Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Vh4xq-0004XK-Pb for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 22:00:38 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.216.52 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.52; envelope-from=etotheipi@gmail.com; helo=mail-qa0-f52.google.com; Received: from mail-qa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.216.52]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Vh4xp-0002Xd-Jx for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 22:00:38 +0000 Received: by mail-qa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id ii20so73280qab.11 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:00:32 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.49.110.9 with SMTP id hw9mr5844101qeb.4.1384466431219; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:00:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.85] (c-76-111-96-126.hsd1.md.comcast.net. [76.111.96.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id a9sm10177818qed.6.2013.11.14.14.00.30 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:00:30 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <528547FD.2070300@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 17:00:29 -0500 From: Alan Reiner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: <52852C2D.9020103@gmail.com> <52853D8A.6010501@monetize.io> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030406090808050008000508" X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: doubleclick.net] -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (etotheipi[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Vh4xp-0002Xd-Jx Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 22:00:39 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030406090808050008000508 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just keep in mind it will be a little awkward that 54.3 uBTC is the smallest unit that can be transferred [easily] and the standard fees are 500 uBTC. It's not a deal breaker, it's just something that needs to be taken into consideration when it comes to user perception (which is one of the reasons we would make such a change in the first place). "Holy crap these fees are huge! I thought Bitcoin didn't have fees!" On 11/14/2013 04:55 PM, Allen Piscitello wrote: > I also would prefer to go straight to uBTC as the "standard wallet unit". It works out perfectly with Satoshi's being the decimal units. Something that costs $10USD would be 25000uBTC. This isn't a problem for a place like South Korea, where 10USD is about 10,000 Won, so we aren't even off on a scale of usable currencies in major economies. > > The downsides are obviously confusion (causing mistakes resulting in lost coins), and possibly from a psychological perspective on price (uBTC are worthless!). On the other hand, it also might help people feel like they are getting in on the ground floor still (I own 100,000 uBTC!), and reduce the perception the Bitcoins are not divisible (I have heard several people worry that 21 million is not enough units). > > Alan's ideas for compatibility with multiple fields will also be helpful to solving the confusion issue. > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Mark Friedenbach > wrote: > > For this reason I'm in favor of skipping mBTC and moving straight to > uBTC. Having eight, or even five decimal places is not intuitive to > the average user. Two decimal places is becoming standard for new > national currencies, and we wouldn't be too far from human scale > everyday numbers: 25.00uBTC ~= $0.01 currently. And I don't think very > many people on this list would consider bitcoin overvalued in the long > term perspective. > > Better to go through a confusing renumbering only once. > > Mark > > On 11/14/13 12:01 PM, Alan Reiner wrote: > > ... I'm also of the opinion that it's freakin' hard to change the > > base unit in such an established system. There is no easy way to > > do this that doesn't cause more heartache than it's worth... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps > OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access > Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server. > Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps > OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access > Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server. > Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > > > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development --------------030406090808050008000508 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just keep in mind it will be a little awkward that 54.3 uBTC is the smallest unit that can be transferred [easily] and the standard fees are 500 uBTC.    It's not a deal breaker, it's just something that needs to be taken into consideration when it comes to user perception (which is one of the reasons we would make such a change in the first place). 

"Holy crap these fees are huge!  I thought Bitcoin didn't have fees!"


On 11/14/2013 04:55 PM, Allen Piscitello wrote:
> I also would prefer to go straight to uBTC as the "standard wallet unit".    It works out perfectly with Satoshi's being the decimal units.  Something that costs $10USD would be 25000uBTC.  This isn't a problem for a place like South Korea, where 10USD is about 10,000 Won, so we aren't even off on a scale of usable currencies in major economies.
>
> The downsides are obviously confusion (causing mistakes resulting in lost coins), and possibly from a psychological perspective on price (uBTC are worthless!).  On the other hand, it also might help people feel like they are getting in on the ground floor still (I own 100,000 uBTC!), and reduce the perception the Bitcoins are not divisible (I have heard several people worry that 21 million is not enough units).
>
> Alan's ideas for compatibility with multiple fields will also be helpful to solving the confusion issue.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize.io <mailto:mark@monetize.io>> wrote:
>
For this reason I'm in favor of skipping mBTC and moving straight to
uBTC. Having eight, or even five decimal places is not intuitive to
the average user. Two decimal places is becoming standard for new
national currencies, and we wouldn't be too far from human scale
everyday numbers: 25.00uBTC ~= $0.01 currently. And I don't think very
many people on this list would consider bitcoin overvalued in the long
term perspective.

Better to go through a confusing renumbering only once.

Mark

On 11/14/13 12:01 PM, Alan Reiner wrote:
> ... I'm also of the opinion that it's freakin' hard to change the
> base unit in such an established system.  There is no easy way to
> do this that doesn't cause more heartache than it's worth...
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps
>     OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access
>     Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server.
>     Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native!
>     http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>     _______________________________________________
>     Bitcoin-development mailing list
>     Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps
> OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access
> Free app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server.
> Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development


--------------030406090808050008000508--