฿TC looks weird, it's like U$D
Topic: Official Bitcoin Unicode Character? - page 5. (Read 83734 times)
I don't like that ฿ sign and fortunatelly noone has to use it just because some people do
฿TC looks weird, it's like U$D
฿TC looks weird, it's like U$D
I've seen a lot of websites already using the ฿
It seems that this matter is decided, at least for now
Wrong.
Tell it to these guys:
https://en.bitcoin.it/
http://freebitcoins.appspot.com/
https://www.kalyhost.com/?Currency=BTC
https://www.autovps.net/?Currency=BTC
and many others
I've seen a lot of websites already using the ฿
It seems that this matter is decided, at least for now
Wrong.
I've seen a lot of websites already using the ฿
It seems that this matter is decided, at least for now
But there is nothing philosophically contradictory (in my opinion) or logistically preventable about the formation of a dominant "Bitcoin Organization".
Absolutely correct. In fact, I think that the emergence of a dominant "Bitcoin Organization" is inevitable, given enough time. There's always a Google or an IBM or a Microsoft waiting to be made.
Okay, I just finished reading all 10 pages of this discussion. It seems to me we are divided into two camps:
1. Those who want a symbol we can start using right away.
2. Those who want a unique symbol that we won't really be able to use online until we manage to get a character into the unicode set (which could be a few years considering it took the Thai government about a year of lobbying to get their country's currency symbol into that set, a task easier than the one we would face as a mere confederacy of nerds.)
I think we ought to decide which approach would be better for us as a community.
1. Those who want a symbol we can start using right away.
2. Those who want a unique symbol that we won't really be able to use online until we manage to get a character into the unicode set (which could be a few years considering it took the Thai government about a year of lobbying to get their country's currency symbol into that set, a task easier than the one we would face as a mere confederacy of nerds.)
I think we ought to decide which approach would be better for us as a community.
I am in the second camp. To me, Bitcoin is a new and exciting idea. It's original, so it should have an original symbol that represents it uniquely. It also has potential to become a universal currency that transcends political boundaries, so I really think it should not co-opt an existing currency's symbol.
I agree that it could take a long time before Bitcoin is big enough to be represented with its own Unicode character, but I don't think that's a problem we need to worry about at this stage. If Bitcoin is truly a worthwhile and meaningful idea destined for mass recognition, Unicode adoption will eventually follow. Worrying about Unicode representation beforehand is, I think, putting the cart before the horse. Until then, "BTC" is perfectly understandable in the digital realm.
That said, I really like the b'at:
I "falcon punched" you on a technicality, which wasn't very nice of me, but I did it to make a point: the bitcoin ecosystem is not monolithic. It's not designed to be. Bitcoins are meant to be the topsoil on which the seeds of our geniuses are nourished, no more than that. The foliage is up to us. If you want to change something, go make it happen. :-)
That being said, one thing we could "change" is to make the Bitcoin ecosystem just a little bit more "monolithic". A Bitcoin Organization is obviously not strictly necessary, and would have no authority beyond its good name, but likewise there is no authority stopping such an organization from being formed. I agree with rooofl insofar as I think that Bitcoin's most prolific users, developers and contributors could benefit from being a little bit less anarchistic - organize, vote on leaders and proposals, make press releases, and assert some of the authority that comes with their experience. If anyone wants to reject that authority, they are more than free to compete with it. But there is nothing philosophically contradictory (in my opinion) or logistically preventable about the formation of a dominant "Bitcoin Organization".
I am saying that as a Bitcoin noob, maybe design can help to make things clever and more accessible.
You're absolutely right. The guys over at weusecoins.com have started off in the right direction. The need for a "killer app" has been discussed at length here, with terms like "kitten activism" and "Jessica Simpson stupid" often getting trotted out. It all boils down to making well-designed services built on the Bitcoin Network.
I "falcon punched" you on a technicality, which wasn't very nice of me, but I did it to make a point: the bitcoin ecosystem is not monolithic. It's not designed to be. Bitcoins are meant to be the topsoil on which the seeds of our geniuses are nourished, no more than that. The foliage is up to us. If you want to change something, go make it happen. :-)
You guys are talking about a detail in the whole (and messy) Bitcoin graphic identity. This detail must be chosen by following a real design process, I don't mean by a single designer, but certainly not on a forum post.
In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
Bitcoin is not an organization. Bitcoin is a technology. Saying Bitcoin has a real identity problem is akin to saying the Internet has a real identity problem.
I am saying that as a Bitcoin noob, maybe design can help to make things clever and more accessible.
You guys are talking about a detail in the whole (and messy) Bitcoin graphic identity. This detail must be chosen by following a real design process, I don't mean by a single designer, but certainly not on a forum post.
In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
Bitcoin is not an organization. Bitcoin is a technology. Saying Bitcoin has a real identity problem is akin to saying the Internet has a real identity problem.
You have been delt a falcon punch.
You guys are talking about a detail in the whole (and messy) Bitcoin graphic identity. This detail must be chosen by following a real design process, I don't mean by a single designer, but certainly not on a forum post.
In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
Bitcoin is not an organization. Bitcoin is a technology. Saying Bitcoin has a real identity problem is akin to saying the Internet has a real identity problem.
I was persuaded after reading a little in here that ⓑ is a good option.
If 1 ⓑ keeps current value or higher, symbols for the smaller fractions may be required. mⓑ, µⓑ etc. may be an option, but are not single symbols. Not that I would care much, I'd be fine with that.
- It is better readable than the capital version.
- It stands for "bit" rather than "byte", being the correct letter terminology-wise.
- It is not frequently used for other purposes.
- It represents the expression "bitcoin" by having the symbol for bit surrounded by a circle, making it look like a coin.
- It is already present in Unicode.
If 1 ⓑ keeps current value or higher, symbols for the smaller fractions may be required. mⓑ, µⓑ etc. may be an option, but are not single symbols. Not that I would care much, I'd be fine with that.
Yes across the board. But what is the Alt+command to create the ⓑ? i am currently using alt+0223 to do a ß
You guys are talking about a detail in the whole (and messy) Bitcoin graphic identity. This detail must be chosen by following a real design process, I don't mean by a single designer, but certainly not on a forum post.
In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
Identity problem, Yes, needed to be solved by "professionals" No thanks, im sure that anyone(s) with Photoshop could create a very decent graphic design that the forums could collectivly agree upon via poll to be the best candidate, and Voila ß identity "crysis" solved In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
You guys are talking about a detail in the whole (and messy) Bitcoin graphic identity. This detail must be chosen by following a real design process, I don't mean by a single designer, but certainly not on a forum post.
In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
In my opinion, Bitcoin has a real identity problem and it must be solved quickly by professionals.
I've made a few proposals on this thread myself, but after some thought my favourite options are this symbol and Ƀ. Both symbols are elegant, simple, and currency-like, and would be easy to render and read at any size that ordinary text could be rendered.
I'd like to see the B with parallel lines at the top and bottom (though not going through the B), that is in a lot of logos already, get added to the Unicode character set. It looks nice and is easily recognisable as a symbol representing money while still being different enough from the Baht symbol ฿.
Oh, and this option too, of course.
Would the "serifs" and the top bulge being smaller than the bottom one be official parts of the symbol or are you suggesting any capital B with the little horns and feet woud be acceptable?
Do what you like. We're only a sort of confederacy at best and there's nobody here that can force anyone else into anything. The only official documentation we have is the wiki, and most of it (excluding the Bitcoin protocol itself) is the result of collective decision making. As far as I'm concerned, requiring the symbol to look exactly like the logo would be silly. The rule would get ignored as soon as the symbol began to get incorporated into other typefaces, I imagine. But whatever catches on is what will persist and thus become "official."
I'm just hoping it's not that misappropriated "baht" symbol that gets popularized.
Would the "serifs" and the top bulge being smaller than the bottom one be official parts of the symbol or are you suggesting any capital B with the little horns and feet woud be acceptable?
I'd like to see the B with parallel lines at the top and bottom (though not going through the B), that is in a lot of logos already, get added to the Unicode character set. It looks nice and is easily recognisable as a symbol representing money while still being different enough from the Baht symbol ฿.
I've made a few proposals on this thread myself, but after some thought my favourite options are this symbol and Ƀ. Both symbols are elegant, simple, and currency-like, and would be easy to render and read at any size that ordinary text could be rendered.
I was persuaded after reading a little in here that ⓑ is a good option.
If 1 ⓑ keeps current value or higher, symbols for the smaller fractions may be required. mⓑ, µⓑ etc. may be an option, but are not single symbols. Not that I would care much, I'd be fine with that.
- It is better readable than the capital version.
- It stands for "bit" rather than "byte", being the correct letter terminology-wise.
- It is not frequently used for other purposes.
- It represents the expression "bitcoin" by having the symbol for bit surrounded by a circle, making it look like a coin.
- It is already present in Unicode.
If 1 ⓑ keeps current value or higher, symbols for the smaller fractions may be required. mⓑ, µⓑ etc. may be an option, but are not single symbols. Not that I would care much, I'd be fine with that.
Makes 100% sense to me. +1
I was persuaded after reading a little in here that ⓑ is a good option.
If 1 ⓑ keeps current value or higher, symbols for the smaller fractions may be required. mⓑ, µⓑ etc. may be an option, but are not single symbols. Not that I would care much, I'd be fine with that.
- It is better readable than the capital version.
- It stands for "bit" rather than "byte", being the correct letter terminology-wise.
- It is not frequently used for other purposes.
- It represents the expression "bitcoin" by having the symbol for bit surrounded by a circle, making it look like a coin.
- It is already present in Unicode.
If 1 ⓑ keeps current value or higher, symbols for the smaller fractions may be required. mⓑ, µⓑ etc. may be an option, but are not single symbols. Not that I would care much, I'd be fine with that.
Jump to: