Discussion Regarding Unit Names

That’s something too! I would be in favor of changing the main unit to 1024 rai, but that would mean that the rai would have two names―rai and yoctonano. But in the future, if the price of Nano increases, it would still be simpler to say “nano” than using confusing prefixes.

Edit: The main unit should be 1024 rai.

I suggest using "ray" instead of "rai" to avoid the same pronunciation confusion we had with "Raiblocks".

I think the units are fine the way they are. We just need to stop using NANO/Nano and call it Mnano. As of today (Nov, 2019), If I have 1 USD I can buy about 1 million nano or 1M nano.

1 Like

It should just be Nano for a full nano and nanites for the smallest unit. Keeps it simple.

1 Like

As long as we call the smallest unit a "Rai", I am happy. Perhaps call the Cent a NanoCent or CentaNano.

CentiNano as in CentiMeter


Much better, sparkcrz.

Here when we talk about the local currency, we just say "cents", and if talking about other currencies we say "cents of x" (eg. "50 cents of dollar"). So it would be 0.50 NANO would be "50 cents of NANO".

The SI prefixes are also cool for other smaller and bigger numbers, because even the little children understands SI prefixes after learning them at school.

I miss the XRB denomination, but XNC would be fine too for NANO.

1 Like

NANO (Nano, nano) - 10^30
rai - 10^24
raw - 1

1 NANO is 1 million rai

i think this is the least confusing option


I like this suggestion a lot, because it doesn't fight with real world convention. Everyone already uses NANO/Nano/nano to refer to Mnano (10^30), and everyone knows that Raw is the smallest unit. Renaming 10^24 from nano to rai removes confusion without forcing mass behavior change, and it still allows SI units to work


I love this. It is so comfortable to say too!

As far as I'm concerned, this is current convention, and we shouldn't stand in its way.
I see far more people uses nano and NANO to mean the 10^30 unit, and more people confused about what a Mnano is, than people "properly" using these terms.
I learned what these terms meant... and then quickly forgot them by choice when I realized that their use really isn't widespread. I will continue to refer to 10^30 raw as nano/Nano/NANO interchangeably, because it is least confusing and what the majority of people do anyways. There's no need for such a silly friction point with such a friction-less currency.

1 Like

Sounds like the current consensus is to make Nano/NANO/nano (10^30) the base unit, and then use standard metric prefixes below that (deci 10^-1, centi 10^-2, milli 10^-3, micro (rai) 10^-6)

Should we submit a PR to officially change the documentation?

I think that 10^30 is established as Nano/NANO/nano now, whether we like it or not, changing it now will probably cause endless confusion.

As for metric prefixes, It is important to avoid extra superfluous units, they generally don't add any utility and do add plenty of confusion for normies. In a perfect world we would all be using the single unit RAW, but obviously those numbers are extremely large....

To prevent confusion that comes with a multitude of superfluous units, I propose we validate only 3 units, to the exclusion of others:

10^0 - RAW as the base unit, (generally only used in programming)

10^24 - (name?) regular users will use, decimal places avoided.

10^30 - Nano (exchange traders, early adopters, whales)

There is good reason to avoid additional units, we know from several historical examples with the introduction of the metric system, limiting the number of units in use has accelerated the smooth transition to new units, great examples being the Australian Building industry banning the cm from use, other successful examples exist.

Another point of nomenclature, we need to specify exactly how decimal places are always meant to be used, in the same way $1.20 is always written to 2 decimal places, even though the final zero is technically superfluous, I would strongly suggest when decimals of 10^30 are displayed, they should be displayed to 6 decimal places, no more, no less. Most services already do this, but on the occasion that someone uses five it is very jarring.. It makes it a lot easier to visualise the value if it is standardised, because the "number" in the decimal is equal to our other standard unit, and we as humans face endless confusion if we don't stick to these standards, Sats on Binance is an example where they don't follow a convention and we have endless 10X confusion of value. Hope this make sense.

For the 10^24 unit, I think it could be called mNano, not because it is a millionth of a nano, (I actually think it's a little confusing to use a similar name), but because it is similar to mPesa, which is synonymous with digital money in underbanked Africa. We can piggy back some of that brand recognition, it has much better search engine optimisation than Nano, and it is similar enough that trade users can figure it's the same thing. We could push mNano adoption for real life use in Africa, with the easy to handle units, that's my 0.02c anyway.

1 Like