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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <laanwj@gmail.com>) id 1WO5mD-0004bs-GK
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:34:25 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.213.180 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.213.180; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ig0-f180.google.com;
Received: from mail-ig0-f180.google.com ([209.85.213.180])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WO5mC-0001Gg-Qc
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:34:25 +0000
Received: by mail-ig0-f180.google.com with SMTP id hl1so2305041igb.1
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:34:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.225.134 with SMTP id rk6mr1855741igc.31.1394717659460;
Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:34:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.27.34 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 06:34:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAJHLa0OMcTCgGESi-F4jT2NA3FyCeMYbD_52j47t3keEYBfK8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKaEYhK4oXH3hB7uS3=AEkA6r0VB5OYyTua+LOP18rq+rYajHg@mail.gmail.com>
<52852C2D.9020103@gmail.com> <52853D8A.6010501@monetize.io>
<CAJHLa0M6CkoDbD6FFixf9-mmhug7DvehSWCJ+EHWVxUDuwNiBg@mail.gmail.com>
<EE02A310-8604-4811-B2D0-FC32C72C20F3@grabhive.com>
<CAJHLa0OMcTCgGESi-F4jT2NA3FyCeMYbD_52j47t3keEYBfK8g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 14:34:19 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+s+GJBSGPBQWWYR1NYSc2E4Y1BWAn8zf7xsu4wQ1O8cA8OWbw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d042ac0f4a8d63704f47d0284
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
(laanwj[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: 1WO5mC-0001Gg-Qc
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
Wendell <w@grabhive.com>
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: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:34:25 -0000
--f46d042ac0f4a8d63704f47d0284
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com> wrote:
> Resurrecting this topic. Bitcoin Wallet moved to mBTC several weeks
> ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like the consensus was
> uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will happen-- may result in
> additional user confusion, thanks to yet another decimal place
> transition.
>
I've kind of given up getting any consensus about this, or even getting
people to care.
Everyone agrees that a decimal shift would be good, but it's the same
boring shed painting discussion every time on how many decimals. In the end
nothing happens.
I can't really blame Andreas for finally taking action and making the
change to mBTC. People in the community are familiar with mBTC because some
exchanges and price sites used mBTC (at least for a while when >$1000),
also mBTC seems to be catching on on reddit etc.
Moving to muBTC (which in itself would be better because it is the final
unit change ever needed without hardfork) would require more coordinated
education effort.
Wladimir
--f46d042ac0f4a8d63704f47d0284
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Jeff Garzik <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
=3D"mailto:jgarzik@bitpay.com" target=3D"_blank">jgarzik@bitpay.com</a>>=
</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Resurrecting this topic. =C2=A0Bitcoin Walle=
t moved to mBTC several weeks<br>
ago, which was disappointing -- it sounded like the consensus was<br>
uBTC, and moving to uBTC later --which will happen-- may result in<br>
additional user confusion, thanks to yet another decimal place<br>
transition.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I've kind of given up g=
etting any consensus about this, or even getting people to care. <br><br>Ev=
eryone agrees that a decimal shift would be good, but it's the same bor=
ing shed painting discussion every time on how many decimals. In the end no=
thing happens.<br>
<br>I can't really blame Andreas for finally taking action and making t=
he change to mBTC. People in the community are familiar with mBTC because s=
ome exchanges and price sites used mBTC (at least for a while when >$100=
0), also mBTC seems to be catching on on reddit etc.<br>
</div><div><br></div><div>Moving to muBTC (which in itself would be better =
because it is the final unit change ever needed without hardfork) would req=
uire more coordinated education effort.<br><br>Wladimir<br></div></div>
</div></div>
--f46d042ac0f4a8d63704f47d0284--
|
