From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Wbue1-0007fD-68 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:31:05 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.216.178 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.178; envelope-from=etotheipi@gmail.com; helo=mail-qc0-f178.google.com; Received: from mail-qc0-f178.google.com ([209.85.216.178]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Wbudx-0007HU-Od for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:31:05 +0000 Received: by mail-qc0-f178.google.com with SMTP id i8so3324051qcq.9 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 09:30:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.93.198 with SMTP id d64mr38882633qge.1.1398011456256; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 09:30:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.85] (c-76-111-96-126.hsd1.md.comcast.net. [76.111.96.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id z10sm68349225qaf.33.2014.04.20.09.30.55 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 20 Apr 2014 09:30:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5353F63F.90307@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 12:30:55 -0400 From: Alan Reiner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Erik Garrison References: <3A69904F-0A3D-42E9-9DE7-067874E710BB@bitsofproof.com> <5353ECDF.6090903@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090601050707020805020707" X-Spam-Score: 0.4 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (etotheipi[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 1.0 FREEMAIL_REPLY From and body contain different freemails X-Headers-End: 1Wbudx-0007HU-Od Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:31:05 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090601050707020805020707 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 >> >> >> 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 > > 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 >>> > 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 >>>> 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 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > 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 > --------------090601050707020805020707 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 microbitcoin) 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:


I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :
and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time pushing for XBT being 1 bit


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





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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


--------------090601050707020805020707--