Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Odinn Cyberguerrilla]

Hello,

I see a lot of talk on this topic and get the senst that it is focused on
default display only regarding the mBTC / uBTC questions.  However, if the
focus is broader, involving whether or how to express other currencies or
moving further along to what that might even mean (since many people have
different ideas about what a currency is) perhaps there is another issue
to open, or a process BIP to address how to display other concepts, for
example:

other currencies

microdonations

etc.

I sense however that may be outside the scope of this thread, so I'll just
stop here and try to read samples of the other stuff going on here.

-Odinn
http://abis.io

> Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC several weeks
> ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like the consensus was
> uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will happen-- may result in
> additional user confusion, thanks to yet another decimal place
> transition.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Wendell  wrote:
>> We're with uBTC too. Been waiting for the signal to do this, let's do it
>> right after the fee system is improved.
>>
>> -wendell
>>
>> grabhive.com | twitter.com/hivewallet | gpg: 6C0C9411
>>
>> On Nov 15, 2013, at 6:03 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>
>>> Go straight to uBTC. Humans and existing computer systems handle
>>> numbers to
>>> the left of the decimals just fine (HK Dollars, Yen). The opposite is
>>> untrue (QuickBooks really does not like 3+ decimal places).
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jeff Garzik
> Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
> BitPay, Inc.  https://bitpay.com/
>
> --
> 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/13534_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/13534_NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Natanael]

Regarding (ISO standards) currency symbols, XBT is already used as
equivalent to 1 Bitcoin in numerous places, and XBC is taken and BT*
belongs to Bhutan (and X** is already the default for non-national currency
common items of trade), so IMHO we should define something like XUB as
microbitcoins so we can have a symbol that doesn't require changing any
existing systems and that can be standardized globally. Then those with
accounting software that needs to deal with something that has two decimals
maximum without losing precision can use that while following well defined
standards. And those who don't like large numbers can still chose to show
mBTC.

- Sent from my phone
Den 14 mar 2014 18:18 skrev "vv01f" :

> I think
> * if we change to mBTC because your state currencys price for bitcoin
> make this a valid option we will change again in future
> * users do not like changes
> * we should keep a good standard
>
> A good standard should be
> * built on standards (e.g. SI)
> * backed by best practice: never force the user to take an option he
> cannot change
> * do not make changes without users permission
> * take care of users at fault when entering 5.967 ot should be pointed
> out before sending that e.g.
> the sw understood 5967.000 000 00 BTC
> instead of 5.967 000 00 BTC
> because the user failed to use the correct delimiter.
>
> For now a good standard is
> * simply bitcoin as BTC with eight decimal places
> or could be
> * uBTC as SI prefix, probably using XBT as a symbol for compatibility
> with other software
> * satoshis (w. SI prefixes if numbers are to big) for regions where
> decimal places in prices are uncommon
>
> So I'd prefer:
> Make the choice transparent to users and set a standard that the user
> alway should be empowered to use all available decimal places.
> And there should be a set of official test-cases for wallet software and
> the desired behavior.
>
>
> --
> 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/13534_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/13534_NeoTech___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Physical key / edge detection software and PIN to generate private key

[Brooks Boyd]

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Jack Scott wrote:

> BIP: XX
> Title: Physical key / edge detection software and PIN to generate a
> Bitcoin private key
> Author: Jack Scott
> Status: Idea
> Type: Standard Track
> Created: 13-3-2014
>
> Abstract:
> A method is proposed to generate a Bitcoin private key by using a physical
> key in conjunction with image recognition software and a PIN.  Use edge
> detection software applied to incoming video feed to convert the shape of a
> physical key into an equation that describes the key.  The hash of the
> key's equation plus a user generated five digit pin can then be used to
> create a Bitcoin private key.
>
>
Interesting idea, though as Wladimir mentioned, a real-world "key" is much
less secure than a Bitcoin/PGP "key", though in this case, I could see your
physical/visual "key" being any complex, high-contrast image (like a Motion
Tracking Target: https://www.google.com/search?q=tracking+markers&tbm=isch),
if just using edge-detection (a high-contrast image would help make
low-light or out-of-focus shots still able to be detected), though like a
QR-code, it should probably have calibration markers in the corners to
specify orientation (would help decoding a skewed or rotated image) and the
standard should enforce some minimum level of complexity to prevent really
simple and easy-to-reproduce/steal keys .

Though if you're getting to that level of complexity, you might as well
just have a QR code of the private key.

Brooks
--
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/13534_NeoTech___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[vv01f]

I think
* if we change to mBTC because your state currencys price for bitcoin
make this a valid option we will change again in future
* users do not like changes
* we should keep a good standard

A good standard should be
* built on standards (e.g. SI)
* backed by best practice: never force the user to take an option he
cannot change
* do not make changes without users permission
* take care of users at fault when entering 5.967 ot should be pointed
out before sending that e.g.
the sw understood 5967.000 000 00 BTC
instead of 5.967 000 00 BTC
because the user failed to use the correct delimiter.

For now a good standard is
* simply bitcoin as BTC with eight decimal places
or could be
* uBTC as SI prefix, probably using XBT as a symbol for compatibility
with other software
* satoshis (w. SI prefixes if numbers are to big) for regions where
decimal places in prices are uncommon

So I'd prefer:
Make the choice transparent to users and set a standard that the user
alway should be empowered to use all available decimal places.
And there should be a set of official test-cases for wallet software and
the desired behavior.

--
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/13534_NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Allen Piscitello]

Fairly useless experiment, since the vast majority of users will almost
always stay at the default.  The winner will always be whatever was
selected as the default initially.  This might work if the default was
randomly chosen, and you see what actually annoyed users enough to switch
off of it most often.


On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Ricardo Filipe
wrote:

> so much discussion for a visual update...
>
> make this a user experiment:
> -give the user the possibility to use BTC/mBTC/uMTC
> -retrieve the results after some time
> -make the default the most used option
>
>
> 2014-03-14 16:15 GMT+00:00 Alex Morcos :
> > I think Mark makes some good arguments.
> > I realize this would only add to the confusion, but...
> > What if we did relabel 100 satoshis to be some new kind of unit ("bit" or
> > whatever else), with a proper 3 letter code, and then from a user
> > standpoint, where people are using mBTC, they could switch to using Kbits
> > (ok thats obviously bad, but you get the idea) at the same nominal price.
> > But accounting backends and so forth would operate in the "bit" base unit
> > with 2 decimals of precision.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Mark Friedenbach 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> A cup of coffee in Tokyo costs about 55 yen. You see similar magnitude
> >> numbers in both Chinas, Thailand, and other economically important East
> >> Asian countries. Expect to pay hundreds of rupees in India, or thousands
> >> of rupees in Indonesia.
> >>
> >> This concept that money should have low, single digits for everyday
> >> prices is not just Western-centric, it's English-centric. An expresso in
> >> Rome would have cost you a few (tens of?) thousand lira in recent
> >> memory. It was pegging of the Euro to the U.S. dollar that brought
> >> European states in line with the English-speaking world (who themselves
> >> trace lineage to the pound sterling).
> >>
> >> No, there is no culturally-neutral common standards for currency and
> >> pricing. But there are ill-advised, ill-informed "standards" in
> >> accounting software that we nevertheless must live with. These software
> >> packages do not handle more than two decimal places gracefully. That
> >> gives technical justifications for moving to either uBTC or accounting
> >> in Satoshis directly. An argument for uBTC is that it retains alignment
> >> with the existing kBTC/BTC/mBTC/uBTC conventions.
> >>
> >> However another limitation of these accounting software practices is
> >> that they do not always handle SI notation very well, particularly
> >> sub-unit prefixes. By relabeling uBTC to be a new three-digit symbol
> >> (XBT, XBC, IBT, NBC, or whatever--I really don't care), we are now fully
> >> compliant with any software accounting package out there.
> >>
> >> We are still very, very early in the adoption period. These are changes
> >> that could be made now simply by a few big players and/or the bitcoin
> >> foundation changing their practice and their users following suit.
> >>
> >> On 03/14/2014 07:49 AM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> >> > How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?
> >> >
> >> > At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
> >> > people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
> >> > 0.003578.
> >> >
> >> > Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> >> >> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
> >> >> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
> >> >> gave them are bad.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
> >> >> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
> >> >> do.
> >> >>
> >> >> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
> >> >> would be.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
> >> >>
> >> >> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
> >> >>> because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
> >> >>> questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
> >> >>> local currency that matters to the users.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> >>  Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
> >>  µBTC.
> >> 
> >>  I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
> >>  other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
> >>  mBTC.
> >> 
> >> 
> >>  On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> >> > The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
> >> > It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
> >> > now.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:2

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Ricardo Filipe]

so much discussion for a visual update...

make this a user experiment:
-give the user the possibility to use BTC/mBTC/uMTC
-retrieve the results after some time
-make the default the most used option


2014-03-14 16:15 GMT+00:00 Alex Morcos :
> I think Mark makes some good arguments.
> I realize this would only add to the confusion, but...
> What if we did relabel 100 satoshis to be some new kind of unit ("bit" or
> whatever else), with a proper 3 letter code, and then from a user
> standpoint, where people are using mBTC, they could switch to using Kbits
> (ok thats obviously bad, but you get the idea) at the same nominal price.
> But accounting backends and so forth would operate in the "bit" base unit
> with 2 decimals of precision.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Mark Friedenbach  wrote:
>>
>> A cup of coffee in Tokyo costs about 55 yen. You see similar magnitude
>> numbers in both Chinas, Thailand, and other economically important East
>> Asian countries. Expect to pay hundreds of rupees in India, or thousands
>> of rupees in Indonesia.
>>
>> This concept that money should have low, single digits for everyday
>> prices is not just Western-centric, it's English-centric. An expresso in
>> Rome would have cost you a few (tens of?) thousand lira in recent
>> memory. It was pegging of the Euro to the U.S. dollar that brought
>> European states in line with the English-speaking world (who themselves
>> trace lineage to the pound sterling).
>>
>> No, there is no culturally-neutral common standards for currency and
>> pricing. But there are ill-advised, ill-informed "standards" in
>> accounting software that we nevertheless must live with. These software
>> packages do not handle more than two decimal places gracefully. That
>> gives technical justifications for moving to either uBTC or accounting
>> in Satoshis directly. An argument for uBTC is that it retains alignment
>> with the existing kBTC/BTC/mBTC/uBTC conventions.
>>
>> However another limitation of these accounting software practices is
>> that they do not always handle SI notation very well, particularly
>> sub-unit prefixes. By relabeling uBTC to be a new three-digit symbol
>> (XBT, XBC, IBT, NBC, or whatever--I really don't care), we are now fully
>> compliant with any software accounting package out there.
>>
>> We are still very, very early in the adoption period. These are changes
>> that could be made now simply by a few big players and/or the bitcoin
>> foundation changing their practice and their users following suit.
>>
>> On 03/14/2014 07:49 AM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
>> > How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?
>> >
>> > At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
>> > people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
>> > 0.003578.
>> >
>> > Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>> >> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
>> >> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
>> >> gave them are bad.
>> >>
>> >> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
>> >> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
>> >> do.
>> >>
>> >> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
>> >> would be.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
>> >>
>> >> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach 
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
>> >>> because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
>> >>> questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
>> >>>
>> >>> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
>> >>> local currency that matters to the users.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
>>  Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
>>  µBTC.
>> 
>>  I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
>>  other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
>>  mBTC.
>> 
>> 
>>  On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
>> > The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
>> > It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
>> > now.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
>> > mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>> wrote:
>> >
>> > The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
>> > presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
>> > configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
>> > combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
>> > mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
>> > symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
>> > customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.
>> >
>> >
>> > We apply the NIST gu

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Andrew Smith]

Well, not sure I wanted to subscribe the mbtc vs ubtc list... its a
default, not a big deal.
--
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/13534_NeoTech___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Alex Morcos]

I think Mark makes some good arguments.
I realize this would only add to the confusion, but...
What if we did relabel 100 satoshis to be some new kind of unit ("bit" or
whatever else), with a proper 3 letter code, and then from a user
standpoint, where people are using mBTC, they could switch to using Kbits
(ok thats obviously bad, but you get the idea) at the same nominal price.
 But accounting backends and so forth would operate in the "bit" base unit
with 2 decimals of precision.




On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Mark Friedenbach  wrote:

> A cup of coffee in Tokyo costs about 55 yen. You see similar magnitude
> numbers in both Chinas, Thailand, and other economically important East
> Asian countries. Expect to pay hundreds of rupees in India, or thousands
> of rupees in Indonesia.
>
> This concept that money should have low, single digits for everyday
> prices is not just Western-centric, it's English-centric. An expresso in
> Rome would have cost you a few (tens of?) thousand lira in recent
> memory. It was pegging of the Euro to the U.S. dollar that brought
> European states in line with the English-speaking world (who themselves
> trace lineage to the pound sterling).
>
> No, there is no culturally-neutral common standards for currency and
> pricing. But there are ill-advised, ill-informed "standards" in
> accounting software that we nevertheless must live with. These software
> packages do not handle more than two decimal places gracefully. That
> gives technical justifications for moving to either uBTC or accounting
> in Satoshis directly. An argument for uBTC is that it retains alignment
> with the existing kBTC/BTC/mBTC/uBTC conventions.
>
> However another limitation of these accounting software practices is
> that they do not always handle SI notation very well, particularly
> sub-unit prefixes. By relabeling uBTC to be a new three-digit symbol
> (XBT, XBC, IBT, NBC, or whatever--I really don't care), we are now fully
> compliant with any software accounting package out there.
>
> We are still very, very early in the adoption period. These are changes
> that could be made now simply by a few big players and/or the bitcoin
> foundation changing their practice and their users following suit.
>
> On 03/14/2014 07:49 AM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> > How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?
> >
> > At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
> > people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
> > 0.003578.
> >
> > Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.
> >
> >
> > On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> >> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
> >> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
> >> gave them are bad.
> >>
> >> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
> >> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
> >> do.
> >>
> >> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
> >> would be.
> >>
> >>
> >> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
> >>
> >> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
> >>> because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
> >>> questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
> >>>
> >>> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
> >>> local currency that matters to the users.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
>  Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
>  µBTC.
> 
>  I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
>  other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
>  mBTC.
> 
> 
>  On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> > The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
> > It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
> > now.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
> > mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>> wrote:
> >
> > The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
> > presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
> > configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
> > combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
> > mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
> > symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
> > customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.
> >
> >
> > We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit
> > symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving
> > icon+m etc).
> >
> > Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from
> > the Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it
> > seems that μ+icon is more sensible.
> >
> > Let us know what you'd like

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Mark Friedenbach]

A cup of coffee in Tokyo costs about 55 yen. You see similar magnitude
numbers in both Chinas, Thailand, and other economically important East
Asian countries. Expect to pay hundreds of rupees in India, or thousands
of rupees in Indonesia.

This concept that money should have low, single digits for everyday
prices is not just Western-centric, it's English-centric. An expresso in
Rome would have cost you a few (tens of?) thousand lira in recent
memory. It was pegging of the Euro to the U.S. dollar that brought
European states in line with the English-speaking world (who themselves
trace lineage to the pound sterling).

No, there is no culturally-neutral common standards for currency and
pricing. But there are ill-advised, ill-informed "standards" in
accounting software that we nevertheless must live with. These software
packages do not handle more than two decimal places gracefully. That
gives technical justifications for moving to either uBTC or accounting
in Satoshis directly. An argument for uBTC is that it retains alignment
with the existing kBTC/BTC/mBTC/uBTC conventions.

However another limitation of these accounting software practices is
that they do not always handle SI notation very well, particularly
sub-unit prefixes. By relabeling uBTC to be a new three-digit symbol
(XBT, XBC, IBT, NBC, or whatever--I really don't care), we are now fully
compliant with any software accounting package out there.

We are still very, very early in the adoption period. These are changes
that could be made now simply by a few big players and/or the bitcoin
foundation changing their practice and their users following suit.

On 03/14/2014 07:49 AM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?
> 
> At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
> people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
> 0.003578.
> 
> Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.
> 
> 
> On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
>> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
>> gave them are bad.
>>
>> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
>> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
>> do.
>>
>> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
>> would be.
>>
>>
>> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
>>
>> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
>>> because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
>>> questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
>>>
>>> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
>>> local currency that matters to the users.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
 Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
 µBTC.

 I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
 other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
 mBTC.


 On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
> It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
> now.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
> mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>> wrote:
>
> The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
> presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
> configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
> combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
> mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
> symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
> customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.
>
>
> We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit
> symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving
> icon+m etc).
>
> Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from
> the Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it
> seems that μ+icon is more sensible.
>
> Let us know what you'd like.
>
> Links: m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG Font
> Awesome icon:
> http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/ NIST SI
> guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html
>
>
> On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik  > wrote:
>
> Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC
> several weeks ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like
> the consensus was uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will
> happen-- may result in additional user confusion, thanks to
> yet another decimal place transition.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Wendell  > wrote:
>> We're w

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Andreas Schildbach]

Indeed, rounding is the obvious easy fix. Bitcoin Wallet rounds all
amounts except if you type amounts with a higher precision.


On 03/14/2014 04:32 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> The issue here is that most people are producing prices in BTC by just
> multiplying through the spot rate with full precision. Obviously if you
> converted dollar prices to Euro prices with the same technique, you'd
> also end up with lots of numbers after the decimal point, but in the
> real world nobody actually does this. They always "prettify" the price.
> 
> This practice often annoys people because they feel like they get short
> changed. The most notorious example is Apple which likes (liked?) to
> charge 99 cents per iTunes song in the USA, and 99 pennies per song in
> the UK, despite that the British pound is worth a lot more than the
> dollar. It should be more like 60 pence.
> 
> Nothing stops BitPay rounding the mBTC price to look more natural, but
> right now it's not common practice.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Andreas Schildbach
> mailto:andr...@schildbach.de>> wrote:
> 
> By that definition 3.56 is a price. Maybe I misunderstood you and you're
> lobbying for mBTC?
> 
> 
> On 03/14/2014 03:57 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> > you miss the point Andreas. It is not about the magnitude but about
> > the form of a price.
> >
> > A number with no decimals or with two decimals is percieved as a
> > price in some currency.
> >
> > A number with more than two decimals is just not percieved as a price
> > but as a geeky something that you rather convert to local currency.
> >
> > Tamas Blummer
> > Bits of Proof
> >
> > On 14.03.2014, at 15:49, Andreas Schildbach  
> > >> wrote:
> >
> >> How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?
> >>
> >> At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
> >> people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
> >> 0.003578.
> >>
> >> Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> >>> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
> >>> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
> >>> gave them are bad.
> >>>
> >>> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
> >>> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
> >>> do.
> >>>
> >>> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
> >>> would be.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
> >>>
> >>> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach
> mailto:andr...@schildbach.de>
> >>> >>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
>  because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
>  questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
> 
>  I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
>  local currency that matters to the users.
> 
> 
>  On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> > Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
> > µBTC.
> >
> > I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
> > other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
> > mBTC.
> >
> >
> > On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> >> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
> >> It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
> >> now.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
> >> mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
> >> presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
> >> configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
> >> combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
> >> mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
> >> symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
> >> customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.
> >>
> >>
> >> We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit
> >> symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving
> >> icon+m etc).
> >>
> >> Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from
> >> the Fo

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Mike Hearn]

The issue here is that most people are producing prices in BTC by just
multiplying through the spot rate with full precision. Obviously if you
converted dollar prices to Euro prices with the same technique, you'd also
end up with lots of numbers after the decimal point, but in the real world
nobody actually does this. They always "prettify" the price.

This practice often annoys people because they feel like they get short
changed. The most notorious example is Apple which likes (liked?) to charge
99 cents per iTunes song in the USA, and 99 pennies per song in the UK,
despite that the British pound is worth a lot more than the dollar. It
should be more like 60 pence.

Nothing stops BitPay rounding the mBTC price to look more natural, but
right now it's not common practice.


On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Andreas Schildbach
wrote:

> By that definition 3.56 is a price. Maybe I misunderstood you and you're
> lobbying for mBTC?
>
>
> On 03/14/2014 03:57 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> > you miss the point Andreas. It is not about the magnitude but about
> > the form of a price.
> >
> > A number with no decimals or with two decimals is percieved as a
> > price in some currency.
> >
> > A number with more than two decimals is just not percieved as a price
> > but as a geeky something that you rather convert to local currency.
> >
> > Tamas Blummer
> > Bits of Proof
> >
> > On 14.03.2014, at 15:49, Andreas Schildbach  > > wrote:
> >
> >> How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?
> >>
> >> At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
> >> people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
> >> 0.003578.
> >>
> >> Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> >>> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
> >>> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
> >>> gave them are bad.
> >>>
> >>> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
> >>> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
> >>> do.
> >>>
> >>> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
> >>> would be.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
> >>>
> >>> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach  >>> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
>  because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
>  questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
> 
>  I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
>  local currency that matters to the users.
> 
> 
>  On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> > Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
> > µBTC.
> >
> > I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
> > other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
> > mBTC.
> >
> >
> > On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> >> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
> >> It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
> >> now.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
> >> mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
> >> presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
> >> configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
> >> combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
> >> mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
> >> symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
> >> customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.
> >>
> >>
> >> We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit
> >> symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving
> >> icon+m etc).
> >>
> >> Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from
> >> the Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it
> >> seems that μ+icon is more sensible.
> >>
> >> Let us know what you'd like.
> >>
> >> Links: m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG Font
> >> Awesome icon:
> >> http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/ NIST SI
> >> guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html
> >>
> >>
> >> On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik  >> 
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC
> >> several weeks ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like
> >> the consensus was uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will
> >> happen-- may result in additional user confusion, thanks to
> >> yet a

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Andreas Schildbach]

I don't know about financial software.

I really don't get what you mean by weird notation? Bitcoin Wallet is
made for ordinary users. They are used to real-world prices like EUR
1.63 / USD 2.26 (that would be the Espresso example). How can mBTC 3.56
be weird to these people?

Granted, there are exceptions, like in Japan. Maybe those would be
better served with µBTC as default. Maybe. Up to now, outside of this
mailing list nobody requested µBTC. Then again, Japanese userbase is
tiny compared to US.


On 03/14/2014 04:12 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> I think you want to misunderstand me Andreas.
> 
> It is astonishing arrogance to define the units because we in Bitcoin
> are used to
> some wierd notation and ignore that the vast majority of population and 
>  financial software in existence does not have a notion of prices
> with more than two decimals.
> 
> With 1 bit = 100 satoshi, we would solve this problem for good. 
> Instead mBTC is a confusing step in-between.
> 
> Tamas Blummer
> http://bitsofproof.com
> 
> On 14.03.2014, at 16:02, Andreas Schildbach  > wrote:
> 
>> By that definition 3.56 is a price. Maybe I misunderstood you and you're
>> lobbying for mBTC?
>>
>>
>> On 03/14/2014 03:57 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>>> you miss the point Andreas. It is not about the magnitude but about
>>> the form of a price.
>>>
>>> A number with no decimals or with two decimals is percieved as a
>>> price in some currency.
>>>
>>> A number with more than two decimals is just not percieved as a price
>>> but as a geeky something that you rather convert to local currency.
>>>
>>> Tamas Blummer
>>> Bits of Proof
>>>
>>> On 14.03.2014, at 15:49, Andreas Schildbach >> 
>>> > wrote:
>>>
 How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?

 At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
 people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
 0.003578.

 Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.


 On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
> gave them are bad.
>
> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
> do.
>
> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
> would be.
>
>
> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
>
> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach  
> >
> wrote:
>
>> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
>> because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
>> questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
>>
>> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
>> local currency that matters to the users.
>>
>>
>> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
>>> Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
>>> µBTC.
>>>
>>> I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
>>> other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
>>> mBTC.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
 The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
 It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
 now.


 On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
 mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>
 
 > wrote:

 The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
 presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
 configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
 combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
 mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
 symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
 customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.


 We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit
 symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving
 icon+m etc).

 Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from
 the Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it
 seems that μ+icon is more sensible.

 Let us know what you'd like.

 Links: m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG Font
 Awesome icon:
 http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/ NIST SI
 guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html


 On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Ga

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Tyler]

>You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder why
>they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you gave them are
bad.

I don't think this is particularly true. The options people are given are
all good in this case and all have their merits. The reason people are
converting to fiat using the exchange rates is because right now the
exchanges define its value. People have no intuitive idea that a loaf of
bread cost X BTC. This isn't going to change anytime soon.

In my opinion it doesn't really matter what denomination you use.  If we
switched to micro we would have 3 extra digits we would be working with on
a daily basis which have very little significance. But thats just a western
point of view and people could adapt.

The real problems are that millibitcoin and microbitcoin are hard to say
loud and the both start with 'm' not too many people have a mu key on their
keyboard. Even Bitcoin is not nice to say. it has two very hard sounds
together in the middle of the word.

It would be far easier if we had a system like one ham is 1000 bits, one
bacon is 1000 hams.

Clearly a ridiculous example but try saying and you'll realize how much
easier it is to describe things not that they are clearly differentiable
words that are easy to say.

I like bits as the lowest one. But its not something you can decide. The
common names will have to develop naturally and in all likelihood will
differ between regions (I know I know we must keep it standardized but what
might be easy to say in North America probably isn't as easy elsewhere.)

So give people the options (Let them transact on their own terms). I would
say restrict it to BTC milli and micro in the settings that will help nudge
people towards even different regions simply having different names for the
same quantity as opposed to some place having 10 hams as a pixie.


On 14 March 2014 10:14, Tamas Blummer  wrote:

> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder why
> they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you gave them are
> bad.
>
> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a currency
> of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies do.
>
> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits would be.
>
>
> Tamas Blummer
> Bits of Proof
>
> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach  wrote:
>
> > btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion because
> > of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and questions if
> > exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
> >
> > I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in local
> > currency that matters to the users.
> >
> >
> > On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> >> Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for µBTC.
> >>
> >> I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched other
> >> wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to mBTC.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> >>> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted. It's too late
> >>> to try and sway this on a mailing list thread now.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe  >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive presentation
> >>>issue. As a result we offer a simple configuration panel giving
> >>>pretty much every possible combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC,
> >>>mBTC,  μBTC, XBT, mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for
> >>>leading/trailing symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows
> >>>anyone to customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered
> default.
> >>>
> >>>We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit symbols
> >>>(i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving icon+m etc).
> >>>
> >>>Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from the
> >>>Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it seems
> >>>that μ+icon is more sensible.
> >>>
> >>>Let us know what you'd like.
> >>>
> >>>Links:
> >>>m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG
> >>>Font Awesome icon:
> http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/
> >>>NIST SI guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik  >>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC several
> weeks
> >>>ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like the consensus
> was
> >>>uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will happen-- may result
> in
> >>>additional user confusion, thanks to yet another decimal place
> >>>transition.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Wendell  >>>> wrote:
>  We're with uBTC too. Been waiting for the signal to do this,
> 

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Tamas Blummer]

I think you want to misunderstand me Andreas.

It is astonishing arrogance to define the units because we in Bitcoin are used 
to
some wierd notation and ignore that the vast majority of population and 
 financial software in existence does not have a notion of prices
with more than two decimals.

With 1 bit = 100 satoshi, we would solve this problem for good. 
Instead mBTC is a confusing step in-between.

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com

On 14.03.2014, at 16:02, Andreas Schildbach  wrote:

> By that definition 3.56 is a price. Maybe I misunderstood you and you're
> lobbying for mBTC?
> 
> 
> On 03/14/2014 03:57 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>> you miss the point Andreas. It is not about the magnitude but about
>> the form of a price.
>> 
>> A number with no decimals or with two decimals is percieved as a
>> price in some currency. 
>> 
>> A number with more than two decimals is just not percieved as a price
>> but as a geeky something that you rather convert to local currency.
>> 
>> Tamas Blummer
>> Bits of Proof
>> 
>> On 14.03.2014, at 15:49, Andreas Schildbach > > wrote:
>> 
>>> How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?
>>> 
>>> At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
>>> people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
>>> 0.003578.
>>> 
>>> Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
 You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
 why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
 gave them are bad.
 
 I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
 currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
 do.
 
 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
 would be.
 
 
 Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
 
 On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach >>> >
 wrote:
 
> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
> because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
> questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
> 
> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
> local currency that matters to the users.
> 
> 
> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
>> Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
>> µBTC.
>> 
>> I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
>> other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
>> mBTC.
>> 
>> 
>> On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
>>> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
>>> It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
>>> now.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
>>> mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>
>>> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
>>> presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
>>> configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
>>> combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
>>> mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
>>> symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
>>> customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit
>>> symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving
>>> icon+m etc).
>>> 
>>> Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from
>>> the Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it
>>> seems that μ+icon is more sensible.
>>> 
>>> Let us know what you'd like.
>>> 
>>> Links: m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG Font
>>> Awesome icon:
>>> http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/ NIST SI
>>> guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik >> 
>>> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC
>>> several weeks ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like
>>> the consensus was uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will
>>> happen-- may result in additional user confusion, thanks to
>>> yet another decimal place transition.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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/135

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Andreas Schildbach]

By that definition 3.56 is a price. Maybe I misunderstood you and you're
lobbying for mBTC?


On 03/14/2014 03:57 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> you miss the point Andreas. It is not about the magnitude but about
> the form of a price.
> 
> A number with no decimals or with two decimals is percieved as a
> price in some currency. 
> 
> A number with more than two decimals is just not percieved as a price
> but as a geeky something that you rather convert to local currency.
> 
> Tamas Blummer
> Bits of Proof
> 
> On 14.03.2014, at 15:49, Andreas Schildbach  > wrote:
> 
>> How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?
>>
>> At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
>> people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
>> 0.003578.
>>
>> Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.
>>
>>
>> On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>>> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
>>> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
>>> gave them are bad.
>>>
>>> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
>>> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
>>> do.
>>>
>>> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
>>> would be.
>>>
>>>
>>> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
>>>
>>> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach >> >
>>> wrote:
>>>
 btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
 because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
 questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.

 I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
 local currency that matters to the users.


 On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
> µBTC.
>
> I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
> other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
> mBTC.
>
>
> On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
>> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
>> It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
>> now.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
>> mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
>> presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
>> configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
>> combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
>> mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
>> symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
>> customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.
>>
>>
>> We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit
>> symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving
>> icon+m etc).
>>
>> Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from
>> the Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it
>> seems that μ+icon is more sensible.
>>
>> Let us know what you'd like.
>>
>> Links: m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG Font
>> Awesome icon:
>> http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/ NIST SI
>> guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html
>>
>>
>> On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik > 
>> > wrote:
>>
>> Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC
>> several weeks ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like
>> the consensus was uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will
>> happen-- may result in additional user confusion, thanks to
>> yet another decimal place transition.



--
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/13534_NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Tamas Blummer]

you miss the point Andreas. It is not about the magnitude but about
the form of a price.

A number with no decimals or with two decimals is percieved as a
price in some currency. 

A number with more than two decimals is just not percieved as a price
but as a geeky something that you rather convert to local currency.

Tamas Blummer
Bits of Proof

On 14.03.2014, at 15:49, Andreas Schildbach  wrote:

> How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?
> 
> At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
> people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
> 0.003578.
> 
> Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.
> 
> 
> On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
>> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
>> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
>> gave them are bad.
>> 
>> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
>> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
>> do.
>> 
>> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
>> would be.
>> 
>> 
>> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
>> 
>> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
>>> because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
>>> questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
>>> 
>>> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
>>> local currency that matters to the users.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
 Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
 µBTC.
 
 I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
 other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
 mBTC.
 
 
 On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
> It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
> now.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
> mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>> wrote:
> 
> The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
> presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
> configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
> combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
> mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
> symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
> customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.
> 
> 
> We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit
> symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving
> icon+m etc).
> 
> Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from
> the Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it
> seems that μ+icon is more sensible.
> 
> Let us know what you'd like.
> 
> Links: m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG Font
> Awesome icon:
> http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/ NIST SI
> guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html
> 
> 
> On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik  > wrote:
> 
> Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC
> several weeks ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like
> the consensus was uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will
> happen-- may result in additional user confusion, thanks to
> yet another decimal place transition.
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Wendell  > wrote:
>> We're with uBTC too. Been waiting for the signal to do
>> this,
> let's do it right after the fee system is improved.
>> 
>> -wendell
>> 
>> grabhive.com  |
>> twitter.com/hivewallet
>  | gpg: 6C0C9411
>> 
>> On Nov 15, 2013, at 6:03 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> 
>>> Go straight to uBTC. Humans and existing computer
>>> systems
> handle numbers to
>>> the left of the decimals just fine (HK Dollars, Yen).
>>> The
> opposite is
>>> untrue (QuickBooks really does not like 3+ decimal
>>> places).
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source
> evangelist BitPay, Inc.  https://bitpay.com/
> 
> --
> 
> 
> 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/13534_NeoTech 
> ___ 
> Bitcoin-de

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Roy Badami]

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 03:05:25PM +0100, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion because
> of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and questions if
> exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.

At the moment, I imagine the vast majority of Bitcoin users are
familliar with SI units and know what milli- and micro- mean.

I doubt that is true of the general population, though.

roy

--
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/13534_NeoTech
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Andreas Schildbach]

How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency?

At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what
people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC
0.003578.

Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused.


On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote:
> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder
> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you
> gave them are bad.
> 
> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a
> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies
> do.
> 
> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits
> would be.
> 
> 
> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof
> 
> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach 
> wrote:
> 
>> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion
>> because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and
>> questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
>> 
>> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in
>> local currency that matters to the users.
>> 
>> 
>> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
>>> Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for
>>> µBTC.
>>> 
>>> I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched
>>> other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to
>>> mBTC.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
 The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted.
 It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread
 now.
 
 
 On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe
 mailto:g.r...@froot.co.uk>> wrote:
 
 The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive
 presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple
 configuration panel giving pretty much every possible
 combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC, mBTC,  μBTC, XBT,
 mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing
 symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to
 customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default.
 
 
 We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit
 symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving
 icon+m etc).
 
 Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from
 the Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it
 seems that μ+icon is more sensible.
 
 Let us know what you'd like.
 
 Links: m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG Font
 Awesome icon:
 http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/ NIST SI
 guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html
 
 
 On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik >>> > wrote:
 
 Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC
 several weeks ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like
 the consensus was uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will
 happen-- may result in additional user confusion, thanks to
 yet another decimal place transition.
 
 
 
 On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Wendell >>> > wrote:
> We're with uBTC too. Been waiting for the signal to do
> this,
 let's do it right after the fee system is improved.
> 
> -wendell
> 
> grabhive.com  |
> twitter.com/hivewallet
  | gpg: 6C0C9411
> 
> On Nov 15, 2013, at 6:03 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
>> Go straight to uBTC. Humans and existing computer
>> systems
 handle numbers to
>> the left of the decimals just fine (HK Dollars, Yen).
>> The
 opposite is
>> untrue (QuickBooks really does not like 3+ decimal
>> places).
> 
 
 
 
 -- Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source
 evangelist BitPay, Inc.  https://bitpay.com/
 
 --

 
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/13534_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 ava

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Tamas Blummer]

You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder why
they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you gave them are bad.

I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a currency
of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies do. 

3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits would be.


Tamas Blummer
Bits of Proof

On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach  wrote:

> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion because
> of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and questions if
> exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.
> 
> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in local
> currency that matters to the users.
> 
> 
> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
>> Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for µBTC.
>> 
>> I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched other
>> wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to mBTC.
>> 
>> 
>> On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
>>> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted. It's too late
>>> to try and sway this on a mailing list thread now.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>>The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive presentation
>>>issue. As a result we offer a simple configuration panel giving
>>>pretty much every possible combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC,
>>>mBTC,  μBTC, XBT, mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for
>>>leading/trailing symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows
>>>anyone to customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default. 
>>> 
>>>We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit symbols
>>>(i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving icon+m etc).
>>> 
>>>Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from the
>>>Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it seems
>>>that μ+icon is more sensible. 
>>> 
>>>Let us know what you'd like.
>>> 
>>>Links:
>>>m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG
>>>Font Awesome icon: http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/
>>>NIST SI guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html
>>> 
>>> 
>>>On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik >>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC several weeks
>>>ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like the consensus was
>>>uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will happen-- may result in
>>>additional user confusion, thanks to yet another decimal place
>>>transition.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Wendell >>> wrote:
 We're with uBTC too. Been waiting for the signal to do this,
>>>let's do it right after the fee system is improved.
 
 -wendell
 
 grabhive.com  | twitter.com/hivewallet
>>> | gpg: 6C0C9411
 
 On Nov 15, 2013, at 6:03 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
 
> Go straight to uBTC. Humans and existing computer systems
>>>handle numbers to
> the left of the decimals just fine (HK Dollars, Yen). The
>>>opposite is
> untrue (QuickBooks really does not like 3+ decimal places).
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>--
>>>Jeff Garzik
>>>Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
>>>BitPay, Inc.  https://bitpay.com/
>>> 
>>>
>>> --
>>>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/13534_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/13534_NeoTech
>>>___
>>>Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>>Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>

Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc

[Andreas Schildbach]

btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion because
of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and questions if
exchange rates happen to differ by >10%.

I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in local
currency that matters to the users.


On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for µBTC.
> 
> I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched other
> wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to mBTC.
> 
> 
> On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
>> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted. It's too late
>> to try and sway this on a mailing list thread now.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe > > wrote:
>>
>> The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive presentation
>> issue. As a result we offer a simple configuration panel giving
>> pretty much every possible combination: icon, m+icon,  μ+icon, BTC,
>> mBTC,  μBTC, XBT, mXBT,  μXBT, sat along with settings for
>> leading/trailing symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows
>> anyone to customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default. 
>>
>> We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit symbols
>> (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving icon+m etc).
>>
>> Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from the
>> Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it seems
>> that μ+icon is more sensible. 
>>
>> Let us know what you'd like.
>>
>> Links:
>> m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG
>> Font Awesome icon: http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/
>> NIST SI guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html
>>
>>
>> On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik > > wrote:
>>
>> Resurrecting this topic.  Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC several weeks
>> ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like the consensus was
>> uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will happen-- may result in
>> additional user confusion, thanks to yet another decimal place
>> transition.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Wendell > > wrote:
>> > We're with uBTC too. Been waiting for the signal to do this,
>> let's do it right after the fee system is improved.
>> >
>> > -wendell
>> >
>> > grabhive.com  | twitter.com/hivewallet
>>  | gpg: 6C0C9411
>> >
>> > On Nov 15, 2013, at 6:03 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> >
>> >> Go straight to uBTC. Humans and existing computer systems
>> handle numbers to
>> >> the left of the decimals just fine (HK Dollars, Yen). The
>> opposite is
>> >> untrue (QuickBooks really does not like 3+ decimal places).
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Garzik
>> Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
>> BitPay, Inc.  https://bitpay.com/
>>
>> 
>> --
>> 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/13534_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/13534_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 av