Please stop with mBTC, microBTC, ...! - page 5.

RobertDJ

full member

Activity: 155

Merit: 100

Quote from: tspacepilot on July 24, 2014, 07:15:18 PM

I think the OP is quite off the mark on this one. Using SI prefixes is a really normal thing to do. Do you say "I'm going to visit my friend in the next town, he lives just 25000 meters away", or do you say "25km"? It's really the same thing. Similarly, most likely you talk about the size of your hard drive in GigaBytes, not 1000000000s of Bytes.

I would, however, agree with you about these proposals for other funky named units "BITS", etc, that stuff does sound like some other coin and it's weird.

SI prefixes are quite standard, however, and they are very useful.

Even people that are on the metric system will not be used to using terms that signify a small percentage of something. Using these terms will cause confusion and will likely cause sellers to get scammed out of their product when they are offered a price that is a small fraction of what their product is worth.

BtcGains

newbie

Activity: 38

Merit: 0

It's all about preference, I personally think mBTC is confusing to start off with but makes sense as you get use to it. It's just like $ and Cents, it makes sense
uBTC on the other hand can be dropped.

Though I guess as value rises, mBTC and uBTC will be more common terms and in which then I agree satoshi is a better use of measuring Bitcoins rather than mBTC and uBTC (uBTC is darn confusing)

Febo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1288

Quote from: rarkenin on July 22, 2014, 10:42:56 AM

In my opinion, ALL engineering notation prefixes should be fair game. I should be able to talk about milliBTC, or microBTC.
BTC and mBTC are used for purchases, while μBTC can be used to discuss fees.

nanoBTC is not of much use. When talking about the network as a whole, it could be worthwhile to discuss kilo- or mega-BTC.

Some altcoin could have a use for kiloFOO, or even megaFOO for transactions themselves.

It is this way normally.

and yes, would be nice to have a kiloBTC Roll Eyes

polynesia

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1000

Very soon, only Satoshis will be required for regular transactions (I wish

)

williamj2543

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

Get ready for PrimeDice Sig Campaign!

I get confused by all the different names, even satoshis. I just like it when people use a big decimal in standard BTC pricing.

tspacepilot

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1081

I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.

I think the OP is quite off the mark on this one. Using SI prefixes is a really normal thing to do. Do you say "I'm going to visit my friend in the next town, he lives just 25000 meters away", or do you say "25km"? It's really the same thing. Similarly, most likely you talk about the size of your hard drive in GigaBytes, not 1000000000s of Bytes.

I would, however, agree with you about these proposals for other funky named units "BITS", etc, that stuff does sound like some other coin and it's weird.

SI prefixes are quite standard, however, and they are very useful.

hikedoon

full member

Activity: 143

Merit: 100

I'll stick to BTC and satoshi.

dyask

hero member

Activity: 854

Merit: 510

Quote from: bitsmichel on July 22, 2014, 02:50:03 PM

With all those terms coming around, it gets very confusing - but this confusion only appears when you need to convert say nBTC to uBTC
or nBTC to bits. BTC is also a great unit.. I think everyone on this forum knows the current BTC market price.
I think overtime a lot of these units will be abandoned.

As long as BTC is used, mBTC, uBTC, nBTC ... are all natural terms. If BTC is abandoned, then I hope we don't fall into a system like the unit miss-mash insane confusing system used in the USA. Fewer units is better than more units. We already have BTC and satoshi, that should be enough. "bits" is just uBTC so it can be used those that really need another unit.

bitsmichel

sr. member

Activity: 518

Merit: 250

With all those terms coming around, it gets very confusing - but this confusion only appears when you need to convert say nBTC to uBTC
or nBTC to bits. BTC is also a great unit.. I think everyone on this forum knows the current BTC market price.
I think overtime a lot of these units will be abandoned.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: STT on July 22, 2014, 02:07:41 PM

It might be all redundant if BTC value rises properly it will make the sat argument far more viable

I think we're finally on a good way to findin a consensus here...

STT

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1452

Complexity can make a product more familiar to various parts of society. Depends if the detail is required or ends up like lawyer speak, alot of trouble and confusion. My experience recently of using btc was its slower, more expensive and fiddly then just transferring funds from my bank account via paypal which is instant and 2 mouse clicks as Ive already set it up

I was just setting up coinbase which has the wallet listed in Bits and I dont think its helping really. I still get a long number with decimal point and comma, the BTC amount is actually simpler apart from the extra zeroes in there.
It might be all redundant if BTC value rises properly it will make the sat argument far more viable

whitefly

newbie

Activity: 44

Merit: 0

I'm actually using BTC and Satoshi, and this is enough for me.
Hoewer, people like to add complexity.

rarkenin

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

In my opinion, ALL engineering notation prefixes should be fair game. I should be able to talk about milliBTC, or microBTC.
BTC and mBTC are used for purchases, while μBTC can be used to discuss fees.

nanoBTC is not of much use. When talking about the network as a whole, it could be worthwhile to discuss kilo- or mega-BTC.

Some altcoin could have a use for kiloFOO, or even megaFOO for transactions themselves.

sandykho47

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Knowledge its everything

i think cBTC, mBTC, bits, XBC, uBTC, nBTC is very hard to remember and to convert to BTC

1 cBTC = 0.01 = 6 USD
1 mBTC = 0.001 = 0.6 USD
1 bits = 0.000001 = 0.0006 USD
1 uBTC = 0.000001 = 0.0006 USD
1 satoshi = 0.00000001 = 0.000006 USD
1 nBTC = 0.000000001 = 0.0000006 USD

all of them are confusing me
but i think we should use BTC & mBTC ONLY
who would buy something with 0.000001 BTC (1 uBTC / 1 bits)

and most exhcange that i see, only use BTC / mBTC

DhaniBoy

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

yeah i agree with this
mBTC, uBTC are too hard to remember
i'm not familiar with that
i prefer to use 0.000005 BTC Tongue

dyask

hero member

Activity: 854

Merit: 510

Quote from: AliceWonder on July 20, 2014, 09:30:22 AM

Quote from: Erdogan on July 20, 2014, 06:52:26 AM

Quote from: BurtW on July 20, 2014, 12:46:13 AM

nBTC would be very confusing since there is no way to currently represent/transact/buy/sell 1 nBTC.

So yes you could represent amounts in nBTC but only in steps of 10 (for now): 10 nBTC, 20 nBTC, 30 nBTC etc.

That's the one parameter satoshi got wrong. To make it compliant with the scientific notation, it should really be 1 BCT = 10⁹ satoshi, or 1 BTC = 10⁶ satoshi.

Anyway, that's not going to be changed.

He didn't get it wrong.

It is compliant with metric notation.

1 satoshi = .01 uBTC.

With respect to scientific notation, you pick one and use it throughout.

e.g. if you are using mks like physics often does - you represent a thousandth of a meter as 10^(-3) m and not as mm.

If you are using cgs like chemists often do - you represent a thousandth of a meter as 10^(-1) cm and not as mm

People keep confusing scientific with metric.

Scientific notation is fine with metric (SI), one is a unit and one is a multiplier. The two can be used together without issue.

AliceWonder

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: Erdogan on July 20, 2014, 06:52:26 AM

Quote from: BurtW on July 20, 2014, 12:46:13 AM

nBTC would be very confusing since there is no way to currently represent/transact/buy/sell 1 nBTC.

So yes you could represent amounts in nBTC but only in steps of 10 (for now): 10 nBTC, 20 nBTC, 30 nBTC etc.

That's the one parameter satoshi got wrong. To make it compliant with the scientific notation, it should really be 1 BCT = 10⁹ satoshi, or 1 BTC = 10⁶ satoshi.

Anyway, that's not going to be changed.

He didn't get it wrong.

It is compliant with metric notation.

1 satoshi = .01 uBTC.

With respect to scientific notation, you pick one and use it throughout.

e.g. if you are using mks like physics often does - you represent a thousandth of a meter as 10^(-3) m and not as mm.

If you are using cgs like chemists often do - you represent a thousandth of a meter as 10^(-1) cm and not as mm

People keep confusing scientific with metric.

wachtwoord

legendary

Activity: 2324

Merit: 1125

Quote from: Erdogan on July 20, 2014, 06:52:26 AM

Quote from: BurtW on July 20, 2014, 12:46:13 AM

nBTC would be very confusing since there is no way to currently represent/transact/buy/sell 1 nBTC.

So yes you could represent amounts in nBTC but only in steps of 10 (for now): 10 nBTC, 20 nBTC, 30 nBTC etc.

That's the one parameter satoshi got wrong. To make it compliant with the scientific notation, it should really be 1 BCT = 10⁹ satoshi, or 1 BTC = 10⁶ satoshi.

Anyway, that's not going to be changed.

At some point we'll stop using Bitcoin as a unit altogether and just use Satoshi or metric derivations of it (KiloSatoshi, MegaSatoshi etc.).

Erdogan

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1005

Quote from: BurtW on July 20, 2014, 12:46:13 AM

nBTC would be very confusing since there is no way to currently represent/transact/buy/sell 1 nBTC.

So yes you could represent amounts in nBTC but only in steps of 10 (for now): 10 nBTC, 20 nBTC, 30 nBTC etc.

That's the one parameter satoshi got wrong. To make it compliant with the scientific notation, it should really be 1 BCT = 10⁹ satoshi, or 1 BTC = 10⁶ satoshi.

Anyway, that's not going to be changed.

BurtW

legendary

Activity: 2646

Merit: 1137

All paid signature campaigns should be banned.

nBTC would be very confusing since there is no way to currently represent/transact/buy/sell 1 nBTC.

So yes you could represent amounts in nBTC but only in steps of 10 (for now): 10 nBTC, 20 nBTC, 30 nBTC etc.

Topic: Please stop with mBTC, microBTC, ...! - page 5. (Read 15214 times)