Topic: Bitcoin units re-branding during ISO submission (Read 903 times)
you americans and your bits, now megabits...
Upon other variants, there is a persistent and popular proposal to call [100 satoshi]=base unit (depicted either as XBT or XBI).
This solves the decimals problem (inability of the majority to easily estimate value after two decimals plus accounting software compatibility)
The argument was made that if you call these units "bitcoin", then people will be confused, but if you call them 'bits", then many would disagree.
How about the following classification scheme for units:
call:
1BTC a "Megabit" or simply "Mega" in jargon. Megabit will not be a part of ISO, but could be used in day-to-day txs.
[100 satoshis]=XBT or XBI=bit
All small purchases will be depicted as in this example: gum- 1,470.99 XBT/XBI (bits)
large purchases (more than current BTC) would be called in megabits
House: 1,500 Megabits (instead of 1,500,000,000 bits). This would ensure ease of use.
BTC (depicted as such) will be a historical (not ISO) unit, which will be fine to use in wallets, etc.
This solves the decimals problem (inability of the majority to easily estimate value after two decimals plus accounting software compatibility)
The argument was made that if you call these units "bitcoin", then people will be confused, but if you call them 'bits", then many would disagree.
How about the following classification scheme for units:
call:
1BTC a "Megabit" or simply "Mega" in jargon. Megabit will not be a part of ISO, but could be used in day-to-day txs.
[100 satoshis]=XBT or XBI=bit
All small purchases will be depicted as in this example: gum- 1,470.99 XBT/XBI (bits)
large purchases (more than current BTC) would be called in megabits
House: 1,500 Megabits (instead of 1,500,000,000 bits). This would ensure ease of use.
BTC (depicted as such) will be a historical (not ISO) unit, which will be fine to use in wallets, etc.
Jump to: