BUIP087: (passed) Utilization of “cash” denomination

[Ken Shishido]

BUIP087: Utilization of “cash” denomination

Date: March 18th, 2018
Version: 0.1
Revision 0.2: April 9th, 2018 [add XCH]

Abstract
We propose “cash” as the standard term for 100 (one hundred) satoshi or 1/1,000,000 (one one-millionth) of a bitcoin cash (BCH). Further, we propose the unofficial ISO code "XCH" to represent a cash unit (millionth of a BCH unit).

Motivation
BCH strives for the worldwide adoption, and unit denomination and calculation must be easy for the average users for daily transactions. And, it needs to to be differentiated from Bitcoin Core (BTC) to avoid confusion.

Rationale
1. Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin, has described Bitcoin as “A Peer to Peer Electronic “Cash” System” in the white paper.

2. BTC now uses “bits” for 1/1,000,000 (one one-millionth). BCH can differentiate itself from "bits", and "cash" should be the easy word to use for all the people around the world.

3. "bits" is similar to “bitte, which is an obscene slang word in French and BCH would like to be user-friendly to the Francophone peoples.

4. Another unit name would not be needed in the future. Because a Starbucks coffee would be 3,000 cash today. (say $3.00 for a cup based on 1BCH being $1,000). When BCH price increases 1,000 times from today, it will be 3 cash for a coffee, which is easy enough for everyone in the world.

5.Governments around the world are phasing out the production and use of their cash, and cash has become the very small part of the money supply. BCH would like to take this opportunity to inherit the word “cash” and the function from the governments.

6. Using the ISO code XCH permits easy representation of Bitcoin Cash amounts in all mainstream fnancial and accounting computer systems. Eight decimal places is not supported in most financial systems and this is a massive hurdle to mainstream adoption.

Potential benefits of utilizing "cash" includes:
Reduce user error on small bitcoin amounts.
Reduce unit bias for users that want a "whole" bitcoin.
Allow easier comparisons of prices for most users.
Allow easier bi-directional comparisons to fiat currencies.
Allows all UTXO amounts to need at most 2 decimal places, which can be easier to handle.
XCH conforms to the ISO 4217 standard for transnational currencies, and is supportable in legacy mainstream financial systems,

Specification
Definition:
a) 1 cash = 100 satoshi. Plural of "cash" is the same "cash". The term "cash" is should not be capitalized unless used at the start of a sentence.
b) the code XCH to be used to represent 1 cash , as above.

All BCH-denominated items are encouraged to also show the denomination in “cash”, either as the default or as an option. Some wallet applications which show “bits” will need to be approached about changing over.

As BCH grows in price versus fiat currencies, it's important to give users the ability to quickly and accurately calculate prices for transactions, savings and other economic activities.
The idea of this BIP is to formalize this name. Additionally, "cash" is likely the only other denomination that will be needed for BCH as 0.01 cash = 1 satoshi, meaning that two decimal places will be sufficient to describe any current utxo.

Existing terms used in BTC such as milli-bitcoin (mBTC) micro-bitcoin (µBTC) etc are irrelevant to BCH It is recommended that "µBCH" in the full node wallet be replaced with the option of "cash" or "XCH".

Credit
“cash” denomination has been discussed and proposed by many people before. Authors of this BUIP take no credit for inventing the term.

Precedence
HandCash and Electron Cash (version 3.1.6) have already implemented “cash”.

Reference (Special thanks to Jimmy Song)
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-December/015399.html

Authors:
Ken Shishido
Jonald Fyookball
Andrew Clifford [XCH proposal]
______________________________________
Memo, by Ken Shishido

Hi,
I am not a developer but I wanted to give it a try and submit an BUIP. Jonald and I wrote this. Please discuss and comment!

 

[torusJKL]

Thanks for writing the BUIP.

I think it is a great idea and hope it will be available for vote during the next round.

@solex please add it to the BUIP index.

 

[AdrianX]

@Ken Shishido I like the idea. I'd like it to see it evolve a bit more.

I'd say an ISO currency code associated with the denomination would present such an opportunity to rename a unit and create a much bigger impact and effort to encourage adoption including the forex world.


@solex maybe you can give some input on the process involved in getting an ISO currency denomination If I recall you were instrumental in getting BTC / XBT recognized as an ISO currency code.

BCH I feel works for now but as this evolves I think it would be extremely bullish for the common unit to be the ISO currency code.

 

[todu]

This BUIP is being discussed in the /r/btc forum as well. Here's the link to that discussion:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/85k3aw/biup_087_utilization_of_cash_denomination/

 

[solex]

@Ken Shishido
As discussed, this BUIP can be put forward for vote. I do think it needs to be updated first as the discussion here evolves.
I checked and "bits" is not a French word, but borrowed from English for computer terminology
http://dictionary.reverso.net/french-english/bits

It is "bitte" which is offensive in slang.

Even so, we can assume that they are similar enough to be problematic. The BUIP should be clear on the spellings.
One solution is simply to have "bits" for the English language wallets, and translate to "cash" for French usage.

About the ISO code.
@AdrianX Yes, thanks for recalling. I used ISO codes every day so it was clear that XBT could fit into the ISO 4217 standard, while BTC never would, because the first two letters are the country code, and BT belongs to Bhutan.
X codes are a dumping ground for trans-national currencies, e.g. XAU for gold and XPT for platinum so they can be pressed into service for crypto, which some dev groups realised like Ripple with XRP and Monero with XMR. However, no crypto has been given an official code. I read that the SIX Interbank Clearing and the Swiss Association for Standards are looking at it. Maybe they are under pressure from central banks to delay their decision. It has been 5 years since they were first made aware of this new asset class requiring ISO codes and _@::____@::..______@:.__
tumbleweeds

Still, it is very important for any cryptocurrency which is intended to have a major role in mainstream finance for it to have a ISO code, formal or informal.

I recommend using the "X" prefix for the 100 satoshis bits/cash unit. There is another major reason which is that the vast majority of mainstream financial systems expect currencies to have 2 decimal places, though some accounting packages go to 4 or 5 (I think Sage does), but none go to 8dp unless they have been altered to suit bitcoin.

A good code for 100 satoshis of Bitcoin Cash is "XCH". At a stroke, this can be used in global forex and accounting systems, and is a leg up for adoption.

 

[torusJKL]

One solution is simply to have "bits" for the English language wallets, and translate to "cash" for French usage.

I think we should try to have an international term.
Either way "bit" is now used by Bitcoin BTC and if Bitcoin Cash would use "cash" instead than it would become unambiguous. (at least as long there is no Bitcoin Cash chain split).

We could say 100 cash without explaining if I mean Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash.

 

[Ken Shishido]

@solex thanks for your insightful information. I see, I had thought XBT was already ISO official but it wasn't.

It's really a good idea to start working on getting ISO code for 1/1,000,000th BCH due to the reasons above. Yes, I think the official ISO code could be "XCH", and people, wallet app etc can start using "cash" for their daily transactions.

Can you advise how do we should go from here? Do we submit an application to ISO? Do we wait for more adoption first?

FYI, UnitWallet said they will integrate the "cash" denomination in their next release. But they plan to use "CSH" so I advised them "cash" is better.

 

[freetrader]

At first I was a bit opposed to using 'cash' as a unit because of the conflicts with the formal name of 'Bitcoin Cash' and also the possible ambiguities with general use of the term cash.

But the BUIP makes good points. 'Cash' as a general term is under attack, and could be lost to future generations. So it is a good idea to claim it and preserve it as a unit of currency.

'Bits' always suffered from similar ambiguity within the context of computing's 'binary digits'. So 'cash' is actually a better choice in my view. I tried to look up homophones for it in other languages, but didn't find any conflicts. That of course doesn't mean there aren't any, the search is difficult but at least it's good that there are no obvious conflict results with major languages. In fact, in Albanian there is a homophone ("kesh") which translates as "having", which fits perfectly with the notion of money you really have.

I like the proposed XCH code too, so this proposal will get my support.

Plus, I look forward to saying "I'll send you point 007 cash. Bitcoin Cash."

 

[solex]

@Ken Shishido
It was good meeting you once again and listening to your presentation on Saturday. This is somewhat at a tangent to this BUIP, but also related. You described how you travelled around the world to many different countries and sought out Bitcoin accepting businesses. A few years ago there were streets in Germany and France where not one, but several businesses accepted BTC. However, now that has changed. This grass-roots phenomenon has been blow-torched by high fees. Recently, you struggle to find merchants accepting BTC, and this is a major reason why you are supporting Bitcoin Cash.

Fees have dropped on BTC again, presently at 10 satoshis per byte today. Do low fees mean that BTC gets back into shops? No! Once bitten - twice shy. Retail owners are not going to bother twice in a hurry, and retail staff who stop seeing BTC payments soon forget how to use the wallet software.

This shows that Bitcoin Cash has to make up lost ground, and never fall into the same trap of being unfriendly to use. Part of that is branding the 100 satoshi unit. I agree with @freetrader that "bits' is not perfect, although I promoted it for a long time. For Anglophone countries "cash" also has a double-meaning and not perfect either. One option is to consider supporting both and give the user a choice.

There is an initiative by central banks to eliminate fiat cash (coins and banknotes), and the reason is that they can use negative interest rates more effectively. Savers with fiat trapped in their bank accounts can be forced to pay interest. So, if central banks are wanting to abandon cash then Bitcoin Cash should move into it.

CSH is a problem because it introduces another abbreviation, as you point out.
XCH can work with the existing ISO standard, but I suspect that the standards body will only take submissions from major retail and central banks.

So, the first step is to get our house in order and agree a set of units for the Bitcoin Cash full nodes. Then all the wallet providers will have a direction which they can use or ignore.

At present there are three options and the last for microbitcoins can only be loved by cryptogeeks.

The challenge is to find a set of units which can go into the BUIP. Before the vote, I would like to also put this discussion into a message for the mailing list to get further feedback.

 

[Ken Shishido]

UnitWallet just started using "cash" in its update.

 

[Windowly]

The more I think about this, the more I like this proposal actually.

It seems in a lot of ways like a superficial change but should make a huge positive difference that will drive adoption forward. I can see benefits in primarily two ways:

1. Making it a lot easier for merchants to price goods and for people buying the goods to fiddle with their phone wallets without having un-intuitively count the zeros after a decimal point.

2. People can easily buy several hundred cash. Nobody will look to buy alts because BCH is too expensive.

 

[solex]

After discussion with @Ken Shishido, BUIP087 is updated to reflect the additional proposal that the unofficial ISO code XCH be used to represent the "cash" (100 satoshis) unit.

 

[AdrianX]

I'm excited about this BUIP. Hopefully, it can avoid the political drama surrounding Bitcoin (Cash).

XCH can work with the existing ISO standard, but I suspect that the standards body will only take submissions from major retail and central banks.

One thought that came to mind when I read the above is there are two very large Bitcoin retailers in this space: BitPay and CoinDesk they both stand to benefit from this proposal, could we put some funding toward lobbying them to endorse an application made to the ISO standard standards body.

@Ken Shishido as per @solex's suggestion BU is about imposing standards but given user options. That said can we make the denomination for 100 satoshi user configurable ie: (we can defalt to Cash or XCH whatever we as a community think it should be but leave the option for the market to optimize.

XCH
Cash
Bits
uBCH

Also, I have some Ideas around defining what is XCH.

Background. Before the BTC S2X and S1X fork mess, it became obvious that neither the developer's, investors nor institution had a quantifiable definition for Bitcoin that would consistently recognize one resulting chain as Bitcoin BTC.

Many institutions would wind up calling one or the other chain BTC, some used political definitions, some authoritarian ones, and some used Hash rate majority, etc. Even those following the hashrate would be at a loss as the majority hashrate could swing 2 weeks later leaving them with a different definition of BTC and a trading symbol BTC that was not reflected in their official description.

I'd propose in addition to this BUIP that BU come up with a definition that determines what XCH is, and how it is defined should a contentious fork arise. A shared common and consistent definition for XCH will also help with institutional adoption of Bitcoin Cash.

 

[torusJKL]

@Ken Shishido @solex will this BUIP be part of the voting on 07.05.?

 

[AdrianX]

of relevance some great discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/8k5ne0/proposal_makes_bits_1_millionth_bch_the_standard/

 

[Toros]

I think we should not complicate things. People are already thinking that cryptocurrency is a hoax. This denomination will create further headaches in the people. It is my point of view. What do you think about it?

 

[solex]

@Toros Based on all the feedback to this, my opinion is that "cash" is fine for the French translation in wallet software, and any other languages which prefer it. However, "bits" is probably best in the English text.

The important thing for usability is to have a BCH millionths unit, which gives 2dp to the smallest unit (satoshis). As pointed out in the OP, 8dp on cryptocurrency units is a major hurdle to global adoption as everyone is used to the 2dp standard in fiat currency.

 

[adamstgbit]

stick a b in front and i'm in. b-cash! seriously!

i think "10 000 cash" is confusing, everyone knows cash is cash, you live and breath bitcoin cash so you her cash and you think bitcoin cash, everyone else however hears CASH ( the cold hard kind )

But if you call it b-cash or bit-cash, then you avoid confusion and leave poeple wondering what is this "B""cash" thing?!

I do believe it is a good idea to sort out this issue early and stick with it, i just think "cash" is NOT "it"

BCH ( this is the standard we adopted right? there was some confusion with BCC at the start and i haven't been bitcoining for a while.)

lets go nuts here and make up some shit
call it a "bithou" ( 1/1000th of a BCH ) pronounced BIT-THouz
or a "grandbit" ???

lol... my point is i think the sub-units need ORIGINAL names, 1) not to cause confusion and 2) to make poeple google " wtf is a b-cash"