Topic: What should 100 satoshis be called? (make sure to vote for TWO choices) - page 2. (Read 3528 times)

I appreciate you for staying true to the spirit of metric prefixes.  If we ever get to the point of needing to subdivide the satoshi, then I think I will be a rich guy

You are right.
We should keep centoshi for extra expansion in the future.

100 centoshi is 1 satoshi.

"Bits" doesn't really make any sense. I can send you a Bitcoin, a satoshi, or "bits" which is supposed to represent 100 satoshis?!

Centoshi is the best option by far!

100 satoshis

Not centi-satoshi.  centoshi, like century.  (Or is a century 1/100 of a year?)

More confusion. The correct term would be hecto-satoshi.
Cento means 1/100, not 100x

'Zib' is no-one's trademark: not registered, not common-law.

Its first use in this context was my proposal and creation of the https://zibcoin.org site. It's a generic newly-coined word for 'microbitcoin', equally open to all, and as the coiner of the term, I'd fight anyone's attempt to trademark it. The word 'zib' has not been used before for money.

'Zib' can't be easily confused with 'bitcoin' or 'digital bit', directly or as abbreviations ('millibit', 'microbit', 'b'). It will always mean just one amount, 100 satoshis.

If people want to use the words, 'zib' can be combined with the metric-multiplier prefixes - kilozib for 100,000 satoshis, megazib for 100,000,000 satoshis - avoiding the same confusion that would happen with 'kilobit' and 'megabit'.

The 'Ƶ' (Z-with-stroke) symbol has been used for real currencies in the past, or for fake currencies in science-fiction. But so has the '฿' (for thai baht) that's already used and useful for Bitcoin. So multiple past usages for 'Ƶ' (Z-with-stroke) just ensure that (a) it can't be monopolized; and (b) it's naturally understandable as meaning 'advanced future money'.

Sure, 'zib' is unfamiliar like any newly-coined word would be, and it's tempting to just pick something cute and familiar (like 'bit') even if risks long-term confusion. Newer words are hard at first, it's OK not to like it. But please be honest about it!

I know what you mean about the atomic nature of a bit.  But, just to be specific, in information theory we often subdivide a bit because we're speaking about an average amount of information in a given context.

I think you're basically on the right track with this post, the only thing is that once you're talking about Msat or Gsat, the BTC is a better unit.  I mean rather than talk about millions of satoshis (Msat), isn't is simpler to talk about cents on the bitcoin?  Likewise for Gsat.  In my own daily life I do this:

I speak of "sats" when I'm in the 1-999 range of Satoshis.

I speak of "Ksat" when I'm in this 1000-99999 range of Satoshis.

I speak of mBTC or 'bitmils' when I'm in the 100000-99999999 range of Satoshi's, ie, for me I'll usually refer to .1btc as 100mBTC. 

Above that, I speak of bitcoins, or BTC.

So I really only use 4 denominations: SAT, KSAT, mBTC, BTC

However, as long as you stick to standard metric prefixes, I can understand whatever you want to say.

No I don't think so.  A bit in that context is either a 1 or a 0 and bits of information cannot be subdivided.  AFAIK there is no such thing as a millionth of a 1 or a millionth of a 0.

it's an important step in the evolution of bitcoin that companies dictate the vocabulary bitcoin users have to use. however, ponzis would be a nice name too.

They should be called Toshis

Personally, I would accept this compromise:



(Quoted from Reddit)

BitPay seems to be moving forward with actual usage http://blog.bitpay.com/2014/05/02/bitpay-bitcoin-and-where-to-put-that-decimal-point.html

We've had lots of discussion in the past but now that the price is stabilizing with 3 digits it's pushing the community to resolve the issue. This is how adoption begins to happen naturally I believe.

Looks like others had the same idea as I had some posts above. It can't be too far off then.

However, I believe that Satoshi told us to write a lowercase "b" when talking about the unit of measurement, i.e. it should be µbit, not µBit...


Edit:
Ah, I can see their reasoning now: The unit (µ)"bit" is already taken as a unit of information, so they're proposing (µ)"Bit" to mean the unit of money: (µ)bitcoin.

It's weird how we vote for these things and we never use them,

Well I haven't seen anyone use these names.

Looks like this idea got some traction at r/bitcoin too http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/24rq1b/%C2%B5bit_proposal_%C2%B5bit_becomes_official_name_for_the/

Sorry.  I see what you're saying now.

Until now, I never noticed that base units have at most 1 upper case letter.

I was referring to the base unit, i.e. just "Hz" (= hertz). The G in in GHz (gigahertz) is just a prefix that is applied in front of the actual unit.

What I wanted to say is that the base unit (without prefix), has at most one uppercase letter.

Looks like bits and ubits lead the way. These could be used interchangeably, no?