how 21 quadrillion are not enough for everyone in this world?
the problem is more about if 1 satoshi could reach 1 dollar in value
the problem is more about if 1 satoshi could reach 1 dollar in value
Great ! I like your answer ! +1
Topic: We dont have enough decimal places. (Read 4482 times)
Great ! I like your answer ! +1
how 21 quadrillion are not enough for everyone in this world?
the problem is more about if 1 satoshi could reach 1 dollar in value
the problem is more about if 1 satoshi could reach 1 dollar in value
21,000,000 * 100,000,000 = 2,100,000,000,000,000 Satoshis
This isn't enough for a global currency.
This isn't enough for a global currency.
Why not ? What do you think if 1 BTC= 20,000 USD
If the global world has accept bitcoin as payment, then we can append more 0 to the end, and give a fork, that's easy work
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine.
I think he's just being pissy about not knowing who wrote the code. He'd like for there to be someone to blame in case of a problem, and the "satoshi" identity just doesn't work for him.
The word "satoshi" as a denomination of currency sounds ridiculous. Too Japanese (i.e. not global) and draws too much attention to the fact that BTC was in a way created in Rothschildesque secrecy.
Just curious, what is it you think about a completely public money supply verifiable by every citizen of the earth with every unit impossible to counterfeit that you call "Rothschildesque secrecy"?
The word "satoshi" as a denomination of currency sounds ridiculous. Too Japanese (i.e. not global) and draws too much attention to the fact that BTC was in a way created in Rothschildesque secrecy.
it looks cool to me, im ok with japanese culture. What do you propose, bits??I prefer "Nan" (short for nanobitcoins, but don't tell people that or they'll get scared by the technical sound of it).
1 Satoshi is 10 Nan.
Since most people that like "bits" say that 1 bit = 100 Satoshi, that would mean that 1 bit is 1,000 Nan (or 1 KiloNan, or 1 KNan).
As such, bitcoin amounts could be written as follows:
10 Nan = 0.00000001 BTC (or 0.01 bits, or 1 Satoshi)
1 KNan = 0.000001 BTC (or 1 bits, or 100 Satoshi)
1 MNan = 0.001 BTC or 1000 bits, or 100000 Satoshi)
1 GNan = 1 BTC or 1000000 bits, or 100000000 Satoshi)
1 TNan = 1000 BTC
1 PNan = 1000000 BTC
21 PNan = 21000000 BTC (there will never be this many bitcoins in existence).
No. You don't. The total number of bitcoins remains exactly the same. The only thing that changes is the size of the pieces that you are using to pay for things.
Or it could rise 1000 fold in one night. It is a volatile and risky experiment right now that is still in the very early stages of price discovery. It is difficult to predict how the market would be likely to react to a change in the divisibility of bitcoin.
If we are being intellectually honest here though, it is rather unlikely to change 1000 fold in either direction from something as simple as modifying the divisibility.
Change in divisibility should have an effect only if the old, or new, divisibilities are on different sides of a stable equilibrium. One satoshi is presently far below the fees of a single transaction. Whatever equilibria exist, I would expect none to be less than 1/10 x typical transaction fees. So a change in divisibility to any other minimum unit also less than 1/10 x typical transaction fees should have no measurable effect on value.
Just an opinion, I guess - but Id be astonished if there were any effect.
Cryddit
The word "satoshi" as a denomination of currency sounds ridiculous. Too Japanese (i.e. not global) and draws too much attention to the fact that BTC was in a way created in Rothschildesque secrecy.
it looks cool to me, im ok with japanese culture. What do you propose, bits??I prefer "Nan" (short for nanobitcoins, but don't tell people that or they'll get scared by the technical sound of it).
1 Satoshi is 10 Nan.
Since most people that like "bits" say that 1 bit = 100 Satoshi, that would mean that 1 bit is 1,000 Nan (or 1 KiloNan, or 1 KNan).
As such, bitcoin amounts could be written as follows:
10 Nan = 0.00000001 BTC (or 0.01 bits, or 1 Satoshi)
1 KNan = 0.000001 BTC (or 1 bits, or 100 Satoshi)
1 MNan = 0.001 BTC or 1000 bits, or 100000 Satoshi)
1 GNan = 1 BTC or 1000000 bits, or 100000000 Satoshi)
1 TNan = 1000 BTC
1 PNan = 1000000 BTC
21 PNan = 21000000 BTC (there will never be this many bitcoins in existence).
The word "satoshi" as a denomination of currency sounds ridiculous. Too Japanese (i.e. not global) and draws too much attention to the fact that BTC was in a way created in Rothschildesque secrecy.
it looks cool to me, im ok with japanese culture. What do you propose, bits?? with new decimal you will add new bitcoins in the system.
No. You don't. The total number of bitcoins remains exactly the same. The only thing that changes is the size of the pieces that you are using to pay for things.
if you add 3 more decimals at once ditcoin could drop 1000 fold in one night.
Or it could rise 1000 fold in one night. It is a volatile and risky experiment right now that is still in the very early stages of price discovery. It is difficult to predict how the market would be likely to react to a change in the divisibility of bitcoin.
If we are being intellectually honest here though, it is rather unlikely to change 1000 fold in either direction from something as simple as modifying the divisibility.
if bitcoin will become an international currency soma day its a big deal.
Bitcoin is an international currency already. There are locations in many countries where it is accepted as payment.
doesn't bitcoin becoma like a fiat if we add any other digit to it? theoritically we increase the number of usable subunites by doing that. if its not an inflation what it is then?
It's different because, if I had 1000 units before the new decimal point, now I have 10000 units with Bitcoin. With fiat, I still have 1000 units.
its not quite diffrent. with new decimal you will add new bitcoins in the siytem. if you add 3 more decimals at once ditcoin could drop 1000 fold in one night. if bitcoin will become an international currency soma day its a big deal.
No, it's not the same. You are not adding any new bitcoins at all. You just redefine one bitcoin to be 1000000000 units instead of 100000000, but the total number of bitcoins remains at 21 million.
doesn't bitcoin becoma like a fiat if we add any other digit to it? theoritically we increase the number of usable subunites by doing that. if its not an inflation what it is then?
It's different because, if I had 1000 units before the new decimal point, now I have 10000 units with Bitcoin. With fiat, I still have 1000 units.
its not quite diffrent. with new decimal you will add new bitcoins in the siytem. if you add 3 more decimals at once ditcoin could drop 1000 fold in one night. if bitcoin will become an international currency soma day its a big deal.
doesn't bitcoin becoma like a fiat if we add any other digit to it? theoritically we increase the number of usable subunites by doing that. if its not an inflation what it is then?
It's different because, if I had 1000 units before the new decimal point, now I have 10000 units with Bitcoin. With fiat, I still have 1000 units.
The word "satoshi" as a denomination of currency sounds ridiculous. Too Japanese (i.e. not global) and draws too much attention to the fact that BTC was in a way created in Rothschildesque secrecy.
doesn't bitcoin becoma like a fiat if we add any other digit to it? theoritically we increase the number of usable subunites by doing that. if its not an inflation what it is then?
This has been addressed already and the conclusion that i gathered was its not a problem
This isn't enough for a global currency.
Spending "dust" or microtransactions incurs fees. As blocks start filling up, amounts less than 0.001 even will become economically unspendable -- nonetheless 0.00000001 bitcoin.
would be 2,100 trillion units (2 quadrillion)
2,100,000,000,000,000
more then enough.... unless you a fan of a one world currency where all 7billion people only have one choice.
i personally see bitcoin as a free choice and not something that should be forced onto the entire population via world wide regulation.
even if 20 million people use bitcoin thats more then some fiat countries population. even if 70million people (0.1% world population) that is still more then the UK's british pound coverage
even if 5% of the world use bitcoin, thats still more than the american population.
bitcoin does not need 100% coverage. just like dollar only has 5% coverage and Yuan has nearly 20%
2,100,000,000,000,000
more then enough.... unless you a fan of a one world currency where all 7billion people only have one choice.
i personally see bitcoin as a free choice and not something that should be forced onto the entire population via world wide regulation.
even if 20 million people use bitcoin thats more then some fiat countries population. even if 70million people (0.1% world population) that is still more then the UK's british pound coverage
even if 5% of the world use bitcoin, thats still more than the american population.
bitcoin does not need 100% coverage. just like dollar only has 5% coverage and Yuan has nearly 20%
That's pretty good! i wonder how much of world's population is on it now
I think 0.1% (70 mil) might be using it , or am saying alot ?
Jump to: