A new Catchy name for 0.0001 BTC? | Bitcointalksearch.org

Peter Lambert

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 500

It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye

Quote from: MoonShadow on May 15, 2013, 04:44:07 PM

Quote from: molecular on May 15, 2013, 02:31:24 PM

I think it's quite possible you'll do the same.

Indeed. There is no real need to name that unit.

Just like there is no real reason to name 10000 btc, which is about halfway between 1 and 21000000; people do not write 2100 0000 total bitcoins, they write 21 000 000 total bitcoins.

MoonShadow

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1007

Quote from: molecular on May 15, 2013, 02:31:24 PM

I think it's quite possible you'll do the same.

Indeed. There is no real need to name that unit.

MoonShadow

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1007

Quote from: bitbadger on May 15, 2013, 06:36:57 AM

I don't think "Satoshi" should be used at all. It's too long for one thing - 3 syllables. Plus it sounds kind of like a geeky in-joke.

1) It's already in use in exactly this fashion....

2) It's not too long as a spoken word....

3) It IS a geeky in joke.

Stampbit

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

What about an itsybit?

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: MoonShadow on May 15, 2013, 01:49:52 AM

The name for 0.0001 BTC has been largely decided long ago, it's either a Millibit or a Gavin.

You fell in the same trap DeathAndTaxes fell in:

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on May 10, 2013, 02:49:17 PM

Quote from: RoadToHell on May 10, 2013, 01:09:17 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on May 10, 2013, 01:06:27 PM

millicoin informally.

If I was pricing something in print I would just use mBTC.

Wouldn't millicoin imply 0.001 BTC? (one less decimal place)

Yes. Oops didn't notice the extra zero.

(thinking 0.0001 = 0.001)

DeathAndTaxes next move was to assert:

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on May 10, 2013, 02:49:17 PM

Yeah there is no reason to name the 0.0001.

I think it's quite possible you'll do the same.

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: MoonShadow on May 15, 2013, 01:49:52 AM

The name for 0.0001 BTC has been largely decided long ago, it's either a Millibit or a Gavin.

When was that decided? I've only heard it in threads discussing what names should denominations have, but not on actual usage.

beckspace

hero member

Activity: 931

Merit: 500

Quote from: Kazimir on May 11, 2013, 05:26:09 AM

Anyway, I'd say 0.0001 BTC is called "a hundred microBit" or "point one milliBit".

In writing: 0.1 mBTC or 100 uBTC

Agreed.

0.1 milliBTC or milliBit / 0.1 mBTC / 0.1 millies

or

100 microBTC or microBit / 100 uBTC / 100 mickeys

bitbadger

member

Activity: 115

Merit: 10

Quote from: theymos on May 11, 2013, 10:51:16 PM

Quote from: BlueNote on May 11, 2013, 10:32:38 PM

A Bitcoin is 10,000 bits.
A bit is 10,000 Satoshis.

Simple. Elegant. No mouthful of metric jumbles and eyesores. No list of 8 geeky multi-syllabic names.
What else should the acting base unit of Bitcoin be called other than a bit?

I like the idea of having units for 1 BTC, 0.0001 BTC and 1 satoshi rather than using SI units, but "bit" seems too ambiguous. Too much like bitcoin. People will say stuff like, "Send me 1 bit coin," which is confusing.

depends on whether you set the context or not. eg.

seller says "how do you want to pay?"

buyer replies: "with Bitcoin".

seller: "ok, then that'll be 500 Bits"

there's no ambiguity because you've already established the transaction is Bitcoin.

If the price was 1 Bitcoin, then you would say, "pay me in Bitcoin, the price is 1 Bitcoin (meaning, 1 BTC or 10,000 Bits or BIT).

It's a similar thing with the Dollar and other fiat. You can say pay me in Dollar. Price is eg 35 Dollars. "Pay me in Dollar" does not mean "pay me one Dollar".

No ambiguity.

I don't think "Satoshi" should be used at all. It's too long for one thing - 3 syllables. Plus it sounds kind of like a geeky in-joke.

Inedible

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

What doesn't kill you only makes you sicker!

Quote from: MoonShadow on May 15, 2013, 01:49:52 AM

The name for 0.0001 BTC has been largely decided long ago, it's either a Millibit or a Gavin. The smallest unit is a satoshi after the creator, and this one is after the second most important figure in the creation and development of Bitcoin; Gavin Andreson. Much like how the most important presidents, according to someone, are presented on the currency of the US, the most important being the smallest denomination.

Surely that's a tenth of a milibitcoin?

dserrano5

legendary

Activity: 1974

Merit: 1029

Quote from: MoonShadow on May 15, 2013, 01:49:52 AM

The name for 0.0001 BTC has been largely decided long ago

[citation needed]

MoonShadow

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1007

The name for 0.0001 BTC has been largely decided long ago, it's either a Millibit or a Gavin. The smallest unit is a satoshi after the creator, and this one is after the second most important figure in the creation and development of Bitcoin; Gavin Andreson. Much like how the most important presidents, according to someone, are presented on the currency of the US, the most important being the smallest denomination.

freedomno1

legendary

Activity: 1806

Merit: 1090

Learning the troll avoidance button :)

Bob since we need a catchy nickname Grin

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: R2D221 on May 14, 2013, 03:59:18 PM

Quote from: molecular on May 14, 2013, 01:33:04 PM

Quote from: BitBank on May 13, 2013, 04:11:33 PM

Naming denominations after people is the most asinine idea I've ever heard. It's almost like you guys WANT bitcoin to bask in obscurity.

Yeah, it's definitely better to use names of landscape features, like "ridge", "hill", "cave", "mountain", or "tal", which is the origin of the name "dollar".

You should obviously use names for weight (such as peso and pound).

Since weight was used because the monetary value was based on precious metal, maybe we should use names quantifying amounts of data like, "bit", "byte", "nibble".

1 BTC = 1000 bits
1 bit = 1000 nibbles
1 nibble = 100 satoshis

1 BTC = 1 bitcoin
1000 BTC = 1 kilobit
1000000 BTC = 1 megabit

as someone said before: some name will emerge from general use rather than us making one up

R2D221

hero member

Activity: 658

Merit: 500

Quote from: molecular on May 14, 2013, 01:33:04 PM

Quote from: BitBank on May 13, 2013, 04:11:33 PM

Naming denominations after people is the most asinine idea I've ever heard. It's almost like you guys WANT bitcoin to bask in obscurity.

Yeah, it's definitely better to use names of landscape features, like "ridge", "hill", "cave", "mountain", or "tal", which is the origin of the name "dollar".

You should obviously use names for weight (such as peso and pound).

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: BitBank on May 13, 2013, 04:11:33 PM

Naming denominations after people is the most asinine idea I've ever heard. It's almost like you guys WANT bitcoin to bask in obscurity.

Yeah, it's definitely better to use names of landscape features, like "ridge", "hill", "cave", "mountain", or "tal", which is the origin of the name "dollar".

Walter Rothbard

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Bytecoin: 8VofSsbQvTd8YwAcxiCcxrqZ9MnGPjaAQm

Quote from: molecular on May 14, 2013, 01:26:31 PM

Quote from: kjj on May 10, 2013, 01:17:54 PM

I agree. This is far too urgent to put off until people come up with their own slang terms, we must decide this now, once and for all. It is also a matter too important to let languish in any of the hundred other threads, we should each make one new thread about it.

Exactly. We should also establish a central authority who prosecutes anyone using anything but the official nomenclature. Use weapons to enforce it.

No, we should implement this in code. Anybody using unofficial units will have demurrage taken from their Bitcoin addresses with each block generation.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: Stephen Gornick on May 12, 2013, 12:00:18 PM

Quote from: Inedible on May 12, 2013, 10:20:16 AM

Maybe we should have Bitcoin in base 2 too?

Like this?
- http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Tonal_Bitcoin

was it you in 2011 propangandizing on #bitcoin-dev to use it?

It would've killed bitcoin in it's roots.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: kjj on May 10, 2013, 01:17:54 PM

I agree. This is far too urgent to put off until people come up with their own slang terms, we must decide this now, once and for all. It is also a matter too important to let languish in any of the hundred other threads, we should each make one new thread about it.

Exactly. We should also establish a central authority who prosecutes anyone using anything but the official nomenclature. Use weapons to enforce it.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on May 10, 2013, 02:49:17 PM

Yes. Oops didn't notice the extra zero. Yeah there is no reason to name the 0.0001.

I agree. And I suggest to call the millibit (mBTC) just "bit".

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: RoadToHell on May 10, 2013, 01:11:56 PM

How about 4bit?

4 bits are called a "nibble"

Topic: A new Catchy name for 0.0001 BTC? (Read 6546 times)