1 mBTC = 0.001 BTC right???
For example...
239,26 mBTC = 0.23926 BTC ??
Yes that's correct. For example...
239,26 mBTC = 0.23926 BTC ??
thx
Topic: Start Using mBTC as Standard Denomination? (Read 30872 times)
thx
1 mBTC = 0.001 BTC right???
For example...
239,26 mBTC = 0.23926 BTC ??
Yes that's correct. For example...
239,26 mBTC = 0.23926 BTC ??
1 mBTC = 0.001 BTC right???
For example...
239,26 mBTC = 0.23926 BTC ??
For example...
239,26 mBTC = 0.23926 BTC ??
who knows' for that to happen ... but it's very possible that we achieve
yeah I gotta start learning this too, is kinda confusing at time, cause I got so used to just using btc and decimals
coffee is worth only 0.0000005 BTC look it up
yes, that's a big part of the problem, people get lost amongst the zeroes. The average joe 6pak would rather not save a few % than have to struggle with this.
perhaps start assigning (colloquially at least) the word BitDollar, or something else.
Bit Currency has a more universal sound to it, therefore, would be more universally accepted. The title of something gives the first impression, and we all know the power of first impressions.
people like to and can think in big numbers, not microscopically small ones.
If we take the example of a purchase of a $3 cup of coffee with today's prices, then it would look like either:
- BTC0.00660778 or;
- mBTC6.60778 or;
- uBTC6,607.78
Out of those, the microbitcoin one does look quite appealing due to the limit of two decimal places. The mobile wallet could of course help the millibitcoin situation by emphasising the significant digits and showing USD equivalent, e.g.:
mBTC6.60778
(about $3.00)
(about $3.00)
If we imagine a world where bitcoin is worth 10 times as much (more likely if bitcoin is much more widespread?) then it's more like:
- BTC0.00066078 or;
- mBTC0.66078 or;
- uBTC660.78
mBTC0.66078
(about $3.00)
(about $3.00)
I'm still really liking the microbitcoin approach here. 660.78 reads fairly easily compared to 0.66078, even with user interface assistance.
So anyway, I do agree with you but I do think standardisation amongst wallet developers will come; when it does I would probably prefer microbitcoins depending on what the typical exchange rate is.
i look at those numbers and shudder at the thought of spending even 0.0006 for a "cup of cofffee"
coffee is worth only 0.0000005 BTC look it up
and what will change if we start using mBTC as the standard denomination?
Nothing; it's a wallet / software / usability issue.Don't underestimate the effect that user interface design can have though.
and what will change if we start using mBTC as the standard denomination?
so, if the uBTC as a unit, 1 Satoshi = 0.01 uBTC, I think it is fit for financially. so, we suggest Bitcoin may change its unit to uBTC.
Bitcoin's unit is already the µBTC. µBTC and mBTC are both subdivisions of BTC. They are available as options in the Bitcoin-QT client.
Changing to µBTC simply requires you to decide to make the change.
so, if the uBTC as a unit, 1 Satoshi = 0.01 uBTC, I think it is fit for financially. so, we suggest Bitcoin may change its unit to uBTC.
people like to and can think in big numbers, not microscopically small ones.
If we take the example of a purchase of a $3 cup of coffee with today's prices, then it would look like either:
- BTC0.00660778 or;
- mBTC6.60778 or;
- uBTC6,607.78
Out of those, the microbitcoin one does look quite appealing due to the limit of two decimal places. The mobile wallet could of course help the millibitcoin situation by emphasising the significant digits and showing USD equivalent, e.g.:
mBTC6.60778
(about $3.00)
(about $3.00)
If we imagine a world where bitcoin is worth 10 times as much (more likely if bitcoin is much more widespread?) then it's more like:
- BTC0.00066078 or;
- mBTC0.66078 or;
- uBTC660.78
mBTC0.66078
(about $3.00)
(about $3.00)
I'm still really liking the microbitcoin approach here. 660.78 reads fairly easily compared to 0.66078, even with user interface assistance.
So anyway, I do agree with you but I do think standardisation amongst wallet developers will come; when it does I would probably prefer microbitcoins depending on what the typical exchange rate is.
Are there any good reasons we can't just use Satoshi's for smaller?
There was a serious suggestion on the development mailing list for wallet developers to standardise on microbitcoins (uBTC, 0.000001, 100 satoshi each) on the basis that if we go to milli- now we will only have to go to micro- later anyway, and it would be better to only have one transition:
http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/bitcoin-development/thread/52853D8A.6010501%40monetize.io/#msg31639713
Also that unless the number of digits were increased in the protocol, displaying in uBTC would mean a maximum of two decimal places, which some people find easier to comprehend.
However it seems that the latest round of releases for various wallets chose to standardise on mBTC by default, and uBTC proponents were not heeded.
I voted for yes, when the BTC prices go higher than $1000, for obvious reason of pricing things in less awkward way; for example pricing a sandwich for 1 mBTC instead of 0.001 BTC.
Until then I'm good with BTC. And frankly, I really like the way it sounds : 1 BTC = 850 $ !!! Makes the dollar look so puny
Yes BTC1 = $850 sounds good, but how does having 100 million sound? Until then I'm good with BTC. And frankly, I really like the way it sounds : 1 BTC = 850 $ !!! Makes the dollar look so puny
I voted for yes, when the BTC prices go higher than $1000, for obvious reason of pricing things in less awkward way; for example pricing a sandwich for 1 mBTC instead of 0.001 BTC.
Until then I'm good with BTC. And frankly, I really like the way it sounds : 1 BTC = 850 $ !!! Makes the dollar look so puny
Until then I'm good with BTC. And frankly, I really like the way it sounds : 1 BTC = 850 $ !!! Makes the dollar look so puny
Are there any good reasons we can't just use Satoshi's for smaller?
There was a serious suggestion on the development mailing list for wallet developers to standardise on microbitcoins (uBTC, 0.000001, 100 satoshi each) on the basis that if we go to milli- now we will only have to go to micro- later anyway, and it would be better to only have one transition:
http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/bitcoin-development/thread/52853D8A.6010501%40monetize.io/#msg31639713
Also that unless the number of digits were increased in the protocol, displaying in uBTC would mean a maximum of two decimal places, which some people find easier to comprehend.
However it seems that the latest round of releases for various wallets chose to standardise on mBTC by default, and uBTC proponents were not heeded.
Are there any good reasons we can't just use Satoshi's for smaller? mbits are ok ish but only a bandaid solution; some of the suggested alternative nomenclatures are just confusing.
In general people are used to thinking in higher (123,456) rather than lower (BTC0.000123456) orders of magnitude; and people actually like to talk higher orders "I just tipped ten k" vs "I just tipped point zero zero zero zero zero one" (and yes lower order is very prone to mistake). In addition, the Bitcoin system is already programmed in satoshi's so it would just require in some cases different display formatting.
In general people are used to thinking in higher (123,456) rather than lower (BTC0.000123456) orders of magnitude; and people actually like to talk higher orders "I just tipped ten k" vs "I just tipped point zero zero zero zero zero one" (and yes lower order is very prone to mistake). In addition, the Bitcoin system is already programmed in satoshi's so it would just require in some cases different display formatting.
mBTC will be popular in future, in year or two... now price is too small to this be that important
One mBTC is currently worth about 46 cents. That doesn't sound unreasonable.
My vote is for Satoshis. In fact, previous to ask myself this kind of stuff, i was speaking in satoshis all the way while evangelizing friends :-) And yes, i do believe as well that eventually a satoshi can reach a tenth or a hundredth of us dollar cent. In the new multi-quantified internet, the 100ths of a cent will be counted. Bonus for logging, for spending time on a web, for word written... Dunno how to say it, i simply envision this too clearly.
mBTC will be popular in future, in year or two... now price is too small to this be that important
One mBTC is currently worth about 46 cents. That doesn't sound unreasonable.
mBTC will be popular in future, in year or two... now price is too small to this be that important
Jump to: