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-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WO64m-0008B5-9y for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:53:36 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.214.179 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.179; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f179.google.com; Received: from mail-ob0-f179.google.com ([209.85.214.179]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WO64k-0002BJ-VE for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:53:36 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f179.google.com with SMTP id va2so1053986obc.10 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:53:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.92.202 with SMTP id co10mr841481oeb.73.1394718809655; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.71.231 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:53:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <52852C2D.9020103@gmail.com> <52853D8A.6010501@monetize.io> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:53:29 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AcOnw-sw33hvojeT1WQur_Lu390 Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Jeff Garzik Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b33d67c360fb004f47d47ed X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) 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 (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 2.5 US_DOLLARS_3 BODY: Mentions millions of $ ($NN, NNN, NNN.NN) 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 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: 1WO64k-0002BJ-VE Cc: Bitcoin Dev , Wendell 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: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:53:36 -0000 --047d7b33d67c360fb004f47d47ed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 BitPay should use mBTC as well. Unless you can point to any major wallets, exchanges or price watching sites that use uBTC by default? I think it is highly optimistic to assume we'll need another 1000x shift any time soon. By now Bitcoin isn't obscure anymore. Lots of people have heard about it. Getting from $1 to $1000 was amazing, but it was possible through huge media coverage. Getting from $1000 to $1,000,000 would take massive adoption of the kind Bitcoin isn't ready for yet. On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > Based on this seeming consensus, BitPay was headed towards uBTC > internally, and hoped to coordinate messaging and rollout with others > in the community. Ah well, proceed apace, and Bitcoin Wallet will > catch up, I suppose. > > Multiple unit changes negatively impact users, but we are already there :/ > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Wladimir wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> > >> Resurrecting this topic. Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC several weeks > >> ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like the consensus was > >> uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will happen-- may result in > >> additional user confusion, thanks to yet another decimal place > >> transition. > > > > > > I've kind of given up getting any consensus about this, or even getting > > people to care. > > > > Everyone agrees that a decimal shift would be good, but it's the same > boring > > shed painting discussion every time on how many decimals. In the end > nothing > > happens. > > > > I can't really blame Andreas for finally taking action and making the > change > > to mBTC. People in the community are familiar with mBTC because some > > exchanges and price sites used mBTC (at least for a while when >$1000), > also > > mBTC seems to be catching on on reddit etc. > > > > Moving to muBTC (which in itself would be better because it is the final > > unit change ever needed without hardfork) would require more coordinated > > education effort. > > > > Wladimir > > > > -- > Jeff Garzik > Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist > BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > 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/13534_NeoTech > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > --047d7b33d67c360fb004f47d47ed Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
BitPay should use mBTC as well. Unless you can point to an= y major wallets, exchanges or price watching sites that use uBTC by default= ?

I think it is highly optimistic to assume we'll ne= ed another 1000x shift any time soon. By now Bitcoin isn't obscure anym= ore. Lots of people have heard about it. Getting from $1 to $1000 was amazi= ng, but it was possible through huge media coverage. Getting from $1000 to = $1,000,000 would take massive adoption of the kind Bitcoin isn't ready = for yet.



On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Jeff Garzik <= jgarzik@bitpay.com<= /a>> wrote:
<vendor hat: on>

Based on this seeming consensus, BitPay was headed towards uBTC
internally, and hoped to coordinate messaging and rollout with others
in the community. =C2=A0Ah well, proceed apace, and Bitcoin Wallet will
catch up, I suppose.

Multiple unit changes negatively impact users, but we are already there :/<= br>


On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
>>
>> Resurrecting this topic. =C2=A0Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC severa= l weeks
>> ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like the consensus was<= br> >> uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will happen-- may result in=
>> additional user confusion, thanks to yet another decimal place
>> transition.
>
>
> I've kind of given up getting any consensus about this, or even ge= tting
> people to care.
>
> Everyone agrees that a decimal shift would be good, but it's the s= ame boring
> shed painting discussion every time on how many decimals. In the end n= othing
> happens.
>
> I can't really blame Andreas for finally taking action and making = the change
> to mBTC. People in the community are familiar with mBTC because some > exchanges and price sites used mBTC (at least for a while when >$10= 00), also
> mBTC seems to be catching on on reddit etc.
>
> Moving to muBTC (which in itself would be better because it is the fin= al
> unit change ever needed without hardfork) would require more coordinat= ed
> education effort.
>
> Wladimir



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

---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---
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/13534_NeoTech
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment

--047d7b33d67c360fb004f47d47ed--