]

This is not what I'm suggesting.

You would say "1000 microbits", or "1000 microcoins".

Not "1k micro bitcoins".

Gold was not used as currency at $1400 per ounce.

What happens when you want to price something that costs 0.000739 bitcoins? Writing 739 uB is a lot easier for the non-mathematician.

Many average users do not like the idea of spending $610 on one bitcoin, so this is a barrier to entry for the average joe.

A price of $0.61 for 1000 microbitcoins seems much more reasonable.

Also note that this thread is in response to this other thread that suggests satoshis as a base unit instead of microbitcoins: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=323776.0

Try this experiment:

1000 uB is 1/1000th of a bitcoin. Right?

Or you can write: 1K uB is 1/1000th of a bitcoin.

So 0.1K uB is 1/10000th of a bitcoin. With me so far?

Now try this for satoshis.

How many satoshis is 1/10000th of a bitcoin?

This solution continues to allow us to have symmetry, and allows scalability beyond subdividing a satoshi, and is backwards compatible with the use of uBTC and mBTC.

You may wish to give uBTC some special name (if not microbits or microcoins) so that this idea works just like the "skip to satoshis" idea.

One problem with the "skip to satoshis" idea is that satoshis are difficult to convert to bitcoins, and microbits are easy to convert to bitcoins. Abandoning bitcoins entirely is now being proposed by some people in favor of satoshis only, which will just confuse things further.

Notice that with SI prefixes for large numbers we have:


Suppose we call these uB for short.

All of the arguments for skipping to satoshis still applies, except that we now have:

1M uB = 1 BTC

instead of

100M satoshi = 1 BTC


We also have: 1K uB = 1 mBTC, and similar simple conversion between other SI prefixes, so those can still be used without breaking anything or adding unnecessary confusion.

Also note that we can still talk about satoshis (in the distant future) easily in terms of uB:

0.01 uB = 1 satoshi

So we have a natural "cent" like many currencies do, which is near the limit for how most people are able to reason about numbers after a decimal place.

And when we subdivide a satoshi then we can move from microcoins to nanocoins much more naturally, without having to explain why there is some arbitrary number of 100 million satoshis.


The current price is about $0.61 for 1000 uB.

Fix the "implimented" typo on mastercoin.org, it's bugging me

The point is that CPU speeds won't suddenly fall, because they aren't in a bubble.

If one ASIC miner is not profitable, adding more doesn't make them any more profitable.

If one ASIC miner loses 10% of your money spent on the device, then 5 ASIC miners also lose ~10% of your money spent on the devices.

If it makes you feel any better, you ignore the fact that if those chips had arrived then you would not be hashing at the current difficulty, because the current difficulty would be much higher (you wouldn't be the only one to get those chips!), and your return would be much lower.

]

I appreciate that!

However they just sold on bitmit. Sorry!

I have 192 BFL chip credits for sale. $50 for all of them. That is $0.26 each.

I will accept BTC as payment, escrow via Bitmit.

]

The price increase effect is due to investor psychology, not due to some tiny investors being able to buy $200 worth of shares. Even if a 100000 people bought 1 share each because apple split from $400 to $200 it wouldn't have a very significant effect on AAPL.

I think OP has a good point.

They bought a press release here:

http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/1265300

https://cryoniks.com

Obvious scam is obvious. Don't preorder these.

Or if you prefer...

In response to jimgolian's explanation of the fork, here is Doc Brown's explanation of the price.

19.17

That is incorrect.

Interac e-Transfer is reversible. This is why canadianbitcoins and cavirtex both stopped receiving funds this way.