Bitcoin Exchange Rate History Graph – Currency Exchange Rates

Putting $400M of Bitcoin on your company balance sheet

Also posted on my blog as usual. Read it there if you can, there are footnotes and inlined plots.
A couple of months ago, MicroStrategy (MSTR) had a spare $400M of cash which it decided to shift to Bitcoin (BTC).
Today we'll discuss in excrutiating detail why this is not a good idea.
When a company has a pile of spare money it doesn't know what to do with, it'll normally do buybacks or start paying dividends. That gives the money back to the shareholders, and from an economic perspective the money can get better invested in other more promising companies. If you have a huge pile of of cash, you probably should be doing other things than leave it in a bank account to gather dust.
However, this statement from MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor exists to make it clear he's buying into BTC for all the wrong reasons:
“This is not a speculation, nor is it a hedge. This was a deliberate corporate strategy to adopt a bitcoin standard.”
Let's unpack it and jump into the economics Bitcoin:

Is Bitcoin money?

No.
Or rather BTC doesn't act as money and there's no serious future path for BTC to become a form of money. Let's go back to basics. There are 3 main economic problems money solves:
1. Medium of Exchange. Before money we had to barter, which led to the double coincidence of wants problem. When everyone accepts the same money you can buy something from someone even if they don't like the stuff you own.
As a medium of exchange, BTC is not good. There are significant transaction fees and transaction waiting times built-in to BTC and these worsen the more popular BTC get.
You can test BTC's usefulness as a medium of exchange for yourself right now: try to order a pizza or to buy a random item with BTC. How many additional hurdles do you have to go through? How many fewer options do you have than if you used a regular currency? How much overhead (time, fees) is there?
2. Unit of Account. A unit of account is what you compare the value of objects against. We denominate BTC in terms of how many USD they're worth, so BTC is a unit of account presently. We can say it's because of lack of adoption, but really it's also because the market value of BTC is so volatile.
If I buy a $1000 table today or in 2017, it's roughly a $1000 table. We can't say that a 0.4BTC table was a 0.4BTC table in 2017. We'll expand on this in the next point:
3. Store of Value. When you create economic value, you don't want to be forced to use up the value you created right away.
For instance, if I fix your washing machine and you pay me in avocados, I'd be annoyed. I'd have to consume my payment before it becomes brown, squishy and disgusting. Avocado fruit is not good money because avocadoes loses value very fast.
On the other hand, well-run currencies like the USD, GBP, CAD, EUR, etc. all lose their value at a low and most importantly fairly predictible rate. Let's look at the chart of the USD against BTC
While the dollar loses value at a predictible rate, BTC is all over the place, which is bad.
One important use money is to write loan contracts. Loans are great. They let people spend now against their future potential earnings, so they can buy houses or start businesses without first saving up for a decade. Loans are good for the economy.
If you want to sign something that says "I owe you this much for that much time" then you need to be able to roughly predict the value of the debt in at the point in time where it's due.
Otherwise you'll have a hard time pricing the risk of the loan effectively. This means that you need to charge higher interests. The risk of making a loan in BTC needs to be priced into the interest of a BTC-denominated loan, which means much higher interest rates. High interests on loans are bad, because buying houses and starting businesses are good things.

BTC has a fixed supply, so these problems are built in

Some people think that going back to a standard where our money was denominated by a stock of gold (the Gold Standard) would solve economic problems. This is nonsense.
Having control over supply of your currency is a good thing, as long as it's well run.
See here
Remember that what is desirable is low variance in the value, not the value itself. When there are wild fluctuations in value, it's hard for money to do its job well.
Since the 1970s, the USD has been a fiat money with no intrinsic value. This means we control the supply of money.
Let's look at a classic poorly drawn econ101 graph
The market price for USD is where supply meets demand. The problem with a currency based on an item whose supply is fixed is that the price will necessarily fluctuate in response to changes in demand.
Imagine, if you will, that a pandemic strikes and that the demand for currency takes a sharp drop. The US imports less, people don't buy anything anymore, etc. If you can't print money, you get deflation, which is worsens everything. On the other hand, if you can make the money printers go brrrr you can stabilize the price
Having your currency be based on a fixed supply isn't just bad because in/deflation is hard to control.
It's also a national security risk...
The story of the guy who crashed gold prices in North Africa
In the 1200s, Mansa Munsa, the emperor of the Mali, was rich and a devout Muslim and wanted everyone to know it. So he embarked on a pilgrimage to make it rain all the way to Mecca.
He in fact made it rain so hard he increased the overall supply of gold and unintentionally crashed gold prices in Cairo by 20%, wreaking an economic havoc in North Africa that lasted a decade.
This story is fun, the larger point that having your inflation be at the mercy of foreign nations is an undesirable attribute in any currency. The US likes to call some countries currency manipulators, but this problem would be serious under a gold standard.

Currencies are based on trust

Since the USD is based on nothing except the US government's word, how can we trust USD not to be mismanaged?
The answer is that you can probably trust the fed until political stooges get put in place. Currently, the US's central bank managing the USD, the Federal Reserve (the Fed for friends & family), has administrative authority. The fed can say "no" to dumb requests from the president.
People who have no idea what the fed does like to chant "audit the fed", but the fed is already one of the best audited US federal entities. The transcripts of all their meetings are out in the open. As is their balance sheet, what they plan to do and why. If the US should audit anything it's the Department of Defense which operates without any accounting at all.
It's easy to see when a central bank will go rogue: it's when political yes-men are elected to the board.
For example, before printing themselves into hyperinflation, the Venezuelan president appointed a sociologist who publicly stated “Inflation does not exist in real life” and instead is a made up capitalist lie. Note what happened mere months after his gaining control over the Venezuelan currency
This is a key policy. One paper I really like, Sargent (1984) "The end of 4 big inflations" states:
The essential measures that ended hyperinflation in each of Germany,Austria, Hungary, and Poland were, first, the creation of an independentcentral bank that was legally committed to refuse the government'sdemand or additional unsecured credit and, second, a simultaneousalteration in the fiscal policy regime.
In english: *hyperinflation stops when the central bank can say "no" to the government."
The US Fed, like other well good central banks, is run by a bunch of nerds. When it prints money, even as aggressively as it has it does so for good reasons. You can see why they started printing on March 15th as the COVID lockdowns started:
The Federal Reserve is prepared to use its full range of tools to support the flow of credit to households and businesses and thereby promote its maximum employment and price stability goals.
In english: We're going to keep printing and lowering rates until jobs are back and inflation is under control. If we print until the sun is blotted out, we'll print in the shade.

BTC is not gold

Gold is a good asset for doomsday-preppers. If society crashes, gold will still have value.
How do we know that?
Gold has held value throughout multiple historic catastrophes over thousands of years. It had value before and after the Bronze Age Collapse, the Fall of the Western Roman Empire and Gengis Khan being Gengis Khan.
Even if you erased humanity and started over, the new humans would still find gold to be economically valuable. When Europeans d̶i̶s̶c̶o̶v̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ c̶o̶n̶q̶u̶e̶r̶e̶d̶ g̶e̶n̶o̶c̶i̶d̶e̶d̶ went to America, they found gold to be an important item over there too. This is about equivalent to finding humans on Alpha-Centauri and learning that they think gold is a good store of value as well.
Some people are puzzled at this: we don't even use gold for much! But it has great properties:
First, gold is hard to fake and impossible to manufacture. This makes it good to ascertain payment.
Second, gold doesnt react to oxygen, so it doesn't rust or tarnish. So it keeps value over time unlike most other materials.
Last, gold is pretty. This might sound frivolous, and you may not like it, but jewelry has actual value to humans.
It's no coincidence if you look at a list of the wealthiest families, a large number of them trade in luxury goods.
To paraphrase Veblen humans have a profound desire to signal social status, for the same reason peacocks have unwieldy tails. Gold is a great way to achieve that.
On the other hand, BTC lacks all these attributes. Its value is largely based on common perception of value. There are a few fundamental drivers of demand:
Apart from these, it's hard to argue that BTC will retain value throughout some sort of economic catastrophe.

BTC is really risky

One last statement from Michael Saylor I take offense to is this:
“We feel pretty confident that Bitcoin is less risky than holding cash, less risky than holding gold,” MicroStrategy CEO said in an interview
"BTC is less risky than holding cash or gold long term" is nonsense. We saw before that BTC is more volatile on face value, and that as long as the Fed isn't run by spider monkeys stacked in a trench coat, the inflation is likely to be within reasonable bounds.
But on top of this, BTC has Abrupt downside risks that normal currencies don't. Let's imagine a few:

Blockchain solutions are fundamentally inefficient

Blockchain was a genius idea. I still marvel at the initial white paper which is a great mix of economics and computer science.
That said, blockchain solutions make large tradeoffs in design because they assume almost no trust between parties. This leads to intentionally wasteful designs on a massive scale.
The main problem is that all transactions have to be validated by expensive computational operations and double checked by multiple parties. This means waste:
Many design problems can be mitigated by various improvements over BTC, but it remains that a simple database always works better than a blockchain if you can trust the parties to the transaction.
submitted by VodkaHaze to badeconomics [link] [comments]

Lines of Navigation | Monthly Portfolio Update - July 202

Our little systems have their day;
They have their day and cease to be
- Tennyson, In Memoriam A.H.H.
This is my forty-fourth portfolio update. I complete this update monthly to check my progress against my goal.
Portfolio goal
My objective is to reach a portfolio of $2 180 000 by 1 July 2021. This would produce a real annual income of about $87 000 (in 2020 dollars).
This portfolio objective is based on an expected average real return of 3.99 per cent, or a nominal return of 6.49 per cent.
Portfolio summary
Total portfolio value: $1 800 119 (+$34 376 or 1.9%)
Asset allocation
Presented visually, below is a high-level view of the current asset allocation of the portfolio.
[Chart]
Comments
The portfolio has substantially increased this month, continuing the recovery in portfolio value since March.
The strong portfolio growth of over $34 000, or 1.9 per cent, returns the value of the portfolio close to that achieved at the end of February this year.
[Chart]
This month there was minimal movement in the value of Australian and global equity holdings, There was, however, a significant lift of around 6 per cent in the value of gold exchange traded fund units, as well as a rise in the value of Bitcoin holdings.
These movements have pushed the value of gold holdings to their highest level so far on the entire journey. Their total value has approximately doubled since the original major purchases across 2009 to 2015.
For most of the past year gold has functioned as a portfolio stabiliser, having a negative correlation to movements in Australian equities (of around -0.3 to -0.4). As low and negative bond rates spread across the world, however, the opportunity cost of holding gold is reduced, and its potential diversification benefits loom larger.
The fixed income holdings of the portfolio also continued to fall beneath the target allocation, making this question of what represents a defensive (or negatively correlated to equity) asset far from academic.
This steady fall is a function of the slow maturing of Ratesetter loans, which were largely made between 2015 and 2017. Ratesetter has recently advised of important changes to its market operation, and placed a fixed maximum cap on new loan rates. By replacing market set rates with maximum rates, the peer-to-peer lending platform appears to be shifting to more of a 'intermediated' role in which higher past returns (of around 8 to 9 per cent) will now no longer be possible.
[Chart]
The expanding value of gold and Bitcoin holdings since January last year have actually had the practical effect of driving new investments into equities, since effectively for each dollar of appreciation, for example, my target allocation to equities rises by seven dollars.
Consistent with this, investments this month have been in the Vanguard international shares exchange-traded fund (VGS) using Selfwealth. This has been directed to bring my actual asset allocation more closely in line with the target split between Australian and global shares.
Fathoming out: franking credits and portfolio distributions
Earlier last month I released a summary of portfolio income over the past half year. This, like all before it, noted that the summary was prepared on a purely 'cash' basis, reflecting dividends actually paid into a bank account, and excluding consideration of franking credits.
Franking credits are credits for company tax paid at the company level, which can be passed to individual shareholders, reducing their personal tax liability. They are not cash, but for a personal investor with tax liabilities they can have equivalent value. This means that comparing equity returns to other investments without factoring these credits can produce a distorted picture of an investor's final after-tax return.
In past portfolio summaries I have noted an estimate for franking credits in footnotes, but updating the value for this recently resulted in a curiosity about the overall significance of this neglected element of my equity returns.
This neglect resulted from my perception earlier in the journey that they represented a marginal and abstract factor, which could effectively be assumed away for the sake of simplicity in reporting.
This is not a wholly unfair view, in the sense that income physically received and able to be spent is something definably different in kind than a notional 'pre-payment' credit for future tax costs. Yet, as the saying goes, because the prospect of personal tax is as certain as extinction from this world, in some senses a credit of this kind can be as valuable as a cash distribution.
Restoring the record: trends and drivers of franking credits
To collect a more accurate picture of the trends and drivers of franking credits I relied on a few sources - tax statements, records and the automatic franking credit estimates that the portfolio tracking site Sharesight generates.
The chart below sets out both the level and major different sources of franking credits received over the past eleven years.
[Chart]
From this chart some observations can be made.
The key reason for the rapid growth over the recent decade has been the increased investment holdings in Australian equities. As part of the deliberate rebalancing towards Australian shares across the past two years, these holdings have expanded.
The chart below sets out the total value of Australian shares held over the comparable period.
[Chart]
As an example, at the beginning of this record Australian equities valued at around $276 000 were held. Three years later, the holding were nearly three times larger.
The phase of consistently increasing the Australian equities holding to meet its allocated weighting is largely complete. This means that the period of rapid growth seen in the past few years is unlikely to repeat. Rather, growth will revert to be in proportion to total portfolio growth.
Close to cross-over: the credit card records
One of the most powerful initial motivators to reach financial independence was the concept of the 'cross over' point in Vicki Robins and Joe Dominguez's Your Money or Your Life. This was the point at which monthly expenses are exceeded by investment income.
One of the metrics I have traced is this 'cross-over' point in relation to recorded credit card expenses. And this point is now close indeed.
Expenditures on the credit card have continued their downward trajectory across the past month. The three year rolling average of monthly credit card spending remains at its lowest point over the period of the journey. Distributions on the same basis now meet over 99 per cent of card expenses - with the gap now the equivalent of less than $50 per month.
[Chart]
The period since April of the achievement of a notional and contingent form of financial independence has continued.
The below chart illustrates this temporary state, setting out the the extent to which to which portfolio distributions (red) cover estimated total expenses (green), measured month to month.
[Chart]
An alternative way to view the same data is to examine the degree to which total expenses (i.e. fixed payments not made on credit card added to monthly credit card expenses) are met by distributions received.
An updated version of this is seen in the chart below.
[Chart]
Interestingly, on a trend basis, this currently identifies a 'crossing over' point of trend distributions fully meeting total expenditure from around November 2019. This is not conclusive, however, as the trend curve is sensitive to the unusual COVID-19 related observations of the first half of this year, and could easily shift further downward if normal expense patterns resume.
One issue this analysis raises is what to do with the 'credit card purchases' measure reported below. This measure is designed to provide a stylised benchmark of how close the current portfolio is to a target of generating the income required to meet an annual average credit card expenditure of $71 000.
The problem with this is that continued falling credit card spending means that average credit card spending is lower than that benchmark for all time horizons - measured as three and four year averages, or in fact taken as a whole since 2013. So the set benchmark may, if anything, be understating actual progress compared the graphs and data above by not reflecting changing spending levels.
In the past I have addressed this trend by reducing the benchmark. Over coming months, or perhaps at the end of the year, I will need to revisit both the meaning, and method, of setting this measure.
Progress
Progress against the objective, and the additional measures I have reached is set out below.
Measure Portfolio All Assets
Portfolio objective – $2 180 000 (or $87 000 pa) 82.6% 111.5%
Credit card purchases – $71 000 pa 100.7% 136.0%
Total expenses – $89 000 pa 80.7% 109.0%
Summary
One of the most challenging aspects of closing in on a fixed numerical target for financial independence with risk assets still in place is that the updrafts and downdrafts of market movements can push the goal further away, or surprisingly close.
There have been long period of the journey where the total value of portfolio has barely grown, despite regular investments being made. As an example, the portfolio ended 2018 lower than it started the year. The past six months have been another such period. This can create a sense of treading water.
Yet amidst the economic devastation affecting real lives and businesses, this is an extremely fortunate position to be in. Australia and the globe are set to experience an economic contraction far more severe than the Global Financial Crisis, with a lesser capacity than previously for interest rates to cushion the impact. Despite similar measures being adopted by governments to address the downturn, it is not clear whether these are fit for purpose.
Asset allocation in this environment - of being almost suspended between two realities - is a difficult problem. The history of markets can tell us that just when assets seem most 'broken', they can produce outsized returns. Yet the problem remains that far from being surrounded by broken markets, the proliferation appears to be in bubble-like conditions.
This recent podcast discussion with the founder of Grant's Interest Rate Observer provided a useful historical context to current financial conditions this month. One of the themes of the conversation was 'thinking the unthinkable', such as a return of inflation. Similar, this Hoover Institute video discussion, with a 'Back from the future' premise, provides some entertaining, informed and insightful views on the surprising and contingent nature of what we know to be true.
Some of our little systems may well have had their day, but what could replace them remains obscured to any observer.
The post, links and full charts can be seen here.
submitted by thefiexpl to fiaustralia [link] [comments]

Complete Guide to CoinBase

Coinbase - The reference platform for investing in cryptocurrencies: here is the complete guide.
Coinbase is currently the most famous website or web platform for trading cryptocurrencies. This is not a classic Exchange but a real Broker that allows you to buy, sell and convert many of the main cryptocurrencies - Bitcoin and Ethereum among others - using traditional currency such as the Euro. In this complete guide to Coinbase we will try to explain all its features in detail.

Founded in 2012 by Brian Armstrong and Fred Ehrsam, it was born as a simple online Bitcoin wallet. Over time it has transformed into a cryptocurrency trading site that now reaches over 33 countries.

Being a broker, registering on the site requires all the necessary steps (KYC) to verify the user who holds the account. By signing up via the following secure link you can immediately earn 10 Dollars which will be credited to you by Coinbase.

Complete Guide to CoinBase
Coinbase as well as an intermediary for the purchase and sale of over 15 cryptocurrencies directly in Euro, also provides a real exchange (crypto exchange site) called Coinbase Pro (ex-GDax): The exchange behaves as a normal stock trading site with purchases and sales in real time with obviously much lower commissions when compared with those of classic trading platforms.

What Coinbase Pro offers.
Coinbase can receive crypto from other exchanges and specifically generates more permanent online wallets that will always remain at your disposal. To all intents and purposes, Coinbase's main task is to act as an archive for its cryptocurrencies for all those who do not want to try their hand at decentralized wallets.

The transfer between Coinbase and Coinbase Pro, for example, will be quick and free (but this does not apply to other exchanges) thus allowing all those who wish to trade between the main cryptocurrencies to be able to avoid expensive passages on other exchanges. Coinbase Pro allows you to exchange a range of cryptocurrencies with each other higher than that of its brother site but at a much lower cost. While on Coinbase the exchange between cryptocurrencies involves the payment of a maximum commission of 2%, on Coinbase Pro the rates fluctuate between 0.15 and 0.25%. Values ​​that will tend to decrease as the volumes traded increase.

The Coinbase account will also allow you to operate on Coinbase Pro. However, an additional request for user verification via Webcam may occur. All these levels of security are obviously necessary to protect customers and comply with the stringent regulations of the various countries in which the company operates.

Thanks to the guide, let's see what the interface shows us.
In this complete guide to Coinbase we also want to clarify the visual aspect. Once inside the site you will find yourself in the Dashboard or Home Page which will show from top to bottom the value of your Portfolio with its historical graph, the list of cryptocurrencies that you decide to keep under observation, a box that shows the 5 heaviest cryptocurrencies in your Portfolio (a pie chart is also available) and a second box with the latest transactions.

In the center of the page there is also the link to register with Coinbase Earn. By subscribing to the waiting list, you will have the opportunity to receive an invitation that will make you earn additional cryptocurrencies simply by following some very short video courses lasting a few minutes.

In addition to the Home Page, there is the Prices page with the listing of all the cryptocurrencies available on Coinbase and a very long list of those not available. By selecting the star on the right you can decide which ones to always keep in the foreground on the home page. Clicking on one of them will open a new screen that will offer a large amount of technical and historical information on the crypto in question as well as a fair number of constantly updated news.
Your funds are well organized.

The Portfolio page will report the amount of the balance in Euro of all the cryptocurrencies deposited on Coinbase. Here you can send and receive crypto to external wallets.
By clicking on Overview you will be sent back to the Prices page just described.
The Safe item, on the other hand, allows you to set aside cryptocurrency at a higher level of security.

Finally, a brief description of the "Make Transactions" item visible at the top right and present in almost all Coinbase pages. By clicking on it in any position you find it on the site, a small screen will open with the items "Buy, Sell, Convert". To purchase, you will first need to associate a payment method to your account. The Credit Card would be the most immediate choice due to its rapidity in crediting if it were not for the high commissions required by Coinbase. We therefore recommend that you be patient and use a normal Sepa standard bank transfer to credit the funds.

Selling your cryptocurrencies on Coinbase, depositing them in your Euro account, is simple and immediate as well as foolproof thanks to the Preview that will always be shown before confirming the transaction. This will involve the payment of a commission between 0.99 and 2.99 Dollars.
Rather high fees due to its wallet nature. For those who love trading, we obviously recommend moving to the Pro version.

The site offers a complete and comprehensive technical support page: https://support.coinbase.com/

We conclude this complete guide to Coinbase with a note on the mobile versions. There are two versions of for smartphones: a standard one called Coinbase Bitcoin Wallet and a personal one called Coinbase Wallet.
This second app allows you to transfer your cryptocurrencies from Coinbase Standard to an encrypted wallet on your smartphone (Coinbase Wallet).
The substantial difference is the following: Coinbase Standard is an online wallet and therefore subject to the remote risk of an external cyber attack while Coinbase Wallet stores the encryption key locally on the phone.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.coinbase.android

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.toshi

We remind trading enthusiasts of the availability on our blog of the article dedicated to Exodus Wallet.


If you liked this article and would like to contribute with a donation:

Bitcoin: 1Ld9b165ZYHZcY9eUQmL9UjwzcphRE5S8Z
Ethereum: 0x8D7E456A11f4D9bB9e6683A5ac52e7DB79DBbEE7
Litecoin: LamSRc1jmwgx5xwDgzZNoXYd6ENczUZViK
Stellar: GBLDIRIQWRZCN5IXPIKYFQOE46OG2SI7AFVWFSLAHK52MVYDGVJ6IXGI
Ripple: rUb8v4wbGWYrtXzUpj7TxCFfUWgfvym9xf

By: cryptoall.it Telegram Channel: t.me/giulo75 Netbox Browser: https://netbox.global/PZn5A

https://www.coinbase.com/join/rosa_fj
https://coinbase.com/earn/eos/invite/6r5m2fwn
https://coinbase.com/earn/oxt/invite/tkdjy946
submitted by Giulo75 to u/Giulo75 [link] [comments]

How To Exchange Australian Dollar To PHP

It is not always easy to send money abroad. Use this site to convert the Australian dollar to PHP and transfer funds anywhere in the world. As it has become the demand of our customers to know how to exchange Australian dollar to PHP, we provide high-performance services to give them a facility to exchange prices between any two currencies easily. Bitcoins xchanger is one of the platforms that is giving complete security and affordable services, making it easy to exchange AUD to PHP with the most efficient converters. Get the conversion rates of any currency that you want with the recent market exchange rates.

Convert AUD To PHP Currency

Convert AUD to PHP currency with the Bitcoins xchanger site that is considered the best exchange platform among the customers worldwide. Get also historical data and charts for AUD to php that can help you in knowing the highest conversion rates over a historical period. It is easy to determine the live forecast for Australian Dollar to Philippine peso using this site. Improve your knowledge by getting information about is it a good time to sell or buy AUD. Use the best tools to get the maximum price of AUD to php in the market and exchange services to make the transactions easy.

How To Transfer Australian Dollar To Peso

If you are about to transfer the Australian dollar to peso, don’t forget to consider the platform namely Bitcoins xchanger, where you are able to get the conversion price more than your assumption. Get to know how to transfer Australian dollar to peso with the best company’s services online to make trade wonderful and profitable. This platform ensures you of its high quality and performance factors that are the requirements of our customers. Want to get the latest AUD to peso graphs? We have a goal to make the way towards the easiest currency conversion of the Australian dollar to the peso and vice versa.

Exchange Australian Dollar To Philippine Peso

People want to know about the worth of conversion of the Australian dollar to Philippine peso. Yes, the exchange of the Australian dollar with Philippine peso can become profitable because we are offering high rates in the market plus giving services that can be used to exchange Australian dollar to Philippine peso easily. This platform is the most consistent and reliable to offer a number of good functionalities for the users for conversion purposes. Are you worried about transaction charges? We don’t charge as high as other platforms do. This makes our currency conversion system scam-free to allow the customers to use it for free without any difficulty.

Where To Buy Eth To AUD

Do you want to get the guide about where to buy Eth to AUD or how to buy Ethereum in Australia? With rising market capitalization, Ethereum has reserved a seat alongside Bitcoins and it the second biggest crypto coin that most people want to get in their wallet to get high money. This site is the best of all the others if you want to use the affordable services to convert Ethereum to the Australian Dollar. To see proof, you can compare our charges with other platforms as well. Get services to deposit and buy Eth securely with the latest crypto market.

Eth To AUD Bank Wire Transfer

It is very easy to get a step-by-step guide to know about Eth to AUD bank wire transfer. Are you still waiting for better Ethereum conversion rates? Set an alert and we will be responsible to tell you about the highest Eth rates. Don’t miss the latest news and enjoy the best bank and other transfer services with this site. Don’t believe a platform that is basically a scam and adds hidden markups to their conversion rates. In this way without your knowledge, it can charge you more. These charges become double if there is involved a separate fee. Bitcoinxchanger never hides charges and always intends to show real rates.
submitted by hagvu007 to u/hagvu007 [link] [comments]

A Breakdown of the 4 Leading Financial Cryptocurrencies

This post is written by a friend of mine who works in the financial services industry. I’m posting it for him because he doesn’t have a Reddit account:
I work in the financial services industry myself, and I decided it might be beneficial to provide my opinion on some of the leading financial cryptos based off their website/white papers/news I've read. Today I'll be covering the 4 leading financial cryptos in my opinion: XRP, REQ, OMG, XLM.
Market Cap & Ranking Graph
Ripple (XRP)
  1. Description: Cross border transactions between banks and payment providers
  2. Slogan: “Enterprise blockchain solutions for global payments”
  3. Potential Market Size: $155 trillion/year cross border transactions (McKinsey Global Payments Industry Study)
  4. Primary Focus: Ripple has had huge success lately given its focus on satisfying and providing cross-border payment services for big banks, who have driven up the price of Ripple. It currently has 100+ customers and has the most enterprise traction of the four coins. One big risk is the 55 billiion XRP put into an escrow out of a max 100 billion XRP. Once these escrows expire, there is always the risk of the company flooding the market with XRP. That being said, while Ripple is much further ahead than the other 3 coins, I fear that banks will license Ripple’s blockchain that is centrally governed without intended usage of their token.
  5. Architecture: Built on Ripple (payment protocol)
  6. Market Cap: ~$77B
Request Network (REQ)
  1. Description: A decentralized network for payment requests
  2. Slogan: “The Future of Commerce”
  3. Potential Market Size: $1,825 trillion/year on the SWIFT network that Request Network can capture on its platform (Extrapolated using daily historicals from U.S. Dept. of Treasury)
  4. Primary Focus: Request Network, also known as “Paypal 2.0” is a Y-Combinator-backed project created by the founders of Moneytis. Request Network has the biggest opportunity of the four. They are building out the infrastructure for payments and accounting/auditing between both businesses and consumers. Request will be more secure (blockchain tech), intelligent (smart contracts and IoT) and universal (supports all currencies both Fiat and cryptocurrencies) than Paypal. A key differentiator of Request is its usage of “token burning” during transactions, which intrinsically increases the value of the remaining REQ coins. In addition, Request is heavily focused on reputation management and helping accountants and auditors easily review transactions at extremely low costs. My concern here is that they are the earliest stage project of the four and also the most ambitious project, soon to be released on Mainnet. That being said, their team has executed ahead of planned timelines and I believe they seem to have the right expertise to get the job done.
  5. Architecture: Built on Ethereum
  6. Market Cap: ~$480M (Market cap is ~1/194 the size of Paypal at current valuation)
  7. Paypal Market Cap for comparison: ~$97B
OmiseGo (OMG)
  1. Description: Advanced e-wallet and payment platform
  2. Slogan: “Unbank the Banked with Ethereum.”
  3. Potential Market Size: N/A (market not clearly defined)
  4. Primary Focus: Many people around the world can’t get a credit card or pay for items online because geographically there are no banks around or their credit score is too low to receive financial services. OmiseGo looks to change that by enabling everyone in especially in developing countries to create an e-wallet that enables this underserved population the ability to cash in and cash out without a bank account at low costs. They have an enormous presence in Asia, and their vision is to look like the bank of the future. My concerns here are adoption outside of the Asian countries given the difficulty of scaling across geographies as well as a tough name to pronounce resulting in the necessity for a potential re-branding, but a very solid project with a fair amount of adoption nevertheless.
  5. Architecture: Built on Ethereum
  6. Market Cap: ~$2.5B
OmiseGo Edit:
Some additional points to note are its recent acquisition of Paysbuy (large payment service provider in Thailand) and partnerships with McDonald's Thailand and Alipay. It's often thought REQ and OMG are quite similar which they are, but their focus is different. OMG is firstly focused on banking and e-wallet services, while REQ is currently more focused on the actual payment request process and the accounting behind it, which you'll realize are quite different despite both moving in the same direction.
Stellar (XLM)
  1. Description: Cross border currency transfers between developing countries
  2. Slogan: “Move Money Across Borders Quickly, Reliably, And For Fractions Of A Penny”
  3. Potential Market Size: N/A (market not clearly defined)
  4. Primary Focus: Stellar competes directly with Ripple at different ends of the market. Stellar is a great project focused on providing low-cost financial services for lower classed individuals, whereas Ripple is focused on profit generation and founded by ex-bankers. Stellar differentiates itself through solutions targeted around micropayments, mobile banking and services for the underbanked (similar to OmiseGo). The thing I like about Stellar is that structurally it is set-up as a non-profit and something established for the people to easily exchange money between one another. I think the market is large enough to support multiple competitors, but it is important to note that they compete with Ripple in cross-border transactions and OmiseGo in services to the underbanked.
  5. Architecture: Built on Stellar (payment network)
  6. Market Cap: ~$11.7B
Stellar Edit:
Expanding on Stellar based off comments, let's clarify that Stellar is indeed founded by one of the co-founders of Ripple, which makes them somewhat similar. But wanted to key in on a few more points that make XLM unique: no mining with circulating supply of 100 billion lumens from the start @ 1% inflation rate and a recent partnership with IBM for cross-border payments as a bridge currency. Finally it's important to look at their Stellar Development Foundation, which controls the distribution of Lumens. Distribution is split as follows: 50% through Direct Sign-up Program, 25% through Partnership Program, 20% through Bitcoin program and 5% held by the foundation to support operations. Note this effect is huge because they can also unleash a large amount of lumens, but they do have a more defined mandate for dilution than Ripple.
Read more about it here: https://www.stellar.org/about/mandate/
Disclaimer and Final Words:
I am a holder of all four coins, but from a returns standpoint, I am most bullish on Request Network given it has the largest market size, smallest market cap and an incredible team. But from a risk standpoint, Ripple is the lowest risk coin to hold given its widespread adoption and use across numerous banks that are displayed on their website. Honorable mention for both Stellar and OmiseGo, which are superb projects that will still succeed. Remember that the financial market is extremely deep with trillions of dollars in transactions moved every day, so there is ample room for all four of these coins to find their niche whether it is in a certain region of the world or in certain product types (i.e. micropayments). All in all, you can’t go wrong holding a portfolio of these four coins because each one of these cryptocurrencies are going to kill it in 2018!
 
Sources:
  1. https://ripple.com/
  2. https://omisego.network/
  3. https://request.network/#/
  4. https://www.stellar.org/
  5. https://coinmarketcap.com/
submitted by brianjly to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Elaborating on Datadash's 50k BTC Prediction: Why We Endorse the Call

As originally published via CoinLive
I am the Co-Founder at CoinLive. Prior to founding Coinlive.io, my area of expertise was inter-market analysis. I came across Datadash 50k BTC prediction this week, and I must take my hats off to what I believe is an excellent interpretation of the inter-connectivity of various markets.
At your own convenience, you can find a sample of Intermarket analysis I've written in the past before immersing myself into cryptos full-time.
Gold inter-market: 'Out of sync' with VIX, takes lead from USD/JPY
USD/JPY inter-market: Watch divergence US-Japan yield spread
EUUSD intermarket: US yields collapse amid supply environment
Inter-market analysis: Risk back in vogue, but for how long?
USD/JPY intermarket: Bulls need higher adj in 10-y US-JP spread
The purpose of this article is to dive deeper into the factors Datadash presents in his video and how they can help us draw certain conclusions about the potential flows of capital into crypto markets and the need that will exist for a BTC ETF.
Before I do so, as a brief explainer, let's touch on what exactly Intermarket analysis refers to:
Intermarket analysis is the global interconnectivity between equities, bonds, currencies, commodities, and any other asset class; Global markets are an ever-evolving discounting and constant valuation mechanism and by studying their interconnectivity, we are much better positioned to explain and elaborate on why certain moves occur, future directions and gain insights on potential misalignments that the market may not have picked up on yet or might be ignoring/manipulating.
While such interconnectivity has proven to be quite limiting when it comes to the value one can extract from analyzing traditional financial assets and the crypto market, Datadash has eloquently been able to build a hypothesis, which as an Intermarket analyst, I consider very valid, and that matches up my own views. Nicolas Merten constructs a scenario which leads him to believe that a Bitcoin ETF is coming. Let's explore this hypothesis.
I will attempt to summarize and provide further clarity on why the current events in traditional asset classes, as described by Datadash, will inevitably result in a Bitcoin ETF. Make no mistake, Datadash's call for Bitcoin at 50k by the end of 2018 will be well justified once a BTC ETF is approved. While the timing is the most challenging part t get right, the end result won't vary.
If one wishes to learn more about my personal views on why a BTC ETF is such a big deal, I encourage you to read my article from late March this year.
Don't Be Misled by Low Liquidity/Volume - Fundamentals Never Stronger
The first point Nicholas Merten makes is that despite depressed volume levels, the fundamentals are very sound. That, I must say, is a point I couldn't agree more. In fact, I recently wrote an article titled The Paradox: Bitcoin Keeps Selling as Intrinsic Value Set to Explode where I state "the latest developments in Bitcoin's technology makes it paradoxically an ever increasingly interesting investment proposition the cheaper it gets."
However, no article better defines where we stand in terms of fundamentals than the one I wrote back on May 15th titled Find Out Why Institutions Will Flood the Bitcoin Market, where I look at the ever-growing list of evidence that shows why a new type of investors, the institutional ones, looks set to enter the market in mass.
Nicholas believes that based on the supply of Bitcoin, the market capitalization can reach about $800b. He makes a case that with the fundamentals in bitcoin much stronger, it wouldn't be that hard to envision the market cap more than double from its most recent all-time high of more than $300b.
Interest Rates Set to Rise Further
First of all, one of the most immediate implications of higher rates is the increased difficulty to bear the costs by borrowers, which leads Nicholas to believe that banks the likes of Deutsche Bank will face a tough environment going forward. The CEO of the giant German lender has actually warned that second-quarter results would reflect a “revenue environment [that] remains challenging."
Nicholas refers to the historical chart of Eurodollar LIBOR rates as illustrated below to strengthen the case that interest rates are set to follow an upward trajectory in the years to come as Central Banks continue to normalize monetary policies after a decade since the global financial crisis. I'd say, that is a correct assumption, although one must take into account the Italian crisis to be aware that a delay in higher European rates is a real possibility now.
![](https://coinlive.io/ckeditor_assets/pictures/947/content_2018-05-30_1100.png)
Let's look at the following combinations: Fed Fund Rate Contract (green), German 2-year bond yields (black) and Italy's 10-year bond yield (blue) to help us clarify what's the outlook for interest rates both in Europe and the United States in the foreseeable future. The chart suggests that while the Federal Reserve remains on track to keep increasing interest rates at a gradual pace, there has been a sudden change in the outlook for European rates in the short-end of the curve.
While the European Central Bank is no longer endorsing proactive policies as part of its long-standing QE narrative, President Mario Draghi is still not ready to communicate an exit strategy to its unconventional stimulus program due to protectionism threats in the euro-area, with Italy the latest nightmare episode.
Until such major step is taken in the form of a formal QE conclusion, interest rates in the European Union will remain depressed; the latest drastic spike in Italy's benchmark bond yield to default levels is pre-emptive of lower rates for longer, an environment that on one hand may benefit the likes of Deutsche Bank on lower borrowing costs, but on the other hand, sets in motion a bigger headache as risk aversion is set to dominate financial markets, which leads to worse financial consequences such as loss of confidence and hence in equity valuations.
![](https://coinlive.io/ckeditor_assets/pictures/948/content_2018-05-30_1113.png)
Deutsche Bank - End of the Road?
Nicholas argues that as part of the re-restructuring process in Deutsche Bank, they will be facing a much more challenging environment as lending becomes more difficult on higher interest rates. At CoinLive, we still believe this to be a logical scenario to expect, even if a delay happens as the ECB tries to deal with the Italian political crisis which once again raises the question of whether or not Italy should be part of the EU. Reference to an article by Zerohedge is given, where it states:
"One day after the WSJ reported that the biggest German bank is set to "decimate" its workforce, firing 10,000 workers or one in ten, this morning Deutsche Bank confirmed plans to cut thousands of jobs as part of new CEO Christian Sewing's restructuring and cost-cutting effort. The German bank said its headcount would fall “well below” 90,000, from just over 97,000. But the biggest gut punch to employee morale is that the bank would reduce headcount in its equities sales and trading business by about 25%."
There is an undeniably ongoing phenomenon of a migration in job positions from traditional financial markets into blockchain, which as we have reported in the past, it appears to be a logical and rational step to be taken, especially in light of the new revenue streams the blockchain sector has to offer. Proof of that is the fact that Binance, a crypto exchange with around 200 employees and less than 1 year of operations has overcome Deutsche Bank, in total profits. What this communicates is that the opportunities to grow an institution’s revenue stream are formidable once they decide to integrate cryptocurrencies into their business models.
One can find an illustration of Deutsche Bank's free-fall in prices below:
![](https://coinlive.io/ckeditor_assets/pictures/946/content_2018-05-30_1052.png)
Nicholas takes notes of a chart in which one can clearly notice a worrying trend for Italian debt. "Just about every other major investor type has become a net seller (to the ECB) or a non-buyer of BTPs over the last couple of years. Said differently, for well over a year, the only marginal buyer of Italian bonds has been the ECB!", the team of Economists at Citi explained. One can find the article via ZeroHedge here.
![](https://coinlive.io/ckeditor_assets/pictures/953/content_2018-05-30_1451.png)
Equities & Housing to Suffer the Consequences
Nicholas notes that trillions of dollars need to exit these artificially-inflated equity markets. He even mentions a legendary investor such as George Soros, who has recently warned that the world could be on the brink of another devastating financial crisis, on lingering debt concerns in Europe and a strengthening US dollar, as a destabilizing factor for both the US's emerging- and developed-market rivals.
Ray Dalio, another legend in the investing world and Founder of Bridgewater Associates, the world’s largest hedge fund, "has ramped up its short positions in European equities in recent weeks, bringing their total value to an estimated $22 billion", MarketWatch reports.
Nicholas extracts a chart by John Del Vecchio at lmtr.com where it illustrates the ratio between stocks and commodities at the lowest in over 50 years.
As the author states:
"I like to look for extremes in the markets. Extremes often pinpoint areas where returns can be higher and risk lower than in other time periods. Take the relationship between commodities and stocks. The chart below shows that commodities haven not been cheaper than stocks in a generation. We often hear this time it is different” to justify what’s going on in the world. But, one thing that never changes is human nature. People push markets to extremes. Then they revert. "
![](https://coinlive.io/ckeditor_assets/pictures/954/content_2018-05-30_1459.png)
Bitcoin ETF the Holy Grail for a Cyclical Multi-Year Bull Run
It is precisely from this last chart above that leads Nicholas to believe we are on the verge of a resurgence in commodity prices. Not only that but amid the need of all this capital to exit stocks and to a certain extent risky bonds (Italian), a new commodity-based digital currency ETF based on Bitcoin will emerge in 2018.
The author of Datadash highlights the consideration to launching a Bitcoin ETF by the SEC. At CoinLive, our reporting of the subject can be found below:
"Back in April, it was reported that the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has put back on the table two Bitcoin ETF proposals, according to public documents. The agency is under formal proceedings to approve a rule change that would allow NYSE Arca to list two exchange-traded funds (ETFs) proposed by fund provider ProShares. The introduction of an ETF would make Bitcoin available to a much wider share of market participants, with the ability to directly buy the asset at the click of a button, essentially simplifying the current complexity that involves having to deal with all the cumbersome steps currently in place."
Nicholas refers to the support the Bitcoin ETF has been receiving by the Cboe president Chris Concannon, which is a major positive development. CoinLive reported on the story back in late March, noting that "a Bitcoin ETF will without a doubt open the floodgates to an enormous tsunami of fresh capital entering the space, which based on the latest hints by Concannon, the willingness to keep pushing for it remains unabated as the evolution of digital assets keeps its course."
It has been for quite some time CoinLive's conviction, now supported by no other than Nicholas Merten from Datadash, that over the next 6 months, markets will start factoring in the event of the year, that is, the approval of a Bitcoin ETF that will serve as a alternative vehicle to accommodate the massive flows of capital leaving some of the traditional asset classes. As Nicholas suggests, the SEC will have little choice but to provide alternative investments.
Bitcoin as a Hedge to Lower Portfolios' Volatility
Last but not least, crypto assets such as Bitcoin and the likes have an almost non-existent correlation to other traditional assets such as stocks, bonds, and commodities, which makes for a very attractive and broadly-applicable diversification strategy for the professional money as it reduces one’s portfolio volatility. The moment a Bitcoin ETF is confirmed, expect the non-correlation element of Bitcoin as a major driving force to attract further capital.
Anyone Can Be Wrong Datadash, But You Won't be Wrong Alone
Having analyzed the hypothesis by Nicholas Merten, at CoinLive we believe that the conclusion reached, that is, the creation of a Bitcoin ETF that will provide shelter to a tsunami of capital motivated by the diversification and store of value appeal of Bitcoin, is the next logical step. As per the timing of it, we also anticipate, as Nicholas notes, that it will most likely be subject to the price action in traditional assets. Should equities and credit markets hold steady, it may result in a potential delay, whereas disruption in the capital market may see the need for a BTC ETF accelerate. Either scenario, we will conclude with a quote we wrote back in March.
"It appears as though an ETF on Bitcoin is moving from a state of "If" to "When."
Datadash is certainly not alone on his 50k call. BitMEX CEO Arthur Hayes appears to think along the same line.
On behalf of the CoinLive Team, we want to thank Nicholas Merten at Datadash for such enlightening insights.
submitted by Ivo333 to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Original: Reinstate Satoshi's original 32MB max blocksize. If actual blocks grow 54% per year (and price grows 1.54^2 = 2.37x per year - Metcalfe's Law), then in 8 years we'd have 32MB blocks, 100 txns/sec, 1 BTC = 1 million USD - 100% on-chain P2P cash, without SegWit/Lightning or Unlimited

TL;DR
Details
(1) The current observed rates of increase in available network bandwidth (which went up 70% last year) should easily be able to support actual blocksizes increasing at the modest, slightly lower rate of only 54% per year.
Recent data shows that the "provisioned bandwidth" actually available on the Bitcoin network increased 70% in the past year.
If this 70% yearly increase in available bandwidth continues for the next 8 years, then actual blocksizes could easily increase at the slightly lower rate of 54% per year.
This would mean that in 8 years, actual blocksizes would be quite reasonable at about 1.548 = 32MB:
Hacking, Distributed/State of the Bitcoin Network: "In other words, the provisioned bandwidth of a typical full node is now 1.7X of what it was in 2016. The network overall is 70% faster compared to last year."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5u85im/hacking_distributedstate_of_the_bitcoin_network/
http://hackingdistributed.com/2017/02/15/state-of-the-bitcoin-network/
Reinstating Satoshi's original 32MB "max blocksize" for the next 8 years or so would effectively be similar to the 1MB "max blocksize" which Bitcoin used for the previous 8 years: simply a "ceiling" which doesn't really get in the way, while preventing any "unreasonably" large blocks from being produced.
As we know, for most of the past 8 years, actual blocksizes have always been far below the "max blocksize" of 1MB. This is because miners have always set their own blocksize (below the official "max blocksize") - in order to maximize their profits, while avoiding "orphan" blocks.
This setting of blocksizes on the part of miners would simply continue "as-is" if we reinstated Satoshi's original 32MB "max blocksize" - with actual blocksizes continuing to grow gradually (still far below the 32MB "max blocksize" ceilng), and without introducing any new (risky, untested) "game theory" or economics - avoiding lots of worries and controversies, and bringing the community together around "Bitcoin Original".
So, simply reinstating Satoshi's original 32MB "max blocksize" would have many advantages:
  • It would keep fees low (so users would be happy);
  • It would support much higher prices (so miners would be happy) - as explained in section (2) below;
  • It would avoid the need for any any possibly controversial changes such as:
    • SegWit/Lightning (the hack of making all UTXOs "anyone-can-spend" necessitated by Blockstream's insistence on using a selfish and dangerous "soft fork", the centrally planned and questionable, arbitrary discount of 1-versus-4 for certain transactions); and
    • Bitcon Unlimited (the newly introduced parameters for Excessive Block "EB" / Acceptance Depth "AD").
(2) Bitcoin blocksize growth of 54% per year would correlate (under Metcalfe's Law) to Bitcoin price growth of around 1.542 = 2.37x per year - or 2.378 = 1000x higher price - ie 1 BTC = 1 million USDollars after 8 years.
The observed, empirical data suggests that Bitcoin does indeed obey "Metcalfe's Law" - which states that the value of a network is roughly proportional to the square of the number of transactions.
In other words, Bitcoin price has corresponded to the square of Bitcoin transactions (which is basically the same thing as the blocksize) for most of the past 8 years.
Historical footnote:
Bitcoin price started to dip slightly below Metcalfe's Law since late 2014 - when the privately held, central-banker-funded off-chain scaling company Blockstream was founded by (now) CEO Adam Back u/adam3us and CTO Greg Maxwell - two people who have historically demonstrated an extremely poor understanding of the economics of Bitcoin, leading to a very polarizing effect on the community.
Since that time, Blockstream launched a massive propaganda campaign, funded by $76 million in fiat from central bankers who would go bankrupt if Bitcoin succeeded, and exploiting censorship on r\bitcoin, attacking the on-chain scaling which Satoshi originally planned for Bitcoin.
Legend states that Einstein once said that the tragedy of humanity is that we don't understand exponential growth.
A lot of people might think that it's crazy to claim that 1 bitcoin could actually be worth 1 million dollars in just 8 years.
But a Bitcoin price of 1 million dollars would actually require "only" a 1000x increase in 8 years. Of course, that still might sound crazy to some people.
But let's break it down by year.
What we want to calculate is the "8th root" of 1000 - or 10001/8. That will give us the desired "annual growth rate" that we need, in order for the price to increase by 1000x after a total of 8 years.
If "you do the math" - which you can easily perform with a calculator or with Excel - you'll see that:
  • 54% annual actual blocksize growth for 8 years would give 1.548 = 1.54 * 1.54 * 1.54 * 1.54 * 1.54 * 1.54 * 1.54 * 1.54 = 32MB blocksize after 8 years
  • Metcalfe's Law (where Bitcoin price corresponds to the square of Bitcoin transactions or volume / blocksize) would give 1.542 = 2.37 - ie, 54% bigger blocks (higher volume or more transaction) each year could support about 2.37 higher price each year.
  • 2.37x annual price growth for 8 years would be 2.378 = 2.37 * 2.37 * 2.37 * 2.37 * 2.37 * 2.37 * 2.37 * 2.37 = 1000 - giving a price of 1 BTC = 1 million USDollars if the price increases an average of 2.37x per year for 8 years, starting from 1 BTC = 1000 USD now.
So, even though initially it might seem crazy to think that we could get to 1 BTC = 1 million USDollars in 8 years, it's actually not that far-fetched at all - based on:
  • some simple math,
  • the observed available bandwidth (already increasing at 70% per year), and
  • the increasing fragility and failures of many "legacy" debt-backed national fiat currencies and payment systems.
Does Metcalfe's Law hold for Bitcoin?
The past 8 years of data suggest that Metcalfe's Law really does hold for Bitcoin - you can check out some of the graphs here:
https://imgur.com/jLnrOuK
https://i.redd.it/kvjwzcuce3ay.png
https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*22ix0l4oBDJ3agoLzVtUgQ.gif
(3) Satoshi's original 32MB "max blocksize" would provide an ultra-simple, ultra-safe, non-controversial approach which perhaps everyone could agree on: Bitcoin's original promise of "p2p electronic cash", 100% on-chain, eventually worth 1 BTC = 1 million dollars.
This could all be done using only the whitepaper - eg, no need for possibly "controversial" changes like SegWit/Lightning, Bitcoin Unlimited, etc.
As we know, the Bitcoin community has been fighting a lot lately - mainly about various controversial scaling proposals.
Some people are worried about SegWit, because:
  • It's actually not much of a scaling proposal - it would only give 1.7MB blocks, and only if everyone adopts it, and based on some fancy, questionable blocksize or new "block weight" accounting;
  • It would be implemented as an overly complicated and anti-democratic "soft" fork - depriving people of their right to vote via a much simpler and safer "hard" fork, and adding massive and unnecessary "technical debt" to Bitcoin's codebase (for example, dangerously making all UTXOs "anyone-can-spend", making future upgrades much more difficult - but giving long-term "job security" to Core/Blockstream devs);
  • It would require rewriting (and testing!) thousands of lines of code for existing wallets, exchanges and businesses;
  • It would introduce an arbitrary 1-to-4 "discount" favoring some kinds of transactions over others.
And some people are worried about Lightning, because:
  • There is no decentralized (p2p) routing in Lightning, so Lightning would be a terrible step backwards to the "bad old days" of centralized, censorable hubs or "crypto banks";
  • Your funds "locked" in a Lightning channel could be stolen if you don't constantly monitor them;
  • Lighting would steal fees from miners, and make on-chain p2p transactions prohibitively expensive, basically destroying Satoshi's p2p network, and turning it into SWIFT.
And some people are worried about Bitcoin Unlimited, because:
  • Bitcoin Unlimited extends the notion of Nakamoto Consensus to the blocksize itself, introducing the new parameters EB (Excess Blocksize) and AD (Acceptance Depth);
  • Bitcoin Unlimited has a new, smaller dev team.
(Note: Out of all the current scaling proposals available, I support Bitcoin Unlimited - because its extension of Nakamoto Consensus to include the blocksize has been shown to work, and because Bitcoin Unlimited is actually already coded and running on about 25% of the network.)
It is normal for reasonable people to have the above "concerns"!
But what if we could get to 1 BTC = 1 million USDollars - without introducing any controversial new changes or discounts or consensus rules or game theory?
What if we could get to 1 BTC = 1 million USDollars using just the whitepaper itself - by simply reinstating Satoshi's original 32MB "max blocksize"?
(4) We can easily reach "million-dollar bitcoin" by gradually and safely growing blocks to 32MB - Satoshi's original "max blocksize" - without changing anything else in the system!
If we simply reinstate "Bitcoin Original" (Satoshi's original 32MB blocksize), then we could avoid all the above "controversial" changes to Bitcoin - and the following 8-year scenario would be quite realistic:
  • Actual blocksizes growing modestly at 54% per year - well within the 70% increase in available "provisioned bandwidth" which we actually happened last year
  • This would give us a reasonable, totally feasible blocksize of 1.548 = 32MB ... after 8 years.
  • Bitcoin price growing at 2.37x per year, or a total increase of 2.378 = 1000x over the next 8 years - which is similar to what happened during the previous 8 years, when the price went from under 1 USDollars to over 1000 USDollars.
  • This would give us a possible Bitcoin price of 1 BTC = 1 million USDollars after 8 years.
  • There would still be plenty of decentralization - plenty of fully-validating nodes and mining nodes), because:
    • The Cornell study showed that 90% of nodes could already handle 4MB blocks - and that was several years ago (so we could already handle blocks even bigger than 4MB now).
    • 70% yearly increase in available bandwidth, combined with a mere 54% yearly increase in used bandwidth (plus new "block compression" technologies such as XThin and Compact Blocks) mean that nearly all existing nodes could easily handle 32MB blocks after 8 years; and
    • The "economic incentives" to run a node would be strong if the price were steadily rising to 1 BTC = 1 million USDollars
    • This would give a total market cap of 20 trillion USDollars after about 8 years - comparable to the total "money" in the world which some estimates put at around 82 trillion USDollars.
So maybe we should consider the idea of reinstating Satoshi's Original Bitcoin with its 32MB blocksize - using just the whitepaper and avoiding controversial changes - so we could re-unite the community to get to "million-dollar bitcoin" (and 20 trillion dollar market cap) in as little as 8 years.
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

People are starting to realize how toxic Gregory Maxwell is to Bitcoin, saying there are plenty of other coders who could do crypto and networking, and "he drives away more talent than he can attract." Plus, he has a 10-year record of damaging open-source projects, going back to Wikipedia in 2006.

https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/d3f6ukl
Wow.
On many occasions, I have publicly stated my respect for Greg's cryptography and networking coding skills and I have publicly given him credit where credit was due.
But now I'm starting to agree with people who say that there are plenty of other talented devs who could also provide those same coding skills as well - and that Greg's destructive, arrogant and anti-social behavior is actually driving away more talented devs than he can attract.
Check out these quotes about Greg from other Bitcoin users below:
I honestly don't think he is capable of being a worthy contributor.
He is arrogant to the extreme, destructive/disruptive to social circles and as an extension decision-making (as he must ALWAYS be right), and thus incapable of being any kind of valuable contributor.
He has a very solid track record spanning years, and across projects (his abhorrent behaviour when he was a Wikipedia contributor) that demonstrate he is not good for much other than menial single-user projects.
I simply do not trust him with anything unless he were overseen by someone that knows what he is like and can veto his decisions at a moment's notice.
At this stage I'd take 5 mediocre but personable cryptographers over Greg every day of the week, as I know they can work together, build strong and respectable working relationships, admit when they're wrong (or fuck up), and point out each others' mistakes without being a cunt about it.
Greg is very, VERY bad for Bitcoin.
He's had over a decade to mature, and it simply hasn't happened, he's fucking done in my books. No more twentieth chance for him.
~ ferretinjapan
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/d3fih4z
His coding skills are absolutely not that rare.
I have hired a dozen people who could code circles around him, and have proven it in their ability to code for millions of dollars.
His lack of comprehension on basic logic, however, is a rare skill.
~ lifeboatz
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/d3fr70q
Cryptography has been figured out by someone else. BTC doesn't need much new in that regard.
ECDSA is a known digital signature algo, and nullc isn't making changes to it.
Even if BTC makes use of another DSA, someone else will write the libs.
~ one_line_commenter
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/d3fq87f
As evidenced by the Wikipedia episode, his modus operandi is to become highly valuable, get in a position of power, undertake autocratic actions and then everyone is in a dilemma - they don't like what he is doing, but they worry about losing his "valuable contributions" (sound familiar?).
It is weak to let concerns over losing his "skills" prevent the project from showing him the door.
He should go.
Why should we risk his behavior with our or other people's money and one of the greatest innovations in the last 50 years?
There is probably some other project out there in the world where he can contribute his skills to.
As it is becoming very obvious - there are many talented developers and innovations going on in altcoins etc. A lot of this talent is simply lost to Bitcoin because of him.
It is easy to see what we might be losing by him going.
It is not as obvious what we might be gaining - but it could be truly great.
~ papabitcoin
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/d3flhj3
When Maxwell did a Satoshi-like disappearance late 2015, the dev mailing list sparked into life with a lot of polite, constructive, and free-thinking discussion.
Tragically, the Maxwell vanishing act only lasted a month or so, and the clammy Shadow of Darkness fell once more on the mailing list and Core Dev.
I don't believe that he can contribute without driving away more development than he can attract.
~ solex1
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/d3fq8ma
I've seen it many times - 1 person can affect a whole culture.
When they are gone it is suddenly like everyone can breathe again.
~ papabitcoin
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/d3fs2hv
If I was maintainer of bitcoin I would ask Greg to go away and leave for good.
I acknowledge the crypto wizardness of Greg, but it seems to be the kind of person to only leave scorched earth after a conflict.
~ stkoelle
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/d3fb0iu
If Greg is under stress, and feeling let-down by those around him, and striving to obtain his vision at all costs - then he would probably be better off stepping back.
If this is a repeating pattern for him, he should probably seek some kind of professional advice and support.
Smart people tend to get screwed up by events in life.
I don't bear him any personal malice - I just want him to go and play in some other sandpit - he has had his chances.
~ papabitcoin
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4kipvu/samsung_mow_austinhill_blockstream_now_its_time/d3fqmd7
Greg's destructiveness seems to actually be part of a pattern stretching back 10 years, as shown by his vandalism of the Wikipedia project in 2006:
Wikipedians on Greg Maxwell in 2006 (now CTO of Blockstream): "engaged in vandalism", "his behavior is outrageous", "on a rampage", "beyond the pale", "bullying", "calling people assholes", "full of sarcasm, threats, rude insults", "pretends to be an admin", "he seems to think he is above policy"...
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/45ail1/wikipedians_on_greg_maxwell_in_2006_now_cto_of/
GMaxwell in 2006, during his Wikipedia vandalism episode: "I feel great because I can still do what I want, and I don't have to worry what rude jerks think about me ... I can continue to do whatever I think is right without the burden of explaining myself to a shreaking [sic] mass of people."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/459iyw/gmaxwell_in_2006_during_his_wikipedia_vandalism/
Greg Maxwell's Wikipedia War - or he how learned to stop worrying and love the sock puppet
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/457y0k/greg_maxwells_wikipedia_war_or_he_how_learned_to/
And of course, there have been many, many posts on these forums over the past months, documenting Greg Maxwell's poor leadership skills, underhanded and anti-social behavior, and economic incompetence.
Below is a sampling of these posts exposing Greg's toxic influence on Bitcoin:
Greg Maxwell admits the main reason for the block size limit is to force a fee market. Not because of bandwidth, transmission rates, orphaning, but because otherwise transactions would be 'too cheap'.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/42hl7g/greg_maxwell_admits_the_main_reason_for_the_block/
Greg Maxwell was wrong: Transaction fees can pay for proof-of-work security without a restrictive block size limit
https://np.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/3yod27/greg_maxwell_was_wrong_transaction_fees_can_pay/
Andrew Stone: "I believe that the market should be making the decision of what should be on the Blockchain based on transaction fee, not Gregory Maxwell. I believe that the market should be making the decision of how big blocks should be, not Gregory Maxwell."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3w2562/andrew_stone_i_believe_that_the_market_should_be/
Mike Hearn:"Bitcoin's problem is not a lack of a leader, it's problem is that the leader is Gregory Maxwell at Blockstream"
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4c9y3e/mike_hearnbitcoins_problem_is_not_a_lack_of_a/
Greg Maxwell caught red handed playing dirty to convince Chinese miners
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/438udm/greg_maxwell_caught_red_handed_playing_dirty_to/
My response to Gregory Maxwell's "trip to the moon" statement
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4393oe/my_response_to_gregory_maxwells_trip_to_the_moon/
It is "clear that Greg Maxwell actually has a fairly superficial understanding of large swaths of computer science, information theory, physics and mathematics."- Dr. Peter Rizun (managing editor of the journal Ledger)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3xok2o/it_is_clear_that_greg_maxwell_unullc_actually_has/
Uh-oh: "A warning regarding the onset of centralised authority in the control of Bitcoin through Blocksize restrictions: Several core developers, including Gregory Maxwell, have assumed a mantle of control. This is centralisation. The Blockchain needs to be unconstrained." (anonymous PDF on Scribd)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4hxlquhoh_a_warning_regarding_the_onset_of_centralised/
Blockstream Core Dev Greg Maxwell still doesn't get it, condones censorship in bitcoin
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/42vqyq/blockstream_core_dev_greg_maxwell_still_doesnt/
This exchange between Voorhees and Maxwell last month opened my eyes that there's a serious problem communicating with Core.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/49k70a/this_exchange_between_voorhees_and_maxwell_last/
Adam Back & Greg Maxwell are experts in mathematics and engineering, but not in markets and economics. They should not be in charge of "central planning" for things like "max blocksize". They're desperately attempting to prevent the market from deciding on this. But it will, despite their efforts.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/46052e/adam_back_greg_maxwell_are_experts_in_mathematics/
Just click on these historical blocksize graphs - all trending dangerously close to the 1 MB (1000KB) artificial limit. And then ask yourself: Would you hire a CTO / team whose Capacity Planning Roadmap from December 2015 officially stated: "The current capacity situation is no emergency" ?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3ynswc/just_click_on_these_historical_blocksize_graphs/
"Even a year ago I said I though we could probably survive 2MB" - nullc ... So why the fuck has Core/Blockstream done everything they can to obstruct this simple, safe scaling solution? And where is SegWit? When are we going to judge Core/Blockstream by their (in)actions - and not by their words?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4jzf05/even_a_year_ago_i_said_i_though_we_could_probably/
Greg Maxwell nullc just drove the final nail into the coffin of his crumbling credibility - by arguing that Bitcoin Classic should adopt Luke-Jr's poison-pill pull-request to change the PoW (and bump all miners off the network). If Luke-Jr's poison pill is so great, then why doesn't Core add it?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/41c1h6/greg_maxwell_unullc_just_drove_the_final_nail/
Gregory Maxwell nullc has evidently never heard of terms like "the 1%", "TPTB", "oligarchy", or "plutocracy", revealing a childlike naïveté when he says: "‘Majority sets the rules regardless of what some minority thinks’ is the governing principle behind the fiats of major democracies."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/44qr31/gregory_maxwell_unullc_has_evidently_never_heard/
Greg Maxwell nullc (CTO of Blockstream) has sent me two private messages in response to my other post today (where I said "Chinese miners can only win big by following the market - not by following Core/Blockstream."). In response to his private messages, I am publicly posting my reply, here:
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4ir6xh/greg_maxwell_unullc_cto_of_blockstream_has_sent/
Rewriting history: Greg Maxwell is claiming some of Gavin's earliest commits on Github
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/45g3d5/rewriting_history_greg_maxwell_is_claiming_some/
Greg Maxwell, nullc, given your valid interest in accurate representation of authorship, what do you do about THIS?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4550sl/greg_maxwell_unullc_given_your_valid_interest_in/
Collaboration requires communication
~ GavinAndresen
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4asyc9/collaboration_requires_communication/
Maxwell the vandal calls Adam, Luke, and Peter Todd dipshits
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4k8rsa/maxwell_the_vandal_calls_adam_luke_and_peter_todd/
In successful open-source software projects, the community should drive the code - not the other way around. Projects fail when "dead scripture" gets prioritized over "common sense". (Another excruciating analysis of Core/Blockstream's pathological fetishizing of a temporary 1MB anti-spam kludge)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4k8kda/in_successful_opensource_software_projects_the/
The tragedy of Core/Blockstream/Theymos/Luke-JAdamBack/GregMaxell is that they're too ignorant about Computer Science to understand the Robustness Principle (“Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept”), and instead use meaningless terminology like “hard fork” vs “soft fork.”
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4k6tke/the_tragedy_of/
Gregory Maxwell - "Absent [the 1mb limit] I would have not spent a dollar of my time on Bitcoin"
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/41jx99/gregory_maxwell_absent_the_1mb_limit_i_would_have/
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Three Laws of BTC Bull and Bear Cycle and Its Applications — Freezing Point Forecast — One

Three Laws of BTC Bull and Bear Cycle and Its Applications — Freezing Point Forecast — One
📷
https://preview.redd.it/ithso6k9w7531.jpg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e87d53120d9cc645b080c070afc5f9b402d56bf3
TOKEN Roll x FENBUSHI DIGITAL
Analyst: Song Shuangjie
Special Adviser: Shen Bo Rin
Guide:
The fourth price-rising cycle of BTC might commence around May 2019. The mainstream institutions join the game and ETF might be the driving force of the fourth round of price cycle.
Summary:
BTC has undergone three rounds of price cycles. ‘It is different this time’ has always been a terrible lesson for investors. The tokens, typical represented by BTC, are special in nature to other financial products, which makes it easily get mistaken that BTC will go up straightly and never decline. When the cycle power works, the asset price, which was thought to create a different history, will collapse. There are 3 major rules of the BTC price cycle:
A. BTC price cycle is closely related to its halving cycle. A complete BTC price cycle lasts for about four years. The price-rising section will commence one year ahead of the time before the output is halved. The BTC output was halved for the first time at the end of November 2012, and before that the BTC price touched the bottom in November 2011. The BTC output was halved for the second time in July 2016, as the BTC price touched the bottom in August 2015. As you can see, each time BTC output halving, is the start of a price-rising cycle, and the price speeding up begins with it.
B. BTC price fluctuation range decreases as market value increasing. The BTC’s (in circulation) market value varies with its price fluctuations, which means BTC’s price rising makes its market value increases, and the price fluctuation range decreases. It is similar to the historical process of other asset classes. During the first price cycle, the price of BTC rose by 10636 times which was the biggest gain, and the maximum drawdown was declined by 93.76%. During the second price cycle, the price of BTC rose by 623 times, and declined by 83.93% maximum. During the third price cycle, BTC rose by 98.57 times at most, the maximum declining has not been confirmed yet.
C. The innovation led by BTC is constantly evolving and more and more approved by the mainstream. From BTC to Altcoin, from Altcoin to Crowdsale, there are iconic innovations and applications in every price cycle. In the first cycle, the birth and gradual application of BTC was a landmark event. In the second cycle, with the re-emergence of BTC in 2013, the tide of the Altcoins was rampant, and a large number of Altcoins appeared. In the third cycle, Crowdsale began to be popular around the world, and many websites started to provide Crowdsale's news and discussion forum. Since 2017, Crowdsale has dominated the blockchain investment, far exceeding VCs and corporate investment. With the development of blockchain technology, the evolution of digital certification, the improvement of practitioners' awareness, and the evolution of government regulation, the innovation led by BTC has evolved and is more approved by the mainstream.
The third round of the price cycle might come to an end around May 2019, and followed by the fourth round of price cycle. The maximum rise in the BTC's fourth price-rising cycle will be smaller than last three cycles. BTC's increasing market value demands more capital. Digital token shall embrace supervision to absorb more institutional funds. ETF will be a viable solution. In the future, it will shift from Crowdsale to ETF, and from deregulation to embracing supervision.
Risk Tips: ETFs have put capital amount into this market less than that we expected. Quantum computer technology is advancing by leaps and bounds
Content
1 The First Round of Price Cycle .
2 The Second Round of Price Cycle
3 The Third Round of Price Cycle
4 Three Major Rules of BTC Price Cycle
4.1 BTC price cycle is closely related to its halving cycle
4.2 BTC price cycle is closely related to its halving cycle
4.3 BTC-led innovatioized by the mainstream
5 The new journey of BTC will Start in May 2019
List of Graphs
Graph 1: BTC Price Trend in The First Price Cycle (in USD)
Graph 2: BTC price trend in the second round of price cycle (in USD)
Graph 3: The number of tokens in 2013 has increased significantly Graph 4: BTC price trend in the third round of price cycle (in USD)
Graph 5: VIX index and BTC price are negatively correlated
Graph 6: Crowdsale has dominated blockchain investment since 2017 (millions of US dollars)
Graph 7: A large number of Crypto Funds were established in recent years.
Graph 8: ETH price trend (in USD)
Graph 9: ETH price is positively related to the size of Crowdsale financing
Graph 10: Lightning network capacity continues to grow
Graph 11: The number of lightning network channels continues to grow
Graph 12: The global Crowdsale growth rate slows down in 2018 .
Graph 13: Crowdsale’s fundraising has started to decline since 2018 .
Graph 14: Significant growth in venture capital in the blockchain sector in 2018
Graph 15: BTC block reward trend reduction
Graph 16: BTC price cycle and halving mechanism (in USD)
Graph 17: BTC market value scale trend increase
Graph 18: BTC price fluctuations become smaller
Graph 19: Admission to mainstream institutions has continued since the end of 2018
Graph 20: The third round of the price cycle may be completed around May 2019
Graph 21: The current stage of the price cycle has been probable more than half, and the downside space is limited
History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme. --Mark Twain
‘It is different this time’ has always been a terrible lesson for investors. The tokens, typical represented by BTC, are special in nature to other financial products, which results in producing an idea, in some investors’ mind, that the price of BTC will go up straightly and never decline. When the cycle power works, the asset price, which was thought to create a different history, will collapse. No matter it is the A-share market of 2007 or the one of 2015, or any ‘bubble time’ in human history, the cycle power played its role. As far as BTC is concerned, its price has also experienced three rounds of cycles.
In addition, when the asset price is in a dark period of continuous decline and weak rebound, the power of the cycle also works. As long as it is a valuable asset, its price will eventually bounce back from the bottom. Opportunities have always been there, if you have an asset with high potential in hand. In the dark moments before dawn, the more you are afraid, the more you will be confused. At this time, you have to believe in the value investing. ‘Be fearful when others are greedy and be greedy when others are fearful’, not the other way around. That means, we shall invest reversely, buying undervalued assets gradually in the bottom region of price decline cycle; selling overvalued assets gradually in the top region of price-rising cycle; and following the trend in other time region of the cycle.
1 The First Round of Price Cycle
The first round of BTC price cycle lasted for 610 days, from March 2010 to November 2011, and in this cycle, BTC price rise rate was the highest of BTCs three price cycles.
The price rise stage of the first round of price cycle, from March 2010 to June 2011, lasted for 447 days. The starting price was 0.003 USD/piece, and the highest price was 31.91 USD/piece, the rise rate reached 10,636 times. The price decline section of the first round of price cycle, from June 2011 to November 2011, lasted for 163 days. In this price decline section, the starting price of BTC was $31.91 per piece, and the lowest price was $1.99 per piece. The decline rate was 94%.
On May 22, 2010, the famous BTC Pizza dealt. Laszlo Hanyecz from Jacksonville, FL, bought two pizzas with 10,000 BTCs. Each price ofBTC is less than 0.01US dollars.
In the first round of the price cycle, there is no explicit positive or negative factors causing BTC's price huge fluctuation. Fluctuations are more like in a “natural” situation. Before the first BTC bubble bursted in November 2011, its price was in a trend of increasing. The reason of rise was that the price base of BTC was very low. With the understanding of BTC gradually getting better, the demand increased, and then, the price rose. For example, June 2011, WikiLeaks and some organizations began accepting BTC donations.
https://preview.redd.it/ol9mlz0kw7531.png?width=688&format=png&auto=webp&s=7f76ac24ef02d785f56c8a770be745cfeddbb1e7
2 The Second Round of Price Cycle
The second round of BTC price cycle lasted for 1377 days, from November 2011 to August 2015, and in this cycle, the price of BTC exceeded gold for the first time.
The price rise stage of the second round of price cycle, from November 2011 to November 2013, lasted for 743 days. The starting price was $1.99 USD/piece, and the highest price was 1,242 USD/piece, the rise rate reached 623 times. The price decline section of the second round of price cycle. From November 2013 to August 2015, lasted for 634 days. In this price decline stage, the starting price of BTC was 1,242 USD per piece, and the lowest price was 199.57 USD per piece. The decline rate was 84%.
At the second price cycle, the range of application of BTC has been greatly expanded. In November 2012, WordPress began to accept BTC; and in October 2013, the world's first BTC ATM was deployed in a coffee shop in Vancouver where customers could buy and sell BTC. In November 2013, the University of Nicosia announced accepting BTC for tuition, the university's chief financial officer called it "gold of tomorrow"; In addition to some underground economy and gray economy began to accept BTC, BTC is also getting closer to daily life.
The success of BTC popularized altcoins. The first type of altcoin LTC (Litecoin) was created in October 2011, and it is the time when the BTC price came to the end of price decline. In 2011, Namecoin and SwiftCoin were born successively. In 2012, Bytecoin and Peercoin were issued, however, BTC was still in the stage of rising slowly from the bottom, and the market was not hot. Along with the re-emergence of BTC in 2013, the tide of the altcoins is rampant, and a large number of altcoins are issued. According to CoinMarketCap data, there were 66 kinds of altcoins at the end of 2013, while there were less than 10 at the beginning of the year.
The safe-haven properties of BTC are widely approved. BTC was a choice for people in many countries that are in crises. The residents flocked to BTC, hoping to maintain assets value through BTC. This phenomenon has occurred many times during the European debt crisis. For example, in early 2013, in order to get the bailout, the Cyprus government imposed taxes on deposits and imposed strict capital controls. In order to prevent property from shrinking, the Cypriot people rushed to bank runs and exchanged their currencies for BTC. The price of BTC quickly rose from 30 something to 265 US dollars.

https://preview.redd.it/slw2443lw7531.png?width=684&format=png&auto=webp&s=33181be556dbfc3a3f0e78e5c6a7674801787951
Due to the lack of supervision, BTC is often affected by negative events, which makes the market confidence in the danger of collapsing. In October 2013, the FBI seized approximately 26,000 BTCs from the Silk Road website, causing the BTC price to collapse to 110 US dollars. On December 5, 2013, the People's Bank of China banned the use of BTC by Chinese financial institutions, which made the price of BTC declined. In February 2014, Mt. Gox, the largest BTC exchange at the time, said that 850,000 BTCs of its customers were stolen, worth nearly 500 million US dollars, and BTC prices fell nearly half, from 867 to 439 US dollars.
The emergence of a large number of altcoins caused market bleeding. Since 2014, the number of altcoins has exploded. By August 2015, the number has reached 556, resulting in diversion of funds and market expansion. On May 1, 2013, BTC accounted for 94.29% of the market value of all tokens, and the market value of other tokens except the top 10 tokens was about 1%. By August 25, 2015, the proportion of BTC is about 83%, and the other tokens account for 4%, which is obvious.
No matter how magical token is, it is still a kind of asset. The mean return of value is a basic common sense of investment. The value will pull the price back to it, just like the gravity. The risk increases with the price rises, and the value appears when the price declines. In the rising section of this cycle, the price of BTC rose by 623 times, which is a great rise rate. When the price is too high, and the potential return in the future is insufficient, the attractiveness to new investors will fall, and the old investors will leave and look for more lucrative assets. Once the power of trend investors exhausted, the trend will reverse.
3 The Third Round of Price Cycle
The third round of price cycle of BTC is not over and is currently in the downward phase of the cycle. The price increased from August 2015 and lasted for 845 days till December 2017. The starting price of the price-rising cycle BTC was 199.57 USD/piece, and the highest price was close to 20,000 USD/piece. The rise rate is up to 99 times. Since December 2017, the price started to decline. The price has fallen to the lowest 3,191.30 US dollars up to now, a drop of 84%.
BTC networks expanded rapidly, and BTC has gained increasing recognition among legislators and traditional financial companies. Studies have shown that by November 2013, the commercialization of BTC is no longer driven by the underground economy, but by legitimate businesses. During this price cycle, people from more countries can get in touch with, select, trade and use BTC on a daily basis. In January 2016, Bitcoin computing capacity reached 1 exahash/S for the first time; In March 2016, the Japanese cabinet acknowledged that BTC has a function similar to real money. In 2017, Norway's largest online bank Skandiabanken integrated BTC accounts. In December 2017, Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) officially launched BTC futures, which is an important step for BTC to take toward mainstream investment. In October 2018, Fidelity launched its independent subsidiary Fidelity Digital Asset Services to provide digital asset services to institutional customers. In December 2018, the first round of financing was completed by the token exchange Bakkt launched by the Intercontinental Exchange. In February 2019, Nasdaq officially launched - Bitcoin Liquid Index (BLX) and Ethereum Liquid Index (ELX)- two indexes. The pension fund of US invests in the encryption fund, the mainstream organization is accelerating, and the relevant infrastructure is gradually improved.
BTC has become a risky asset. Under the current “three lows” environment - low interest rates, low spreads and low volatility, investors are seeking high returns, which leads to excessive financial risk behaviors and complacency, investors' risk appetite, and high leverage tools and the acceptance of high-risk products has increased, arbitrage transactions have prevailed, liquidity mismatches have been severe, and the overall market is fragile. As the results we can see that, the price of BTC is increasingly correlated with the VIX index (Chicago Options Exchange Volatility Index). A lower VIX index indicates that investors expect less volatility, while a higher VIX indicates higher expected volatility. The lower VIX index indicates that investors are optimistic about S&P 500, while the higher VIX means that investors are uncertain about the market outlook. When market volatility declines, investors buy stocks and other types of risk assets, when the market volatility rises, investors sell risky assets.
Risk assets will be dumped when risk appetite reduces panic market. BTC bid farewell to the nature of safe-haven assets and become a risky asset. Since December 2017, with the decline of the VIX index, the price of BTC rises, and the price of BTC is negatively correlated with the VIX index. At the beginning of 2018, the VIX index skyrocketed and BTC fell rapidly. In October 2018, the global market risk aversion trend increased, the VIX index went up, and the BTC price also fell sharply.

https://preview.redd.it/49ld77xlw7531.png?width=664&format=png&auto=webp&s=af5b7ff492fe7e8253640f9e6df7820a10c59f52
Crowdsale has become the main financing method in the blockchain field. Crowdsale was born in the second round of the price cycle, Mastercoin did the world's first Crowdsale in July 2013. In 2014, Ethereum also raised funds through Crowdsale, when the price of ETH was less than 0.22 USD per piece. After 2016, when it is in the third price cycle, Crowdsale is popular around the world, and many websites began to provide information and discussion communities for Crowdsale. From a global perspective, Crowdsale has dominated the blockchain investment since 2017, far exceeding VCs and corporate investment. In 2017, Crowdsale raised 7.4 billion US dollars, and in the first half of 2018, Crowdsale Raised 12 billion US dollars.
The Crypto Fund emerged. Along with the Crowdsale boom, a large number of Crypto Funds were created. The number of Crypto Funds newly established in 2017 was nearly 200, far exceeding the total amount of the Crypto funds created in previous years, which fully demonstrated that, with the rise in the price of the token, the enthusiasm of funds to blockchain field is high.

https://preview.redd.it/31badgpmw7531.png?width=659&format=png&auto=webp&s=3e7bdf4dbf07b83d405298aa57424e2b61b5d84a
The rise of blockchain 2.0, the Crowdsale tide pushed ETH up nearly 10,000 times. In the third round of the BTC (Token) price cycle, the biggest star is not BTC, but ETH. Crowdsale after 2016, issued tokens mainly through Ethereum, which represented the rise of ETH in the blockchain 2.0 era. Crowdsale prosperity boosted the rise of ETH. On January 13, 2018, the price of ETH rose to a peak of 1,432.88 US dollars per piece, which is 6512 times rise rate comparing to its initial price.
The ETH price has a significant positive correlation with the growth rate of Crowdsale financing. The growth rate of Crowdsale financing decreased by 69.23% in 2015, the price of ETH decreased by 66.30% in the same year. In 2016, the growth rate of Crowdsale financing increased by 2737.5%, and ETH increased by 753.74%. In 2017, the growth rate of Crowdsale financing increased by 3,159.91%, and ETH rose by 8809.91%.

https://preview.redd.it/ssvz3bonw7531.png?width=660&format=png&auto=webp&s=b91b15aaa7fc4333a7bf1b0bca1fb3bf7ac6fc67
Plan for public blockchain performance improvement emerged, and significant progress were made in lightning network. With the popularization of blockchains, the congestion of BTC and other public chains has gradually emerged, and performance has become one of the bottlenecks in the blockchain industry. In 2018, the performance-improvement plan of the public blockchain emerged. Improvements were made to the difference in blockchain logical architecture, including on-chain capacity expansion schemes by improving consensus mechanism and sharing, and off-chain capacity expansion schemes by status channel, sidechain, off-chain computing, and Layer 0 expansion scheme that enhance the scalability of the blockchain by optimizing the underlying data transmission protocol of the blockchain. Since the main net of BTC lightning network goes live, the number and capacity of channels have been increasing. As of March 10, 2019, the capacity has reached 790 BTC, and the number of channels has reached 35,464.

https://preview.redd.it/qfgryviow7531.png?width=660&format=png&auto=webp&s=59f8f45fb4320fcbf1dff1b50925cb9a8bfb9a7a
Note: The Unique channel refers to the channel that is directly connected to the node for the first time, and the Duplicate channel refers to the channel between the nodes that have been connected.
The standardization of the token is promoted. On January 22, 2018, South Korea required all BTC dealers to disclose their identity, thereby prohibiting anonymous trading of BTC. During the first quarter of 2018, Facebook, Google and Twitter prohibited the promotion of Crowdsale, while the US Securities and Exchange Commission investigated a large number of Crowdsale projects, and issued bans to some Crowdsale projects. Regardless of the government's attitude towards the token, it is committed to incorporating the token into the regulatory framework for legal compliance.
The Crowdsale bubble bursted and the magical story is no longer magical. According to incomplete statistics, in 2017, 871 Crowdsale were completed in the world. These projects involved directions as distributed analogous Facebook, twitter, amazon, and next-generation public chain (blockchain 3.0), etc. These projects have raised a large amount of funds, but the actual operating is worrying. The promotion of the project dissipated a large amount of funds, but the actual development progress was far less than expected, resulting in the market's expectation failure and the diversion of funds from the mainstream token. Superimposed the impact of more and more negative news, technical adjustment requirements and market sentiment fluctuation. The market enters a negative cycle, as the decline begins.

https://preview.redd.it/s51gsunpw7531.png?width=677&format=png&auto=webp&s=f3a2e01c57eece54c9d442b141194faec083350a
In 2018, there has been rapid growth in venture capital in the blockchain sector, indicating that venture capital still have good expectations about the application and future prospects of the blockchain. According to Coindesk data, the risk investment in the blockchain sector in 2018 reverse the decline of 2017, year-on-year increase of 257%, and the total amount for the year 2018 reached 3.1 billion US dollars.

https://preview.redd.it/7bujn1fqw7531.png?width=452&format=png&auto=webp&s=5719239aa4f3447b4320ea47dbe88eec766cdcae
BTC peaked first. In terms of time, in the third round of the price cycle, the first to peak is BTC, which reached 19,870.62 USD per piece in December 2017. The peak of ETH happened later than BTC, in January 2018. EOS did not peak until April. The important reason for BTC to peak first is that the amount of funds needed to support the BTC market value scale is the largest. When the market’s ability to carry on is not enough, it is inevitable for the price of BTC to react first.
4 Three Major Rules of BTC Price Cycle
The price cycle of BTC has obvious regularity, and some unchanging factors determine the price fluctuation of BTC.
4.1 BTC price cycle is closely related to its halving cycle
One full BTC price cycle lasts approximately four years. In the first round of price cycles, the measure of time span is not reliable because of the availability of BTC trading prices. The second round of the price cycle lasted for 1,377 days, from November 2011 to August 2015, about four years.
The price-rising cycle of BTC is closely related to its halving period, and the price-rising cycle starts one year before each halving. At the end of November 2012, the first production of BTC was halved, that is, the number of BTC generated by each block was 25, and in November 2011, the price of BTC has bottomed out, and the halving of BTC is one year after the second price-rising cycle. In July 2016, production of BTC was halved the second time, that is, the number of BTC generated by each block was 12.5. In August 2015, BTC had already bottomed out, and BTC's production was reduced again one year after the third price-rising cycle started.

https://preview.redd.it/9529268rw7531.png?width=445&format=png&auto=webp&s=fe1050eefe6d70403ddcdc053bdbccb0bc47818f
BTC output halving blows the horn of each price-rising cycle, and the price speeding up begin. Although it is not BTC output halving that brings the price-rising cycle, but the halving of BTC output significantly reduced the growth rate of BTC supply, speeding up the rise of BTC price and the price-rising cycle. From November 2011 to November 2012, before the halving of BTC output, BTC increased by 6.74 times in one year. From November 2012 to November 2013, BTC price increased by 99.57 times. In the third price-rising cycle, BTC price rose by a maximum of 2.87 times in about 11 months before the production cut. After halving, BTC price rose by a maximum of 29.73 times in about 11 months.

https://preview.redd.it/dft83mprw7531.png?width=687&format=png&auto=webp&s=82014d03eaee7136a6995a1b2df1faa9d22c6a5f
4.2 BTC price cycle is closely related to its halving cycle
The change in the market value scale of BTC (circulation) is mainly caused by its price fluctuations, and has little to do with the changes in the total amount of BTC output. According to CMC data, by April 28, 2013, the total amount of BTC that had been mined was about 11.18 million pieces, which is more than 53% of the total amount of BTC of 21 million pieces. The halving mechanism of BTC also accelerated the marginal decline of BTC total growth rate. Compared with the amount of BTC already mined, the new supply of BTC is very insignificant. In addition, the volatility of BTC prices far exceeds the volatility of BTC's total output, and the market value of BTC fluctuates with its price.
The market value of BTC has increased in trend. Because of the trend of BTC price-rising, the number of BTC total output has also increased in one direction, and the market value of BTC has increased in the long run. According to CMC data, on April 28, 2013, BTC's market value in circulation was only 1.5 billion US dollars. By the peak of the third price-rising cycle, the market value increased to 326.1 billion US dollars, and the current market value also reached 113.8 billion US dollars, increased by 74.87 times.
The price volatility of BTC is gradually getting smaller. With the increasing of BTC market value in trend, the BTC market is becoming more and more mature, more and more accepted by the public, more and more professional organizations are participating, the compliance operation is becoming mainstream, and the BTC price volatility is decreasing. Similar to the historical process of other asset classes, and the same thing is repeated again and again. In the first price cycle, the price of BTC increased by 10636 times, and the fell by 93.76% maximum. In the second price cycle, the price of BTC increased by 623 times, and fell by 83.93% maximum. In the third price cycle, the maximum increase of BTC price was 98.57 times, and the biggest decline has not been confirmed

https://preview.redd.it/kmk5qeesw7531.png?width=674&format=png&auto=webp&s=bf9d8fd61b833c87c3f859a3bf0f4f63b9c0ff88
4.3 BTC-led innovation continues to evolve and is more and more recognized by the mainstream
From BTC to Altcoin, from Altcoin to Crowdsale, there are iconic innovations and applications in every price cycle. In the first cycle, the birth and gradual application of BTC was a landmark event. In the second cycle, with the re-emergence of BTC in 2013, the tide of the Altcoins was rampant, and a large number of Altcoins appeared. In the third cycle, Crowdsale began to be popular around the world, many websites started to provide Crowdsale's news and discussion forum. Since 2017, Crowdsale has dominated the blockchain investment, far exceeding VCs and corporate investment.
The original intention of Nakamoto to create BTC is to establish a more efficient means of trading that can be electronically transferred in a safe, verifiable and non-tamperable form. During the early days of bitcoin and blockchain development, this drove the development of most applications of BTC and blockchain. However, with the development of blockchain technology, the evolution of digital token, the recognition of practitioners, and the evolution of government regulation, the changes led by BTC continue to evolve and gain more mainstream recognition.
More and more countries recognize that the blockchain reflects its unique value in many fields. The government has gradually incorporated digital token into regulation, and mainstream institutions are increasingly recognizing BTC. In 2017, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) officially launched BTC futures, as BTC took an important step toward mainstream investment, improving the accessibility of BTC to traditional financial institutions. In March 2017, Cameron's Cliveworth and Taylor W. Crawworth brothers attempted to submit an application to the US Securities and Exchange Commission for BTC ETF (transactional open-ended index fund). Although on September 22, 2018, US Securities and Exchange Commission rejected nine BTC ETF applications, the approval of BTC ETF application is a high probability event in the long run. With the continuous improvement of related infrastructure and the gradual maturity of the market, the pace of institutional entry has shown signs of acceleration. Since the end of 2018, news about the organization of encrypted assets by mainstream institutions has continued.

https://preview.redd.it/pf0u2patw7531.png?width=349&format=png&auto=webp&s=eb603172001520e62eee309e8d37df44c4f8bad9
5 The new journey of BTC will Start in May 2019
The fourth price-rising cycle of BTC will start in May 2019, and mainstream institutions will enter the market, while ETF may become the core trend of the fourth round of BTC price cycle.
From the perspective of supply, the third halving of BTC begins around May 21, 2020. The price-rising cycle of BTC is closely related to its halving period. The price-rising cycle starts about one year before halving. From this perspective, the BTC price-rising cycle may be opened around May 2019.

https://preview.redd.it/29dzwhwtw7531.png?width=695&format=png&auto=webp&s=7e69a27442cd093611027fd067cb4bbd784cb2b0
From the time dimension, the complete BTC price cycle lasts for about four years. The third round of the price cycle, which started in August 2015, will be completed around August 2019, and the fourth round of the price cycle of BTC will begin thereafter. Considering that the data in the second round of the price cycle is more reliable, only the second round of price cycle data is used as the measurement standard, the complete price cycle is 1377 days, about 3 years and 9 months, and the third round price cycle may end around May 2019.
Combined with the previous two BTC price cycles, the downturn phase of the current price cycle has been probably more than half, and further downside space is limited. In the first two rounds of the price cycle, the duration of the downlink phase is less than the duration of the uplink phase. The duration of the third phase of the price cycle has been confirmed (845 days), while the duration of the downturn phase has been more than half of the upstream phase (450 days). From the first two rounds of the price cycle, the rapid decline in prices occurred in the early stage of the downtrend phase. The price fluctuations of BTC in the second half of the downturn phase have been significantly reduced. The BTC price declines reached 61% in the first half and 74% in the second round of the price cycle, and the corresponding maximum declines in BTC were 94% and 84% respectively. In the current round of the price cycle, the biggest drop has reached 84%, so take it from now, even if the price is further down, the downside space is already limited.
https://preview.redd.it/kra7vduuw7531.png?width=684&format=png&auto=webp&s=4f1eda32d42a15b4e34ebfa5dbdaee78065ab110
Note: The data of the third round of the price cycle and the total duration are up to March 12, 2019.
From the price dimension, the downside space of the current round of BTC prices is limited, and the maximum increase of BTC's fourth price-rising cycle will become smaller. In the first price cycle, the price of BTC increased by 10636 times, and fell by 93.76% maximum. In the second price cycle, the price of BTC increased by 623 times, and fell by 83.93% maximum. In the third price cycle, the maximum increase of BTC price was 98.57 times, and the biggest decline has not been confirmed. On February 6, 2018, BTC fell to a minimum of 3,191.30 US dollars per piece, drop by 84.07%, has reached the low of second round of price cycle, from the perspective of price adjustment, BTC price downside has been more limited. The maximum increase in the fourth price-rising cycle of BTC will be smaller.
From the perspective of risk, after a year of continuous adjustment, BTC prices have fully fallen, risks have been gradually released, and investor’s risk appetite has risen to create favorable conditions for BTC prices to stabilize. Beginning at the end of December 2018, the VIX index has fallen, and now it has reached 15 or below. The investor's risk appetite has gradually picked up, creating favorable conditions for the BTC price to rise stably.
Last but not least, from the perspective of capital, the mainstream institutions accelerated their entry and many positive signals were released. With the continuous improvement of related infrastructure and the gradual maturity of the market, the pace of institutional entry has shown signs of acceleration. Since 2018, on the one hand, the entry of mainstream institutions can bring incremental funds to the entire market, on the other hand, it also contributes to the formal development of the entire industry.
The value of the BTC's market value in circulation continues to increase, and the digital token embraces regulation. It is expected that the ETF will be the core trend in the fourth price cycle. As the value of the BTC and digital token market increases, their use will be more tied-up to legitimate use than illegal activities. According to the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) data, only 10% of the current BTC transactions is related to illegal activities and 90% is used for legal transactions. BTC's increasingly large market value requires more financial support. Digital token will embrace supervision to absorb more funds, and ETF will be a viable solution. In the future, there is going to be an evolution from Crowdsale to ETF, from regulation to embrace supervision.
Note:
Although in this report, we try to predict the bottom and time of Token, especially BTC, by using time and space cycle, we would like to tell investors that it is very dangerous to invest basing on a specific dot and time. An investment shall base on the assessment of the value of the token.
Here are our suggestions: 1. Do not try to predict the market. Mistakes are liable to happen when you try to predict market harshly. 2. Feel the cycle. Cycle is always there, because of the constant human nature;3. Be with a good Token, which will bring you more chance to win. 4.Keep valuation in mind. The most important thing in value investing is to keep the valuation in mind. If the price is reasonable, everything is getable. The key is the difference between price and value (Absolute valuation method is not available with Token because of its specialty. However, a relative valuation method can be applied. Please refer to Token Toll’s report series).
Notions:
For some reasons, some definition in this report are not very defined, such as: Token, Digital Token, Digital Currency, Currency, Crowdsale, etc.
If you have any questions, be free to call us to discuss with us.

https://preview.redd.it/bjnu2hjvw7531.png?width=698&format=png&auto=webp&s=43df46d8337c63a52b8a7089ed5e24360f3b281d
submitted by Token_Roll to u/Token_Roll [link] [comments]

My draft for a new /r/btc FAQ explaining the split from /r/Bitcoin to new users

If /btc is going to actually compete with /Bitcoin, it needs to be just as friendly and informative to new users, especially given its position as the “non default” or “breakaway” sub. The current /btc sticky saying "Welcome to the Wiki" doesn't even have any content in it and I feel this is a bit of a wasted opportunity to create an informative resource that new users will see by default and everyone else can link to instead of retyping things over and over about the history and difference between the subs.
Here's what I've written as a starting point. I've done my best to keep it as concise and relevant as possible but in all honesty it is a complicated issue and a short but effective explanation is basically impossible. I hope the community can expand/improve on it further.
Quick bit about me
I got into Bitcoin in October 2013, when /Bitcoin had around 40k subscribers if I remember correctly, so by now I've actually personally experienced a large portion of Bitcoin's history - including the events preceding and since the creation of this sub. I have been an active and popular poster on /Bitcoin for almost all of that time, until the split and my subsequent banning. With the recent censorship fiasco, I'm finding I have to reiterate the same points over and over again to explain to newer users what happened with the /Bitcoin vs /btc split, questions about hard forks, what is likely to happen in the future and so on. So I put a couple of hours into writing this post to save myself the trouble in future.

/btc FAQ - Historical split from /Bitcoin megathread - v0.1

There is a TL:DR; at the bottom, but it is exactly that. If you skip straight to the TL:DR; then don’t expect sympathy when you post questions that have already been covered in the lengthy and detailed main post.

New to Bitcoin?

I am totally new to Bitcoin. What is it? How does it work? Can/should I mine any? Where can I buy some? How do I get more information?
All of these questions are actually really well covered in the /Bitcoin FAQ. Check it out in a new tab here. Once you've got a bit of a handle on the technology as a whole, come back here for the rest of the story.

History: /btc vs /Bitcoin

What's the difference between /btc and /Bitcoin? What happened to create two such strongly opposed communities? Why can't I discuss /btc in /Bitcoin?
Historically, the /Bitcoin subreddit was the largest and most active forum for discussing Bitcoin. As Bitcoin grew close to a cap in the number of transactions it could process, known as the 1MB block size limit, the community had differing opinions on the best way to proceed. Note that this upcoming issue was anticipated well ahead of time, with Satoshi's chosen successor to lead the project Gavin Andresen posting about it in mid 2015. Originally, there was quite a broad spread of opinions - some people favoured raising the blocksize to various extents, some people favoured implementing a variety of second layer solutions to Bitcoin, probably most people thought both could be a good idea in one form or another.
This topic was unbelievably popular at the time, taking up almost every spot on the front page of /Bitcoin for weeks on end.
Unfortunately, the head moderator of /Bitcoin - theymos - felt strongly enough about the issue to use his influence to manipulate the debate. His support was for the proposal of existing software (called Bitcoin Core) NOT to raise the blocksize limit past 1MB and instead rely totally on second layer solutions - especially one called Segregated Witness (or SegWit). With some incredibly convoluted logic, he decided that any different implementations of Bitcoin that could potentially raise the limit were effectively equivalent to separate cryptocurrencies like Litecoin or Ethereum and thus the block size limit or implement other scaling solutions were off-topic and ban-worthy. At the time the most popular alternative was called Bitcoin XT and was supported by experienced developers Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn, who have since both left Bitcoin Core development in frustration at their marginalisation. Theymos claimed that for Bitcoin XT or any other software implementation to be relevant to /Bitcoin required "consensus", which was never well defined, despite it being seemingly impossible for everyone to agree on the merits of a new project if no one was allowed to discuss it in the first place. Anyone who didn't toe the line of his vaguely defined moderation policy was temporarily or permanently banned. There was also manipulation of the community using the following tactics - which can still be seen today:
This created enormous uproar among users, as even many of those in favour of Bitcoin Core thought it was authoritarian to actively suppress this crucial debate. theymos would receive hundreds of downvotes whenever he posted: for example here where he gets -749 for threatening to ban prominent Bitcoin business Coinbase from the subreddit.
In an extraordinary turn of events, Theymos posted a thread which received only 26% upvotes in a sample size of thousands announcing that he did not care if even 90% of users disagreed with his policy, he would not change his opinion or his moderation policy to facilitate the discussion the community wanted to have. His suggested alternative was instead for those users, however many there were, to leave.
Here are Theymos' exact words, as he describes how he intends to continue moderating Bitcoin according to his own personal rules rather than the demands of the vast majority of users, who according to him clearly don't have any "real arguments" or "any brains".
Do not violate our rules just because you disagree with them. This will get you banned from /Bitcoin , and evading this ban will get you (and maybe your IP) banned from Reddit entirely.
If 90% of /Bitcoin users find these policies to be intolerable, then I want these 90% of /Bitcoin users to leave. Both /Bitcoin and these people will be happier for it. I do not want these people to make threads breaking the rules, demanding change, asking for upvotes, making personal attacks against moderators, etc. Without some real argument, you're not going to convince anyone with any brains -- you're just wasting your time and ours. The temporary rules against blocksize and moderation discussion are in part designed to encourage people who should leave /Bitcoin to actually do so so that /Bitcoin can get back to the business of discussing Bitcoin news in peace.
/btc was therefore born in an environment not of voluntary departure but of forced exile.
This forced migration caused two very unfortunate occurrences:
  1. It polarised the debate around Bitcoin scaling. Previously, there was a lot of civil discussion about compromise and people with suggestions from all along the spectrum were working to find the best solution. That was no longer possible when a moderation policy would actively suppress anyone with opinions too different from Theymos. Instead it forced everyone into a "with us or against us" situation, which is why the /btc subreddit has been pushed so far in favour of the idea of a network hard fork (discussed below).
  2. It has distracted Bitcoin from its mission of becoming a useful, global, neutral currency into a war of information. New users often find /Bitcoin and assume it to be the authoritative source of information, only to later discover that a lot of important information or debate has been invisibly removed from their view.
Since then, like any entrenched conflict, things have degenerated somewhat on both sides to name calling and strawman arguments. However, /btc remains committed to permitting free and open debate on all topics and allowing user downvotes to manage any "trolling" (as /Bitcoin used to) instead of automatic shadow-banning or heavy-handed moderator comment deletion (as /Bitcoin does now). Many users in /Bitcoin deny that censorship exists at all (it is difficult to see when anyone pointing out the censorship has their comment automatically hidden by the automoderator) or justify it as necessary removal of "trolls", which at this point now includes thousands upon thousands of current and often long-standing Bitcoin users and community members.
Ongoing censorship is still rampant, partially documented in this post by John Blocke
For another detailed account of this historical sequence of events, see singularity87 s posts here and here.
/btc has a public moderator log as demonstration of its commitment to transparency and the limited use of moderation. /Bitcoin does not.
Why is so much of the discussion in /btc about the censorship in /Bitcoin? Isn't a better solution to create a better community rather than constantly complaining?
There are two answers to this question.
  1. Over time, as /btc grows, conversation will gradually start to incorporate more information about the Bitcoin ecosystem, technology, price etc. Users are encouraged to aid this process by submitting links to relevant articles and up/downvoting on the /new and /rising tab as appropriate. However, /btc was founded effectively as a refuge for confused and angry users banned from /Bitcoin and it still needs to serve that function so at least some discussion of the censorship will probably always persist (unless there is a sudden change of moderation policy in /Bitcoin).
  2. The single largest issue in Bitcoin right now is the current cap on the number of transactions the network can process, known as the blocksize limit. Due to the censorship in /Bitcoin, open debate of the merits of different methods of addressing this problem is impossible. As a result, the censorship of /Bitcoin (historically the most active and important Bitcoin community forum) has become by proxy the single most important topic in Bitcoin, since only by returning to open discussion would there be any hope of reaching agreement on the solution to the block size limit itself. As a topic of such central importance, there is naturally going to be a lot of threads about this until a solution is found. This is simply how Bitcoin works, that at any one time there is one key issue under discussion for lengthy periods of time (previous examples of community "hot topics" include the demise of the original Bitcoin exchange Mt Gox, the rise to a 51% majority hash rate of mining pool GHash.io and the supposed "unveiling" of Bitcoin's anonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto).

Bitcoin Network Hard Forks

What is a hard fork? What happens if Bitcoin hard forks?
A network hard fork is when a new block of transactions is published under a new set of rules that only some of the network will accept. In this case, Bitcoin diverges from a single blockchain history of transactions to two separate blockchains of the current state of the network. With any luck, the economic incentive for all users to converge quickly brings everyone together on one side of the fork, but this is not guaranteed especially since there is not a lot of historical precedent for such an event.
A hard fork is necessary to raise the block size limit above its 1MB cap.
Why is /btc generally in favour of a hard fork and /Bitcoin generally against?
According to a lot of users on /Bitcoin - a hard fork can be characterised as an “attack” on the network. The confusion and bad press surrounding a hard fork would likely damage Bitcoin’s price and/or reputation (especially in the short term). They point to the ongoing turmoil with Ethereum as an example of the dangers of a hard fork. Most of /Bitcoin sees the stance of /btc as actively reckless, that pushing for a hard fork creates the following problems:
According to a lot of users on /btc - a hard fork is necessary despite these risks. Most of /btc sees the stance of /Bitcoin as passively reckless, that continuing to limit Bitcoin’s blocksize while remaining inactive creates the following problems:
Bitcoiners are encouraged to examine all of the information and reach their own conclusion. However, it is important to remember that Bitcoin is an open-source project founded on the ideal of free market competition (between any/all software projects, currencies, monetary policies, miners, ideas etc.). In one sense, /btc vs /Bitcoin is just another extension of this, although Bitcoiners are also encouraged to keep abreast of the top posts and links on both subreddits. Only those afraid of the truth need to cut off opposing information.
What do Bitcoin developers, businesses, users, miners, nodes etc. think?
Developers
There are developers on both sides of the debate, although it is a common argument in /Bitcoin to claim that the majority supports Bitcoin Core. This is true in the sense that Bitcoin Core is the current default and has 421 listed code contributors but misleading because not only are many of those contributors authors of a single tiny change and nothing else but also many major figures like Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn and Jeff Garzik have left the project while still being counted as historical contributors.
Businesses including exchanges etc.
A definite vote of confidence is not available from the vast majority of Bitcoin businesses, and wouldn't be binding in any case. The smart decision for most businesses is to support both chains in the event of a fork until the network resolves the issue (which may only be a day or two).
Users
Exact user sentiment is impossible to determine, especially given the censorship on /Bitcoin.
Miners and Nodes
Coin.dance hosts some excellent graphical representations of the current opinion on the network.
Node Support Information
Miner Support Information
What do I do if the network hard forks?* Do we end up with two Bitcoins?
Firstly, in the event of a hard fork there is no need to panic. All Bitcoins are copied to both chains in the case of a split, so any Bitcoins you have are safe. HOWEVER, in the event of a fork there will be some period of confusion where it is important to be very careful about how/why you spend your Bitcoins. Hopefully (and most likely) this would not last long - everyone in Bitcoin is motivated to converge into agreement for everyone's benefit as soon as possible - but it's impossible to say for sure.
There isn't a lot of historical data about cryptocurrency hard forks, but one example is alternative cryptocurrency Ethereum that forked into two coins after the events of the DAO and currently exists as two separate chains, ETH (Ethereum) and ETC (Ethereum Classic).
The Ethereum fork is not a good analogy for Bitcoin because its network difficulty target adjusts every single block, so a massive drop in hash rate does not significantly impede its functioning. Bitcoin’s difficult target adjusts only every 2100 blocks - which under usual circumstances takes two weeks but in the event of a hard fork could be a month or more for the smaller chain. It is almost inconceivable that a minority of miners would willingly spend millions of dollars over a month or more purely on principle to maintain a chain that was less secure and processed transactions far slower than the majority chain - even assuming the Bitcoins on this handicapped chain didn't suffer a market crash to close to worthless.
Secondly, a hard fork is less likely to be a traumatic event than it is often portrayed in /Bitcoin:

What Happens Now

How do I check on the current status of opinion?
Coin.dance hosts some excellent graphical representations of the current opinion on the network.
Node Support Information
Miner Support Information
Users are also welcome to engage in anecdotal speculation about community opinion based on their impression of the commentary and activity in /btc and /Bitcoin.
Haven't past attempts to raise the blocksize failed?
There is no time limit or statute of limitations on the number of attempts the community can make to increase the block size and scale Bitcoin. Almost any innovation in the history of mankind required several attempts to get working and this is no different.
The initial attempt called Bitcoin XT never got enough support for a fork because key developer Mike Hearn left out of frustration at trying to talk around all the censorship and community blockading.
The second major attempt called Bitcoin Classic gained massive community momentum until it was suddenly halted by the drastic implementation of censorship by Theymos described above.
The most popular attempt at the moment is called Bitcoin Unlimited.
/btc is neutral and welcoming to any and all projects that want to find a solution to scaling Bitcoin - either on-or off-chain. However, many users are suspicious of Bitcoin Core's approach that involves only SegWit, developed by a private corporation called Blockstream and that has already broken its previous promises in a document known as the Hong Kong Agreement to give the network a block size limit raise client along with Segregated Witness (only the latter was delivered) .
What if the stalemate is irreconcilable and nothing ever happens?
Increasing transaction fees and confirmation times are constantly increasing the pressure to find a scaling solution - leading some to believe that further adoption of Bitcoin Unlimited or a successor scaling client will eventually occur. Bitcoin Core's proposed addition of SegWit is struggling to gain significant support and as it is already the default client (and not censored in /Bitcoin) it is unlikely to suddenly grow any further.
If the stalemate is truly irreconcilable, eventually users frustrated by the cost, time and difficulty of Bitcoin will begin migrating to alternative cryptocurrencies. This is obviously not a desirable outcome for long standing Bitcoin supporters and holders, but cannot be ignored as the inevitable free market resort if Bitcoin remains deadlocked for long enough.

TL:DR;

I don’t know anything about Bitcoin. Help me?
What’s the /btc vs /Bitcoin story?
  • Bitcoin is at its transaction capacity and needs to scale to onboard more users
  • The community was discussing different ways to do this until the biased head moderator of /Bitcoin Theymos got involved
  • Theymos, started an authoritarian censorship rampage which culminated in telling 90% of /Bitcoin users to leave. /btc is where they went. Here is the thread where it all started. Note the 26% upvoted on the original post, the hundreds of upvotes of community outcry in the comments and the graveyard of [removed] posts further down the chain. Highly recommended reading in its entirety.
  • To this day, /Bitcoin bans all discussion of alternative scaling proposals and /btc
  • Bitcoin is about freedom, and can’t function effectively with either an artificially restricted transaction cap or a main community forum that is so heavily manipulated. This subreddit is the search for solutions to both problems as well as general Bitcoin discussion.
What’s the deal with hard forks?
  • No TL:DR; possible, read the whole post.
What happens now?
  • Node Support Information
  • Miner Support Information
  • Debate continues in /btc, and generally doesn't continue in /Bitcoin - although posts referencing /btc or Bitcoin Unlimited regularly sneak past the moderators because it is such a crucial topic
  • Eventually one side or the other breaks, enough miners/nodes/users get on one side and Bitcoin starts scaling. This may or may not involve a hard fork.
  • If not, fees and average confirmation times continue to rise until users migrate en masse to an altcoin. This is not an imminent danger, as can be seen by the BTC marketcap dominance at its historical levels of 80+% but could change at any time
submitted by Shibinator to btc [link] [comments]

Chart - Exchange rate NZ$1.00 = US$ Bitcoin Cost & Price Bitcoin Today & Bitcoin Money & Bitcoin Value in Dollars & Bitcoin Account What is a Bitcoin? - YouTube HISTORICAL BITCOIN HASHRATE DROP!!! How to Use Bitcoin Exchange Rate Charts

Interactive historical chart showing the daily Euro - U.S. Dollar (EURUSD) exchange rate back to 1999. Buy Bitcoin. Purchase Bitcoin using a credit card or with your linked bank account via an online exchange. Learn More On the price chart there is shown historical value of BTC cryptocurrency, log graph of Bitcoin market capitalization and the most reasonable historical dates. Bitcoin in 2008 History of Bitcoin price in 2008, 2009, 2010. On 18 August 2008, the domain name bitcoin.org was registered. Later that year on October 31st, a link to a paper authored by Satoshi Nakamoto titled Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer ... Euro Dollar Exchange Rate Eur Usd Historical Chart Macrotrends. A Historical Look At The Price Of Bitcoin 2040. This Bitcoin Business Is Entirely Out Of Hand The Atlantic. 1 Simple Bitcoin Price History Chart Since 2009 . Us Dollar Singapore Exchange Rate Historical Chart Macrotrends. Four Charts That Suggest Bitcoin Value Could Be At 10 000 Usd Next Year. Bitcoin Value Graph 2018. Bitcoin ... New Liberty Standard opens a service to buy and sell bitcoin, with an initial exchange rate of 1,309.03 BTC to one U.S. Dollar, or about eight hundredths of a cent per bitcoin. The rate is derived from the cost of electricity used by a computer to generate, or “mine” the currency.

[index] [8694] [42909] [10132] [25540] [30602] [19947] [13784] [2570] [12073] [24833]

Chart - Exchange rate NZ$1.00 = US$

The EUR/USD (Euro - US Dollar) exchange rate has fluctuated a lot during the last 10 years. Recently there is a lot of commotion about the slide of the Euro versus the US Dollar. Raising volume in the Bitcoin is good, but how fluid is it all? From the Technical Indicators section, choose Money Flow index. A second graph appears. It looks like this currency doesn't have yet ... This video represent history of BTC-USD exchange rate until 2019.07.11 Bitcoin price is like crazy right now. How much will rising up? and, How much will falling down? Exchanges I'm using: ... Bitcoin Cash(BCH) hash rate drops 90% after halving. Time to abandon ship? - Duration: 5:52. Cryptocurrency News 2,944 views. 5:52. How to Trade Options on Robinhood for ... #bitcoin to dollar #bitcoin exchange #how much is one bitcoin #local bitcoin #bitcoin cost #buy bitcoin instantly #bitcoin rate #bitcoin market cap #bitcoin exchange rate #bitcoin account #bitcoin ...

#