Topic: Use code XBT, not BTC for bitcoins (Read 9817 times)

lol

Lol...  Trendsetter fails...

I think that franky1's post summed it up best:


That there makes sense, how BTC should be used as an informal reference to the actual 'currency'. That would therefore mean that it isn't too late to change. Technically it's never too late, just that the longer you leave it, the longer it takes to establish itself.

It is not too late to switch. I have seen several places that use the XBT abbreviation. I works well for places that do foreign exchange, where you see the other currency codes. We will see over time, but I suspect that soon everybody will recognize both XBT and btc as abbreviations for bitcoins, just as you might see gold abbreviated XAU or Au, depending on the context.

I think it is too late to switch now. Too many people are used to using BTC.

Yes agreed.

In March last year when I started a thread promoting XBT I thought that the lack of an ISO code was a major handicap. It is, but it was only recently that I realized the 8 decimal places is an even bigger handicap. So assigning the ISO without having a unit for 100 satoshis is putting the cart before the horse.

I kinda liked the idea to use BTC for 1 Bitcoin, and XBT for 100 satoshis. That way trading / financial software can cope (only 2 decimals) with XBT.

1 XBT = 1 bit = 1 mBit = 100 satoshis

1,000,000 XBT = 1 BTC

I don't think that anybody is pretending that BTC is a "good international abbreviation", I think that it was just a term that came with the most peoples' exposure to Bitcoin.

It's funny how you would turn to ISO 4217 Currency Codes for something that generally isn't recognised as a currency Internationally.

But you have a point, it would take some doing - there would be a lot of confusion, which could be reduced by rolling the changes out responsibly. No doubt a few people will get scammed in the process. Are there any coins squatting on the abbreviation 'XBT'?

Maybe one day all people will use xbt for practical reasons, but until that day btc it's so much better.

BTC forever!! No way I'm switching 

Hmm, from above page:



seems yahoo chose BTC: http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=BTCUSD=X

XBT for forex BTC, BTC and bitcoin for common people
GBP for forex £, quid and pound for common people
USD for forex $, bucks and dollar for common people

now i think that wraps up the argument

yawn ... another nitpicker who wants to tell us abut right and wrong ... 

True, but I doubt many cryptocurrencies will make to mainstream...

Similarly, many people here preferred BTC over XBT.

an X and 2 more characters is way too limited tho. Theres lots of altcoins slowly getting traction and they wont get less. This naming "standard" cannot be kept with crypto currencies.

Decisive indeed.

In the financial industry, XBT will very likely become the standard abbreviation for bitcoin. The bitcoin community will undoubtedly continue to use BTC, but XBT will be used when traders look at currency crosses and spot tickers. X** is quite common for currencies that are new, offbeat, or supra-national. For example, IMF Special Drawing Rights are often abbreviated SDR in common parlace, but carry the ISO designation XDR. Similarly, gold's official currency code is XAU (au being gold's elemental symbol). I suspect Ripple abbreviating their currency XRP was deliberately based upon this naming convention by ISO and banking standards.

In terms of abbreviations, I wonder if bitcoin will take the path of the Chinese currency. When I travel internationally, I see some currency exchangers list RMB (renminbi) whereas others list CNY (Chinese Yuan).  See http://www.bbc.com/news/10413076 for clarification.

ISO values are for industrial bank system.
Bitcoin is not a bank system.



Even Bank use "Eur" notation instead of € standard sigle.

My 'understanding' is, to be honest, mostly hopium that something along the lines of what I'd envisioned back in 2011 was actually being implemented.  I've spent a few months being fairly out-of-touch and busy with other things, and to lazy to delve into the technical details.

Back when I suggested '{x}{x}0', I noted that it was cool, but entirely unnecessary, that 'my purchase of Skittles live along side some goat cheese sale in Mongolia' and do so in nearly real time on every computer who wishes to be a full peer (edit: forever!)  A possible solution would be to 'spawn' sidechains when needed.  e.g., when a chain got to big for comfort meaning that it would require a Google-like datacenter and a 'load balancing supernode' to handle the load.

Generally I would personally maintain sidechains which I actually used (in addition to 'xx0'.)  Once in a blue moon I may actually have some desire to buy some goat cheese from a vendor in Mongolia.  In that case I would need to cross chains.  A universal (if potentially less convenient and more expensive) chain which was able to do this robustly and reliably would be desirable.  That is what I hoped (and continue to hope) the first Bitcoin blockchain evolved into.

Of course my actual 'savings account' would be a paper wallet on 'xx0'.

Happily, your description of 'sidechains' seems to be geared toward providing the foundation for what I was imagining.