{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-03-13\n📝 Original message:\u003e\n\u003e Using milli- and micro- notation for currency units is also not very\n\u003e well supported. Last time this thread was active, I believe there was a\n\u003e suggestion to use 1 XBT == 1 uBTC.\n\n\nUnfortunately I think some people already started using XBT to mean the\nsame as BTC (another ship that sailed: somehow Bhutan will have to live\nwith it). So if some software started to redefine it to mean something\nelse, that seems like a recipe for accidentally sending far too much or too\nlittle money by mistake.\n\nThe whole area of symbols, denominations etc is a confusing mess right now,\nit opens up the potential for mistakes and makes Bitcoin look\nunprofessional. Part of the reason I don't want us to revisit this at the\nmoment is we need to grab onto any consistency we can get. People want to\nthink in terms of a single unit. BTC vs mBTC is already bad enough, it'd be\neasy to miss the denomination and do some sums wrong. Introducing a third\nunit, especially one that skips the intervening nanoBTC, seems like a way\nto make mistakes even more common!\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140313/1238dc0f/attachment.html\u003e"}