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

2014-05-05 Thread Gordon Mohr
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 bits was a term for a unit of
 money long before the invention of digital computers.

Of course people *can* manage, when they need to; natural language is 
full of such overloading. But the clashes are not costless, they add 
mental load for first-time learners and low-context users.

So the concern is, when there's a free choice, why not bootstrap words 
that are less fragile and context-dependent? Why add extra comprehension 
gotchas into what is already a challenging domain?

And it's exactly the aspect that makes 'bit' attractive – it's right 
there in the name _Bit_coin! – that equally presents the clash – 
because the sense of 'bit' honored in the Bitcoin name, and central to 
the systems' essential properties, is the binary digit.

It's like intentionally introducing a 'false friend' word-correlation 
between the vernacular of the casual Bitcoin user, and the language of 
Bitcoin experts. And the word pair is nearly auto-antonymic in some 
essential dimensions: indivisible vs. divisible, base-2 vs. base-10, 
composed-geometrically vs. composed-arithmetically.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_friend - interferes w/ lang learning
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-antonym

In naming amounts, there's no desperate need to stay in the shallow 
crowded pool of words just derived from bit and coin. Real 
currencies have many names for their units, including subunits with 
highly-unrelated sounds. The contrasting words help create more shades 
of meaning for different purposes. Some examples:

  dollars/bucks - bits (1/8ths) - dimes (1/10ths) - cents (1/100ths)
  pounds/quid - shillings (1/20ths) - pence (1/100th; formerly 1/240th)
  yuan/kuai - jiao (1/10ths) - fen (1/100ths)

Regarding the cute example of contextual disambiguation...

On 5/3/14, 11:15 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
 that feeds it, or a drill bit broken to bits after just a bit of use.

That there are many existing definitions doesn't reassure that one 
*extra* definition will still be costless, especially for 
low-literacy/low-context/low-numeracy users or learners.

Note that this example *doesn't* showcase the new proposed 
'100-satoshi-value' usage, nor activate the 'binary digit' meaning. (It 
does activate the part/quantity, usually small or imprecise sense of 
'bit', 7 times depending on how you classify the idioms.)

Try instead this mash of concepts, which someone deciding whether to 
trust 'bits' will face:

Bitcoin uses the digital science of bits, the indivisible 1s and 0s of 
computer logic, to create a networked money measured in bits, which 
split into 100 indivisible cents called satoshis. Bit amounts are 
represented as 64-bit integer counts of 1/100th of a bit, so 64-bit 
integers can represent any balance from the smallest positive bit total, 
0.01 bits (integer 1), up to a number over 92 quintillion bits (2^63-1, 
integer 9,223,372,036,854,775,808).

That max value won't be needed, though, because a crucial bit of the 
original Satoshi design is a maximum issuance of 21,000,000,000,000.00 
bits (21 trillion bits, 21 terabits). These new bits are awarded to 
computers racing to complete a digital verification task on an 
algorithmic schedule: currently 25 million bits (25 megabits) arrive 
about every 10 minutes. That is, the total number of Bitcoin bits is 
increasing at 6.33 Kbps, though that arrival slows to 0 bps by around 
the year 2140.

The most important bit to remember is that your ability to spend bits is 
controlled by secret 256-bit numbers, called private keys, bits of info 
that only you know. The fact that these keys are 256-bits long is what 
makes them practically unguessable, even if someone had a computing 
budget of all the bits in the world, or built a computer out of all the 
bits in the universe. (That is, even though the network can create 25 
million bits every 10 minutes, it can't guess your secret 256 bits in 
the lifetime of the universe!)

Watch out, though: human-chosen passwords and 4-8 word phrases typically 
provide much less than 128 bits of security, far too little to create a 
256-bit key. And in the math of bits, having half as many bits doesn't 
mean half the security, it means the square-root as much security. (For 
a 128-bit shortfall, that's 2^128 or 340 billion billion billion billion 
times less strength.)

If your secret has enough bits, though, you can be confident that you 
can put millions of dollars into bits, because of the cryptographic 
power of hundreds of bits. The current value of 

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

2014-05-04 Thread Aaron Voisine
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 to being a humorist when you have the whole
government working for you -- Will Rodgers


On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote:
 +1

 On 4 May 2014 02:06, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com 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 my guess is people would tend to use it
 naturally own their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.

 The other synergies are:
 -bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
 whole bitcoin.
 -bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
 -bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
 -when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
 The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
 standard in the protocol rules.

 All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
 confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
 uses of the word.

 On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
  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 time, less so.
 
  The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much
  to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to
  prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront.  They don't get
  horribly confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks 
  to
  them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes that
  everyone should be an expert at computer science.  The average joe may
  assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't
  important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified
  in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
 
  Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would
  be to avoid.  It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of
  language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible 
  target
  audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in light 
  of
  our objectives.  It's marketing.
 
  Mike
 
  Sent from my iPhone
 
  On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Christophe Biocca
  christophe.bio...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  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 are supposed to be
  the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
 
  Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
  deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
  are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
  understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
  understanding of either.
 
  Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
 
  - Mining (for transaction validation).
  - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
  exist at the network level).
  - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
  backups can be stolen from equally).
 
  I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
  Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
  because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
  concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
  the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
  pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
  protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
  definitiely seen average people get confused between the blockchain
  and blockchain.info (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
  come up in beginner explanations).
 
  It seems downright masochistic to add
  yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
  for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
  people?
 
  --
  Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
  

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

2014-05-04 Thread Un Ix
+1(bit) for your bit on bits.

 On 4/05/2014, at 2:18 pm, Aaron Voisine vois...@gmail.com 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 broken to bits after just a bit of use.
 
 Aaron
 
 There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
 government working for you -- Will Rodgers
 
 
 On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote:
 +1
 
 On 4 May 2014 02:06, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com 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 my guess is people would tend to use it
 naturally own their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.
 
 The other synergies are:
 -bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
 whole bitcoin.
 -bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
 -bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
 -when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
 The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
 standard in the protocol rules.
 
 All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
 confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
 uses of the word.
 
 On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
 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 time, less so.
 
 The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much
 to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to
 prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront.  They don't get
 horribly confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks 
 to
 them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes that
 everyone should be an expert at computer science.  The average joe may
 assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't
 important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified
 in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
 
 Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would
 be to avoid.  It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of
 language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible 
 target
 audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in light 
 of
 our objectives.  It's marketing.
 
 Mike
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
 On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Christophe Biocca
 christophe.bio...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 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 are supposed to be
 the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
 
 Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
 deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
 are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
 understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
 understanding of either.
 
 Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
 
 - Mining (for transaction validation).
 - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
 exist at the network level).
 - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
 backups can be stolen from equally).
 
 I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
 Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
 because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
 concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
 the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
 pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
 protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
 definitiely seen average people get confused between the blockchain
 and blockchain.info (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
 come up in beginner explanations).
 
 It seems downright masochistic to add
 yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
 for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
 people?
 
 --
 Accelerate Dev Cycles 

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

2014-05-04 Thread Wladimir
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Aaron Voisine vois...@gmail.com 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 broken to bits after just a bit of use.

+1 good summary

And I think that's a good conclusion to this discussion about unit
names on the development mailing list. Everything has been said now.

Wladimir

--
Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get 
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


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

2014-05-04 Thread Tamas Blummer
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-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get 
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


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

2014-05-04 Thread Wladimir
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Tamas Blummer ta...@bitsofproof.com 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

--
Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get 
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


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

2014-05-04 Thread Mike Caldwell
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 vois...@gmail.com 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 broken to bits after just a bit of use.
 
 Aaron
 
 There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
 government working for you -- Will Rodgers
 
 
 On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Drak d...@zikula.org wrote:
 +1
 
 On 4 May 2014 02:06, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com 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 my guess is people would tend to use it
 naturally own their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.
 
 The other synergies are:
 -bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
 whole bitcoin.
 -bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
 -bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
 -when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
 The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
 standard in the protocol rules.
 
 All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
 confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
 uses of the word.
 
 On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
 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 time, less so.
 
 The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much
 to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to
 prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront.  They don't get
 horribly confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks 
 to
 them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes that
 everyone should be an expert at computer science.  The average joe may
 assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't
 important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified
 in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
 
 Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would
 be to avoid.  It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of
 language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible 
 target
 audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in light 
 of
 our objectives.  It's marketing.
 
 Mike
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
 On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Christophe Biocca
 christophe.bio...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 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 are supposed to be
 the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
 
 Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
 deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
 are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
 understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
 understanding of either.
 
 Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
 
 - Mining (for transaction validation).
 - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
 exist at the network level).
 - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
 backups can be stolen from equally).
 
 I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
 Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
 because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
 concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
 the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
 pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
 protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
 definitiely seen average people get confused between the blockchain
 and blockchain.info (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
 come up in beginner explanations).
 
 It seems downright masochistic to add
 yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
 for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
 people?
 
 

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

2014-05-03 Thread 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 are supposed to be
the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).

Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
understanding of either.

Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:

- Mining (for transaction validation).
- Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
exist at the network level).
- Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
backups can be stolen from equally).

I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
definitiely seen average people get confused between the blockchain
and blockchain.info (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
come up in beginner explanations).

It seems downright masochistic to add
yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
people?

On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:41 AM, Aaron Voisine vois...@gmail.com 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 bits was a term for a unit of
 money long before the invention of digital computers.

 Aaron

 There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
 government working for you -- Will Rodgers


 On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Gordon Mohr goj...@gmail.com wrote:
 [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 informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when
 the real bits of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs
 become important. The bit as binary digit was important enough that
 Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is
 muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.

 Some examples of possible problems:

 * If bit equals 100 satoshis, then the natural-language unpacking of
 bit-coin is 100 satoshi coin, which runs against all prior usage.

 * If people are informed that a 256-bit private key is what ultimately
 controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, if each key
 has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?

 * When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think,
 OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10 kilobytes.

 * When people naturally extend bit into kilobits to mean 1000
 bits, then the new coinage kilobits will mean the exact same amount
 (100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling millibits.

 I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a
 synonym for microbitcoin, and I've laid out the case for zib as that
 word at http://zibcoin.org.

 'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ'
 (Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or
 gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for
 data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts
 where subtleties of casing/stroking are lost.)

 (There's summary of more problems with bit in the zibcoin.org FAQ  at:
 http://zibcoin.org/faq#why-not-bits-to-mean-microbitcoins.)

 - Gordon

 On 5/1/14, 3:35 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
 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 choice for the currency unit.

 I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
 with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
 whether we call bits or something else:
   

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

2014-05-03 Thread slush
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 
christophe.bio...@gmail.com wrote:

 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 are supposed to be
 the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).

 Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
 deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
 are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
 understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
 understanding of either.

 Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:

 - Mining (for transaction validation).
 - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
 exist at the network level).
 - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
 backups can be stolen from equally).

 I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
 Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
 because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
 concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
 the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
 pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
 protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
 definitiely seen average people get confused between the blockchain
 and blockchain.info (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
 come up in beginner explanations).

 It seems downright masochistic to add
 yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
 for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
 people?

 On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:41 AM, Aaron Voisine vois...@gmail.com 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 bits was a term for a unit of
  money long before the invention of digital computers.
 
  Aaron
 
  There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
  government working for you -- Will Rodgers
 
 
  On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Gordon Mohr goj...@gmail.com wrote:
  [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 informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when
  the real bits of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs
  become important. The bit as binary digit was important enough that
  Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is
  muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.
 
  Some examples of possible problems:
 
  * If bit equals 100 satoshis, then the natural-language unpacking of
  bit-coin is 100 satoshi coin, which runs against all prior usage.
 
  * If people are informed that a 256-bit private key is what ultimately
  controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, if each key
  has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?
 
  * When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think,
  OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10
 kilobytes.
 
  * When people naturally extend bit into kilobits to mean 1000
  bits, then the new coinage kilobits will mean the exact same amount
  (100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling millibits.
 
  I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a
  synonym for microbitcoin, and I've laid out the case for zib as that
  word at http://zibcoin.org.
 
  'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ'
  (Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or
  gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for
  data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts
  where subtleties of casing/stroking are lost.)
 
  (There's summary of more problems with bit in the zibcoin.org FAQ
  at:
  http://zibcoin.org/faq#why-not-bits-to-mean-microbitcoins.)
 
  - Gordon
 
  On 5/1/14, 3:35 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
  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 

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

2014-05-03 Thread Tamas Blummer
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, slush sl...@centrum.cz wrote:

 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 
 christophe.bio...@gmail.com wrote:
 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 are supposed to be
 the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
 
 Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
 deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
 are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
 understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
 understanding of either.
 
 Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
 
 - Mining (for transaction validation).
 - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
 exist at the network level).
 - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
 backups can be stolen from equally).
 
 I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
 Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
 because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
 concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
 the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
 pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
 protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
 definitiely seen average people get confused between the blockchain
 and blockchain.info (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
 come up in beginner explanations).
 
 It seems downright masochistic to add
 yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
 for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
 people?
 
 On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:41 AM, Aaron Voisine vois...@gmail.com 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 bits was a term for a unit of
  money long before the invention of digital computers.
 
  Aaron
 
  There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
  government working for you -- Will Rodgers
 
 
  On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Gordon Mohr goj...@gmail.com wrote:
  [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 informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when
  the real bits of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs
  become important. The bit as binary digit was important enough that
  Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is
  muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.
 
  Some examples of possible problems:
 
  * If bit equals 100 satoshis, then the natural-language unpacking of
  bit-coin is 100 satoshi coin, which runs against all prior usage.
 
  * If people are informed that a 256-bit private key is what ultimately
  controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, if each key
  has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?
 
  * When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think,
  OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10 kilobytes.
 
  * When people naturally extend bit into kilobits to mean 1000
  bits, then the new coinage kilobits will mean the exact same amount
  (100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling millibits.
 
  I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a
  synonym for microbitcoin, and I've laid out the case for zib as that
  word at http://zibcoin.org.
 
  'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ'
  (Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or
  gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for
  data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts
  where subtleties of 

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

2014-05-03 Thread Mike Caldwell
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 time, less so.

The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much to do 
with the fact that the average lay person has little need to prioritize this as 
something to keep in the forefront.  They don't get horribly confused, they 
just simply don't get worked up over what looks to them like a rounding error, 
much to the dismay of anyone who believes that everyone should be an expert at 
computer science.  The average joe may assess (accurately from his perspective) 
that the distinction isn't important enough to merit significant mental 
resources and he is justified in not expending them that way even if someone 
else thinks he should.

Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would be to 
avoid.  It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of language to 
achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible target audience using 
the language most likely to be understood by them in light of our objectives.  
It's marketing. 

Mike

Sent from my iPhone

 On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Christophe Biocca christophe.bio...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 
 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 are supposed to be
 the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
 
 Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
 deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
 are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
 understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
 understanding of either.
 
 Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
 
 - Mining (for transaction validation).
 - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
 exist at the network level).
 - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
 backups can be stolen from equally).
 
 I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
 Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
 because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
 concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
 the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
 pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
 protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
 definitiely seen average people get confused between the blockchain
 and blockchain.info (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
 come up in beginner explanations).
 
 It seems downright masochistic to add
 yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
 for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
 people?

--
Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get 
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


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

2014-05-03 Thread Chris Pacia
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 their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.

The other synergies are:
-bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
whole bitcoin.
-bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
-bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
-when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
standard in the protocol rules.

All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
uses of the word.

On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
 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 time, less 
 so.

 The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much to 
 do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to prioritize 
 this as something to keep in the forefront.  They don't get horribly 
 confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks to them like a 
 rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes that everyone 
 should be an expert at computer science.  The average joe may assess 
 (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't important enough 
 to merit significant mental resources and he is justified in not expending 
 them that way even if someone else thinks he should.

 Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would be to 
 avoid.  It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of language 
 to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible target audience 
 using the language most likely to be understood by them in light of our 
 objectives.  It's marketing. 

 Mike

 Sent from my iPhone

 On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Christophe Biocca 
 christophe.bio...@gmail.com wrote:

 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 are supposed to be
 the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).

 Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
 deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
 are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
 understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
 understanding of either.

 Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:

 - Mining (for transaction validation).
 - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
 exist at the network level).
 - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
 backups can be stolen from equally).

 I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
 Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
 because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
 concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
 the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
 pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
 protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
 definitiely seen average people get confused between the blockchain
 and blockchain.info (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
 come up in beginner explanations).

 It seems downright masochistic to add
 yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
 for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
 people?
 --
 Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
 Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get 
 unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
 Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
 http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
 ___
 Bitcoin-development mailing list
 Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development



--
Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run 

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

2014-05-03 Thread Drak
+1
On 4 May 2014 02:06, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com 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 my guess is people would tend to use it
 naturally own their own. Kind of like 'bucks' for dollars.

 The other synergies are:
 -bit is part of the word Bitcoin. The currency unit bit is part of a
 whole bitcoin.
 -bit symbolically represents the tech nature of the bitcoin.
 -bit used to be a unit of money way back when. This largely reclaims it.
 -when used as money bit when in references to a precession metal coin.
 The name 'bitcoin' references that as well as the mimicking of the gold
 standard in the protocol rules.

 All around I don't think there is a better fit. I doubt people will get
 confused by it. The context it's used in will distinguish it from other
 uses of the word.

 On 05/03/2014 12:27 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote:
  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 time, less so.
 
  The fact that people routinely confuse RAM and hard drive sizes has much
 to do with the fact that the average lay person has little need to
 prioritize this as something to keep in the forefront.  They don't get
 horribly confused, they just simply don't get worked up over what looks
 to them like a rounding error, much to the dismay of anyone who believes
 that everyone should be an expert at computer science.  The average joe may
 assess (accurately from his perspective) that the distinction isn't
 important enough to merit significant mental resources and he is justified
 in not expending them that way even if someone else thinks he should.
 
  Poor understanding is precisely what a proper effort to name this would
 be to avoid.  It is not frill or aesthetics, it is a planned targeting of
 language to achieve the clearest communication to the widest possible
 target audience using the language most likely to be understood by them in
 light of our objectives.  It's marketing.
 
  Mike
 
  Sent from my iPhone
 
  On May 3, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Christophe Biocca 
 christophe.bio...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  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 are supposed to be
  the same, base 1000 vs 1024 notwithstanding).
 
  Bit (as a unit) is already really confusing for anyone who doesn't
  deal with it on a regular basis. I think people who don't see an issue
  are making an assumption based on their own lack of confusion. We
  understand computer science AND Bitcoin. Most people have zero
  understanding of either.
 
  Bitcoin already has a ton of issues with terrible names for things:
 
  - Mining (for transaction validation).
  - Addresses (which are meant to be one-time use, and don't even really
  exist at the network level).
  - Wallets (which don't hold your bitcoins, can be copied, and all
  backups can be stolen from equally).
 
  I end up having to make the distinctions obvious every time I explain
  Bitcoin to someone new to it. There's an acceptable tradeoff here,
  because there were arguably no better words to assign to these
  concepts (although I'd argue mining is a really awful metaphor, and is
  the one that prompts the most questions from people). Then add to the
  pile a bunch of third parties naming themselves after parts of the
  protocol (Coinbase,Blockchain.info). Not blaming them for it, but I've
  definitiely seen average people get confused between the blockchain
  and blockchain.info (not so much Coinbase, because that name doesn't
  come up in beginner explanations).
 
  It seems downright masochistic to add
  yet-another-word-that-doesn't-mean-what-you-think-it-means to the pile
  for no reason other than aesthetics. Are we actively trying to confuse
  people?
 
 --
  Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
  Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get
  unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform
 available.
  Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
  http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
  ___
  Bitcoin-development mailing list
  Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
  https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
 



 

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

2014-05-02 Thread Gordon Mohr
[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 informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when 
the real bits of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs 
become important. The bit as binary digit was important enough that 
Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is 
muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.

Some examples of possible problems:

* If bit equals 100 satoshis, then the natural-language unpacking of 
bit-coin is 100 satoshi coin, which runs against all prior usage.

* If people are informed that a 256-bit private key is what ultimately 
controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, if each key 
has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?

* When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think, 
OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10 kilobytes.

* When people naturally extend bit into kilobits to mean 1000 
bits, then the new coinage kilobits will mean the exact same amount 
(100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling millibits.

I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a 
synonym for microbitcoin, and I've laid out the case for zib as that 
word at http://zibcoin.org.

'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ' 
(Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or 
gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for 
data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts 
where subtleties of casing/stroking are lost.)

(There's summary of more problems with bit in the zibcoin.org FAQ  at: 
http://zibcoin.org/faq#why-not-bits-to-mean-microbitcoins.)

- Gordon

On 5/1/14, 3:35 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
 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 choice for the currency unit.

 I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
 with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
 whether we call bits or something else:
   http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/0180/index.htm

 Another candidate is Unicode character U+2422, the blank symbol, but I
 prefer stroke b.
 http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2422/index.htm

 Aaron

 There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
 government working for you -- Will Rodgers

 On Apr 21, 2014 5:41 AM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wuille@gm... wrote:

 On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, Un Ix slashdevnull@... 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

 --
 Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
 Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get
 unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
 Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
 http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
 ___
 Bitcoin-development mailing list
 Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


--
Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get 
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


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

2014-05-02 Thread Aaron Voisine
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 invention of digital computers.

Aaron

There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
government working for you -- Will Rodgers


On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Gordon Mohr goj...@gmail.com wrote:
 [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 informal use to understanding the system internals - that is, when
 the real bits of key sizes, hash sizes, and storage/bandwidth needs
 become important. The bit as binary digit was important enough that
 Satoshi named the system after it; that homage gets lost if the word is
 muddied with a new retconned meaning that's quite different.

 Some examples of possible problems:

 * If bit equals 100 satoshis, then the natural-language unpacking of
 bit-coin is 100 satoshi coin, which runs against all prior usage.

 * If people are informed that a 256-bit private key is what ultimately
 controls their balances, it could prompt confusion like, if each key
 has 256-bits, will I need 40 keys to hold 10,000.00 bits?

 * When people learn that there are 8 bits to a byte, they may think,
 OK, my wallet holding my 80,000.00 bits will then take up 10 kilobytes.

 * When people naturally extend bit into kilobits to mean 1000
 bits, then the new coinage kilobits will mean the exact same amount
 (100,000 satoshi) as many have already been calling millibits.

 I believe it'd be best to pick a new made-up single-syllable word as a
 synonym for microbitcoin, and I've laid out the case for zib as that
 word at http://zibcoin.org.

 'Zib' also lends itself to an expressive unicode symbol, 'Ƶ'
 (Z-with-stroke), that remains distinctive even if it loses its stroke or
 gets case-reversed. (Comparatively, all 'b'-derived symbols for
 data-bits, bitcoins, or '100 satoshi bits' risk collision in contexts
 where subtleties of casing/stroking are lost.)

 (There's summary of more problems with bit in the zibcoin.org FAQ  at:
 http://zibcoin.org/faq#why-not-bits-to-mean-microbitcoins.)

 - Gordon

 On 5/1/14, 3:35 PM, Aaron Voisine wrote:
 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 choice for the currency unit.

 I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
 with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
 whether we call bits or something else:
   http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/0180/index.htm

 Another candidate is Unicode character U+2422, the blank symbol, but I
 prefer stroke b.
 http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2422/index.htm

 Aaron

 There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
 government working for you -- Will Rodgers

 On Apr 21, 2014 5:41 AM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wuille@gm... wrote:

 On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, Un Ix slashdevnull@... 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

 --
 Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
 Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get
 unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
 Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
 http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
 ___
 Bitcoin-development mailing list
 Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


 --
 Accelerate Dev Cycles with 

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

2014-05-01 Thread Aaron Voisine
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 choice for the currency unit.

I would like to propose using Unicode character U+0180, lowercase b
with stroke, as the symbol to represent the microBTC denomination,
whether we call bits or something else:
 http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/0180/index.htm

Another candidate is Unicode character U+2422, the blank symbol, but I
prefer stroke b.
http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/2422/index.htm

Aaron

There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole
government working for you -- Will Rodgers

 On Apr 21, 2014 5:41 AM, Pieter Wuille pieter.wuille@gm... wrote:

On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, Un Ix slashdevnull@... 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

--
Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.  Get 
unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available.
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
___
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


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

2014-04-23 Thread Danny Hamilton
It seems to me that xbit is no more distinct or intuitive than µbit. In
either case it's simply an arbitrary character in front of the word bit.
Of course, for the majority of the world familiar with SI, the µ actually
adds additional meaning that is lost with the x.

Furthermore, given the multiple concerns voiced about the overuse of the
word bit, µBTC seems to solve the problem.

Since we are talking about how it would be displayed in software, we don't
need to be concerned about how people will pronounce it, or what the
nickname will be.  If most of the wallets start displaying amounts in µBTC
quantities, it will be obvious that a µBTC is a different magnitude than a
BTC.  Nobody is going to look at their 100,000 µBTC balance and think they
have 100,000 BTC. People will immediately make the mental adjustment to the
new order of magnitude even if they don't specifically know that µ means
micro, or that micro means 1e-6.

Nicknames will form organically (much like buck, fin, large, k, grand, and
benny for U.S. currency), I've always been partial to milly (or millie) and
mike (or micky) as nicknames for mBTC and µBTC.  I've personally used those
when speaking with people, and they seem to catch on pretty quickly.

As has already been mentioned, you're going to be hard pressed to find
software that denotes U.S. balances in bucks.  There isn't any good
reason to be coding a nickname like bit, xbit, or mike into wallet
software.

-  Danny Hamilton


On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Aaron Axvig aa...@axvigs.com wrote:

 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 something.

 -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

 On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com 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


 --
 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

--
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

2014-04-23 Thread Tamas Blummer
The problem is µBTC that bit tries to solve. 

BTC, mBTC and µBTC are just too similiar for enyone else than engineers. The 
mixed use of them leads to misunderstanding. 
I think adoption would benefit of a single unit with easily remembered and 
associated name that has no smaller than 1/100 fractions called satoshis.

Regards,

Tamás Blummer
Founder, CEO

http://bitsofproof.com

On 23.04.2014, at 11:44, Danny Hamilton danny.hamil...@gmail.com wrote:

 It seems to me that xbit is no more distinct or intuitive than µbit. In 
 either case it's simply an arbitrary character in front of the word bit.  
 Of course, for the majority of the world familiar with SI, the µ actually 
 adds additional meaning that is lost with the x.
 
 Furthermore, given the multiple concerns voiced about the overuse of the word 
 bit, µBTC seems to solve the problem.
 
 Since we are talking about how it would be displayed in software, we don't 
 need to be concerned about how people will pronounce it, or what the nickname 
 will be.  If most of the wallets start displaying amounts in µBTC quantities, 
 it will be obvious that a µBTC is a different magnitude than a BTC.  Nobody 
 is going to look at their 100,000 µBTC balance and think they have 100,000 
 BTC. People will immediately make the mental adjustment to the new order of 
 magnitude even if they don't specifically know that µ means micro, or that 
 micro means 1e-6.
 
 Nicknames will form organically (much like buck, fin, large, k, grand, and 
 benny for U.S. currency), I've always been partial to milly (or millie) and 
 mike (or micky) as nicknames for mBTC and µBTC.  I've personally used those 
 when speaking with people, and they seem to catch on pretty quickly.
 
 As has already been mentioned, you're going to be hard pressed to find 
 software that denotes U.S. balances in bucks.  There isn't any good reason 
 to be coding a nickname like bit, xbit, or mike into wallet software.
 
 -  Danny Hamilton
 
 
 On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Aaron Axvig aa...@axvigs.com wrote:
 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 something.
 
 -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
 
 On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com 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
 
 --
 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
 
 --
 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

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

2014-04-23 Thread Chris D'Costa
I have a rather off-beat suggestion. Perhaps decimal was not satoshi's 
intention.

In old English money 1 guinea is 21 shillings. I wonder if 1 million guineas is 
more or less the total number of bitcoins = 21 million shillings. There was 
also the notion of bits (two bob bits = 1 florin = 2 shillings). I quite like 
the idea as it's absolutely not expected.

Old English money is a funny mix of decimal and imperial (base12) measures but 
may have some interesting properties, one of which would be to have multiple 
names for overlapping layers not just the 2 or 3 that has been mentioned here 
and elsewhere.

I wonder in the long run if this will not just naturally occur anyway.

Regards

Chris D'Costa

Email: chris_dco...@meek.io

Sent from my iPhone

 On 23 Apr 2014, at 11:56, Tamas Blummer ta...@bitsofproof.com wrote:
 
 The problem is µBTC that bit tries to solve. 
 
 BTC, mBTC and µBTC are just too similiar for enyone else than engineers. The 
 mixed use of them leads to misunderstanding. 
 I think adoption would benefit of a single unit with easily remembered and 
 associated name that has no smaller than 1/100 fractions called satoshis.
 
 Regards,
 
 Tamás Blummer
 Founder, CEO
 email.png
 http://bitsofproof.com
 
 On 23.04.2014, at 11:44, Danny Hamilton danny.hamil...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 It seems to me that xbit is no more distinct or intuitive than µbit. In 
 either case it's simply an arbitrary character in front of the word bit.  
 Of course, for the majority of the world familiar with SI, the µ actually 
 adds additional meaning that is lost with the x.
 
 Furthermore, given the multiple concerns voiced about the overuse of the 
 word bit, µBTC seems to solve the problem.
 
 Since we are talking about how it would be displayed in software, we don't 
 need to be concerned about how people will pronounce it, or what the 
 nickname will be.  If most of the wallets start displaying amounts in µBTC 
 quantities, it will be obvious that a µBTC is a different magnitude than a 
 BTC.  Nobody is going to look at their 100,000 µBTC balance and think they 
 have 100,000 BTC. People will immediately make the mental adjustment to the 
 new order of magnitude even if they don't specifically know that µ means 
 micro, or that micro means 1e-6.
 
 Nicknames will form organically (much like buck, fin, large, k, grand, and 
 benny for U.S. currency), I've always been partial to milly (or millie) and 
 mike (or micky) as nicknames for mBTC and µBTC.  I've personally used those 
 when speaking with people, and they seem to catch on pretty quickly.
 
 As has already been mentioned, you're going to be hard pressed to find 
 software that denotes U.S. balances in bucks.  There isn't any good reason 
 to be coding a nickname like bit, xbit, or mike into wallet software.
 
 -  Danny Hamilton
 
 
 On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Aaron Axvig aa...@axvigs.com wrote:
 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 something.
 
 -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
 
 On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com 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
 
 --
 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

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

2014-04-22 Thread Natanael
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. If there's no significant opposition and most people are in favor, I'd
say go ahead.

- Sent from my phone
Den 21 apr 2014 11:38 skrev Tamas Blummer ta...@bitsofproof.com:

 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,
 but to align Bitcoin with capabilities of existing financial software and
 customs of finance and average people,
 and ISO standard of currency abbreviations.

 bit and XBT seems to check the boxes.

 I would love to have some feedback on xbit as per my previous mail.

 Regards,

 Tamas Blummer
 http://bitsofproof.com



 --
 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


--
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

2014-04-21 Thread 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 pieter.wui...@gmail.com wrote:

 
 On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, Un Ix slashdevn...@hotmail.com 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] bits: Unit of account

2014-04-21 Thread Thomas Voegtlin
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 the ambiguity
will be a big issue. I don't think lots of people will mistakenly send
1000 times more than the amount they intended.

The name bitcoin has a huge advantage over any other proposal, because
it is already established. No marketing is needed.

This kind of renaming has already taken place many times in history,
because the currency was debased. Bitcoin would be the first time it
happens in the other direction.


--
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

2014-04-21 Thread Tamas Blummer
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, 
but to align Bitcoin with capabilities of existing financial software and 
customs of finance and average people,
and ISO standard of currency abbreviations.

bit and XBT seems to check the boxes. 

I would love to have some feedback on xbit as per my previous mail.

Regards,

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com



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] bits: Unit of account

2014-04-21 Thread Un Ix
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 cents or centavos. I guess this might clash with 
formal S.I. notation but it's easy to read and has less ambiguity, IMHO.

 On 21/04/2014, at 2:21 pm, Tamas Blummer ta...@bitsofproof.com wrote:
 
 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 pieter.wui...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 
 On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, Un Ix slashdevn...@hotmail.com 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
 
--
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

2014-04-21 Thread Tamas Blummer
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. Bloomberg.

Regards,

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com

On 21.04.2014, at 14:14, Un Ix slashdevn...@hotmail.com wrote:

 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.
 



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] bits: Unit of account

2014-04-20 Thread 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 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 rob.gold...@astutium.com 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 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 rob.gold...@astutium.com 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 pieter.wui...@gmail.com 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 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 rob.gold...@astutium.com 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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
 https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.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
 https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.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
 https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html

 Regards,

 Tamas Blummer
 http://bitsofproof.com

 On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.com
 mailto:pieter.wui...@gmail.com 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 ta...@bitsofproof.com
 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 rob.gold...@astutium.com 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 

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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 etothe...@gmail.com 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.htmlhttps://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.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.htmlhttps://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.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.htmlhttps://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html

  Regards,

 Tamas Blummer
 http://bitsofproof.com

  On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.com 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 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 
 rob.gold...@astutium.comrob.gold...@astutium.comwrote:

 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
 

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

2014-04-20 Thread 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.htmlhttps://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.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.htmlhttps://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.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.htmlhttps://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg04256.html

 Regards,

Tamas Blummer
http://bitsofproof.com

 On 20.04.2014, at 16:53, Pieter Wuille pieter.wui...@gmail.com 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 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
rob.gold...@astutium.comrob.gold...@astutium.comwrote:

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

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

2014-04-20 Thread Wladimir
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 laa...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia ctpa...@gmail.com 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 etothe...@gmail.com 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 abruts...@xylon.de 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 abruts...@xylon.de 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 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


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

2014-04-20 Thread 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 
 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 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


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

2014-04-20 Thread Justin A
delurk

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?

/delurk

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 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 
 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 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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 
allp...@gmail.commailto:allp...@gmail.com wrote:


delurk

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?

/delurk

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 
mcaldw...@swipeclock.commailto: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 
 christophe.bio...@gmail.commailto: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 
 bitc...@olivere.demailto: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.netmailto: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.netmailto: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.netmailto: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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 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 allp...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 delurk
 
 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?
 
 /delurk
 
 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 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 
  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 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
--
Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform
Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software
Java Based Open Source 

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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 
slashdevn...@hotmail.commailto: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 
mcaldw...@swipeclock.commailto: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 
allp...@gmail.commailto:allp...@gmail.com wrote:


delurk

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?

/delurk

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 
mcaldw...@swipeclock.commailto: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 
 christophe.bio...@gmail.commailto: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 
 bitc...@olivere.demailto: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.netmailto: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.netmailto: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.netmailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
--
Start Your Social Network Today - 

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

2014-04-20 Thread Christopher Paika
Bit is simple phonetically, I'm for it.


On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Mike Caldwell mcaldw...@swipeclock.comwrote:

 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 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 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 allp...@gmail.com wrote:

 delurk

 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?

 /delurk

 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 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 
 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 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 - 

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

2014-04-20 Thread Pieter Wuille
On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, Un Ix slashdevn...@hotmail.com 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


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

2014-04-20 Thread 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 pieter.wui...@gmail.com wrote:

 
 On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, Un Ix slashdevn...@hotmail.com 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