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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1WgPqF-0004Th-6X
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 03 May 2014 02:38:19 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1WgPqE-0005Iz-AO for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 03 May 2014 02:38:19 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76])
(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E4F9108011E;
Sat, 3 May 2014 02:38:49 +0000 (UTC)
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: Ben Davenport <bendavenport@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 02:38:10 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.6-gentoo; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAKaEYhK4oXH3hB7uS3=AEkA6r0VB5OYyTua+LOP18rq+rYajHg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJHLa0M+Wibtu7v6vq-ivv92t9Z+Va4Vjtbzk3AQwwjxN2pmJQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CALimQCVLF4UbbDFO1RxhWuutThF2o+p-8JJgtbqCCih-WWFAqQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALimQCVLF4UbbDFO1RxhWuutThF2o+p-8JJgtbqCCih-WWFAqQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201405030238.11625.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain 0.0 LOTS_OF_MONEY Huge... sums of money
X-Headers-End: 1WgPqE-0005Iz-AO
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
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: <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 02:38:19 -0000
On Saturday, May 03, 2014 12:54:37 AM Ben Davenport wrote:
> My only addition is that I think we should all stop trying to attach SI
> prefixes to the currency unit. Name me another world currency that uses SI
> prefixes. No one quotes amounts as 63 k$ or 3 M$. The accepted standard at
> least in the US is <currency-symbol><amount><modifier>, i.e. $63k or $3M.
> That may not be accepted form everywhere, but in any case it's an informal
> format, not a formal one. The important point is there should be one base
> unit that is not modified with SI prefixes. And I think the arguments are
> strong for that unit being = 100 satoshi.
Huh? Your examples demonstrate the *opposite* of your point. 'k' and 'M' *are*
the SI prefixes. People *do* use 63k USD, $63k, and $3M. I'll be the first one
to admit SI is terrible, but I don't understand your argument here.
Luke
P.S. Note that SI units haven't actually ever been adopted, except by force of
law. "Name me ... that uses SI" is a silly thing to say, since virtually all
naturally-or-freely-adopted units of any measure have been based on a number
that factor to twos and threes (not fives, like decimal).
|
