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

2014-04-20 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. Regardi

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Mailing list abuse

2014-04-20 Thread Rodney Morris
Not a bad idea. Semantics of the word abuse not withstanding. I don't want to become the self appointed mailing list cop, but I notice it maybe more than others because I almost exclusively read this mailing list on a mobile device. Hence my asking for feedback without publicly calling anyone out.

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 fina

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Mailing list abuse

2014-04-20 Thread Wladimir
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Rodney Morris wrote: > What is the procedure for dealing with it? Is it considered abuse to reply > to and quote the entire digest for the sake of a few lines of content? Am I > the only one annoyed by this (if so I'll just shut right up). I would not go as far as

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

2014-04-20 Thread Pieter Wuille
On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" wrote: > > Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in common usage I.e. bit. What units will be called colloquially is not something developers will determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is not relevant to this discussi

[Bitcoin-development] Mailing list abuse

2014-04-20 Thread Rodney Morris
What is the procedure for dealing with it? Is it considered abuse to reply to and quote the entire digest for the sake of a few lines of content? Am I the only one annoyed by this (if so I'll just shut right up). Rodney --

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Economics of information propagation

2014-04-20 Thread Daniel Lidstrom
> Of course, in reality smaller miners can just mine on top of block headers > and include no transactions and do no validation, but that is extremely > harmful to the security of Bitcoin. If it's only during the few seconds that it takes to to verify the block, then would this really be that big

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 wrote: > If bit had to be preceded by a letter I would nominate "ebit" or "xbit" > (which could still be XBT) > > Those needing a definition for x could define it as "coin/100". > > That said, I am still m

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Economics of information propagation

2014-04-20 Thread Peter Todd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 That is mistaken: you can't mine on top of just a block header, leaving small miners disadvantaged as they are earning no profit while they wait for the information to validate the block and update their UTXO sets. This results in the same problem

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Economics of information propagation

2014-04-20 Thread Mark Friedenbach
As soon as we switch to headers first - which will be soon - there will be no difference in propagation time no matter how large the block is. Only 80 bites will be required to propagate the block header which establishes priority for when the block is fully validated. On Apr 20, 2014 6:56 PM, "Jon

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 s

[Bitcoin-development] Economics of information propagation

2014-04-20 Thread Jonathan Levin
Hi all, I am a post-graduate economist writing a paper on the incentives of mining. Even though this issue has been debated in the forums, I think it is important to get a sense of the magnitude of the incentives at play and determine what implications this has for the transaction fee market.

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 pl

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

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

2014-04-20 Thread Justin A
What about "ubit", pronounced "YOU-bit", representing 1e-6 bitcoin? Easy to say, tied in a visual way to the metric micro, leaves the required 2 decimal places for the marginally numerate.. What more could one want? Also, hi. My first post; plan to get involved over the southern hemisphere win

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 P

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 distin

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

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

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" wrote: > > agree

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

2014-04-20 Thread Arne Brutschy
I agree that overloading isn't an issue when necessary, but my point was that the necessity is lacking. If we're free to pick anything, why pick something that is overloaded? Moreover, "bit" is an abbreviation of bitcoin and might be confused with it. Most currencies use a work that is phonetical

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

2014-04-20 Thread Pavol Rusnak
On 04/20/2014 06:56 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote: > I consider overload/conflict with existing meanings of "bit" as a non-issue > for typical population at large. So far I have not seen any reasonable name except for "bit". I also tried to come up with something else (e.g.naka, toshi, etc.) to avoid

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

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 mi

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 > in

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

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

2014-04-20 Thread Alan Reiner
Btw, I should clarify my email: I'm a staunch supporter of moving to 1e-6 BTC as the default unit for wallet applications, not necessarily any particular name. I would be fine with "bits" as I think this context is sufficiently different that it won't be confused by regular consumers. But it woul

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" wrote: > On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia wrote: > > The term bit is really only overloa

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

2014-04-20 Thread Wladimir
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Chris Pacia wrote: > The term bit is really only overloaded for those who are techy. 95% of the > population never uses the term bit in their daily lives and I doubt most > could even name one use of the term. > Plus bit used to be a unit of money way back when, so

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 p

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

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 s

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

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 wrote: > People on this

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 mo

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

2014-04-20 Thread Tamas Blummer
People on this list are mostly engineers who have no problem dealing with magnitudes and have rather limited empathy for people who have a problem with them. They also tend to think, that because they invented money 2.0 they would not need to care of finance’s or people’s current customs. The

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

2014-04-20 Thread Rob Golding
> The average person is not going to be confident that the prefix they > are using is the correct one, The use of any 'prefix' is one of choice and entirely unnecessary, and there are already established 'divisions' in u/mBTC for those that feel they need to use such things. > people WILL send 1

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

2014-04-20 Thread Mike Gehl
The usefulness of a "bitcoin" unit will decrease as the value of the network increases. Today, a majority of transactions are denominated in fractions of a bitcoin. As a consequence, millibitcoin (mBTC) and microbitcoin (uBTC) units have been introduced to alleviate the decimal problem. While SI u