I don't have anything interesting to add, except that I have been using 'bits' on my site for over 3 years. It's a great unit that people quickly adapt to, and it's far more convenient. When dealing with large amounts of money, people have no problem naturally thinking in "thousand bits" or "million bits" (a bitcoin).
I would highly encourage it to be a default everywhere. Consistency is really important.
Also slightly unrelated, but the whole "sat/B" thing for fees is such a clusterfuck. Half the time it's used as "vbyte" and half the time actual bytes. Users are constantly confused because of explorers and wallet and stuff all showing it inconsistently. I would suggest there that there is a "standard" of "bits per kiloweight" (i.e. how many bits of fees to pay for a transaction that is 1000 weight)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Utilization of bits denomination
Local Time: December 15, 2017 12:20 PM
UTC Time: December 15, 2017 6:20 PM
From: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
To: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>, Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
>Bitcoin (BTC), Millibitcoin (mBTC) and Microbitcoin (µBTC) is the >correct< approach. It's tidy, systematic and precise.
The SI system is great, but it's nice if you pick a base unit that is easy for intuition to comprehend.
It is a fact that I weigh approximately .000,000,000,000,000,000,000,014 Earth masses. If we arrived at rough consensus that this was a cumbersome way to express the mass of a human, we might then find a group of people making the superficially sensible proposal that we use SI prefixes and say I weigh 14 yoctoearths. This would be tidy, systematic and precise, but that might not be enough to make it the best option. It might be even better to choose a base unit that human intuition can make sense of, and THEN add prefixes as needed.
I dislike the name "bits" but I think 100 satoshis does make a nice base unit. If we cannot crowdsource a more inspiring label we may be stuck with bits just due to linguistic network effects.
-Ethan