mike Caldwell
2014-05-05 22:33 ` Gordon Mohr
1 sibling, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Christophe Biocca @ 2014-05-03 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bitcoin Development
Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
understand the topics they're talking about.
Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
units (not that that can be helped, as the units are supposed to be
the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
understanding of either.
Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
- Mining (for transaction validation).
- Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
exist at the network level).
- Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
backups can be stolen from equally).
I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
definitiely seen average people get confused between "the blockchain"
and "blockchain.info" (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
come up in beginner explanations).
It seems downright masochistic to add
yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
people?
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:41 AM, Aaron Voisine <voisine@gmail•com> wrote:
> I have to agree with Mike. Human language is surprisingly tolerant of
> overloading and inference from context. Neurotypical people have no
> problem with it and perceive a software engineer's aversion to it as
> being pedantic and strange. Note that "bits" was a term for a unit of
> money long before the invention of digital computers.
>
> Aaron
>
> There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
> government working for you -- Will Rodgers
>
>
> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Gordon Mohr <gojomo@gmail•com> wrote:
>> [resend - apologies if duplicate]
>>
>> Microbitcoin is a good-sized unit, workable for everyday transaction
>> values, with room-to-grow, and a nice relationship to satoshis as 'cents'.
>>
>> But "bits" has problems as a unit name.
>>
>> "Bits" will be especially problematic whenever people try to graduate
>> from informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when
>> the real "bits" of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs
>> become important. The "bit" as "binary digit" was important enough that
>> Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is
>> muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.
>>
>> Some examples of possible problems:
>>
>> * If "bit" equals "100 satoshis", then the natural-language unpacking of
>> "bit-coin" is "100 satoshi coin", which runs against all prior usage.
>>
>> * If people are informed that a "256-bit private key" is what ultimately
>> controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, "if each key
>> has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?"
>>
>> * When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think,
>> "OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10 kilobytes".
>>
>> * When people naturally extend "bit" into "kilobits" to mean "1000
>> bits", then the new coinage "kilobits" will mean the exact same amount
>> (100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling "millibits".
>>
>> I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a
>> synonym for "microbitcoin", and I've laid out the case for "zib" as that
>> word at <http://zibcoin.org>.
>>
>> 'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ'
>> (Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or
>> gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for
>> data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts
>> where subtleties of casing/stroking are lost.)
>>
>> (There's summary of more problems with "bit" in the zibcoin.org FAQ at:
>> <http://zibcoin.org/faq#why-not-bits-to-mean-microbitcoins>.)
>>
>> - Gordon
>>
>> On 5/1/14, 3:35 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
>>> I'm also a big fan of standardizing on microBTC as the standard unit.
>>> I didn't like the name "bits" at first, but the more I think about it,
>>> the more I like it. The main thing going for it is the fact that it's
>>> part of the name bitcoin. If Bitcoin is the protocol and network, bits
>>> are an obvious choice for the currency unit.
>>>
>>> I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
>>> with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
>>> whether we call bits or something else:
>>> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/0180/index.htm
>>>
>>> Another candidate is Unicode character U+2422, the blank symbol, but I
>>> prefer stroke b.
>>> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2422/index.htm
>>>
>>> Aaron
>>>
>>> There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
>>> government working for you -- Will Rodgers
>>>
>>>> On Apr 21, 2014 5:41 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <pieter.wuille@gm•..> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@...> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common
>>>>> usage I.e. bit.
>>>>
>>>> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will
>>>> determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not
>>>> relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
>>>>
>>>> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up
>>>> (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as
>>>> "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing
>>>> in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling
>>>> dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with
>>>> having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous
>>>> than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Pieter
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
>>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-03 2:06 ` Gordon Mohr
@ 2014-05-03 5:41 ` Aaron Voisine
2014-05-03 15:48 ` Christophe Biocca
2014-05-05 22:33 ` Gordon Mohr
0 siblings, 2 replies; 56+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Voisine @ 2014-05-03 5:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gordon Mohr; +Cc: Bitcoin Development
I have to agree with Mike. Human language is surprisingly tolerant of
overloading and inference from context. Neurotypical people have no
problem with it and perceive a software engineer's aversion to it as
being pedantic and strange. Note that "bits" was a term for a unit of
money long before the invention of digital computers.
Aaron
There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
government working for you -- Will Rodgers
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Gordon Mohr <gojomo@gmail•com> wrote:
> [resend - apologies if duplicate]
>
> Microbitcoin is a good-sized unit, workable for everyday transaction
> values, with room-to-grow, and a nice relationship to satoshis as 'cents'.
>
> But "bits" has problems as a unit name.
>
> "Bits" will be especially problematic whenever people try to graduate
> from informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when
> the real "bits" of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs
> become important. The "bit" as "binary digit" was important enough that
> Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is
> muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.
>
> Some examples of possible problems:
>
> * If "bit" equals "100 satoshis", then the natural-language unpacking of
> "bit-coin" is "100 satoshi coin", which runs against all prior usage.
>
> * If people are informed that a "256-bit private key" is what ultimately
> controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, "if each key
> has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?"
>
> * When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think,
> "OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10 kilobytes".
>
> * When people naturally extend "bit" into "kilobits" to mean "1000
> bits", then the new coinage "kilobits" will mean the exact same amount
> (100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling "millibits".
>
> I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a
> synonym for "microbitcoin", and I've laid out the case for "zib" as that
> word at <http://zibcoin.org>.
>
> 'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ'
> (Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or
> gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for
> data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts
> where subtleties of casing/stroking are lost.)
>
> (There's summary of more problems with "bit" in the zibcoin.org FAQ at:
> <http://zibcoin.org/faq#why-not-bits-to-mean-microbitcoins>.)
>
> - Gordon
>
> On 5/1/14, 3:35 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
>> I'm also a big fan of standardizing on microBTC as the standard unit.
>> I didn't like the name "bits" at first, but the more I think about it,
>> the more I like it. The main thing going for it is the fact that it's
>> part of the name bitcoin. If Bitcoin is the protocol and network, bits
>> are an obvious choice for the currency unit.
>>
>> I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
>> with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
>> whether we call bits or something else:
>> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/0180/index.htm
>>
>> Another candidate is Unicode character U+2422, the blank symbol, but I
>> prefer stroke b.
>> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2422/index.htm
>>
>> Aaron
>>
>> There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
>> government working for you -- Will Rodgers
>>
>>> On Apr 21, 2014 5:41 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <pieter.wuille@gm•..> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common
>>>> usage I.e. bit.
>>>
>>> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will
>>> determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not
>>> relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
>>>
>>> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up
>>> (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as
>>> "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing
>>> in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling
>>> dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with
>>> having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous
>>> than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Pieter
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
>> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
>> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
>> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
2014-05-01 22:35 Aaron Voisine
@ 2014-05-03 2:06 ` Gordon Mohr
2014-05-03 5:41 ` Aaron Voisine
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Gordon Mohr @ 2014-05-03 2:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bitcoin-development
[resend - apologies if duplicate]
Microbitcoin is a good-sized unit, workable for everyday transaction
values, with room-to-grow, and a nice relationship to satoshis as 'cents'.
But "bits" has problems as a unit name.
"Bits" will be especially problematic whenever people try to graduate
from informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when
the real "bits" of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs
become important. The "bit" as "binary digit" was important enough that
Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is
muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.
Some examples of possible problems:
* If "bit" equals "100 satoshis", then the natural-language unpacking of
"bit-coin" is "100 satoshi coin", which runs against all prior usage.
* If people are informed that a "256-bit private key" is what ultimately
controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, "if each key
has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?"
* When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think,
"OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10 kilobytes".
* When people naturally extend "bit" into "kilobits" to mean "1000
bits", then the new coinage "kilobits" will mean the exact same amount
(100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling "millibits".
I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a
synonym for "microbitcoin", and I've laid out the case for "zib" as that
word at <http://zibcoin.org>.
'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ'
(Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or
gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for
data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts
where subtleties of casing/stroking are lost.)
(There's summary of more problems with "bit" in the zibcoin.org FAQ at:
<http://zibcoin.org/faq#why-not-bits-to-mean-microbitcoins>.)
- Gordon
On 5/1/14, 3:35 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> I'm also a big fan of standardizing on microBTC as the standard unit.
> I didn't like the name "bits" at first, but the more I think about it,
> the more I like it. The main thing going for it is the fact that it's
> part of the name bitcoin. If Bitcoin is the protocol and network, bits
> are an obvious choice for the currency unit.
>
> I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
> with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
> whether we call bits or something else:
> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/0180/index.htm
>
> Another candidate is Unicode character U+2422, the blank symbol, but I
> prefer stroke b.
> http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2422/index.htm
>
> Aaron
>
> There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
> government working for you -- Will Rodgers
>
>> On Apr 21, 2014 5:41 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <pieter.wuille@gm•..> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@...> wrote:
>>>
>>> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common
>>> usage I.e. bit.
>>
>> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will
>> determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not
>> relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
>>
>> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up
>> (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as
>> "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing
>> in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling
>> dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with
>> having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous
>> than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
>>
>> --
>> Pieter
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get
> unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
@ 2014-05-01 22:35 Aaron Voisine
2014-05-03 2:06 ` Gordon Mohr
0 siblings, 1 reply; 56+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Voisine @ 2014-05-01 22:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bitcoin Development
I'm also a big fan of standardizing on microBTC as the standard unit.
I didn't like the name "bits" at first, but the more I think about it,
the more I like it. The main thing going for it is the fact that it's
part of the name bitcoin. If Bitcoin is the protocol and network, bits
are an obvious choice for the currency unit.
I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
whether we call bits or something else:
http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/0180/index.htm
Another candidate is Unicode character U+2422, the blank symbol, but I
prefer stroke b.
http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2422/index.htm
Aaron
There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
government working for you -- Will Rodgers
> On Apr 21, 2014 5:41 AM, "Pieter Wuille" <pieter.wuille@gm•..> wrote:
>
>>On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@...> wrote:
>>
>> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common
>> usage I.e. bit.
>
> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will
> determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not
> relevant to this discussion in my opinion.
>
> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up
> (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as
> "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing
> in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling
> dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with
> having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous
> than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
>
> --
> Pieter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 56+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-05-05 22:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-04-20 12:35 [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account 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
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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox