Topic: [VOTE] ISO Currency Code bringing Bitcoin into the mainstream financial markets - page 3. (Read 8810 times)

No, we shouldn't complicate things by defining arbitrary standards. One bitcoin should be one XBT.

Solex, compliments for your efforts! I believe that everything that will make Bitcoin more mainstream will significantly strengthen the project and improve the chance that we will be using it fifty years from now.

I think the purpose of this initiative to open for mainstream.

I can tell from long experience with banking software, that dealing with fractions less than 1/100 for money is a challenge to them!
It is however not to deal with billions.

If we do this change to open for mainstream, then let us define XBT as 100 satoshi. This would fit perfectly with existing infrastructure and familiar to people. 

USDXBT (again using FX market standard conventions) would be about 20,000 now and declining as XBT strengthens expressing nicely that USD falls.

This is excellent!  If you would check, and hopefully register these for Bitcoin that would be a great start.

XBT Bitcoin ISO currency code (application pending)
BTC Bitcoin currency code (informal use)

Please let us know if they would be accepted.



ArticMine, BitPirate and grau

Informal ISO codes can be assigned for minor units. USX and GBX are sometimes used for cents and pence, Sometimes USc and GBp, it depends on the data vendors and banks.
XBS could be used for 1 satoshi. However 1 XBT needs to equal 1 BTC.

Yes, indeed, I will ask them. A letter from the Bitcoin Foundation would carry more weight than from anyone else. However, I now understand that last year SIX rejected a request to give Bitcoin an ISO code, but I don't know where the request came from or the code(s) suggested.

The poll has only been going 8 days yet there is a consensus that an X-code is warranted and XBT is the front-runner of those.

There are several fronts in this war of attrition.

1. Bitcoin's monetary base (in USD) is now over $500 million which can't be ignored, and may even get to 10 figures this year, so a new request to SIX can point this out.

2. Mainstream partner banks of bitcoin firms could be asked to write a letter of support for a Bitcoin ISO code. These letters would be submitted with a new application to SIX, and they would help a lot, as these are the firms which the standards agency is meant to represent.

3. MagicalTux has indicated that Mt.Gox would consider supporting a new ISO code in addition to the existing BTC. If other major Bitcoin firms were to also support XBT as an alternate code then it would have a snowball effect. Every time a mainstream financial company decides to look at using Bitcoin they could be given XBT and told the official application is pending. This would be good enough to get some of them using it anyway,

If enough firms used XBT then the pressure for it to be officially recognized would be overwhelming.

Edit: It would be smart to assign XBT to 100 satoshi, so we have the split discussion out the way for good and retain the name for the change using magnitudes people are used to e.g. 1 $ = 100 cents.

We would have ca. 1 USD = 20,000 XBT or 1,000 XBT = 5 USD cents

Or using the FX codes standards:

USDXBT = 20,000
1000 XBTUSD = 0.05


Using USDXBT as standard reference would express USD weakening as XBT gets stronger, that would be a better message than XBT getting ever more expensive.

I think going for BTC is a stupid move which will only delay in getting an ISO Currency Code. I can imagine people voting for BTC since we are so used to it, but this shouldn't be taken seriously.

So now what, is the Bitcoin Foundation going to lobby for XBT? Seems like an excellent job for them.

^^ That's a pretty smart move...

1 XBT ~= 5 US cents

I vote to keep BTC and use XBT for millibitcoin so that 1000 XBT = 1 BTC. The ISO currency code will be XBT and the mainstream financial markets can use XBT. Early adopters and other Bitcoin users can of course continue to use BTC, if they so wish. There are many examples where an ISO currency code has been changed due to inflation so in reality this is not that new. The only difference is that in this case it is changed among other things due to deflation.

yes.


I agree it is possible that XBC is "squatted" today, however bonds often have very long maturity dates and Bitcoin just can't wait years for existing issuance in these to hit expiry. A new X-code is the answer, with BTC retained for informal use.

What is the ECB? Is it European Central Bank?

If so, is XBC an obsolete old code from back before Europe got assigned the EU country-code?

If XBC is actually a European Bond, how is that a world currency? Isn't a US Bond, a Bhutan bond, etc etc equally much a world wide currency? How come all countries don't get an X code for their bonds?

Is maybe XBC being wrongly squatted by the EU?

-MarkM-

Looks like XBT is winning, I will start using XBT from now on.

You da man!

But maybe that's just me.

It's true that XBT echoes nice but XBC is far more according. My vote goes for XBC.

XBT is my favourite. I would pronounce as "EcksBit" which is easier to say and identify with "bitcoin" than XBC "EcksBeeSee".

XTC sounds bad for obvious reasons. BTC is most familiar to us but it hardly matters for mainstream adoption. XBT sounds best. Or BIT if we can buy that one away.

X-codes are reserved for not only metals. XDR (Special Drawing Rights) is one example. Bitcoin should not have a local code because Bitcoin is decentralized and not local to a country. Assigning a Bhutan code is counterproductive to that goal.

If BTC is an issue, XBT has my vote, or XBC is just as good.

Indeed. Even the EU country code which makes EUR a valid currency code was reluctantly assigned as an "exceptional code" and the EU represents over 500 million people!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1_alpha-2#Current_codes

The path of least resistance is with an unused X-code...