Good for payment processor only.
Aspiring to being currency requires to develop intrinsic value.
Only with assumption that the result is the same. In my opinion it is not.
Who want to achieve a lot, have to risk a lot (and work hard
My question:
Is the risk justified enough to shift comma 3 places left and give people currency feel, in term of numbers, they are used to?
I am not qualified to sincerely answer, thus I seek advice of smarter people.
It depends which country you’re talking about. East Asian countries (think Korean Won and Japanese Yen) already deal with long strings of digits when it comes to prices. So people can adapt, but the question is why should they?
Dealing with decimal places requires the user to pay a cognitive cost.
The way Arabic numerals are written, whole numbers expand from right to left, with no leading zeros, so it’s faster for the brain to visually parse big numbers, since you simply have to look at the length of the string of digits and make a “fuzzy” estimate of value before parsing the individual digits. Commas are added between three zeros and floating point numbers are capped at 2 digits, to aid in comprehension, and can be quickly parsed.
Once you introduce decimal places, especially one of variable length, the length of a string of digits can no longer be an accurate gauge of how big a value is. There may or may not be trailing zeros, one has to parse where the decimal dot is and count the places, complicating the matter.
That makes a number harder to scan and parse quickly — it makes sense for careful financial transactions, but not everyday purchases where you have to quickly evaluate value.
The alternatives suggested, such as adding a fiat currency conversion value or using a different denomination, don’t work because you’re paying the cognitive cost of processing even more layers of information.
Good user experience is often about letting computerized information systems deal with the cognitive complexities of mathematical calculations, rather than relying on the human to do so, minimizing mistakes and stress.
Striking the right balance is key, we should never trade off usability for system needs. If it’s technically hard to do a stock split, the question should be, how do we transition to it? How will we rewrite the system to handle it? How can we manage the real-world risks?
Not “it’s risky and we won’t do it” because that sets a dangerous precedent of putting technical needs before human needs.
Which, for DASH, is actually antithetical to the goal of creating the first user-friendly digital currency.
