<p>Definitely 36.2k BTC.</p>

<p>As you noticed, it's what is most used for money anyway.</p>

<p>And, for the record, I'd never short lesser units as @Meni suggested, because it would only cause confusion: it's not a SI unit we are talking about, it's money, and money uses different conventions.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T17:16:11.997Z
Then what, in your opinion, is the convention for writing 0.0000063 BTC?
Meni Rosenfeld
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T18:01:02.643Z
@MeniRosenfeld 6.3u BTC? Unless you can use a mu letter.
ThePiachu
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T18:06:47.733Z
@ThePiachu: That's what I think (though probably should be 6.3 uBTC). I'm challenging Lohoris' reluctance to use small SI prefixes.
Meni Rosenfeld
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-27T08:50:46.180Z
0.0000063 BTC, until they are valued enough it will be commonplace to exchange such amounts.
o0'.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T17:00:07.893Z
2012-06-26T17:00:07.893Z
o0'.
<p>As BTC is written on the right side of the amount, it suggests being more like a science quantity, rather than a currency, which usually have their signs on the left side. So I'd argue that if you want to write 36,235.97 BTC, you should do it like 36.2 kBTC, but if you wanted to write BTC36,235.97, you'd write BTC36.2k. I haven't seen the latter version used, so probably the first one would be preferred, but then again, nobody would notice anyway...</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T16:31:37.030Z
Not a valid comparison. BTC is supposed to be a currency code like USD, not a currency symbol. AFAIK people say "100 USD", not "USD100".
Meni Rosenfeld
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-27T04:01:10.283Z
I googled "usd100": About 1,680,000 results, and then "100usd": About 1,520,000 results
Highly Irregular
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-27T04:33:11.690Z
@HighlyIrregular: Interesting.
Meni Rosenfeld
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-27T04:39:37.007Z
@HighlyIrregular: Oh, but "100 USD" (with space, exact) gives 14,900,000 results. And you do know the number of results is mostly made up (or a very wild guess at best), right?
Meni Rosenfeld
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-27T05:02:19.427Z
@MeniRosenfeld I wasn't claiming it was reliable, but there's obviously a lot of variation out there in notation (and for what it's worth "100 USD" gives me a bit over 5m results, rather than 14m!)
Highly Irregular
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T16:14:32.157Z
2012-06-26T16:14:32.157Z
ThePiachu
<p>I would write 36.2K BTC.</p>

<p>On the other hand, if I had 0.0362 BTC, I would write 36.2 mBTC.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T16:57:51.297Z
mBTC, omg, that's horrible, readability just died!
o0'.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T17:14:34.463Z
@Lohoris: Are you the one who downvoted me? For mentioning mBTC, the accepted abbreviation for millibitcoin which should become more standard as BTC price increases? (Which is also used by bitcoin-qt by the way)
Meni Rosenfeld
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T17:21:13.163Z
In other words you've downvoted a correct answer because you don't like the facts mentioned in it.
Meni Rosenfeld
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T17:29:49.787Z
I think it's horrible, so I've downvoted it. Nothing personal.
o0'.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T17:48:32.750Z
mBTC ftw. :) also, 3.62 bitcents (aka cBTC :) ) works.
nanotube
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-27T14:16:37.340Z
Given that the community [have agreed on an answer to this](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#What_do_I_call_the_various_denominations_of_Bitcoins.3F), I'm upvoting. SI units FTW.
Gary
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-27T17:19:23.950Z
There's also this chart that also includes the tonal prefixes: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Units
Colin Dean
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-28T11:27:52.040Z
The common people will use what everyone else is using. Which means that if we establish a convention of SI, everyone will use SI. That doesn't preclude the possibility of a shortened name or fancy symbol though.
Meni Rosenfeld
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T15:30:04.460Z
2012-06-26T15:30:04.460Z
Meni Rosenfeld
<p>If I have 36,235.97 BTC, would I shorten that by writing that I have <em>36.2k BTC</em> or would I write <em>36.2 kBTC</em>?</p>

<p>It seems that latter is proper for SI units, while the former is used more often for money, at least in the U.S.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T16:10:08.433Z
You could always use tonal Bitcoins;)
ThePiachu
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T16:15:28.927Z
This is a very interesting question, but it's probably the quirkiest and least useful of a legitimate question I've seen in a long time! ;)
ThePiachu
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-26T22:41:29.210Z
If I had 36,235,97 BTC I wouldn't tell anyone.  If anyone asks I'ld say that I have 98.76 bitcoins but even then most of them are in cold storage so don't even try.
Stephen Gornick
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-27T14:14:12.617Z
I had some fun writing this [guide to denominations](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#What_do_I_call_the_various_denominations_of_Bitcoins.3F) a while back.
Gary
<currencies><terminology>
What is the preferred way to denote orders of magnitude in BTC?
Colin Dean
# What is the preferred way to denote orders of magnitude in BTC?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-06-26)

If I have 36,235.97 BTC, would I shorten that by writing that I have *36.2k BTC* or would I write *36.2 kBTC*?

It seems that latter is proper for SI units, while the former is used more often for money, at least in the U.S.

**Tags:** currencies, terminology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: You could always use tonal Bitcoins;)  
> **username_1**: This is a very interesting question, but it's probably the quirkiest and least useful of a legitimate question I've seen in a long time! ;)  
> **username_2**: If I had 36,235,97 BTC I wouldn't tell anyone.  If anyone asks I'ld say that I have 98.76 bitcoins but even then most of them are in cold storage so don't even try.  
> **username_3**: I had some fun writing this [guide to denominations](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#What_do_I_call_the_various_denominations_of_Bitcoins.3F) a while back.  

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_5 on 2012-06-26. Score: 6 | Accepted answer

I would write 36.2K BTC.

On the other hand, if I had 0.0362 BTC, I would write 36.2 mBTC.

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: mBTC, omg, that's horrible, readability just died!  
> **username_5**: @Lohoris: Are you the one who downvoted me? For mentioning mBTC, the accepted abbreviation for millibitcoin which should become more standard as BTC price increases? (Which is also used by bitcoin-qt by the way)  
> **username_5**: In other words you've downvoted a correct answer because you don't like the facts mentioned in it.  
> **username_4**: I think it's horrible, so I've downvoted it. Nothing personal.  
> **username_7**: mBTC ftw. :) also, 3.62 bitcents (aka cBTC :) ) works.  
> **username_3**: Given that the community [have agreed on an answer to this](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#What_do_I_call_the_various_denominations_of_Bitcoins.3F), I'm upvoting. SI units FTW.  
> **username_0**: There's also this chart that also includes the tonal prefixes: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Units  
> **username_5**: The common people will use what everyone else is using. Which means that if we establish a convention of SI, everyone will use SI. That doesn't preclude the possibility of a shortened name or fancy symbol though.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2012-06-26. Score: 3

Definitely 36.2k BTC.

As you noticed, it's what is most used for money anyway.

And, for the record, I'd never short lesser units as @username_5 suggested, because it would only cause confusion: it's not a SI unit we are talking about, it's money, and money uses different conventions.

> **Comments:**
> **username_5**: Then what, in your opinion, is the convention for writing 0.0000063 BTC?  
> **username_1**: @username_5 6.3u BTC? Unless you can use a mu letter.  
> **username_5**: @username_1: That's what I think (though probably should be 6.3 uBTC). I'm challenging Lohoris' reluctance to use small SI prefixes.  
> **username_4**: 0.0000063 BTC, until they are valued enough it will be commonplace to exchange such amounts.  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2012-06-26. Score: -1

As BTC is written on the right side of the amount, it suggests being more like a science quantity, rather than a currency, which usually have their signs on the left side. So I'd argue that if you want to write 36,235.97 BTC, you should do it like 36.2 kBTC, but if you wanted to write BTC36,235.97, you'd write BTC36.2k. I haven't seen the latter version used, so probably the first one would be preferred, but then again, nobody would notice anyway...

> **Comments:**
> **username_5**: Not a valid comparison. BTC is supposed to be a currency code like USD, not a currency symbol. AFAIK people say "100 USD", not "USD100".  
> **username_6**: I googled "usd100": About 1,680,000 results, and then "100usd": About 1,520,000 results  
> **username_5**: @username_6: Interesting.  
> **username_5**: @username_6: Oh, but "100 USD" (with space, exact) gives 14,900,000 results. And you do know the number of results is mostly made up (or a very wild guess at best), right?  
> **username_6**: @username_5 I wasn't claiming it was reliable, but there's obviously a lot of variation out there in notation (and for what it's worth "100 USD" gives me a bit over 5m results, rather than 14m!)  

---

