Summary This BIP proposes redefining the generally acknowledged "bitcoin" unit in order that what was beforehand generally known as the smallest indivisible unit turns into the first reference unit. Below this proposal, one bitcoin is outlined as that smallest unit, eliminating the necessity for decimal locations. By making the integral unit the usual measure, this BIP goals to simplify consumer comprehension, scale back confusion, and align on-chain values straight with their displayed illustration.
Motivation The present conference defines one BTC as 100,000,000 of the smallest indivisible items. This illustration requires coping with eight decimal locations, which may be complicated and foster the misunderstanding that bitcoin is inherently decimal-based. In actuality, Bitcoin’s ledger represents values as integers of a smallest unit, and the decimal level is merely a human-imposed abstraction.
By redefining the smallest unit as "one bitcoin," this BIP aligns consumer notion with the protocol’s true nature. It reduces cognitive overhead, ensures customers perceive Bitcoin as counting discrete items, and finally improves instructional readability and consumer expertise.
Specification
Redefinition of the Unit: Internally, the smallest indivisible unit stays unchanged.
Traditionally, 1 BTC = 100,000,000 base items. Below this proposal, "1 bitcoin" equals that smallest unit.
What was beforehand known as "1 BTC" now corresponds to 100 million bitcoins beneath the brand new definition.
Terminology: The casual phrases "satoshi" or "sat" are deprecated. All references, interfaces, and documentation SHOULD discuss with the bottom integer unit merely as "bitcoin."
Show and Formatting: Functions SHOULD current values as complete integers with out decimals.
Instance: Outdated show: 0.00010000 BTC New show: 10000 BTC (or ₿10000)
Conversion: Ledger and consensus guidelines stay unchanged. Implementations adopting this normal MUST multiply beforehand displayed BTC quantities by 100,000,000 to find out the brand new integer illustration.
Rationale Usability: Integer-only shows simplify psychological arithmetic and scale back potential confusion or consumer error.
Protocol Alignment: The Bitcoin protocol inherently counts discrete items. Eradicating the bogus decimal format aligns consumer notion with Bitcoin’s precise integral design.
Instructional Readability: Presenting integers ensures newcomers don’t mistakenly assume that Bitcoin’s nature is decimal-based. It conveys Bitcoin’s true design from the beginning.
Future-Proofing: Adopting the smallest unit as the first measure ensures a constant normal that may scale easily as Bitcoin adoption grows.
Addressing Various Approaches Refuting the "Bits" Proposal (BIP 176)
An alternate suggestion (BIP 176) proposes utilizing "bits" to signify one-millionth of a bitcoin (100 satoshis). Whereas this reduces the variety of decimal locations in sure contexts, it fails to totally deal with the core points our BIP goals to unravel:
Persistent Decimal Mindset: Utilizing "bits" nonetheless retains a layered decimal strategy, requiring customers to suppose by way of a number of denominations (BTC and bits). This shifts complexity reasonably than eliminating it.
Inconsistent Consumer Expertise: Customers should be taught to toggle between BTC for giant quantities and bits for small quantities. As an alternative of offering a unified view of worth, it fragments the consumer expertise.
Incomplete Alignment with the Protocol’s Nature: The "bits" proposal doesn’t realign the displayed worth with the integral nature of Bitcoin’s ledger. It continues to depend on fractional items, masking the basic integer-based accounting that Bitcoin employs.
Not Completely Future-Proof: Although "bits" could simplify sure value ranges, future circumstances might demand further denominations or scaling changes. Our integral strategy resolves this drawback fully by making the smallest unit the usual measure, avoiding future fragmentation.
In essence, whereas BIP 176 makes an attempt to simplify small quantity representations, it solely replaces one decimal illustration with one other. By redefining "bitcoin" because the smallest indivisible unit, this BIP eliminates reliance on decimal fractions and separate denominations fully, providing a clearer, extra intuitive, and finally extra sturdy resolution.
Backward Compatibility No consensus guidelines are altered, and on-chain information stays unchanged. Variations come up solely in show codecs:
For Builders: Replace GUIs, APIs, and documentation to current values as integers. Take away references to fractional BTC.
For Customers: The precise worth of holdings doesn’t change. Transitional measures, similar to twin shows or explanatory tooltips, can ease the adjustment interval. Safety Issues
A brief-term threat of confusion exists as customers adapt to the brand new illustration. Customers accustomed to decimals could misread preliminary shows. To mitigate this: Supply twin shows and tooltips in the course of the transition.
Present clear instructional supplies and coordinated messaging.
Use alerts or confirmations in functions if enter values seem unexpectedly giant or small.
Over time, confusion will subside, leaving an easier, extra intuitive understanding of Bitcoin’s integral values.
Reference Implementation Some wallets, similar to Bitkit, have efficiently adopted integer-only shows, demonstrating the feasibility of this strategy. Transitional options—like displaying each previous and new codecs side-by-side—might help easy the transition.
Take a look at Vectors Outdated: 1.00000000 BTC → New: 100000000 BTC (or ₿100000000) Outdated: 0.00010000 BTC → New: 10000 BTC (or ₿10000) Outdated: 0.00500000 BTC → New: 500000 BTC (or ₿500000)
All previously fractional representations now straight correspond to whole-number multiples of the smallest unit.
Implementation Timeline Part 1 (3-6 months): Introduce the idea, present twin shows and academic supplies.
Part 2 (6-12 months): Outstanding companies undertake integer-only shows by default.
Part 3 (12+ months): Integer illustration turns into normal. Documentation and consumer guides now not reference decimal-based codecs. Conclusion
Redefining the "bitcoin" unit because the smallest indivisible unit and eradicating decimal-based representations simplifies comprehension and aligns displayed values with the protocol’s integral accounting. Whereas a transition interval could also be mandatory, the long-term advantages embody clearer communication, diminished confusion, and a extra correct understanding of Bitcoin’s elementary design.
Copyright This BIP is licensed beneath CC0-1.0.
submitted by /u/SierraRhuno [comments]
Source link
