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-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WfzZY-0000GC-Vw for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 01 May 2014 22:35:21 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.175; envelope-from=voisine@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f175.google.com; Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com ([209.85.214.175]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WfzZY-0003sY-1S for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 01 May 2014 22:35:20 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id wp4so4296693obc.20 for ; Thu, 01 May 2014 15:35:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.76.194 with SMTP id m2mr13428665oew.47.1398983714536; Thu, 01 May 2014 15:35:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.45.231 with HTTP; Thu, 1 May 2014 15:35:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 15:35:14 -0700 Message-ID: From: Aaron Voisine To: Bitcoin Development Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) 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 (voisine[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -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 X-Headers-End: 1WfzZY-0003sY-1S 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: Thu, 01 May 2014 22:35:21 -0000 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" wrote: > >>On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" 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