rich1.0npub1ccegg9n9lnx6huppxg43m95488yur7pfemkn3pz0agjws5ffvtts0ex8m8https://nostr.ae/npub1ccegg9n9lnx6huppxg43m95488yur7pfemkn3pz0agjws5ffvtts0ex8m8njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2014-03-14 📝 Original message:I think you want to misunderstand me Andreas. It is astonishing arrogance to define the units because we in Bitcoin are used to some wierd notation and ignore that the vast majority of population and financial software in existence does not have a notion of prices with more than two decimals. With 1 bit = 100 satoshi, we would solve this problem for good. Instead mBTC is a confusing step in-between. Tamas Blummer http://bitsofproof.com On 14.03.2014, at 16:02, Andreas Schildbach <andreas at schildbach.de> wrote: > By that definition 3.56 is a price. Maybe I misunderstood you and you're > lobbying for mBTC? > > > On 03/14/2014 03:57 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote: >> you miss the point Andreas. It is not about the magnitude but about >> the form of a price. >> >> A number with no decimals or with two decimals is percieved as a >> price in some currency. >> >> A number with more than two decimals is just not percieved as a price >> but as a geeky something that you rather convert to local currency. >> >> Tamas Blummer >> Bits of Proof >> >> On 14.03.2014, at 15:49, Andreas Schildbach <andreas at schildbach.de >> <mailto:andreas at schildbach.de>> wrote: >> >>> How much do you pay for an Espresso in your local currency? >>> >>> At least for the Euro and the Dollar, mBTC 3.56 is very close to what >>> people would expect. Certainly more familiar than µBTC 3558 or BTC >>> 0.003578. >>> >>> Anyway, I was just sharing real-world experience: nobody is confused. >>> >>> >>> On 03/14/2014 03:14 PM, Tamas Blummer wrote: >>>> You give them a hard to interpret thing like mBTC and then wonder >>>> why they rather look at local currency. Because the choices you >>>> gave them are bad. >>>> >>>> I think Bitcoin would have a better chance to be percieved as a >>>> currency of its own if it had prices and fractions like currencies >>>> do. >>>> >>>> 3.558 mBTC or 0.003578 BTC will never be as accepted as 3558 bits >>>> would be. >>>> >>>> >>>> Tamas Blummer Bits of Proof >>>> >>>> On 14.03.2014, at 15:05, Andreas Schildbach <andreas at schildbach.de >>>> <mailto:andreas at schildbach.de>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> btw. None of Bitcoin Wallet's users complained about confusion >>>>> because of the mBTC switch. In contrast, I get many mails and >>>>> questions if exchange rates happen to differ by >10%. >>>>> >>>>> I suspect nobody looks at the Bitcoin price. It's the amount in >>>>> local currency that matters to the users. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 03/13/2014 02:40 PM, Andreas Schildbach wrote: >>>>>> Indeed. And users were crying for mBTC. Nobody was asking for >>>>>> µBTC. >>>>>> >>>>>> I must admit I was not aware if this thread. I just watched >>>>>> other wallets and at some point decided its time to switch to >>>>>> mBTC. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 03/13/2014 02:31 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: >>>>>>> The standard has become mBTC and that's what was adopted. >>>>>>> It's too late to try and sway this on a mailing list thread >>>>>>> now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary Rowe >>>>>>> <g.rowe at froot.co.uk <mailto:g.rowe at froot.co.uk> >>>>>>> <mailto:g.rowe at froot.co.uk>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The MultiBit HD view is that this is a locale-sensitive >>>>>>> presentation issue. As a result we offer a simple >>>>>>> configuration panel giving pretty much every possible >>>>>>> combination: icon, m+icon, μ+icon, BTC, mBTC, μBTC, XBT, >>>>>>> mXBT, μXBT, sat along with settings for leading/trailing >>>>>>> symbol, commas, spaces and points. This allows anyone to >>>>>>> customise to meet their own needs beyond the offered default. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We apply the NIST guidelines for representation of SI unit >>>>>>> symbols (i.e no conversion to native language, no RTL giving >>>>>>> icon+m etc). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Right now MultiBit HD is configured to use m+icon taken from >>>>>>> the Font Awesome icon set. However reading earlier posts it >>>>>>> seems that μ+icon is more sensible. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let us know what you'd like. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Links: m+icon screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/WCDoG Font >>>>>>> Awesome icon: >>>>>>> http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/icon/btc/ NIST SI >>>>>>> guidelines: http://physics.nist.gov/Pubs/SP811/sec07.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 13 March 2014 12:56, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at bitpay.com >>>>>>> <mailto:jgarzik at bitpay.com> >>>>>>> <mailto:jgarzik at 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. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140314/605b143c/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 495 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140314/605b143c/attachment.sig>