To avoid the recurrence of this issue, a symbol for the satoshi could be implemented and the satoshi itself should be a standard unit along side BTC.
I am much more likely to convince a prospective new member of the bitcoin community to purchase 100,000 satoshis for a dollar than .001BTC (or a full bitcoin for ~$1,000).
Large transactions could then be in BTC and small transactions could be in satoshis. This would promote small transactions to get people comfortable using a new financial system. It's more harrowing to be sending around fractions of something expensive than it is to be sending around lots of something cheap.
Topic: When to "move the decimal points" ? - page 3. (Read 17811 times)
Thinking about scale up, large-scale adoption projections, etc reminds me lessons of the time everybody thought that an ip address size 32-bit should be enough for the internet, and now everybody is behind nat lol ... and as Vint Cerf once said "OK 32-bit It’s my fault, but now 128-bit space should be enough... at least will not be a problem to my generation anymore" 
...
... Change the decimal now or it's dead. Wake up people !
How about we call one-millionth of a BTC (i.e. a micro-bitcoin) a Finney? One million Finneys equal a Bitcoin.Conveniently, 100 Satoshis equal a Finney, so we can use a convenient two digits after the decimal point, just like dollars and cents. So 0.0015 BTC becomes 1500.00 Finneys.
Forex traders don't like more than two digits after the decimal, so this notation should suit them perfectly.
A Finney is currently worth around a tenth of a cent, so it will remain a useful unit as the price of a bitcoin rises.
The Finney is named in honor of Hal Finney, of course.
Why not Finney ? It sound absurd to rename it "Finney" but it is much better than Bitcoin. As you said, decimals make no sense for normal people.
For most people a "Finney" does not seem to refer to Bitcoin. A millibit sounds too cheap. So, let's introduce the "squareroot-Bitcoin" which is 10 000 Satoshi or 1/10 000th of 1 Bitcoin.
Notation:
1 USD = 12.5 rBTC
BUMP because nothing has changed.
Are we going to move the decimal or what ??
Looks like the market answer is "no". Instead, most clients have moved to an adjustable display with a default of millibits.Are we going to move the decimal or what ??
Market is shooting himself in the foot. Without opening the market to mainstream, Bitcoin will remain an experiment for ever.
People are dumb, that's a fact. They think Bitcoin is too expensive and they'll never change their mind.
Change the decimal now or it's dead. Wake up people !
Don't assume that you can predict such things. Bill Gates thought the Internet was a fad.
Change the decimal now or it's dead. Wake up people !
How about we call one-millionth of a BTC (i.e. a micro-bitcoin) a Finney? One million Finneys equal a Bitcoin.Conveniently, 100 Satoshis equal a Finney, so we can use a convenient two digits after the decimal point, just like dollars and cents. So 0.0015 BTC becomes 1500.00 Finneys.
Forex traders don't like more than two digits after the decimal, so this notation should suit them perfectly.
A Finney is currently worth around a tenth of a cent, so it will remain a useful unit as the price of a bitcoin rises.
The Finney is named in honor of Hal Finney, of course.
Why not Finney ? It sound absurd to rename it "Finney" but it is much better than Bitcoin. As you said, decimals make no sense for normal people.
BUMP because nothing has changed.
Are we going to move the decimal or what ??
Looks like the market answer is "no". Instead, most clients have moved to an adjustable display with a default of millibits.Are we going to move the decimal or what ??
Market is shooting himself in the foot. Without opening the market to mainstream, Bitcoin will remain an experiment for ever.
People are dumb, that's a fact. They think Bitcoin is too expensive and they'll never change their mind.
Change the decimal now or it's dead. Wake up people !
BUMP because nothing has changed.
Are we going to move the decimal or what ??
Looks like the market answer is "no". Instead, most clients have moved to an adjustable display with a default of millibits.
BUMP because nothing has changed.
Are we going to move the decimal or what ??
How about adding 3 levels between bitcoin and satoshi:
1 Bitcoin = 100 Gold coins (or Gold bits, or Gold BTC).
1 Gold bit = 100 Silver bits
1 Silver bit = 100 Bronze bit
1 Bronze bit = 100 Satoshis.
Or substitute other ordered triads, something random like:
1 BTC = 100 King bits = 10k Queen bits = 1M Jack bits
1 BTC = 100 Mondo bits = 10k itty bits = 1M micro bits
1 BTC = 100 Jupiters = 10k Mars bits = 1M pluto bits
I don't know, something that rolls off the tongue more easily than deci- and milli- and nano
-- FK
Bitcoin is a difficult, geeky thing enough itself, and now you want to tech people mathematic notations ?
This is madness. It will take people ages to learn that (i mean majority of "normal" people).
Notation proposed by me is better simply because it is more intuitive by orders of magnitude than "mili", "micro", "nano" and such (which "normal", non-geeky people do not know). These are simply too "geeky" to be accepted & easily understood by general population.
Also AFAIK, these notations were never used in currency. Currencies have their own names for everything. So should bitcoin.
This is a simple matter:
If you want to make Bitcoin difficult - use the metrics notation.
If you want to make Bitcoin easily understandable & intiutive - use my (or similiar) notation.
Go on - ask your mother what "micro", "nano" and "mili" means. I wonder if she knows.
1 Bitcoin = 100 Gold coins (or Gold bits, or Gold BTC).
1 Gold bit = 100 Silver bits
1 Silver bit = 100 Bronze bit
1 Bronze bit = 100 Satoshis.
Or substitute other ordered triads, something random like:
1 BTC = 100 King bits = 10k Queen bits = 1M Jack bits
1 BTC = 100 Mondo bits = 10k itty bits = 1M micro bits
1 BTC = 100 Jupiters = 10k Mars bits = 1M pluto bits
I don't know, something that rolls off the tongue more easily than deci- and milli- and nano
-- FK
We are trying to drive the adoption of a new idea (i.e. Bitcoin). It tilts the odds towards failure if we also require people to learn other new things, such as unfamiliar notations.
Bitcoin is a difficult, geeky thing enough itself, and now you want to tech people mathematic notations ?
This is madness. It will take people ages to learn that (i mean majority of "normal" people).
Notation proposed by me is better simply because it is more intuitive by orders of magnitude than "mili", "micro", "nano" and such (which "normal", non-geeky people do not know). These are simply too "geeky" to be accepted & easily understood by general population.
Also AFAIK, these notations were never used in currency. Currencies have their own names for everything. So should bitcoin.
This is a simple matter:
If you want to make Bitcoin difficult - use the metrics notation.
If you want to make Bitcoin easily understandable & intiutive - use my (or similiar) notation.
Go on - ask your mother what "micro", "nano" and "mili" means. I wonder if she knows.
Wouldn't the only bad thing to come out of extending the decimal points be the increased size of the blockchain?
The scripts that people use would allow the extra decimals to be optional and just pass as 0's.
The scripts that people use would allow the extra decimals to be optional and just pass as 0's.
The effect would me neglible.
Why?
Wouldn't the only bad thing to come out of extending the decimal points be the increased size of the blockchain?
The scripts that people use would allow the extra decimals to be optional and just pass as 0's.
The scripts that people use would allow the extra decimals to be optional and just pass as 0's.
The effect would me neglible.
Wouldn't the only bad thing to come out of extending the decimal points be the increased size of the blockchain?
The scripts that people use would allow the extra decimals to be optional and just pass as 0's.
The scripts that people use would allow the extra decimals to be optional and just pass as 0's.
The effect would be neglible.
Wouldn't the only bad thing to come out of extending the decimal points be the increased size of the blockchain?
The scripts that people use would allow the extra decimals to be optional and just pass as 0's.
The only thing that would need to change would be, how far should it go out?
It's inevitable that one day we will be REQUIRED to move it further as the supply/demand increases. After-all, there will only be 21 million coins EVER.
The scripts that people use would allow the extra decimals to be optional and just pass as 0's.
The only thing that would need to change would be, how far should it go out?
It's inevitable that one day we will be REQUIRED to move it further as the supply/demand increases. After-all, there will only be 21 million coins EVER.
U mean unlimited subdividing (its wrong anyway), no differed to printing unlimited fiatmonthly rent for a house in 1900 was $5
That's not at all so. No matter how it's represented, there is no way to inflate the currency base beyond the protocol. Moving the decimal point for bitcoins is no more inflating the currency than if you were to start referring to all your exchanges and prices in cents rather than dollars or euros. It's just division.
Beyond that, as others have already mentioned, the protocol doesn't really even care where we put the decimal point, as it simply counts in satoshis anyway.
When 1 Bitcoin is worth somewhere around $100 (in 2010 dollars), I think it'll be time for the client to switch to millicoins (e.g. .001 BTC), so if I'm buying a paperback book it costs 50 milliBTC instead of .05 BTC.
We arrived.
And now...?
The client is capable of displaying the balance in mills, but has to be set to do so, as that is not the default.
Thats 5000 Dost.
When 1 Bitcoin is worth somewhere around $100 (in 2010 dollars), I think it'll be time for the client to switch to millicoins (e.g. .001 BTC), so if I'm buying a paperback book it costs 50 milliBTC instead of .05 BTC.
We arrived.
And now...?
No, the protocol is subdivided to the Satoshi, all transactions are recorded in Satoshi, and that isn't going to change. This is just a naming/writing system that makes it easier to work with very small numbers.
Quote
1 BTC = 1 Bit
0.1 BTC = 1 Decibit/Dec (Optional)
0.01 BTC = 1 Centibit/Cent
0.001 BTC = 1 Millibit/Mil
0.000,001 BTC = 1 Microbit/Micro
0.000,000,01 BTC = 1 Satoshi
0.1 BTC = 1 Decibit/Dec (Optional)
0.01 BTC = 1 Centibit/Cent
0.001 BTC = 1 Millibit/Mil
0.000,001 BTC = 1 Microbit/Micro
0.000,000,01 BTC = 1 Satoshi
1 BTC = 1 Bit
0.1 BTC = 1 Decibit
0.01 BTC = 1 Centibit
0.001 BTC = 1 Millibit
0.000,001 BTC = 1 Microbit
0.000,000,01 BTC = 1 Satoshi
0.000,000,000,01 BTC = 1 DeciSatoshi
0.000,000,000,000,01 BTC = 1 CentiSatoshi
0.000,000,000,000,000,01 BTC = 1 MilliSatoshi
............
U mean unlimited subdividing (its wrong anyway), no differed to printing unlimited fiat
monthly rent for a house in 1900 was $5
1, BitCoin, BTC
0.01, BitCent
0.000,01, BitDost, Dost
0.000,000,01, Satoshi, Soe
21,000 BitGroup, BTG
Perfect
0.01, BitCent
0.000,01, BitDost, Dost
0.000,000,01, Satoshi, Soe
21,000 BitGroup, BTG
Perfect
Jump to: