Topic: satoshis seriously, already! its defacto now, forget ubtc and mbtc (Read 2954 times)

so has anyone made a proposal on the main bitcoin github to have the next update include bits.. or are you just waffling on about it on a forum?

Milibit should be adopted. Right now it's worth enough to mention mbtc.

1 bit should be equivalent to a millibit perhaps?

Bits is by far the best proposal for practical purposes.

1 bit is a hundred Satoshi
1 bitcoin is a million bits

Easy to remember, easy to use.

I think I am leaning this way too now.  "Bits" is a nice easy name.  We could still use SI prefixes when writing (e.g., 23 kbits) but people would say 23 thousand bits rather than 23 kilobits.  You can't really do that if you use the divisive SI prefixes like milli and micro.    

The price of bitcoin right now would be $0.46 per thousand bits.  

My only concern is that it does not make the resolution of bitcoin obvious like satoshis does.  But at least when people ask, the answer that there are 100 sub-units in each bit will seem natural.  

I was in favor of mBTC (or em bits) for a long time but "bits" as a colloquial for micro bitcoins could be useful.  Being 100 satoshis it reduces (somewhat) the excessive number of zeroes, provides two decimal places (useful for legacy financial applications) and shouldn't need to be changed outside of the most optimistic (and unrealistic) scenarios.

For example:
The dust limit is currently 5.6 bits.
The min fee to relay is being reduced from 100 bits to 10 bits.
You can currently get more than 2,200 bits to the dollar.
There are one million bits in a bitcoin.
I am selling this used GPU for 840,000 bits.

Exactly.  An "excessive" number of zeros on the right is just as easy to make mistakes as an excessive number of zeros on the left.

Quick (without tediously counting zeros) was that 200000000000 sats, 2000000000 sats, or 20000000000 sats?

Satoshis are too small to be used in everyday currently but in the future hopefully

never really linked mBTC bits is more intersting and more natural.

I dont think we are ready for such big numbers. Imagine sending 20000000000 satoshis

Then the dust threshold and anti DOS fees would be raised 100x.  They aren't arbitrary.  They serve a purpose and if you redenominated then the min fee to relay and the dust threshold (which is ~56% of min fee to relay) would rise correspondingly.

Still the dust threshold is now (v0.9) 560 satoshis which is worth 1/4 of a US cent.  There is no reason for the dust threshold to be lower (unless the value goes much higher at which point the it will be lowered again).

yes, Bits sounds easier to explain to the normal laymen.

Satoshis or Satoshis (0.00000001 XBT) sounds good to the people here but to the laymen on the street, they'll be scared stiff. I prefer to use the word "bits" too.

Agree.

Mbtc is a viable plan, satoshis, now... NOPE

when thinking of the usefulness of mBTC right now.. NO ONE can just transmit 0.01 mBTC due to the fee and satoshi dust limits. thus right now mBTC is still not ready to be used for anything meaningful, apart from looking like you have alot of coins/value

its much the same (well the polar opposite due to the inflation/deflation differences) as the dollar offering a $1000 bank note. although it looks like you have more value by holding one of these in your hand. you cant really use it to buy a pack of chewing gum at the local 7-11.

and as i said before, pricing everything in mBTC will make things like fee's look larger, cause things like change for 1c to become less helpful. so until the fee's which mining pools want to charge are atleast 2 decimals below mBTC. then mBTC is useless for actual use, and only useful for wealth display.

although i do think that spending years arguing about BTC versus mBTC is redundant as by the time people get use to mBTC, the value of it all will rise so high it will just spark another debate about changing from mBTC versus Sat's

one day in the future we will all be measuring in satoshi's much like the Zimbabwe dollar, so i find the mBTC arguments as futile for the reasons given above. same goes for uBTC.

as for anyone thinking that any change in measurement requires a blockchain fork.. you have it wrong. the blockchain protocol already measures in SATOSHI's... not bitcoin, not mBTC, not uBTC... but satoshi's... it is only the front end, web php code that converts it up. so its easy to move to other measurements without changing the protocol

jeez  

this doesn't solve the problem of dust transactions at all; and just how are you including transaction fees if you send 100 satoshis??!!

NO

Only way forward is to stick with the current divisibility (10^8 satoshis per bitcoin) but do a SPLIT via a fork

1:100 would be perfect.

All the name change "solutions" are a joke.

We are already using different units like btc, mBTC, ubtc and satoshi.
There is no need to have just one unit.

Satoshi will be ok when price increases a lot. Maybe $100,000.

mBTC is ok for now.

What is wrong with Satoshi?