From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E752AC00 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:37:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from newmail.dtrt.org (li1228-87.members.linode.com [45.79.129.87]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25362B0 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:37:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from harding by newmail.dtrt.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ePEiZ-0003CT-9R; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:37:31 +0000 Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 16:36:07 -0500 From: "David A. Harding" To: Jimmy Song , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <20171213213607.ijlvqwpdaokucgi6@fedora-23-dvm> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vtt3snletko5xmhp" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Utilization of bits denomination X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:37:33 -0000 --vtt3snletko5xmhp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 01:46:09PM -0600, Jimmy Song via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Hey all, >=20 > I am proposing an informational BIP to standardize the term "bits". The > term has been around a while, but having some formal informational standa= rd > helps give structure to how the term is used. >=20 > https://github.com/jimmysong/bips/blob/unit-bias/bip-unit-bias.mediawiki Wallets and other software is already using this term, so I think it's a good idea to ensure its usage is normalized. That said, I think the term is unnecessary and confusing given that microbitcoins provides all of the same advantages and at least two additional advantages: - Microbitcoins is not a homonym for any other word in English (and probably not in any other language), whereas "bit" and "bits" have more than a dozen homonyms in English---some of which are quite common in general currency usage, Bitcoin currency usage, or Bitcoin technical usage. - Microbitcoins trains users to understand SI prefixes, allowing them to easily migrate from one prefix to the next. This will be important when bitcoin prices rise to $10M USD[1] and the bits denomination has the same problems the millibitcoin denomination has now, but it's also useful in the short term when interacting with users who make very large payments (bitcoin-scale) or very small payments (nanobitcoin-scale).[2] Maybe a table of scale can emphasize this point: Wrong (IMO): Right (IMO): --------------- -------------- BTC BTC mBTC mBTC bits =B5BTC nBTC nBTC =20 [1] A rise in price to $10M doesn't require huge levels of growth---it only requires time under the assumption that a percentage of bitcoins will be lost every year due to wallet mishaps, failure to inherit bitcoins, and other issues that remove bitcoins from circulation. In other words, it's important to remember that Bitcoin is expected to become a deflationary currency and plan accordingly. [2] Although Bitcoin does not currently support committed nanobitcoin-scale payments in the block chain, it can be supported in a variety of ways by offchain systems---including (it is hypothesized) trustless systems based on probabilistic payments. Thanks, -Dave --vtt3snletko5xmhp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJaMZ1GAAoJENnbQalsImnToKEQAMtNMd4YpxyKg+0UtEMgCWGA aA2LoDuyZBFaIg5NEHX8Zku6LPOAil3ynMsSxlUL0SbZl9199mL1Mb3DuYD0nrXL 6TZjxiU2krpjisvngmYdP76B8DZw4H53i9yPGjhcnpFCnujiY9jdn5PizyOh65tv 1GoHnTbukhUaCxzTZjnyfSEoMnjRlqnmOWvNxPp1z36CK3ThvDjsxrGvik5T01MZ AuNR66P67UqB0ZNgXsXbFcjTzPHp4TSEJM/rf6jHdMPyTx6klRIWz+xbYHXKlLoT BGVsbhsPyKCtoAZy/XTCXkd3h1VfnidCZjgyrCbFocCDde+KJcg4s3l2mw2qIUcI wA9cYGb9lJYX4+tWGVXWuq7n3BkcYSha7dez/McNUBuJnnK41ta6oKlgsL+oyBbF Fd9EZ1+8/eVQtU5lv1Qa3Hm9lOnesaClzPgWsovt+S8ODuUt/OGrJF8jkHD0vivd aQ2fUb4XvI+ULvZswOjlzPrw0eGEnutIqJ2f7k7cAxE2fy+YfhO61tG7TjO43QOD 7m3ExHePx9tk1aYmWzeQJKm9nfZTrKNzMhntOPdiRwBL/OtimV8S/32B7acYpMAa URTrPi7/vYnlTXqpEqmrZy7KXxwQb98CXr76xaNu9FFHDOk939sUULsSQB12P2R8 Od8Dxco/7eluU7Mhz4Nx =nL2t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vtt3snletko5xmhp--