From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WgOE0-0007T7-H0 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 03 May 2014 00:54:44 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.214.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.170; envelope-from=bendavenport@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f170.google.com; Received: from mail-ob0-f170.google.com ([209.85.214.170]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WgODz-0002he-Cg for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 03 May 2014 00:54:44 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f170.google.com with SMTP id uy5so250548obc.15 for ; Fri, 02 May 2014 17:54:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.125.72 with SMTP id mo8mr19964007oeb.36.1399078477894; Fri, 02 May 2014 17:54:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.11.168 with HTTP; Fri, 2 May 2014 17:54:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <52852C2D.9020103@gmail.com> <52853D8A.6010501@monetize.io> Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 17:54:37 -0700 Message-ID: From: Ben Davenport To: Jeff Garzik Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b343ddab01e3904f87457b7 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) 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 (bendavenport[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 0.0 LOTS_OF_MONEY Huge... sums of money X-Headers-End: 1WgODz-0002he-Cg Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc 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: Sat, 03 May 2014 00:54:44 -0000 --047d7b343ddab01e3904f87457b7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I fully support this (it's what I suggested over a year ago), but what it comes down to is BitPay, Coinbase, Blockchain and Bitstamp getting together, agreeing what they're going to use, and doing a little joint customer education campaign around it. If there's community momentum around "bits", great. My only addition is that I think we should all stop trying to attach SI prefixes to the currency unit. Name me another world currency that uses SI prefixes. No one quotes amounts as 63 k$ or 3 M$. The accepted standard at least in the US is , i.e. $63k or $3M. That may not be accepted form everywhere, but in any case it's an informal format, not a formal one. The important point is there should be one base unit that is not modified with SI prefixes. And I think the arguments are strong for that unit being = 100 satoshi. Ben On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > Related: > http://blog.bitpay.com/2014/05/02/bitpay-bitcoin-and-where-to-put-that-decimal-point.html > > -- > Jeff Garzik > Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist > BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > "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 > --047d7b343ddab01e3904f87457b7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I fully support this (it's what I suggested over a yea= r ago), but what it comes down to is BitPay, Coinbase, Blockchain and Bitst= amp getting together, agreeing what they're going to use, and doing a l= ittle joint customer education campaign around it. If there's community= momentum around "bits", great.

My only addition is that I think we should all stop trying t= o attach SI prefixes to the currency unit. Name me another world currency t= hat uses SI prefixes. No one quotes amounts as 63 k$ or 3 M$. The accepted = standard at least in the US is <currency-symbol><amount><mod= ifier>, i.e. $63k or $3M. That may not be accepted form everywhere, but = in any case it's an informal format, not a formal one. The important po= int is there should be one base unit that is not modified with SI prefixes.= And I think the arguments are strong for that unit being =3D 100 satoshi.<= /div>

Ben




On Fri, May 2, 2014= at 12:17 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
<vendor hat: on>

Related: http://blog.bitpay.co= m/2014/05/02/bitpay-bitcoin-and-where-to-put-that-decimal-point.html

--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://bitpay.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - Fo= r FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. =C2=A0Get<= br> 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-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment

--047d7b343ddab01e3904f87457b7--