Topic: The only way forward is to split it. (Read 2616 times)

Well the problem is you won't be saying you have 100 Satoshis.

Lets price some common items in satoshis.

A $8.99 domain name from namecheap
$8.99 USD
0.01997778 BTC
19.97778 mBTC
1,997,778 sat

Ouch well they are all ugly.  if we round to 0.00001 BTC (1/2 cent in value)
0.01998000 BTC
19.98 mBTC
1,998,000 sat

$399.95 GPU from tiger direct.
0.88877778 BTC
888.77778  mBTC
88,877,778 sat

Or rounded
0.88978000 BTC
888.78 mBTC
88,878,000 sat

$5,000 mining rig
11.11111000 BTC
11,111.11 mBTC
1,111,111,000  sat

A satoshi has so little value that you end up with equally "long" values.

Right now mBTC is ~ $0.45 in value.  Rounding to two decimal places (pretty common in currencies) gives you 0.00001 BTC precision (~ 1/2 US cent).  Even at $5,000 USD:BTC exchange rate that gives you 5 cent precision. 

I voted for keeping BTC. I don't trust other cryptocurrencies

mBTC and uBTC are complicated.  "Oh so x amount of a fraction of a bitcoin" is what mainstream adopters will think.

Much better for them to say I have 100 satoshis, simple.

I'm fully in support of changing to mBTC or µBTC. Either is significantly better than what we have now, we just need consensus and action.

which will force transaction costs down, and make btc even more compedative

+1 for me.

Ive always sensed that the moment for Bitcoin "Winning" will be with 1 satoshi= 1 USD cent. In that moment, the BTC will be completely spreaded throughout the world. And anyone will be able to use it in everyday lives. The goal value of 1 satoshi= 1 us cent also puts the value of a whole Bitcoin where it deserves if it gets adopted worldwide and as an everyday money vehicle.
Also, ive been using satoshis for a while too, the push of the DOGE community is really big atm.

what do you buy from them the only thing I do there is look up market cap  http://www.coinwarz.com/cryptocurrency

I agree. The psychologic effect of having full or more is better than having fractions, whole numbers + small fractions are easier to read than tiny fractions like 0,004546, and if btc skyrockets to 10000+, the trasaction costs will start to become significative

+1

Migrating to "satoshis" solves two perceived problems simultaneously, while mBTC, uBTC, etc solve only one:

   1.  The price today could be quoted on the news as "$4.46 per million satoshis" making bitcoin sound affordable;

   2.  It makes the public automatically aware of the resolution of bitcoin's unit of account:
              Q: "what's smaller than a satoshi?"
              A: "nothing."

Many people who are familiar with bitcoin still don't know that 1 BTC is composed of 100,000,000 credits that we call "satoshis."  Discussing satoshis more commonly would simultaneously make bitcoin appear more affordable and educate the public about its pricing resolution. 

satoshis

people are already using satoshis, lets go straight to that, its pretty common now, Doge User base complete familiar with satoshis .

Satoshis now,
it differentiates,
cements the BTC history in,
set BTC as the bar,
works nicely to 1satoshi = 1 cent
feels good to own 10K satoshi

saves this argument at mbit , ubit etc

Ok, I get it.

I just deal with so many people here at bitcointalk who have significant difficulty with large numbers, that it seemed possible that there was a misunderstanding about the difference between 10⁵ and 10⁷ (It's only 2!)

Deleted my post, since it's clear that I missed the humor in your post.

When Googling to find the price of gold, I noticed that there are about 2.1 x 10^5 cubic feet of gold in existence above ground. Which, if you squint, is delightfully similar to the 2.1 x 10^7 total supply of Bitcoins.

Pointless fact of the day.

I agree.

I see the future of Bitcoin commerce using designs where it looks like you are buying something in $, but behind the scenes it is all Bitcoin. 

+1

i love it when people say 21million coins is a barrier to entry..

back in egyptian times there were gold statues that weighed a tonne.. and measured as such. yet not many people know that there are only 170 THOUSAND tonnes, far less "units" then bitcoin

yet if gold can be divided down to ounces and grams over the centuries. then bitcoin can be devided down to bitmils (mbtc) and satoshi's in a few years, as things naturally progress

A 1kg bar of gold costs what, $41,000? Is that a barrier to the adoption of gold as a store of value? No, because you can buy smaller bars.

I suspect that he choose 21 million, rather than billion or trillion, for scarcity reasons. Millions is not that much these days but trillions is still a shitload, as far as early adoption goes, saying there is only 21 million, as opposed to 21 trillion, sounds a hell of a lot more enticing.

IMO I also don't think the unit of btc matters so much. I think everyone here focuses on the btc unit too much (e.g I have 10 btc, this thing costs 2 btc). Btc is a hedge against inflation and protection from government/banks. In my eyes, its much better to quote how much fiat value one has in bitcoin, not just the number of bitcoin. If we only ever talked about the fiat value, it would never be that confusing, and it would sound awesome too. For example, "I bought $1000 worth of bitcoin in 2011 and now it's worth $2.3 million" as opposed to "I bought 1000 bitcoin in 2011, I'm rich man." "yeah, cool man, how much are a thousand bitcoin?". No point using numbers of bitcoin when everyone is going to convert it to fiat for perspective anyway.

Same goes for gold. In my country there is a lottery where you can win gold. They don't say you'll win 10 ounces (boring) they say you'll win $10,000. Just makes more sense and sounds impressive.

I say never use btc amounts (or price things in btc) when talking to people, use the fiat amounts, that way decimal places don't matter.

Or maybe I'm just an idiot, I don't know.

I just found this old thread accidentally. It may provide some insights for you.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoin-protocol-magic-numbers-and-reason-263750

the bitcoin PROTOCOL is actually measured in satoshi's.. it is then clients, services, front-ends that use math to change it down to become measurements of bitcoins.

so changing the front end to use less decimals will not harm the protocol..

before
$value= 12345678 / 100000000
$value= 0.12345678 BTC

after
$value= 12345678 / 100000
$value= 123.45678 mBTC (bitmill)

simples

Everything about bitcoin was chosen very carefully by satoshi. I'm convinced of that. The more I look into it, the more I realize his/her/their genius and foresight, I am struggling with the number of coins though. Anyone care to postulate a good reason for 21 mil?

The reason why I propose it is that in technical matters, the core devs are constantly evaluating proposals to make minor changes in the software, and "forcing them from the top" once they a) believe that the change is important enough b) there is sufficient concensus.

The software won't crash even if we don't do anything to this problem (so it is not of critical urgency). But that is not a reason to refuse to do anything about it (it is of critical importance sooner or later).

My aim is to make the change so prevalent that all popular media will use the "new" unit. At that point it does not matter if the rednecks use "grand" as their basic unit. The focus is in prospective users, not current ones.