Topic: is this a coincidence? - page 2. (Read 2025 times)

you car cost 10 decadollars, and you soda cost 1milidollar. that is confusing and you need to learn which is worth more than the other. with kilo, mega, giga ALOT of people already know which is above the other. and the decimal places are not practical. how are you going to compare prices with that shit? imagine going to the grocery store and seeing prices all in those $0,00003 you would get tired very fast. the reason the smallest amount should be called bitcoin is because its more in line with the reality. i mean why do you want to call bitcoin satoshi all of a sudden? 1 megasatoshi? wtf? it should be megabitcoin

So you want to swap the meanings of Bitcoin and satoshi? That won't be confusing at all.

What's wrong with satoshi anyway? You can have 1 satoshi, 1 kilosatoshi (1000 satoshis), 1 megasatoshi (1 million satoshis), etc. How much does a soda cost? One megasatoshi! (That's $1.42 at the current exchange rate, by the way.)

I don't really see how tiny units of a currency makes it sound bad or not "empowering". What if I said a soda cost $0.00142 instead of $1.42? Or in other words, you can buy 1000 sodas for $1.42. To me, that would be more empowering because a dollar in that scenario is very valuable and can buy a lot. It sounds better (to me) than saying a soda costs $1420; a single dollar would be almost worthless.

centi bitcoin and deci bitcoin just sounds wrong. im talking about improving the feel of the currency, centi and deci bitcoin is not going to help here. even micro and mili bitcoin sounds wrong, we need names that empower the currency. you also have to keep in mind as the currency deflates we are going to use lesser and lesser amounts. do you really want to be trading in Microbitcoins and Milibitcoins in the future? i prefer kilobitcoin or anything that sounds more empowering instead

what needs to be done imo is do away with the comma and when doing this call the lowerst amount possible a bitcoin. we can then call the current BTC a satoshi. The current btc is just 100,000,000 units of the smallest amount anyway. Thats what people are trading on the exchanges. Its 100,000,000 units of the smallest amount atm. and the smallest amount should of course be called a bitcoin? makes most sense imo

In that case there would all of a sudden be up to about 2.1 quadrillion bitcoins in existence and noone will worry wether there will be enough for everybody anymore..

i mean, the system untill now has worked fine, with the amount of people involved and the type of people involved. But there are more and more people involved now, and its no longer geek only

Instead of redefining the SI prefixes that have been used for centuries (milli-, micro-, kilo-, etc), why don't you just use "bitcent" to mean 1/100 of a Bitcoin? "Cent" comes from Latin meaning "hundred", after all.

And I don't understand how "1 BTC is exactly 1 Terabitcoin"...?? You're saying that 1 is the same as 1,000,000,000,000 (or would it be 1,00,00,00,00 in your new system)?

As far as "an easy to grasp rule set", we already have that with existing SI prefixes:


The first 3 will probably be used most often in the coming years.

All in all I think you're full of confusion.

I think it's being used quite alot already... 

just dont think bitcoin will really be used in its current form

Those are satoshis.

I think that if you tell someone you're sending them ten megasatoshis instead of 1 btc they might look at you a little funny.

It does kind of sound cooler though.

blacksmith has had other equally FAIL threads about this same thing...


HUH?! Really dude?

100 BTC = 1 Kilo Bitcoin

100 Kilos = 1 Mega coin

100 Mega coins = 1 Giga coins?

OMG you are OFF.


EDIT: Do you know how much my cocaine habit is going to frustrate me now? 1 Kilo is 1,000 grams for 100 Kilobitcoins or rather 1 Megacoin... er screw it! I am going to the METH!

Agree. I prefer 1 BTC = 12 satoshi.

So you are suggesting that we redesign the metric system?  No thanks.

We should start a BTC funded charity to inform metrically-challenged people. 

You'll get used to it. Nothing can be as complicated as the old english money system.

And for IT people 1024 meters is a kilometer....

Just wait for it ... will handle itself

Two problems:

1) You're trying to redefine kilo-, mega-, giga-, tera-, etc to mean values less than 1 - we already have prefixes for that (milli-, micro-, etc)
2) You're trying to define them as powers of 100 rather than 1000 - we also have prefixes for some of those and could build others more consistently (e.g. centi-, decimilli-, micro-)

I think it's OK to use the base-100 system for convenience, with familiar terms such as "cent" or "bitcent", but we should reserve the SI prefixes for their usual meanings, and use those alongside as necessary.  Also given that nobody knows how much bitcoins will be worth next month, don't get too attached to binding terminology to current fiat currency values (so don't try to call 0.01BTC a "bollar" or a "bit-dollar" or whatever, it will just be wrong again sometime in the future).

For colloquial, non-SI usage, most currencies end up using new words that are completely different to each other, as "penny" is to "pound", or "dime", "nickel", "dollar", or "farthing", "shilling", "crown", etc.

Any normal person has enough brain to be able to manage the decimals without problems.

That's the first thing I thought when I heard about BTC. Knowing there will only be about 20 million, I guess the original developers never thought they would reach $130 each! Back when it started, it would have been as awkward as now. Who's to say that they price will remain high to justify a change? :::prepare for flame:::

again that chart is hard to memorize. names are awkard the denominations amount equally so. i think its important the denominations are as simple as possible and adhere to an easy to grasp rule set

We have this already. E.g. a microbitcoin is 0.000001 BTC. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Units

would it make sense to come up with a better denomination system? atm. i think the 8 decimal places feels awkward.

i was wondering if the system could handle denominations that go by the hundreds, just like normal currency does. 100 cents to a dollar, 100 pennies to a pound etc.

i wanted to imitate the kilobyte, megabyte system, because well its computerish, as is bitcoin. problem is this system builds on denominations by the thousands. ~1000 bytes is a kilobyte, ~1000 kilobyte is a megabyte. but the names are good because people already know them and can relate to them easily.

so use the same names, but have them go by the 100's instead of 1000's because its more in line with a currency.

i made a spreadsheet where i put my current balance at the top, and then the spreadsheet worked out how many Kilobitcoin i had, how many Megabitcoin and so on. And i was pleased with the result. It turns out 1 BTC is exactly 1 Terabitcoin. Well the result was at least more pleasing than having 1,12345678 BTC in balance. Its probably too late to rework the currency...... but i dont think thats neccesary. With a little logic the backend could still work in the old way. Or have the raw balance. But up front it would be displayed in either kilobitcoin, megabitcoin or whatever depending on how many bitcoin you actually have. i think its a better system because its future proofed. i mean, we willl know today what the denominations will be down the line as the currency deflates. it will also be easier to price this way. instead of having prices of 0.000003 etc. you could just have 3 Kilobitcoin. I mean for short it could just be Kbc, or Kbc or whatever...

Even mining would feel more lucrative or what have you if the mining wallets etc. was displayed in another denomination than 0,000334 because it doesent feel rewarding to mine 0,00434. If however the denomination was changed, you might still only be mining 0,003434 but it would display 3434 Kbc instead which just changes the whole game imo. The currency itself would be more lovable, if you can say that about a currency...... the 0,0003434 denominations makes it look like a freak child. Even the proposed uBTC and mBTC dont feel right as they dont abide by any rule set really, and the amount of decimal places they represent will be harder to memorize/remember. With the Kilobitcoin/Megabitcoin denomination set you only have to remember they work the same way as with file sizes, but they increase by the 100's not the 1000's. you would always know that 1 Kilobitcoin is 100 bitcoin(which is currently called satoshis) and 1 Megabitcoin is 100 kilobitcoin. You could have various exhanges spring up. Ones that specialised in kilobitcoins, ones that specialised in Terabitcoins and so on. Not everyone can afford to trade a whole BTC so even today this system could make sense. There is alot more to it, to get it working in practice, but what do you think about the inital idea?