Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Tamas Blummer]

Here is one to please those looking for a “fully qualified” slang word, that 
links with the official XBT:

xbit (spoken: ex-bit) would rationalise XBT (where X comes from supranational 
use) and is unique.

I personally associate from x to six also supporting the 1e-6 divisor of 
Bitcoin.

Regarding XBT: No matter who used it for what. The way Bloomberg will use it 
will define its use in finance,
and since that did not happen yet, we are not late to shape.

Regards,

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com

On 21.04.2014, at 07:41, Pieter Wuille  wrote:

> 
> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix"  wrote:
> >
> > Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common 
> > usage I.e. bit.
> 
> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will 
> determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not relevant 
> to this discussion in my opinion.
> 
> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up 
> (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as 
> "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing 
> in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling 
> dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with having 
> colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous than 
> "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
> 
> -- 
> Pieter
> --
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Mailing list abuse

[Rodney Morris]

Not a bad idea. Semantics of the word abuse not withstanding.

I don't want to become the self appointed mailing list cop, but I notice it
maybe more than others because I almost exclusively read this mailing list
on a mobile device. Hence my asking for feedback without publicly calling
anyone out.

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Rodney
 On 21/04/2014 3:47 pm, "Wladimir"  wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Rodney Morris 
> wrote:
> > What is the procedure for dealing with it? Is it considered abuse to
> reply
> > to and quote the entire digest for the sake of a few lines of content?
> Am I
> > the only one annoyed by this (if so I'll just shut right up).
>
> I would not go as far as calling it 'abuse' if it is not done on
> purpose. Probably the person doesn't even know he/she is doing this.
> Best to mail the person and ask (nicely) instead of complaining to the
> list.
>
> Wladimir
>
--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Tamas Blummer]

I think we have two very good candidates both substantiated with arguments for 
their use in their context:

bit  - the word for everyday use 
XBT - the acronym to fit into the ISO currency set.

both meaning 100 satoshis or 1e-6 Bitcoin. 

I am glad that I erred, and this list finaly cares of finance customs and 
average Joe’s.

Regards,

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com

On 21.04.2014, at 07:41, Pieter Wuille  wrote:

> 
> On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix"  wrote:
> >
> > Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common 
> > usage I.e. bit.
> 
> What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will 
> determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not relevant 
> to this discussion in my opinion.
> 
> It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up 
> (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as 
> "official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing 
> in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling 
> dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with having 
> colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous than 
> "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.
> 
> -- 
> Pieter
> --
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Mailing list abuse

[Wladimir]

On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Rodney Morris  wrote:
> What is the procedure for dealing with it? Is it considered abuse to reply
> to and quote the entire digest for the sake of a few lines of content? Am I
> the only one annoyed by this (if so I'll just shut right up).

I would not go as far as calling it 'abuse' if it is not done on
purpose. Probably the person doesn't even know he/she is doing this.
Best to mail the person and ask (nicely) instead of complaining to the
list.

Wladimir

--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Pieter Wuille]

On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix"  wrote:
>
> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common
usage I.e. bit.

What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will
determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not
relevant to this discussion in my opinion.

It may well be that people in some geographic or language area will end up
(or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That's fine, but using that as
"official" name in software would be very strange and potentially confusing
in my opinion. As mentioned by others, that would seem to me like calling
dollars "bucks" in bank software. Nobody seems to have a problem with
having colloquial names, but "US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous
than "bit". I think we need a more distinctive name.

-- 
Pieter
--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

[Bitcoin-development] Mailing list abuse

[Rodney Morris]

What is the procedure for dealing with it? Is it considered abuse to reply
to and quote the entire digest for the sake of a few lines of content? Am I
the only one annoyed by this (if so I'll just shut right up).

Rodney
--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Economics of information propagation

[Daniel Lidstrom]

> Of course, in reality smaller miners can just mine on top of block headers
> and include no transactions and do no validation, but that is extremely
> harmful to the security of Bitcoin.


If it's only during the few seconds that it takes to to verify the block,
then would this really be that big of a deal?  E.g. even if all miners did
this, a 10 second delay would only yield an average of a couple blind/empty
blocks per day.


On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Peter Todd  wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> That is mistaken: you can't mine on top of just a block header, leaving
> small miners disadvantaged as they are earning no profit while they wait
> for the information to validate the block and update their UTXO sets. This
> results in the same problem as before, as the large pools who mine most
> blocks can validate either instantly - the self-mine case - or more quickly
> than the smaller miners.
>
> Of course, in reality smaller miners can just mine on top of block headers
> and include no transactions and do no validation, but that is extremely
> harmful to the security of Bitcoin.
>
>
> On 20 April 2014 23:58:58 GMT-04:00, Mark Friedenbach 
> wrote:
> >As soon as we switch to headers
> >first - which will be soon - there will be no difference in propagation
> >time no matter how large the block is. Only 80 bites will be required
> >to
> >propagate the block header which establishes priority for when the
> >block is
> >fully validated.
> >On Apr 20, 2014 6:56 PM, "Jonathan Levin"
> >
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I am a post-graduate economist writing a paper on the incentives of
> >> mining. Even though this issue has been debated in the forums, I
> >think it
> >> is important to get a sense of the magnitude of the incentives at
> >play and
> >> determine what implications this has for the transaction fee market.
> >>
> >> As it has been pointed out before the marginal cost for miners does
> >not
> >> stem from the private cost of the miner validating the signature and
> >> including it in the list of transactions in the block but rather the
> >> increased probability that the block will be orphaned as a result of
> >slower
> >> propagation. Gavin did some back of the envelope worst case
> >calculations
> >> but these overstated the effect of propagation delay. The reason
> >being the
> >> 80ms additional time to reach 50% of the network is spread throughout
> >the
> >> time that it takes to reach 50% of the network. During this time
> >miners are
> >> notified about the block and treat it as the longest chain and hence
> >are no
> >> longer mining with the aim to produce a competing block.
> >>
> >> I am looking to calculate the change in the curvature of the
> >probability
> >> mass function that a block hears about my block in any given second
> >as a
> >> function of the block size. Although there is likely to be
> >significant
> >> noise here, there seems to be some stable linear relationships with
> >the
> >> time that it takes to reach different quartiles. Has anyone done
> >this? I
> >> have used some empirical data that I am happy to share but ideally I
> >would
> >> like analytical solutions.
> >>
> >> Following Peter Todd, I also find the concerning result that
> >propagation
> >> delays results in increasing returns to higher shares of the hashing
> >power.
> >> Indeed it may well be in the interest of large pools to publish large
> >> blocks to increase propagation delays on the network which would
> >increase
> >> orphan rates particularly for small miners and miners that have not
> >> invested in sufficient bandwidth / connectivity. If a small miner
> >hears
> >> about a block after 4.5 seconds on average there is a 0.7% chance
> >that
> >> there is already a block in circulation.  Large miners can increase
> >the
> >> time that it takes for small miners to hear about blocks by
> >increasing the
> >> size of their blocks. For example if the time that it takes for a
> >small
> >> miner to hear about the block goes to 12 seconds there is a 2 percent
> >> chance there is already a block in circulation for the small miner.
> >There
> >> is also a 1.2% chance that there will be a competing block published
> >after
> >> a small miner propagates in the time that it gets to full
> >propagation. Am I
> >> getting this right that the probability of a miner’s block being
> >orphaned
> >> is comprised of the probability that the miner was not the first to
> >find a
> >> valid block and the probability that given they are first, someone
> >else in
> >> the absence of hearing about it finds a competing valid block.
> >>
> >> One question is: Are orphans probabilistic and only resolved after
> >hearing
> >> about a new block that lengthens the chain or is there a way to know
> >in
> >> advance? Is it frowned upon to mine on top of a block that you have
> >just
> >> found even though it is very likely going to end up an orphan?
> >>
> >> Would be happy to share

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Christopher Paika]

Bit is simple phonetically, I'm for it.


On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:

> If bit had to be preceded by a letter I would nominate "ebit" or "xbit"
> (which could still be XBT)
>
> Those needing a definition for x could define it as "coin/100".
>
> That said, I am still more in favor of "bit". Xbit would just solve the
> problems others cite about ambiguity if they had to be solved without the
> resulting name being too long.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 7:33 PM, "Un Ix"  wrote:
>
> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common
> usage I.e. bit.
>
> My 2 cents goes for "bit".
>
> Because: Bitcoin is a digital currency, BTC starts with "bit", "bit"
> refers to a small amount of something in its regular english usage and
> lastly 99.9876543% of people on the planet don't know what a digital "bit"
> is yet ...
>
> Gavin
>
> On 21/04/2014, at 9:20 am, "Mike Caldwell" 
> wrote:
>
> My impression:
>
> Good because it is short, memorable, and pronounceable by speakers of most
> languages (though to most of the world that would be oo-bit, as "u" being
> "yu" is mostly an English thing)
>
> Downsides include the fact that μ is not a U, it just resembles one. It is
> a lowercase M in Greek, a live spoken language also studied by many, and
> calling it a U conveys a notion of global unawareness. And the potential
> for "XBT" to be 1e-6 BTC on the world stage would be huge, worth pursuing.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 6:16 PM, "Justin A"  wrote:
>
> 
>
> What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy
> to say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2
> decimal places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?
>
> 
>
> Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere
> winter if I can learn enough.
> On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell"  wrote:
>
>> By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural
>> reference in the name.  For example "satoshi" would be a reference to
>> Japanese culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who
>> Satoshi turns out to be.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" <
>> christophe.bio...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
>> > for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
>> > in Turkish as well.
>> >
>> > Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
>> > short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
>> >
>> >> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger 
>> wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> just my two 'cents':
>> >>
>> >> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>> >> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>> >> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>> >> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>> >>
>> >> - oliver
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> --
>> >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their
>> >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> >> ___
>> >> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> >> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>> >
>> >
>> --
>> > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>> their
>> > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> > ___
>> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>>
>> --
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> ___
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>
> 

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Economics of information propagation

[Peter Todd]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

That is mistaken: you can't mine on top of just a block header, leaving small 
miners disadvantaged as they are earning no profit while they wait for the 
information to validate the block and update their UTXO sets. This results in 
the same problem as before, as the large pools who mine most blocks can 
validate either instantly - the self-mine case - or more quickly than the 
smaller miners.

Of course, in reality smaller miners can just mine on top of block headers and 
include no transactions and do no validation, but that is extremely harmful to 
the security of Bitcoin.


On 20 April 2014 23:58:58 GMT-04:00, Mark Friedenbach  wrote:
>As soon as we switch to headers
>first - which will be soon - there will be no difference in propagation
>time no matter how large the block is. Only 80 bites will be required
>to
>propagate the block header which establishes priority for when the
>block is
>fully validated.
>On Apr 20, 2014 6:56 PM, "Jonathan Levin"
>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am a post-graduate economist writing a paper on the incentives of
>> mining. Even though this issue has been debated in the forums, I
>think it
>> is important to get a sense of the magnitude of the incentives at
>play and
>> determine what implications this has for the transaction fee market.
>>
>> As it has been pointed out before the marginal cost for miners does
>not
>> stem from the private cost of the miner validating the signature and
>> including it in the list of transactions in the block but rather the
>> increased probability that the block will be orphaned as a result of
>slower
>> propagation. Gavin did some back of the envelope worst case
>calculations
>> but these overstated the effect of propagation delay. The reason
>being the
>> 80ms additional time to reach 50% of the network is spread throughout
>the
>> time that it takes to reach 50% of the network. During this time
>miners are
>> notified about the block and treat it as the longest chain and hence
>are no
>> longer mining with the aim to produce a competing block.
>>
>> I am looking to calculate the change in the curvature of the
>probability
>> mass function that a block hears about my block in any given second
>as a
>> function of the block size. Although there is likely to be
>significant
>> noise here, there seems to be some stable linear relationships with
>the
>> time that it takes to reach different quartiles. Has anyone done
>this? I
>> have used some empirical data that I am happy to share but ideally I
>would
>> like analytical solutions.
>>
>> Following Peter Todd, I also find the concerning result that
>propagation
>> delays results in increasing returns to higher shares of the hashing
>power.
>> Indeed it may well be in the interest of large pools to publish large
>> blocks to increase propagation delays on the network which would
>increase
>> orphan rates particularly for small miners and miners that have not
>> invested in sufficient bandwidth / connectivity. If a small miner
>hears
>> about a block after 4.5 seconds on average there is a 0.7% chance
>that
>> there is already a block in circulation.  Large miners can increase
>the
>> time that it takes for small miners to hear about blocks by
>increasing the
>> size of their blocks. For example if the time that it takes for a
>small
>> miner to hear about the block goes to 12 seconds there is a 2 percent
>> chance there is already a block in circulation for the small miner.
>There
>> is also a 1.2% chance that there will be a competing block published
>after
>> a small miner propagates in the time that it gets to full
>propagation. Am I
>> getting this right that the probability of a miner’s block being
>orphaned
>> is comprised of the probability that the miner was not the first to
>find a
>> valid block and the probability that given they are first, someone
>else in
>> the absence of hearing about it finds a competing valid block.
>>
>> One question is: Are orphans probabilistic and only resolved after
>hearing
>> about a new block that lengthens the chain or is there a way to know
>in
>> advance? Is it frowned upon to mine on top of a block that you have
>just
>> found even though it is very likely going to end up an orphan?
>>
>> Would be happy to share the draft form of the paper and receive any
>> feedback.
>>
>> Finally, at coinometrics we are working on a modified client to
>capture
>> information on network propagation and would invite any suggestions
>of any
>> other useful statistics that would be useful in the development of
>software.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21 Apr 2014, at 01:16, <
>> bitcoin-development-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net> <
>> bitcoin-development-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Send Bitcoin-development mailing list submissions to
>> >   bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> >
>> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> >
>https://l

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Economics of information propagation

[Mark Friedenbach]

As soon as we switch to headers
first - which will be soon - there will be no difference in propagation
time no matter how large the block is. Only 80 bites will be required to
propagate the block header which establishes priority for when the block is
fully validated.
On Apr 20, 2014 6:56 PM, "Jonathan Levin" 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am a post-graduate economist writing a paper on the incentives of
> mining. Even though this issue has been debated in the forums, I think it
> is important to get a sense of the magnitude of the incentives at play and
> determine what implications this has for the transaction fee market.
>
> As it has been pointed out before the marginal cost for miners does not
> stem from the private cost of the miner validating the signature and
> including it in the list of transactions in the block but rather the
> increased probability that the block will be orphaned as a result of slower
> propagation. Gavin did some back of the envelope worst case calculations
> but these overstated the effect of propagation delay. The reason being the
> 80ms additional time to reach 50% of the network is spread throughout the
> time that it takes to reach 50% of the network. During this time miners are
> notified about the block and treat it as the longest chain and hence are no
> longer mining with the aim to produce a competing block.
>
> I am looking to calculate the change in the curvature of the probability
> mass function that a block hears about my block in any given second as a
> function of the block size. Although there is likely to be significant
> noise here, there seems to be some stable linear relationships with the
> time that it takes to reach different quartiles. Has anyone done this? I
> have used some empirical data that I am happy to share but ideally I would
> like analytical solutions.
>
> Following Peter Todd, I also find the concerning result that propagation
> delays results in increasing returns to higher shares of the hashing power.
> Indeed it may well be in the interest of large pools to publish large
> blocks to increase propagation delays on the network which would increase
> orphan rates particularly for small miners and miners that have not
> invested in sufficient bandwidth / connectivity. If a small miner hears
> about a block after 4.5 seconds on average there is a 0.7% chance that
> there is already a block in circulation.  Large miners can increase the
> time that it takes for small miners to hear about blocks by increasing the
> size of their blocks. For example if the time that it takes for a small
> miner to hear about the block goes to 12 seconds there is a 2 percent
> chance there is already a block in circulation for the small miner. There
> is also a 1.2% chance that there will be a competing block published after
> a small miner propagates in the time that it gets to full propagation. Am I
> getting this right that the probability of a miner’s block being orphaned
> is comprised of the probability that the miner was not the first to find a
> valid block and the probability that given they are first, someone else in
> the absence of hearing about it finds a competing valid block.
>
> One question is: Are orphans probabilistic and only resolved after hearing
> about a new block that lengthens the chain or is there a way to know in
> advance? Is it frowned upon to mine on top of a block that you have just
> found even though it is very likely going to end up an orphan?
>
> Would be happy to share the draft form of the paper and receive any
> feedback.
>
> Finally, at coinometrics we are working on a modified client to capture
> information on network propagation and would invite any suggestions of any
> other useful statistics that would be useful in the development of software.
>
> Best,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 21 Apr 2014, at 01:16, <
> bitcoin-development-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net> <
> bitcoin-development-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>
> > Send Bitcoin-development mailing list submissions to
> >   bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >   https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >   bitcoin-development-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> >   bitcoin-development-ow...@lists.sourceforge.net
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Bitcoin-development digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >   1. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Oliver Egginger)
> >   2. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Christophe Biocca)
> >   3. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Gmail)
> >   4. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Mike Caldwell)
> >   5. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Justin A)
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Message: 1

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Mike Caldwell]

If bit had to be preceded by a letter I would nominate "ebit" or "xbit" (which 
could still be XBT)

Those needing a definition for x could define it as "coin/100".

That said, I am still more in favor of "bit". Xbit would just solve the 
problems others cite about ambiguity if they had to be solved without the 
resulting name being too long.

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 20, 2014, at 7:33 PM, "Un Ix" 
mailto:slashdevn...@hotmail.com>> wrote:

Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common usage 
I.e. bit.

My 2 cents goes for "bit".

Because: Bitcoin is a digital currency, BTC starts with "bit", "bit" refers to 
a small amount of something in its regular english usage and lastly 99.9876543% 
of people on the planet don't know what a digital "bit" is yet ...

Gavin

On 21/04/2014, at 9:20 am, "Mike Caldwell" 
mailto:mcaldw...@swipeclock.com>> wrote:

My impression:

Good because it is short, memorable, and pronounceable by speakers of most 
languages (though to most of the world that would be oo-bit, as "u" being "yu" 
is mostly an English thing)

Downsides include the fact that μ is not a U, it just resembles one. It is a 
lowercase M in Greek, a live spoken language also studied by many, and calling 
it a U conveys a notion of global unawareness. And the potential for "XBT" to 
be 1e-6 BTC on the world stage would be huge, worth pursuing.

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 20, 2014, at 6:16 PM, "Justin A" 
mailto:allp...@gmail.com>> wrote:




What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy to 
say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2 decimal 
places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?



Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere 
winter if I can learn enough.

On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell" 
mailto:mcaldw...@swipeclock.com>> wrote:
By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural 
reference in the name.  For example "satoshi" would be a reference to Japanese 
culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who Satoshi turns 
out to be.

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" 
> mailto:christophe.bio...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
> for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
> in Turkish as well.
>
> Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
> short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
>
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger 
>> mailto:bitc...@olivere.de>> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> just my two 'cents':
>>
>> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>>
>> - oliver
>>
>>
>> --
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> ___
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo 

[Bitcoin-development] Economics of information propagation

[Jonathan Levin]

Hi all,

I am a post-graduate economist writing a paper on the incentives of mining. 
Even though this issue has been debated in the forums, I think it is important 
to get a sense of the magnitude of the incentives at play and determine what 
implications this has for the transaction fee market.

As it has been pointed out before the marginal cost for miners does not stem 
from the private cost of the miner validating the signature and including it in 
the list of transactions in the block but rather the increased probability that 
the block will be orphaned as a result of slower propagation. Gavin did some 
back of the envelope worst case calculations but these overstated the effect of 
propagation delay. The reason being the 80ms additional time to reach 50% of 
the network is spread throughout the time that it takes to reach 50% of the 
network. During this time miners are notified about the block and treat it as 
the longest chain and hence are no longer mining with the aim to produce a 
competing block. 

I am looking to calculate the change in the curvature of the probability mass 
function that a block hears about my block in any given second as a function of 
the block size. Although there is likely to be significant noise here, there 
seems to be some stable linear relationships with the time that it takes to 
reach different quartiles. Has anyone done this? I have used some empirical 
data that I am happy to share but ideally I would like analytical solutions.

Following Peter Todd, I also find the concerning result that propagation delays 
results in increasing returns to higher shares of the hashing power. Indeed it 
may well be in the interest of large pools to publish large blocks to increase 
propagation delays on the network which would increase orphan rates 
particularly for small miners and miners that have not invested in sufficient 
bandwidth / connectivity. If a small miner hears about a block after 4.5 
seconds on average there is a 0.7% chance that there is already a block in 
circulation.  Large miners can increase the time that it takes for small miners 
to hear about blocks by increasing the size of their blocks. For example if the 
time that it takes for a small miner to hear about the block goes to 12 seconds 
there is a 2 percent chance there is already a block in circulation for the 
small miner. There is also a 1.2% chance that there will be a competing block 
published after a small miner propagates in the time that it gets to full 
propagation. Am I getting this right that the probability of a miner’s block 
being orphaned is comprised of the probability that the miner was not the first 
to find a valid block and the probability that given they are first, someone 
else in the absence of hearing about it finds a competing valid block. 

One question is: Are orphans probabilistic and only resolved after hearing 
about a new block that lengthens the chain or is there a way to know in 
advance? Is it frowned upon to mine on top of a block that you have just found 
even though it is very likely going to end up an orphan?

Would be happy to share the draft form of the paper and receive any feedback.

Finally, at coinometrics we are working on a modified client to capture 
information on network propagation and would invite any suggestions of any 
other useful statistics that would be useful in the development of software. 

Best,

Jonathan










On 21 Apr 2014, at 01:16,  
 wrote:

> Send Bitcoin-development mailing list submissions to
>   bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   bitcoin-development-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   bitcoin-development-ow...@lists.sourceforge.net
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Bitcoin-development digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Oliver Egginger)
>   2. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Christophe Biocca)
>   3. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Gmail)
>   4. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Mike Caldwell)
>   5. Re: "bits": Unit of account (Justin A)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 20:43:24 +0200
> From: Oliver Egginger 
> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
> To: Bitcoin Development 
> Message-ID: <5354154c.1080...@olivere.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> Hello,
> 
> just my two 'cents':
> 
> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
> 
> 

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Un Ix]

Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common usage 
I.e. bit.

My 2 cents goes for "bit". 

Because: Bitcoin is a digital currency, BTC starts with "bit", "bit" refers to 
a small amount of something in its regular english usage and lastly 99.9876543% 
of people on the planet don't know what a digital "bit" is yet ...

Gavin

> On 21/04/2014, at 9:20 am, "Mike Caldwell"  wrote:
> 
> My impression:
> 
> Good because it is short, memorable, and pronounceable by speakers of most 
> languages (though to most of the world that would be oo-bit, as "u" being 
> "yu" is mostly an English thing)
> 
> Downsides include the fact that μ is not a U, it just resembles one. It is a 
> lowercase M in Greek, a live spoken language also studied by many, and 
> calling it a U conveys a notion of global unawareness. And the potential for 
> "XBT" to be 1e-6 BTC on the world stage would be huge, worth pursuing. 
> 
> Mike
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Apr 20, 2014, at 6:16 PM, "Justin A"  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy to 
>> say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2 decimal 
>> places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere 
>> winter if I can learn enough.
>> 
>>> On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell"  wrote:
>>> By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural 
>>> reference in the name.  For example "satoshi" would be a reference to 
>>> Japanese culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who 
>>> Satoshi turns out to be.
>>> 
>>> Mike
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> > On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" 
>>> >  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
>>> > for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
>>> > in Turkish as well.
>>> >
>>> > Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
>>> > short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
>>> >
>>> >> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger  
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> Hello,
>>> >>
>>> >> just my two 'cents':
>>> >>
>>> >> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>>> >> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>>> >> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>>> >> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>>> >>
>>> >> - oliver
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and 
>>> >> their
>>> >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>> >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> >> ___
>>> >> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> >> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>>> > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>> > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> > ___
>>> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> ___
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> --
> Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
> Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
> Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
> Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listin

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Mike Caldwell]

My impression:

Good because it is short, memorable, and pronounceable by speakers of most 
languages (though to most of the world that would be oo-bit, as "u" being "yu" 
is mostly an English thing)

Downsides include the fact that μ is not a U, it just resembles one. It is a 
lowercase M in Greek, a live spoken language also studied by many, and calling 
it a U conveys a notion of global unawareness. And the potential for "XBT" to 
be 1e-6 BTC on the world stage would be huge, worth pursuing.

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 20, 2014, at 6:16 PM, "Justin A" 
mailto:allp...@gmail.com>> wrote:




What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy to 
say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2 decimal 
places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?



Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere 
winter if I can learn enough.

On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell" 
mailto:mcaldw...@swipeclock.com>> wrote:
By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural 
reference in the name.  For example "satoshi" would be a reference to Japanese 
culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who Satoshi turns 
out to be.

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" 
> mailto:christophe.bio...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
> for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
> in Turkish as well.
>
> Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
> short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
>
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger 
>> mailto:bitc...@olivere.de>> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> just my two 'cents':
>>
>> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>>
>> - oliver
>>
>>
>> --
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> ___
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Justin A]

What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy to
say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2
decimal places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want?



Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere
winter if I can learn enough.
On Apr 20, 2014 4:32 PM, "Mike Caldwell"  wrote:

> By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural
> reference in the name.  For example "satoshi" would be a reference to
> Japanese culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who
> Satoshi turns out to be.
>
> Mike
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" <
> christophe.bio...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
> > for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
> > in Turkish as well.
> >
> > Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
> > short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
> >
> >> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger 
> wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> just my two 'cents':
> >>
> >> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
> >> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
> >> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
> >> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
> >>
> >> - oliver
> >>
> >>
> >>
> --
> >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their
> >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> >> ___
> >> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> >> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >
> >
> --
> > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their
> > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> > ___
> > Bitcoin-development mailing list
> > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready
Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Mike Caldwell]

By culturally neutral I mean we avoid deliberately invoking a cultural 
reference in the name.  For example "satoshi" would be a reference to Japanese 
culture just for being a common Japanese name regardless of who Satoshi turns 
out to be. 

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 20, 2014, at 1:20 PM, "Christophe Biocca" 
>  wrote:
> 
> Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
> for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
> in Turkish as well.
> 
> Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
> short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.
> 
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger  wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> just my two 'cents':
>> 
>> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
>> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
>> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
>> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>> 
>> - oliver
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> ___
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> 
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Gmail]

People in the Bitcoin community are sometimes resistant to the idea of using 
the word "credit" as a unit of Bitcoin, because Bitcoin is not a credit-based 
system. 

However, given that the average person has close to no understanding of what 
"credit" means, and probably no concern for the distinction even if they do 
know, it may be wise to use the futuristic and easily understandable "credit" 
as our human-friendly unit. 

Do others agree that "credits" as a unit of account has a desirable futuristic 
connotation?

Will



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Christophe Biocca]

Culturally neutral? "bit" in French phonetically collides with slang
for phallus ("bitte", with a silent "e"). Apparently it means "louse"
in Turkish as well.

Not that this really would be avoidable with any short word (all the
short possible words are usually taken), but it's not neutral.

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Oliver Egginger  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> just my two 'cents':
>
> Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
> mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
> except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
> established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.
>
> - oliver
>
>
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Oliver Egginger]

Hello,

just my two 'cents':

Terms arises by itself. Just as most people speak of coins when they
mean bitcoins. I do not see that bitcoin is currently in common use
except for speculation. Therefore no term for smaller units has
established yet. No problem in my eyes. Time will tell.

- oliver


--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Mike Caldwell]

Mainly because it is short, memorable, effectively leads the listener to infer 
the proper meaning, is culturally neutral, is easy to say by speakers of just 
about any language, and many other reasons. 

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 20, 2014, at 12:23 PM, "Arne Brutschy"  wrote:
> 
> agree that overloading isn't an issue when necessary, but my point was
> that the necessity is lacking. If we're free to pick anything, why pick
> something that is overloaded?
> 
> Moreover, "bit" is an abbreviation of bitcoin and might be confused with
> it. Most currencies use a work that is phonetically very different and
> short, so why not do the same?
> 
> Pluk, or cred, or finney (as proposed the thread I posted), or
> whichever. We could call it "unsp" for unspent ;)
> 
> Arne
> 

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Arne Brutschy]

I agree that overloading isn't an issue when necessary, but my point was
that the necessity is lacking. If we're free to pick anything, why pick
something that is overloaded?

Moreover, "bit" is an abbreviation of bitcoin and might be confused with
it. Most currencies use a work that is phonetically very different and
short, so why not do the same?

Pluk, or cred, or finney (as proposed the thread I posted), or
whichever. We could call it "unsp" for unspent ;)

Arne


On 20/04/14 20:11, Mike Caldwell wrote:
> It is a paradigm that is easy to explain and grasp for neurotypical
> people.
> 
> The average mind has no problem overloading words and distinguishing
> the intended meaning from context. For most people, overloading a
> single syllable word with a new meaning is much less complicated than
> using a unique 3+ syllable word like satoshi or micro-anything.
> 
> Doing software development warps our minds to demand fully qualified
> names for everything. We know our compilers would say "bit? Fatal
> error 0xaaawtf, can't continue, not sure if you mean a Boolean or
> a dog bite".  But this peculiarity should not be projected onto the
> people we are trying to get bitcoin to appeal to, not if we want them
> to feel like we think about their experience.
> 
> If I were to say "a Bitcoin can be divided into a million bits", less
> than 0.1% of average joes would think I was talking about German
> beers or the thing that goes in horses mouths. Really, most people
> are good at using context to relate this to "a dollar can be divided
> into 100 cents" and accepting it.  This requires much less of their
> mind resources than using SI prefixes correctly or learning 3
> syllable words that (to them) have no instantly apparent relationship
> to Bitcoin.
> 
> Mike
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Apr 20, 2014, at 11:44 AM, "Arne Brutschy" 
> wrote:
> 
>>> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the 
>>> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC) 
>>> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.
>> 
>> There have been many proposals for more or less arbitrary subunits.
>> What would be the merit of your proposal? I don't really follow the
>> reasoning that it's better if it's uncommon for everyone rather
>> than just uncommon for people not used to metric units.
>> 
>> Regarding the label of a "bit": I have to agree with the others
>> that bit is heavily overused as a unit, but I am a computer
>> scientist, so I don't have the "average joe's" perspective on this.
>> I find it weird to use as it's already in use in English - "a bit
>> of work" etc
> 
> --
>
> 
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
> their applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, 
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! 
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech 
> ___ Bitcoin-development
> mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net 
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> 

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Pavol Rusnak]

On 04/20/2014 06:56 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
> I consider overload/conflict with existing meanings of "bit" as a non-issue 
> for typical population at large. 

So far I have not seen any reasonable name except for "bit". I also
tried to come up with something else (e.g.naka, toshi, etc.) to avoid
the confusion with bits used in computing, but I was not satisfied with
neither of them.

Then I though about "credit", which is more-or-less established in video
games and sci-fi literature and people are already used to sentences
like "Not enough credits" or "This item costs 1 credits", because of
this. Also it would be particularly funny if these sci-fi pieces
predicted the future by actually defining it. ;-)

Another options might be "cubit" or "crebit", but the latter is
sometimes used as a compound word meaning both "credit" and "debit" such
as in "You can use crebit cards here".

Also this Wikipedia source is a list of sometimes rather funny
possibilites: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_currencies

-- 
Best Regards / S pozdravom,

Pavol Rusnak 

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Mike Caldwell]

It is a paradigm that is easy to explain and grasp for neurotypical people. 

The average mind has no problem overloading words and distinguishing the 
intended meaning from context. For most people, overloading a single syllable 
word with a new meaning is much less complicated than using a unique 3+ 
syllable word like satoshi or micro-anything.

Doing software development warps our minds to demand fully qualified names for 
everything. We know our compilers would say "bit? Fatal error 0xaaawtf, 
can't continue, not sure if you mean a Boolean or a dog bite".  But this 
peculiarity should not be projected onto the people we are trying to get 
bitcoin to appeal to, not if we want them to feel like we think about their 
experience. 

If I were to say "a Bitcoin can be divided into a million bits", less than 0.1% 
of average joes would think I was talking about German beers or the thing that 
goes in horses mouths. Really, most people are good at using context to relate 
this to "a dollar can be divided into 100 cents" and accepting it.  This 
requires much less of their mind resources than using SI prefixes correctly or 
learning 3 syllable words that (to them) have no instantly apparent 
relationship to Bitcoin. 

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 20, 2014, at 11:44 AM, "Arne Brutschy"  wrote:

>> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
>> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
>> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.
> 
> There have been many proposals for more or less arbitrary subunits. What
> would be the merit of your proposal? I don't really follow the reasoning
> that it's better if it's uncommon for everyone rather than just uncommon
> for people not used to metric units.
> 
> Regarding the label of a "bit": I have to agree with the others that bit
> is heavily overused as a unit, but I am a computer scientist, so I don't
> have the "average joe's" perspective on this. I find it weird to use as
> it's already in use in English - "a bit of work" etc

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Jannis Froese]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I agree that a unit based on 1e-6 BTC is easier to use in practice
than BTC. The name microbitcoin is ok-ish. Nearly all countries
officially use the SI-system, but that doesn't mean that the average
citizen knows all the SI prefixes. Mega, kilo and milli are
universally understood, micro not so much. This is a serious
accessibility concern.

But I dislike the term bit for the already stated reasons: It's
already used in various languages for various things. Simply using
Satoshis may be easier and is universally understood.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=EPvS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Arne Brutschy]

Hello,

> While SI units are great for people well versed in them, there is a
> very good reason people aren't asking for 100 micro dollars in change.
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one, people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road, and these mistakes will happen
> frequently. Labeling should be easy enough for kindergarten kids.

Agree - but why do you propose not only a new label but also a different
subunit?

Also, everybody in the metric world is used to the milli- prefix due to
meters and millimeters. It's not such a stretch to expect people to
master that; but I agree that most people would struggle with microbitcoins.

> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.

There have been many proposals for more or less arbitrary subunits. What
would be the merit of your proposal? I don't really follow the reasoning
that it's better if it's uncommon for everyone rather than just uncommon
for people not used to metric units.

Regarding the label of a "bit": I have to agree with the others that bit
is heavily overused as a unit, but I am a computer scientist, so I don't
have the "average joe's" perspective on this. I find it weird to use as
it's already in use in English - "a bit of work" etc

I don't really see the advantage of a "bit" - it is part of "bitcoin"
and it's short, but that's about it. I think we are free to pick
anything we want for a label, so why not avoid ambiguities?

See this thread for many creative ideas for labels (and another
arbitrary subunit proposal:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=396522.0

Arne

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Mike Caldwell]

As someone who has put a lot of thought into how to best help typical everyday 
people understand bitcoin, I strongly favor 1 bit = 1e-6 BTC as being very 
straightforward to explain to non technical types, and also XBT as one "bit".  
"There are a million bits in a bit coin" is highly intelligible to average 
people. 

I consider overload/conflict with existing meanings of "bit" as a non-issue for 
typical population at large. 

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 20, 2014, at 10:31 AM, "Alan Reiner"  wrote:
> 
> Whatever we call it. I'm happy to support it as long as it's 1e-6.

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Alan Reiner]

Btw, I should clarify my email: I'm a staunch supporter of moving to
1e-6 BTC as the default unit for wallet applications, not necessarily
any particular name.  I would be fine with "bits" as I think this
context is sufficiently different that it won't be confused by regular
consumers.  But it wouldn't be my first choice.  I don't know what my
first choice would be.

While writing this email, I asked my wife (who's been tired of hearing
about Bitcoin for two years), what she thinks of "bits", "microbes",
"micros".  She said she is fine with any of them.  Apparently microbes
reminders her of biology, not "germs".  But she's also well-educated, so
she fine with milli, micro, kilo, etc... and apparently biology...

Whatever we call it. I'm happy to support it as long as it's 1e-6.


On 04/20/2014 12:23 PM, Erik Garrison wrote:
>
> The world is rapidly becoming a place in which a solid grasp of orders
> of magnitude could be considered a basic mathematical skill.  People
> are very likely to learn what mBTC and µBTC are simply because they
> risk their money if they do not.  This is not a bad thing and I think
> stands only to help people who learn about these monikers for orders
> of magnitude this way.
>
> Any appropriate nicknames for these denominations is sure to develop
> in due course.  Promoting an already-overloaded term that could just
> as easily be applied colloquially to refer to a small amount of value
> in any currency seems problematic.
>
> I've been a staunch supporter of "microbitcoin" and would like to do
> anything I can to make sure that we jump directly to it if we're going
> to promote changing the default units.  And I'm happy to integrate it
> into Armory as a default (with appropriate explanations and
> settings/options).  I'm not so convinced about the "bits" name though
> -- I do like it, but I do also think that word is too overloaded. 
> Though, I think we could get away with it. 
>
> (Sadly, I still use "microbes" occasionally (as in *microb*itcoin)
> when I'm talking to coworkers, because it slips off the tongue and is
> actually a good combination of brevity and self-explanatory -- it just
> doesn't instill the right visuals...)
>
> We started integrating alternative units into Armory.  But, of course,
> there were a few more loose ends than I expected, which will require
> some work.   We want to put it in but not necessarily change the
> default right away.  I'd /prefer/ we get some commitments from some
> other wallet developers, so we can make a unified push for it.  I'm
> happy to lead that and make it default as long as I'm not the only one
> in the world doing it.
>
> -Alan
>
>
>
> On 04/20/2014 11:05 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>> Here is an earlier reference to bits:
>>
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html
>> 
>>
>> I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :
>>
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html
>> 
>>
>> and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time
>> pushing for XBT being 1 bit
>>
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html
>> 
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tamas Blummer
>> http://bitsofproof.com
>>
>> On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille > > wrote:
>>
>>> I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
>>> Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
>>> to just one client.
>>>
>>> I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer
>>> mailto:ta...@bitsofproof.com>> wrote:
 People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem
 dealing with
 magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a
 problem
 with them.
 They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they
 would not
 need to care of finance's or people's current customs.

 The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as
 people
 already use wallets other than the core.

 Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.

 BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support
 and Jeff
 Garzik's.

 Regards,

 Tamas Blummer
 http://bitsofproof.com

 On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding 
  wrote:

 The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
 are using is the correct one,


 The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary,
 and t

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Chris Pacia]

You're correct, my impression of the term is based of what I experience in
the US. If it is more widely used in other cultures that should be a
consideration.
On Apr 20, 2014 12:27 PM, "Wladimir"  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia  wrote:
> > The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of
> the
> > population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I doubt most
> > could even name one use of the term.
> > Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
> > reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.
>
> That's a very anglocentric way of thinking.
>
> Here in the Netherlands, a "bit" is something you put in a horses's
> mouth. It's also used as imported word (in the information sense).
> We've never used the term for money.
>
> Wladimir
>
--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Wladimir]

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia  wrote:
> The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of the
> population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I doubt most
> could even name one use of the term.
> Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
> reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.

That's a very anglocentric way of thinking.

Here in the Netherlands, a "bit" is something you put in a horses's
mouth. It's also used as imported word (in the information sense).
We've never used the term for money.

Wladimir

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Erik Garrison]

The world is rapidly becoming a place in which a solid grasp of orders of
magnitude could be considered a basic mathematical skill.  People are very
likely to learn what mBTC and µBTC are simply because they risk their money
if they do not.  This is not a bad thing and I think stands only to help
people who learn about these monikers for orders of magnitude this way.

Any appropriate nicknames for these denominations is sure to develop in due
course.  Promoting an already-overloaded term that could just as easily be
applied colloquially to refer to a small amount of value in any currency
seems problematic.
 I've been a staunch supporter of "microbitcoin" and would like to do
anything I can to make sure that we jump directly to it if we're going to
promote changing the default units.  And I'm happy to integrate it into
Armory as a default (with appropriate explanations and settings/options).
I'm not so convinced about the "bits" name though -- I do like it, but I do
also think that word is too overloaded.  Though, I think we could get away
with it.

(Sadly, I still use "microbes" occasionally (as in *microb*itcoin) when I'm
talking to coworkers, because it slips off the tongue and is actually a
good combination of brevity and self-explanatory -- it just doesn't instill
the right visuals...)

We started integrating alternative units into Armory.  But, of course,
there were a few more loose ends than I expected, which will require some
work.   We want to put it in but not necessarily change the default right
away.  I'd *prefer* we get some commitments from some other wallet
developers, so we can make a unified push for it.  I'm happy to lead that
and make it default as long as I'm not the only one in the world doing it.

-Alan



On 04/20/2014 11:05 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote:

Here is an earlier reference to bits:


https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html

 I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :


https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html

 and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time
pushing for XBT being 1 bit


https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html

 Regards,

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com

 On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille  wrote:

I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
to just one client.

I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer 
wrote:

People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
with them.
They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not
need to care of finance's or people's current customs.

The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
already use wallets other than the core.

Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.

BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff
Garzik's.

Regards,

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com

On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding
wrote:

The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
are using is the correct one,


The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
to use such things.

people WILL send 1000x more or less than
intended if we go down this road,


Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.

I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.


I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.

Rob


--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoi

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Chris Pacia]

The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of the
population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I doubt most
could even name one use of the term.
Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so this is kind of
reclaiming it. I think it's a great fit.
On Apr 20, 2014 11:52 AM, "Alan Reiner"  wrote:

>  I've been a staunch supporter of "microbitcoin" and would like to do
> anything I can to make sure that we jump directly to it if we're going to
> promote changing the default units.  And I'm happy to integrate it into
> Armory as a default (with appropriate explanations and settings/options).
> I'm not so convinced about the "bits" name though -- I do like it, but I do
> also think that word is too overloaded.  Though, I think we could get away
> with it.
>
> (Sadly, I still use "microbes" occasionally (as in *microb*itcoin) when
> I'm talking to coworkers, because it slips off the tongue and is actually a
> good combination of brevity and self-explanatory -- it just doesn't instill
> the right visuals...)
>
> We started integrating alternative units into Armory.  But, of course,
> there were a few more loose ends than I expected, which will require some
> work.   We want to put it in but not necessarily change the default right
> away.  I'd *prefer* we get some commitments from some other wallet
> developers, so we can make a unified push for it.  I'm happy to lead that
> and make it default as long as I'm not the only one in the world doing it.
>
> -Alan
>
>
>
> On 04/20/2014 11:05 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>
> Here is an earlier reference to bits:
>
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html
>
>  I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :
>
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html
>
>  and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time
> pushing for XBT being 1 bit
>
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html
>
>  Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
>  On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille  wrote:
>
> I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
> Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
> to just one client.
>
> I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
>
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer 
> wrote:
>
> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
> with them.
> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would
> not
> need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
>
> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
> already use wallets other than the core.
>
> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>
> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and
> Jeff
> Garzik's.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding 
> wrote:
>
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one,
>
>
> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and
> there
> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
> to use such things.
>
> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road,
>
>
> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>
> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.
>
>
> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.ne

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Alan Reiner]

I've been a staunch supporter of "microbitcoin" and would like to do
anything I can to make sure that we jump directly to it if we're going
to promote changing the default units.  And I'm happy to integrate it
into Armory as a default (with appropriate explanations and
settings/options).  I'm not so convinced about the "bits" name though --
I do like it, but I do also think that word is too overloaded.  Though,
I think we could get away with it. 

(Sadly, I still use "microbes" occasionally (as in *microb*itcoin) when
I'm talking to coworkers, because it slips off the tongue and is
actually a good combination of brevity and self-explanatory -- it just
doesn't instill the right visuals...)

We started integrating alternative units into Armory.  But, of course,
there were a few more loose ends than I expected, which will require
some work.   We want to put it in but not necessarily change the default
right away.  I'd /prefer/ we get some commitments from some other wallet
developers, so we can make a unified push for it.  I'm happy to lead
that and make it default as long as I'm not the only one in the world
doing it.

-Alan



On 04/20/2014 11:05 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> Here is an earlier reference to bits:
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html
> 
>
> I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html
> 
>
> and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time
> pushing for XBT being 1 bit
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html
> 
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
> On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille  > wrote:
>
>> I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
>> Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
>> to just one client.
>>
>> I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer > > wrote:
>>> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing
>>> with
>>> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
>>> with them.
>>> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they
>>> would not
>>> need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
>>>
>>> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
>>> already use wallets other than the core.
>>>
>>> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>>>
>>> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support
>>> and Jeff
>>> Garzik's.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Tamas Blummer
>>> http://bitsofproof.com
>>>
>>> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding  wrote:
>>>
>>> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
>>> are using is the correct one,
>>>
>>>
>>> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary,
>>> and there
>>> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel
>>> they need
>>> to use such things.
>>>
>>> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
>>> intended if we go down this road,
>>>
>>>
>>> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2
>>> and 3
>>> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of
>>> thousands - Not
>>> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
>>> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>>>
>>> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
>>> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
>>> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.
>>>
>>>
>>> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is,
>>> they can
>>> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
>>> their
>>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>>> ___
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'R

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Tamas Blummer]

Here is an earlier reference to bits:

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04248.html

I forgot that Alan Reiner was also supporting a unit equals to bits :

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04264.html

and here the earlier going back to March 2013 and a poll at that time pushing 
for XBT being 1 bit

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html

Regards,

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com

On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille  wrote:

> I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
> Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
> to just one client.
> 
> I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.
> 
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer  wrote:
>> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
>> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
>> with them.
>> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not
>> need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
>> 
>> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
>> already use wallets other than the core.
>> 
>> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>> 
>> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff
>> Garzik's.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Tamas Blummer
>> http://bitsofproof.com
>> 
>> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding  wrote:
>> 
>> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
>> are using is the correct one,
>> 
>> 
>> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
>> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
>> to use such things.
>> 
>> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
>> intended if we go down this road,
>> 
>> 
>> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
>> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
>> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
>> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>> 
>> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
>> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
>> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.
>> 
>> 
>> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
>> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>> 
>> Rob
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> ___
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
>> ___
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Pieter Wuille]

I told him specifically to bring it here (on a pull request for
Bitcoin Core), as there is no point in making such convention changes
to just one client.

I wasn't aware of any discussion about the "bits" proposal here before.

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Tamas Blummer  wrote:
> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
> with them.
> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not
> need to care of finance's or people's current customs.
>
> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
> already use wallets other than the core.
>
> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>
> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff
> Garzik's.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding  wrote:
>
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one,
>
>
> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
> to use such things.
>
> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road,
>
>
> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>
> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.
>
>
> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>
> Rob
>
>
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Christophe Biocca]

If you absolutely want a name for some small unit (which may be
valuable, not knocking that part of the idea), please use anything
other than "bits", which is already a massively overloaded term that
will confuse the hell out of people:

Harddrive costs measured in "bits per gigabyte"?
An itunes movie download that costs 200,000 bits and takes 804.2
megabytes of space?
Or a 10-megabit internet connection costing 10,000,000 bits per month?

It's especially bad given that bitcoin will likely be adopted first
for online use, where the competing (and more recognized) meaning of
"bit" is most prevalent.

Not to mention the overlap within bitcoin itself, with people already
using "millibits" in conversation as a shorthand for mBTC. Hence one
new "bit" is exactly 1/1000 of the old "millibit".

Make something up if you have to, or just use satoshis.

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Tamas Blummer  wrote:
> People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with
> magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem
> with them.
> They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not
> need to care of finance’s or people’s current customs.
>
> The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people
> already use wallets other than the core.
>
> Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer.
>
> BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff
> Garzik’s.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
>
> On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding  wrote:
>
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one,
>
>
> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
> to use such things.
>
> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road,
>
>
> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
>
> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.
>
>
> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
>
> Rob
>
>
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Tamas Blummer]

People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with 
magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem with 
them.
They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not 
need to care of finance’s or people’s current customs. 

The importance of their decisions in these questions will fade as people 
already use wallets other than the core.

Bring this particular discussion elsewhere, to the wallet developer. 

BTW the topic was discussed here several times, you have my support and Jeff 
Garzik’s.

Regards,

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com

On 20.04.2014, at 15:15, Rob Golding  wrote:

>> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
>> are using is the correct one, 
> 
> The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
> are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
> to use such things.
> 
>> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
>> intended if we go down this road, 
> 
> Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
> dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
> once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
> they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.
> 
>> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
>> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
>> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.
> 
> I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
> just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> --
> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Rob Golding]

> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
> are using is the correct one, 

The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there
are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need
to use such things.

> people WILL send 1000x more or less than
> intended if we go down this road, 

Exceptionally unlikely - I deal every day with currencies with 0, 2 and 3
dp's in amount ranging from 'under 1 whole unit' to tens of thousands - Not
once in 20 years has anyone ever 'sent' more or less than intended - oh,
they've 'intended' to underpay just fine, but never *unintended*.

> I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
> Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
> equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.

I propose that for people unable to understand what a bitcoin is, they can
just use satoshi's and drop this entire proposal.

Rob


--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

[Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account

[Mike Gehl]

The usefulness of a "bitcoin" unit will decrease as the value of the
network increases. Today, a majority of transactions are denominated
in fractions of a bitcoin. As a consequence, millibitcoin (mBTC) and
microbitcoin (uBTC) units have been introduced to alleviate the
decimal problem.

While SI units are great for people well versed in them, there is a
very good reason people aren't asking for 100 micro dollars in change.
The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they
are using is the correct one, people WILL send 1000x more or less than
intended if we go down this road, and these mistakes will happen
frequently. Labeling should be easy enough for kindergarten kids.

I propose that users are offered a preference to denominate the
Bitcoin currency in a unit called a bit. Where one bitcoin (BTC)
equals one million bits (bits) and one bit equals 100 satoshis.

For a user discussion on the topic see:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/23flcn/bits_instead_of_%CE%BCbtc/
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rmto3/its_bits/

--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development