1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gojomo@gmail.com>) id 1WgPLI-00028P-Gz
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 03 May 2014 02:06:20 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.220.51 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.220.51; envelope-from=gojomo@gmail.com;
helo=mail-pa0-f51.google.com;
Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.220.51])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WgPLH-0004X0-9m
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 03 May 2014 02:06:20 +0000
Received: by mail-pa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id fb1so6338134pad.38
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 02 May 2014 19:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.66.148.134 with SMTP id ts6mr41853813pab.113.1399082773156;
Fri, 02 May 2014 19:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from probook.local (70-36-143-107.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net.
[70.36.143.107])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id i10sm5470618pat.36.2014.05.02.19.06.11
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Fri, 02 May 2014 19:06:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53644F13.1080203@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2014 19:06:11 -0700
From: Gordon Mohr <gojomo@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
References: <CACq0ZD6EJnG4iwehfcFU-4AhBiNdtyf7eE9iGW8d6rv6327Eug@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACq0ZD6EJnG4iwehfcFU-4AhBiNdtyf7eE9iGW8d6rv6327Eug@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-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
(gojomo[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-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: 1WgPLH-0004X0-9m
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "bits": Unit of account
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 02:06:20 -0000
[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
>
|
