I remember robocop http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85cL1HisrNc

So now I can say "I'll buy that for a Gavin!"

You're saying that people can't distinguish between computer bits and Bitcoin bits? I buy a product called Bacon Bits at the grocery store, and I've never confused pieces of bacon with units of computer data.

The term would be used with Bitcoin, as in "Bitcoin bit." The symbol would be BIT.

So 1 BTC = 10,000 BIT

I'm arguing that it fits with BITcoin perfectly. All we're doing is describing a range of the currency. Since they made Bitcoin with eight decimal places, we can describe two ranges of four - the bit and the Satoshi.

This is super clean and super easy. It's a standard that would be used forever with this currency because it's right in the middle of the range.

If you see a price of 500 BIT on a cup of coffee or whatever, are you going to be confused? If you are, how is it any more confusing than seeing 50 mBTC? How hard is it to tell people that BIT is for Bitcoin? If you use mBTC you have to tell them it's a millibitcoin. We're just not referencing any math with BIT.

This option is unique because all the others are giving us metric denominations rather than a shorthand term that is free of math and the constant reminder that you're only getting a portion of the main unit of the currency. A term like bit can take the place of things like mBTC without conveying the message that you missed out on the "Ponzi scheme" of the main unit.

The way I see it, it was a mistake to limit the issue to 21 million. It's just way too small, and so now we have a public relations problem. People see prices of $100+ for ONE bitcoin, and it's off the scale of how they see everyday values. So we sort of have to "re-issue" the currency with a smaller unit so that it takes the place of the increasingly out-of-reach main unit for everyday transactions. I'm arguing that using something like bit is a fresh start. You're not presenting it with a constant reference to its BTC value.
That goes a long way in marketing and ease of use, IMO.

I mean if you look down enough, we'll be reliving Star Wars very soon, and people will call satoshis "Credits" because it will be convenient. You know what we need? SciFi that incorporates Bitcoins - Bit-Fiction

Science Fiction here we come!

We're already way ahead of you. Bit-fiction has existed for years; one of the most successful bit-fiction authors goes by the name "Pirate@40" and produced a highly successful work of fiction that found numerous fans on this very forum.

I think they will call them millies.

imo we can just keep the metric system, the names used eventually by most people will grow naturally, probably they even differ from country to country.

I definitely think new names would reduce the chance of confounding denominations, as well as make handling smaller amounts of BTC much simpler.
Additionally those new names should not have the same sound to them, as that also facilitates confusion when two parties negotiate over price or when you send funds.
Third, in this stage of bitcoin, it seems futile to me to try press names into a scheme mirroring the Dollar-Cents relationship, because we have no idea where the valuation of bitcoin will end up in 1, 2, 5 years from now.
It might make more sense to use first names of people that heavily contributed to the bitcoin ecosystem (as in 1 Satoshi), in steps of 1000 as that is the scheme every SI unit generally follows. For all practical purposes the "cent" denominations can be added to the main denomination like so:

My official proposal:
1 Bitcoin, == 100 Bitcoincent (or 1 Bitcent),
1 Bitcoin, == 1000 Gavin (or Gav for short)
1 Bitcoin, == 1000 00 Gavincent (or Gavcent)
1 Bitcoin, == 1000 000 Finney (or Fin for short)
1 Bitcoin, == 1000 000 00 Finneycent (=Fincent, or Satoshi)

Pairs: Bitcoin/Bitcoincent, Gavin/Gavincent, Finney/Finneycents(Satoshis)

Advantage of that scheme is, that whatever the current valuation of bitcoin, you can always use bitcoin in the familiar way you handle the Dollar/cents pair.
So eg use Bitcoin/Bitcents for denominations of Bitcoin < 100$, Gavin/Gavincents for denominations of Bitcoin at 100$ and above, and later at maybe around 10k USD use Finneys/Finneycents(Satoshis).

Edit note: Please lets not use milli, micro and all the other prefixes - to easy to get it wrong (whoopsi, just sent the amount 1000 times) and they are also visual traps: mBTC, uBTC, ugh..

I think confusing uBTC and mBTC in a dropdown menu with the ease of a mouseclick is far easier than drinking 300 liters of milk. What's your point?
Edit: even more so as "milli" and "micro" start with the same letter.

I vote for

1btc = 1000 gavins or the minium fee at the moment.
1 gavin = 1000 credits
1 credit = 100 satoshis  (as satoshis will not be used in our life-time)

the upside of this:
i can send 10000 bitcoin credits to my friend, he will be so happy!

so 1 million bitcoin credits= 1 bitcoin! fast and easy!