On 5/2/14, 10:41 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> I have to agree with Mike. Human language is surprisingly tolerant of
> overloading and inference from context. Neurotypical people have no
> problem with it and perceive a software engineer's aversion to it as
> being pedantic and strange. Note that "bit
I will drink to that!
Bitte ein Bit! (A Bit please - aka Bitburger Beer)
Mike
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 4, 2014, at 12:17 AM, "Aaron Voisine" wrote:
>
> Bit by bit, it's become clear that it's a bit much to worry even a
> little bit that overloading the word "bit" would be every bit as bad
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> Wladimir,
>
> what is missing is a decision to pull for the reference client.
> Or did I missed that bit?
No opinion - we'll follow whatever the rest does.
Wladimir
---
Wladimir,
what is missing is a decision to pull for the reference client.
Or did I missed that bit?
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
--
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Bro
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
> Bit by bit, it's become clear that it's a bit much to worry even a
> little bit that overloading the word "bit" would be every bit as bad
> as a two bit horse with the bit between it's teeth that bit the hand
> that feeds it, or a drill bit br
+1(bit) for your bit on bits.
> On 4/05/2014, at 2:18 pm, "Aaron Voisine" wrote:
>
> Bit by bit, it's become clear that it's a bit much to worry even a
> little bit that overloading the word "bit" would be every bit as bad
> as a two bit horse with the bit between it's teeth that bit the hand
>
Bit by bit, it's become clear that it's a bit much to worry even a
little bit that overloading the word "bit" would be every bit as bad
as a two bit horse with the bit between it's teeth that bit the hand
that feeds it, or a drill bit broken to bits after just a bit of use.
Aaron
There's no trick
+1
On 4 May 2014 02:06, "Chris Pacia" wrote:
> Absent a concerted effort to move to something else other than 'bits', I
> would be willing to bet the nomenclature moves in that direction anyway.
> 'Bits' is just a shorten word for 'millibits' (or microbits, if you
> will). It's easier to say and
Absent a concerted effort to move to something else other than 'bits', I
would be willing to bet the nomenclature moves in that direction anyway.
'Bits' is just a shorten word for 'millibits' (or microbits, if you
will). It's easier to say and my guess is people would tend to use it
naturally own t
I agree with the sentiment that most people don't understand either computer
science or Bitcoin. The goal of getting people to understand enough about
Bitcoin to use it is achievable and a goal that is "in scope" of our efforts.
Getting them to understand computer science at large at the same t
bit has a lot of meanings to geeks, so what.
bit means for average people:
- something very small, that 100 satoshi is.
- part of the name Bitcoin
- easy to get conversion 1 coin = 1 million bits = 1 Bitcoin
Regards,
Tamas Blummer
Founder, CEO
http://bitsofproof.com
On 03.05.2014, at 18:02, sl
Excellent points Christophe!
Although moving to 1e-6 units is fine for me and I see advantages of doing
this, I don't get that people on this mailing list are fine with calling
such unit "bit". It's geeky as hell, ambiguous and confusing.
slush
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Christophe Biocca
Context as a disambiguator works fine when the interlocutors
understand the topics they're talking about.
Not a day goes by without me seeing "neurotypical people" get horribly
confused between RAM and Hard Drive sizes, because they share the same
units (not that that can be helped, as the units ar
I have to agree with Mike. Human language is surprisingly tolerant of
overloading and inference from context. Neurotypical people have no
problem with it and perceive a software engineer's aversion to it as
being pedantic and strange. Note that "bits" was a term for a unit of
money long before the
[resend - apologies if duplicate]
Microbitcoin is a good-sized unit, workable for everyday transaction
values, with room-to-grow, and a nice relationship to satoshis as 'cents'.
But "bits" has problems as a unit name.
"Bits" will be especially problematic whenever people try to graduate
from i
I'm also a big fan of standardizing on microBTC as the standard unit.
I didn't like the name "bits" at first, but the more I think about it,
the more I like it. The main thing going for it is the fact that it's
part of the name bitcoin. If Bitcoin is the protocol and network, bits
are an obvious ch
>>> That piece of horse equipment is called a bit in the US too. But the point
>>> stands: most people don't use "bit" on a daily basis other than referring to
>>> "a little bit of ."
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>>
r than referring to
> "a little bit of ."
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wladimir [mailto:laa...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 11:27 AM
> To: Chris Pacia
> Cc: Bitcoin Dev
> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
>
r than referring
> to
> "a little bit of ."
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: Wladimir [mailto:laa...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2014 11:27 AM
> To: Chris Pacia
> Cc: Bitcoin Dev
> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
&g
11:27 AM
To: Chris Pacia
Cc: Bitcoin Dev
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
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
I am in favor of xbit, my only concern is if average Joes will consider
that name "stupid" (like various attempts at "cool" branding with unusual
letters like Q, X, Z, etc). We should see if we can get support for it in
the community and if there would be any notable opposition against it or
not. I
xbit is close to XBT because it would be the same unit, both would mean 100
satoshi or 1e-6 Bitcoin.
xbit would be for everyday use, XBT for ISO.
I know, the XBT was used by some sites to be a synonym for BTC that is however
in my opinion not yet graved in stone until it is used by e.g. Bloombe
Tamas,
"xbit" is only a typo or spelling error away from "XBT", and some folks may
assume they refer to the same unit of measure, not knowing the new currency
system as developers here do.
From your email, I got the idea of using "x" as a suffix at the end of a number
of bits e.g. 17500x, like
Thomas V:
Your proposal misses the points that:
- this is about a unit with 1e-6 Bitcoins or 100 satoshis.
- it is not about people who know Bitcoin and are techies, but about those who
don’t and aren’t.
The reasons for such a unit are more than shifting the comma some places for
convinience
Let me make a sacrilegious proposal: keep using the name "bitcoin", and
shift the decimal point.
There would be a short adaption period, where people will need to talk
about "new bitcoins" and "old bitcoins" in order to disambiguate them.
However, Bitcoin users are techies, so I don't think that t
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.
Regardi
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 fina
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 discussi
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 m
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 s
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 pl
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
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
win
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 P
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 distin
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
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
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
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 phonetical
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
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
-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 mi
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
> in
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
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 woul
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 overloa
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
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
p
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
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 s
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
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
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 mo
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
> 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 1
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 u
56 matches
Mail list logo
