Topic: Bitcoin will only succeed once it takes the right approach to the decimal place. (Read 3632 times)
June 13, 2011, 04:28:13 PM
IDD, a mil (and, by extend, millibitcoin) would be great.
June 13, 2011, 04:26:34 PM
Calling .001 bitcoin a "millibitcoin" or "mil" for short will work just fine. I've already posted these pictures in one of the many other threads on this issue, but I think it is important to hammer the point home that there is precedent. People are capable of handling mils, and have done so before.
.001 dollar token:
A coin of .005 Maltese Lira:
A banknote for 0.5 palestinian pounds, or "500 mils":
An aluminium 1 mil coin for .001 cypriot pounds:
.001 dollar token:
A coin of .005 Maltese Lira:
A banknote for 0.5 palestinian pounds, or "500 mils":
An aluminium 1 mil coin for .001 cypriot pounds:
You will notice that every single picture of those random odd failing(?) currency units all have had to convert the decimals into "normal" numbers and give them a new name.
This is exactly what is being proposed here: keep the actual network the way it is, but change the way the GUI shows bitcoins, and what we understand as 1 unit of the bitcoin currency to something that is easier to comprehend.
The way it is now is contrary to how people usually deal with both numbers and currencies, and only serve to overcomplicate things.
Now before you argue that the numbers all add up, and decimals are just fine, then remember that you are someone who is used to technology, numbers and computer and whatnot.
We want this to be for more than the elite of computer users, right?
If we want this to be a currency for John Does too, then we need to make it more appealing and less robotic.
June 13, 2011, 02:56:52 PM
It is too late. You will never get the network to agree to changing the fundamental unit. Let me repeat that never. For this to work, you would need to shut down the entire network, at once, for the big software update. Will. Not. Happen.
Nobody here wants to change the unit used by the network. We want to change the unit used by the GUI and, by that, the unit used by the humans using the software. There's no thecnical challanges to implement that, just a bunch of "*1000".
And about the name... not satoshi, please.
June 13, 2011, 02:41:35 PM
It is too late. You will never get the network to agree to changing the fundamental unit. Let me repeat that never. For this to work, you would need to shut down the entire network, at once, for the big software update. Will. Not. Happen.
Feel free to set up your local display for whatever floats your boat, but if you use the term bitcoin to mean anything other than what the rest of the network thinks of as a bitcoin, you are in for a rude surprise.
Feel free to set up your local display for whatever floats your boat, but if you use the term bitcoin to mean anything other than what the rest of the network thinks of as a bitcoin, you are in for a rude surprise.
June 13, 2011, 01:59:43 PM
Even Mt. Gox can't handle anything lower than 0.1, and I would argue that this isn't a technical issue, but more of a psychological one related to the decimal point. A person should at least be able to buy as small amount of bitcoins as he can get at the exchange rate for the amount of dollars and cents he has in his Mt. Gox account, but currently, that is't possible. Once that other bug with fees on smaller transactions in the Bitcoin client gets worked out, I would argue that there should be no reason to force all trades on Mt. Gox to be higher than 0.1.
June 13, 2011, 01:58:59 PM
there are 210 trillion satoshis available. (American trillions. Note that euros have a different meaning for "trillion")
The currency should be changed so that:
1 bitcoin becomes 1 satoshi
Just change the meaning of what we currently call a bitcoin to what is currently called a satoshi.
Bitcoins and satoshis become the same thing and the problem will be solved. The public will understand, and will be excited to get their hands on 10, 100, 1k, 100k, 1mil, 100mil, 500mil bitcoins.
Fractions are poison for the currency.
The currency should be changed so that:
1 bitcoin becomes 1 satoshi
Code:
CURRENT VALUE FUTURE VALUE
1 satoshi 1 bitcoin
500 satoshi 500 bitcoins
500k satoshi 500 thousand bitcoins (500k)
500 million satoshi 500 million bitcoins (500mil)
500 billion satoshi 500 billion bitcoins (500bil)
210 trillion satoshi 210 trillion bitcoins (210tril)
Just change the meaning of what we currently call a bitcoin to what is currently called a satoshi.
Bitcoins and satoshis become the same thing and the problem will be solved. The public will understand, and will be excited to get their hands on 10, 100, 1k, 100k, 1mil, 100mil, 500mil bitcoins.
Fractions are poison for the currency.
June 13, 2011, 01:44:09 PM
ITT: Nerds do not understand simple psychology. Nothing new I guess, but shows that this community is still self-embracing and not very inviting to the outside world.
Dealing in decimal may be fine for super nerds and computers, but if we want this to be more than our secret tree house were we do things normal people don't get, then we need to make it more appealing to John Does.
One way of doing this is moving the decimal place.
Dealing in decimal may be fine for super nerds and computers, but if we want this to be more than our secret tree house were we do things normal people don't get, then we need to make it more appealing to John Does.
One way of doing this is moving the decimal place.
yep.
no prefix is going to solve this issue-- there should be NO decimals in bitcoins AT ALL. PERIOD.
A bitcoin should be the SMALLEST unit you can make, and people can deal in:
e.g.
10 bitcoins
100 bitcoins
600 bitcoins
1k bitcoins
100k bitcoins
600k bitcoins
1mil bitcoins
100mil bitcoins
600mil bitoins
1bil bitcoins
100bil bitcoins
600bil bitcoins
1tril bitcoins
100tril bitcoins
600tril bitcoins
people understand these numbers. People DO NOT, under ANY circumstances, understand fractions.
June 13, 2011, 01:33:35 PM
I fall in-between SEA and HYP
I expect man others are in two categories
I expect man others are in two categories
June 13, 2011, 01:05:57 PM
maybe try PMing Gavin or another developer with your concerns and see what their assessment is. They seem to be very receptive to critiques, I'm sure they'll give you a thoughtful response.
June 13, 2011, 12:55:02 PM
hello_good_sir, awesome analysis of the Bitcoin people involved.
It might be a good starting point of several issues, not just decimal shifting, which I do agree is important.
It might be a good starting point of several issues, not just decimal shifting, which I do agree is important.
June 13, 2011, 10:53:24 AM
You could pay someone to make a new client, or to make a patch for the default client. Bounties have been popular.
The point is that changing your local client to display mBTC or uBTC, or to allow switching between them, doesn't require that the entire network change instantly.
The point is that changing your local client to display mBTC or uBTC, or to allow switching between them, doesn't require that the entire network change instantly.
June 13, 2011, 10:40:51 AM
I agree with the op, that the decimal place should shift.
Perhaps this only needs to be a client UI issue tho - all transactions could still use the current decimal places, and just in the UI the user could switch between 'BTC' i.e. what we have now, or a more user friendly 'UBTC' or whatever we call it, which makes them feel richer and is perhaps easier to use in mental math, etc (and which is perhaps the default 'view').
just a thought
*edit* just did some reading, looks like others have already suggested just making it a simple client ui edit. seems the easiest way to go.
Perhaps this only needs to be a client UI issue tho - all transactions could still use the current decimal places, and just in the UI the user could switch between 'BTC' i.e. what we have now, or a more user friendly 'UBTC' or whatever we call it, which makes them feel richer and is perhaps easier to use in mental math, etc (and which is perhaps the default 'view').
just a thought
*edit* just did some reading, looks like others have already suggested just making it a simple client ui edit. seems the easiest way to go.
This is the only renormalization that is even remotely practical right now, and there is nothing stopping anyone from implementing it locally.
There is, since only a small percentage of us have the programming expertise to 'implement it locally'.
June 13, 2011, 08:24:38 AM
I agree with the op, that the decimal place should shift.
Perhaps this only needs to be a client UI issue tho - all transactions could still use the current decimal places, and just in the UI the user could switch between 'BTC' i.e. what we have now, or a more user friendly 'UBTC' or whatever we call it, which makes them feel richer and is perhaps easier to use in mental math, etc (and which is perhaps the default 'view').
just a thought
*edit* just did some reading, looks like others have already suggested just making it a simple client ui edit. seems the easiest way to go.
Perhaps this only needs to be a client UI issue tho - all transactions could still use the current decimal places, and just in the UI the user could switch between 'BTC' i.e. what we have now, or a more user friendly 'UBTC' or whatever we call it, which makes them feel richer and is perhaps easier to use in mental math, etc (and which is perhaps the default 'view').
just a thought
*edit* just did some reading, looks like others have already suggested just making it a simple client ui edit. seems the easiest way to go.
This is the only renormalization that is even remotely practical right now, and there is nothing stopping anyone from implementing it locally.
June 13, 2011, 07:49:19 AM
And everyone that pops up suggesting this forgets that their proposed renormalization is just as arbitrary as the current one. Are you suggesting that we keep changing the entire network every time the value changes by a factor of 10?
That is a valid question, but not one that makes this issue less important to deal with, but rather more so.
I suggest we should try to move the decimal quite a lot to make it "future proof", so for example, so that 1 standard bitcoin unit is what we today call 0.00001.
June 13, 2011, 07:13:08 AM
OP is right!
June 13, 2011, 06:46:32 AM
I agree with the op, that the decimal place should shift.
Perhaps this only needs to be a client UI issue tho - all transactions could still use the current decimal places, and just in the UI the user could switch between 'BTC' i.e. what we have now, or a more user friendly 'UBTC' or whatever we call it, which makes them feel richer and is perhaps easier to use in mental math, etc (and which is perhaps the default 'view').
just a thought
*edit* just did some reading, looks like others have already suggested just making it a simple client ui edit. seems the easiest way to go.
Perhaps this only needs to be a client UI issue tho - all transactions could still use the current decimal places, and just in the UI the user could switch between 'BTC' i.e. what we have now, or a more user friendly 'UBTC' or whatever we call it, which makes them feel richer and is perhaps easier to use in mental math, etc (and which is perhaps the default 'view').
just a thought
*edit* just did some reading, looks like others have already suggested just making it a simple client ui edit. seems the easiest way to go.
June 13, 2011, 06:32:47 AM
And everyone that pops up suggesting this forgets that their proposed renormalization is just as arbitrary as the current one. Are you suggesting that we keep changing the entire network every time the value changes by a factor of 10?
June 13, 2011, 06:17:25 AM
Not only do I agree but I found it very enjoyably written. Though I disagree that it would languish forever below 1000%, I think culture would eventually adapt to using decimals simply because it would be advantageous to each individual who 'gets over it'. Just that it would take longer. Probably long enough to be worth the technical cost of changing it.
June 13, 2011, 04:39:49 AM
begrudgingly agree with OP.
June 13, 2011, 04:20:20 AM
ITT: Nerds do not understand simple psychology. Nothing new I guess, but shows that this community is still self-embracing and not very inviting to the outside world.
Dealing in decimal may be fine for super nerds and computers, but if we want this to be more than our secret tree house were we do things normal people don't get, then we need to make it more appealing to John Does.
One way of doing this is moving the decimal place.
Dealing in decimal may be fine for super nerds and computers, but if we want this to be more than our secret tree house were we do things normal people don't get, then we need to make it more appealing to John Does.
One way of doing this is moving the decimal place.
Jump to: