Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VhFcx-0003l1-ML for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:23:47 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of leitl.org designates 164.177.174.8 as permitted sender) client-ip=164.177.174.8; envelope-from=eugen@leitl.org; helo=leitl.org; Received: from v8.ativel.com ([164.177.174.8] helo=leitl.org) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1VhFcv-0000kY-KI for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:23:47 +0000 Received: by leitl.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 219CD540F2A; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 10:23:39 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 10:23:39 +0100 From: Eugen Leitl To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <20131115092338.GN5661@leitl.org> References: <52852C2D.9020103@gmail.com> <52853D8A.6010501@monetize.io> <52854F59.9000500@monetize.io> <5285545C.4030607@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5285545C.4030607@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) 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 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1VhFcv-0000kY-KI 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: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:23:47 -0000 On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 05:53:16PM -0500, Alan Reiner wrote: > I really like the XBT idea. It makes a lot of sense to match the ISO I really don't. Just use the SI prefixes. > currency symbol (though the ISO guys will have to adjust the way they've > defined the "XBT"). And I do agree that going right to uBTC and > skipping mBTC makes sense, too. The display units should be choosable by the user. > I'd prefer them not be called "micro bitcoins." I really want to call > them "microbes" ... but I'm not sure that has the right flavor for money Why on earth? > transfer :) "Please give me 872 microbes". Perhaps we just call them > "bits." Or even "micros" or "microbits". As I write this, I realize > there's probably 872 threads on the forums about this already... > > But we would want to promote a consistent term, to avoid further > confusion when people use different names for the new unit. It's not > guaranteed to be successful, but if we pick a good name, and build it > into the interface on the first release pushing the new unit, we have a > chance to make the transition even easier. The reason SI prefixes were invented is exactly to preven that case.