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
|
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 <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>) id 1Wc6z2-0007sP-S2
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 21 Apr 2014 05:41:36 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.213.169 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.213.169; envelope-from=pieter.wuille@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ig0-f169.google.com;
Received: from mail-ig0-f169.google.com ([209.85.213.169])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Wc6z2-0002Ty-7J
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 21 Apr 2014 05:41:36 +0000
Received: by mail-ig0-f169.google.com with SMTP id h18so1425479igc.0
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 20 Apr 2014 22:41:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.43.136 with SMTP id w8mr19989423igl.20.1398058890923;
Sun, 20 Apr 2014 22:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.164.167 with HTTP; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 22:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.164.167 with HTTP; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 22:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BLU402-EAS292E80B3A1FA891428B768C65E0@phx.gbl>
References: <CAJKMfeQO6pyi5b-83FyMSHcq0Sa1QkP+RouQVBdCYPtXXboY8A@mail.gmail.com>
<53540715.7050803@xylon.de>
<1C408C12-B39B-46E4-B997-153D566158B1@swipeclock.com>
<5354154C.1080908@olivere.de>
<CANOOu=9=TAnaCuyh_P2GqHaguyY39xjhj84HSA_x+6F4MOqM_A@mail.gmail.com>
<4098C706-D67F-474E-9C13-E4C8F56B41ED@swipeclock.com>
<CAK2MuX3GufxU_AH0Kaw3pUkzgX_agok86ahCh+7r96UkxZwneQ@mail.gmail.com>
<11664045-9CAB-4A9B-BE45-271496D870CD@swipeclock.com>
<BLU402-EAS292E80B3A1FA891428B768C65E0@phx.gbl>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 07:41:30 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBidnatH1RHZ02kn2K2Tkn1OGP9n+ieLJcT68C_s11Rpgg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Un Ix <slashdevnull@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011602a891989c04f786f321
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
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
(pieter.wuille[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: 1Wc6z2-0002Ty-7J
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
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: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 05:41:37 -0000
--089e011602a891989c04f786f321
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <slashdevnull@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
--089e011602a891989c04f786f321
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On Apr 21, 2014 3:37 AM, "Un Ix" <<a href=3D"mailto:slashdevnu=
ll@hotmail.com">slashdevnull@hotmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Something tells me this would be reduced to a single syllable in commo=
n usage I.e. bit.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">What units will be called colloquially is not something deve=
lopers will determine. It will vary, depend on language and culture, and is=
not relevant to this discussion in my opinion.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">It may well be that people in some geographic or language ar=
ea will end up (or for a while) calling 1e-06 BTC "bits". That=
9;s fine, but using that as "official" name in software would be =
very strange and potentially confusing in my opinion. As mentioned by other=
s, that would seem to me like calling dollars "bucks" in bank sof=
tware. Nobody seems to have a problem with having colloquial names, but &qu=
ot;US dollar" or "euro" are far less ambiguous than "bi=
t". I think we need a more distinctive name.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">-- <br>
Pieter<br>
</p>
--089e011602a891989c04f786f321--
|
