Bitcoin Gold price today, BTG marketcap, chart, and info ...
Bitcoin Gold price today, BTG marketcap, chart, and info ...
Ecosystem Bitcoin Gold
Gold vs Bitcoin Chart: BTC Price in Gold (Updated Daily)
Gold Parity 247 Bitcoin
Gold, Bitcoin, and the Death of Risk Parity Real Vision
For every 1 BTC in the world, there's 333 ounces of gold. True "bitcoin-gold parity" is 1 BTC = 333 ounces of gold or 1 mBTC = 1/3 oz gold. Today's 1 mBTC average fee (forced on us by Greg Maxwell / Adam Back / AXA) is the new 10,000 BTC pizza. Congratulations! You just paid 1/3 oz gold in txn fees!
For every 1 BTC on the planet, there's 333 ounces of gold.
For every 1 mBTC (0.001 BTC) on the planet, there's 1/3 ounce of gold.
Under the artificial "fee markets" imposed by the ignorant, corrupt, AXA-fiat-funded Blockstream CEO Adam Back and CTO Greg Maxwell, network congestion and transaction delays lasting for days have now become a weekly occurrence - and the average Bitcoin transaction fee has now skyrocketed to 1 mBTC per transaction.
So now you're paying the future equivalent of 1/3 ounce of gold in artificially high fees, every time you do a slow, unreliable Bitcoin transaction.
This disaster was totally avoidable. The blame is due solely to the economic ignorance and central planning of Adam Back / Greg Maxwell / AXA, and their misguided attempt to distort Bitcoin's economic value in order to force everyone off the blockchain and onto Blockstream's non-existent, centralized, censorable, unreliable LightningNetwork Central Banking Hubs.
We must preserve Satoshi's original economic design for Bitcoin:
Details http://www.numbersleuth.org/worlds-gold/ For every 1 BTC on the planet, there's 333 ounces of gold. There's only 15 MILLION BTC in the world (plus new BTC mining of 12.5 * 6 * 24 * 365 = 657,000 new BTC mined each year - ie 4.38% annual bitcoin "inflation" - during the current 4-year "halving" period which runs from approximately August 2016 to August 2020). There's 165,000 metric tons * 32,150 troy ounces per ton = 5 BILLION troy ounces of gold in the world (plus new gold mining of 2,500 metric tons * 32,150 troy ounces per ton = 80.375 million new troy ounces of new gold being mined each year - ie 1.52% annual gold "inflation"). If you like to think of Bitcoin as "digital gold", and you want to be able to do rough but realistic comparisons and computations quickly in your head, then you should adopt the following guidelines: A whole bitcoin is really big! Stop thinking in terms of whole Bitcoins, and start thinking in terms of milli-Bitcoins - ie mBTC (0.001 BTC). Always remember that a whole bitcoin is very "big" - it contains 1,000 mBTC (milli-Bitcoins, where 1 mBTC = 0.001 BTC). The following comparison (motto / slogan) is what you should always say to yourself in your head:
For every 1 BTC in the world, there are 333 ounces of gold.
This is because it is based on comparing roughly similar number of units in the world:
the 15 billion mBTC or "milli-Bitcoins" (0.001 BTC) in the world, versus
the 5 billion ounces of gold in the world.
So 3 mBTC (3 milli-Bitcoins) corresponds to 1 troy ounce of gold - and will probably someday be worth as much, after we get rid of the price suppression caused by Greg Maxwell / Adam Back / AXA. It's nice to see comparisons of "1 BTC = 1 ounce of gold!!1!" in the mainstream and the Bitcoin media - but talking about "bitcoin-gold parity" now is actually a meaningless, confusing, financially ingorant and deceptive distraction. This is because the only thing that has happened is that the price of 1 BTC (which is a lot of mBTC, it's 1000 mBTC!) has surpassed the price of 1 troy ounce of gold - which isn't really very meaningful, because it doesn't match similar-number-of-units-to-similar-number-of-units. True "bitcoin-gold parity" will arrive:
when the total market cap of Bitcoin (currently about USD 20 BILLION USD) is equal to the total market cap of gold (currently about 6.6 TRILLION USD);
ie when 1 BTC is worth 333 ounces of gold;
ie when 3 mBTC is worth 1 ounce of gold.
So, the true "bitcoin-gold parity" isn't here yet - but it's almost certainly going to be here in a few years. The Bitcoin price "only" needs to rise about 333x - ie it "only" needs to double 8-9 more times (because 28 = 256 and 29 = 512) - which is actually quite doable in the next few years. "1 mBTC fees" are the new "10,000 BTC pizza." Remember, today's ridiculously and artificially high "1 mBTC average transaction fee" will probably eventually be worth 1/3 ounce of gold. Congratulations! You just spent 1/3 of an ounce of gold to send a "cheap" Bitcoin transaction! In a few years, we will all look back with regret on the "one-dollar average Bitcoin transaction fees" which we have now started (over-)paying in the artificial "fee market" of 2017 which was artificially forced on us by the evil central bankers of AXA and Blockstream's toxic, deceptive, economically ignorant CEO Dr Adam Backu/adam3us and CTO Greg Maxwellu/nullc.
"I'm angry about AXA scraping some counterfeit money out of their fraudulent empire to pay autistic lunatics millions of dollars to stall the biggest sociotechnological phenomenon since the internet and then blame me and people like me for being upset about it." ~ u/dresden_k
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.
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.
Greg Maxwell u/nullc says "The next miner after them sets their minimum [fee] to some tiny value ... and clears out the backlog and collects a bunch of funds that the earlier miner omitted" - like it's a BAD THING. Greg is proposing a SUPPLY-LIMITING AND PRICE-FIXING CARTEL, like it's a GOOD THING.
Greg Maxwell used to have intelligent, nuanced opinions about "max blocksize", until he started getting paid by AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group - the legacy financial elite which Bitcoin aims to disintermediate. Greg always refuses to address this massive conflict of interest. Why?
The biggest threat to Bitcoin is Blockstream President Adam "Phd" Back. He never understood Bitcoin, but he wants to control it and radically change it. It is time for Bitcoin users, developers and miners to reject his dangerous ideas and his attempts to centrally control our community and our code.
4 weird facts about Adam Back: (1) He never contributed any code to Bitcoin. (2) His Twitter profile contains 2 lies. (3) He wasn't an early adopter, because he never thought Bitcoin would work. (4) He can't figure out how to make Lightning Network decentralized. So... why do people listen to him??
Changing to a very high fee model is a betrayal of investors, a vast diminishment of sound money, as every holder must spend in order to benefit from all their holding. Such a betrayal, if it ever must happen, needs to be a disastrous last resort, certainly not a first resort. ~ u/ForkiusMaximus
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5fpk9m/changing_to_a_very_high_fee_model_is_a_betrayal/ Don't fall for the economic ignorance of the corrupt AXA-fiat-funded Blockstream CEO Dr Adam Back and CEO Greg Maxwell and their artificial, insanely overpriced "fee markets". Remember, every time you send 3 transactions - you just paid ridiculous, artificially overpriced fees to miners which will someday probably be worth a whole ounce of precious gold. What can we do? We can and should reject the artificial fee markets created by AXA and Blockstream CEO Adam Back and CTO Greg Maxwell and their crippled Blocktream Core / SegWit code with its centrally planned 1MB and 1.7MB blocksize. If you want Bitcoin's price and volume to rise, and Bitcoin's fees to decrease - while miners can still make lots of money from the block reward based on high prices and high volume, now you can! Now you can support lower fees and higher volume and prices (and plenty of profits for miners - due to higher bitcoin price, and more, cheaper transactions per block), simply by running better Bitcoin software - such as Bitcoin Unlimited. Bitcoin Unlimited is better than Bitcoin Core and SegWit - because Bitcoin Unlimited supports market-based blocksize - in line with Satoshi's original vision for Bitcoin, supporting higher volume and prices, and lower fees.
1 BTC = 64 000 USD would be > $1 trillion market cap - versus $7 trillion market cap for gold, and $82 trillion of "money" in the world. Could "pure" Bitcoin get there without SegWit, Lightning, or Bitcoin Unlimited? Metcalfe's Law suggests that 8MB blocks could support a price of 1 BTC = 64 000 USD
Bitcoin Original: Reinstate Satoshi's original 32MB max blocksize. If actual blocks grow 54% per year (and price grows 1.542 = 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
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5uljaf/bitcoin_original_reinstate_satoshis_original_32mb/ Miners provide a cheap commodity (blockspace) - and they work for you. From the block reward alone, miners are earning 12.5 Bitcoins - or 12,500 mBTC, every ten-minute block, during this current 4-year "halving" period. At some point in the not-too-distant future, today's 10-minute block reward of 12.5 bitcoins could easily be worth 12,500 / 3 = 4,163 friggin' ounces of gold! Doing 10 minutes of work to compete to earn 12.5 BTC or 12,500 mBTC (ie, the future equivalent of 4,163 ounces of gold) is a lot of fuckin' money - based on the block reward alone, and not even counting any fees, which are just "gravy". This is why Satoshi was right when he intended the block reward alone to be sufficient for mining during this four-year "halving" period - and during the next few four-year halving periods as well. Remember, 1 BTC is a lot.
1 BTC = 1,000 mBTC
1 BTC corresponds to 333 ounces of gold
3 mBTC corresponds to 1 ounce of gold.
Miners don't need fees to get rich, during the next few decades of four-year "halving" periods where each 10-minute block reward alone (without fees) lets a miner earn:
50,000 mBTC per block until 2012 (probably eventually worth 16,650 ounces of gold);
25,000 mBTC per block until 2016 (probably eventually worth 8,325 ounces of gold);
12,500 mBTC per block until 2020 (probably eventually worth 4,163 ounces of gold);
6,250 mBTC per block until 2024 (probably eventually worth 2,081 ounces of gold);
3,125 mBTC per block until 2028 (probably eventually worth 1,041 ounces of gold);
1,562.5 mBTC per block until 2032 (probably eventually worth 520 ounces of gold);
781.25 mBTC per block until 2036 (probably eventually worth 260 ounces of gold);
390.625 mBTC per block until 2040 (probably eventually worth 130 ounces of gold);
195.3125 mBTC per block until 2044 (probably eventually worth 65 ounces of gold);
The above "ounces of gold" are what a miner can earn every ten minutes with Bitcoin - before even including any fees. Miners are being short-sighted and greedy by trying to get more money from (artificially) higher bitcoin fees right now. They're shooting themselves in the foot. They should instead focus on getting more money from higher bitcoin price - which will happen with market-based blocksize (which will actually also bring more fees, because there will be more transactions per block).
I think that it will be easier to increase the volume of transactions 10x than it will be to increase the cost per transaction 10x. - jtoomim (miner, coder, founder of Classic)
The Nine Miners of China: "Core is a red herring. Miners have alternative code they can run today that will solve the problem. Choosing not to run it is their fault, and could leave them with warehouses full of expensive heating units and income paid in worthless coins." – tsontar
For 55.2% of Bitcoin addresses, fees are now bigger than the amount of Bitcoin they have. Where will YOU be when YOUR savings are wiped out by fees?
https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/5xsxhu/for_552_of_bitcoin_addresses_fees_are_now_bigge The market - and Satoshi - knows more than any of today's coders, when it comes to Bitcoin's economic qualities, like volume and price and fees. Core/Blockstream wants "centrally planned" (tiny) Bitcoin's volume - which actually leads to "centrally planned" (high) fees and "centrally planned" (suppressed) price - and over half of Bitcoin's currently addresses now becoming essentially unspendable, as shown in the link above.
Nobody has been able to convincingly answer the question, "What should the optimal block size limit be?" And the reason nobody has been able to answer that question is the same reason nobody has been able to answer the question, "What should the price today be?" – tsontar
The debate is not "SHOULD THE BLOCKSIZE BE 1MB VERSUS 1.7MB?". The debate is: "WHO SHOULD DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?" (1) Should an obsolete temporary anti-spam hack freeze blocks at 1MB? (2) Should a centralized dev team soft-fork the blocksize to 1.7MB? (3) OR SHOULD THE MARKET DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5pcpec/the_debate_is_not_should_the_blocksize_be_1mb/ Core/Blockstream's code is starting to cause an economic disaster for Bitcoin. Core/Blockstream's code imposes a centrally planned 1MB blocksize (or SegWit's centrally planned 1.7MB blocksize) - inevitably leading to frequent backlogs and high fees and decreased price and adoption - plus years of distracting, needless bikeshedding about blocksize. Core/Blockstream's proposed SegWit would be yet more unwanted and inefficient "central planning" - plus new, radical, irresponsible changes to Bitcoin's original economic design - imposing a centrally planned 1.7MB blocksize - plus adding lots of dangerous and unnecessary technical debt (eg, making all transactions "anyone-can-spend").
Segregated Witness: A Fork Too Far by Jaqen Hash'ghar Segregated Witness is the most radical and irresponsible protocol upgrade Bitcoin has faced in its eight year history. The push for the SW soft fork puts Bitcoin miners in a difficult and unfair position to the extent that they are pressured into enforcing a complicated and contentious change to the Bitcoin protocol, without community consensus or an honest discussion weighing the benefits against the costs. The scale of the code changes are far from trivial - nearly every part of the codebase is affected by SW. While increasing the transaction capacity of Bitcoin has already been significantly delayed, SW represents an unprofessional and ineffective solution to both transaction malleability and scaling. As a soft fork, SW introduces more technical debt to the protocol and fundamentally fails to achieve its design purpose. As a hard fork, combined with real on-chain scaling, SW can effectively mitigate transaction malleability and quadratic signature hashing. Each of these issues are too important for the future of Bitcoin to gamble on SW as a soft fork and the permanent baggage that comes with it. It is far better to work towards a clean technical solution to malleability and scaling than to further encumber the Bitcoin protocol with permanent technical debt.
is artificially causing congestion on the network - driving away users;
is artificially increasing Bitcoin fees;
has artificially made over half of all current Bitcoin addresses effectively "unspendable".
Some people might laugh and say that those addresses represent "only" a total of 1,600 BTC - but remember, that corresponds to "only" 1,600 * 333 = 532,800 or over half a million ounces of gold being made "unspendable" - all because of the economic ignorance and central planning of Adam Back and Greg Maxwell and AXA.
Core/Blockstream is living in a fantasy world. In the real world everyone knows (1) our hardware can support 4-8 MB (even with the Great Firewall), and (2) hard forks are cleaner than soft forks. Core/Blockstream refuses to offer either of these things. Other implementations (eg: BU) can offer both.
If there are only 20 seats on the bus and 25 people that want to ride, there is no ticket price where everyone gets a seat. Capacity problems can't be fixed with a "fee market", they are fixed by adding seats, which in this case means raising the blocksize cap. – Vibr8gKiwi
Letting FEES float without letting BLOCKSIZES float is NOT a "market". A market has 2 sides: One side provides a product/service (blockspace), the other side pays fees/money (BTC). An "efficient market" is when players compete and evolve on BOTH sides, approaching an ideal FEE/BLOCKSIZE EQUILIBRIUM.
imposing yet another centrally planned blocksize (1.7MB);
adding dangerous and unnecessary "technical debt" by making all transactions "anyone-can-spend" - simply because Core is afraid that a proper upgrade (a hard fork) would remove them from their position of power.
Core/Blockstream is pro-AXA and pro-central-bankers - and anti-market and anti-Bitcoin. The only reason you're now paying the future equivalent of 1/3 of an ounce of gold every time you do a Bitcoin transaction is because of the toxic alliance between $76 million in "fantasy fiat" from evil central bankers like AXA combined with the centralized economic planning and ignorance of Blockstream CEO Adam Back and CTO Greg Maxwell. Adam Backu/adam3us and Greg Maxwellu/nullc are among the most economically ignorant and damaging people in the Bitcoin community.
They don't understand anything about how Bitcoin and markets actually work in the real world.
They want to impose their own centrally planned numbers, which they pulled out of their ass (1MB current blocksize, 1.7MB SegWit blocksize), instead of letting the market (miners) continue to determine the blocksize - the way Bitcoin worked so successfully for the past 8 years.
Adam Back was one of the first people that Satoshi told about Bitcoin - but Adam didn't understand it then, and he didn't buy any until it was at its first major all-time high of over 1,100 USD. So he missed being an early adopter - because he doesn't understand economics and markets.
Adam Back thinks he's important because he invented hashcash - and he says very misleading things like "Bitcoin is hashcash plus inflation control" which is ignorant and/or insulting on his part.
The proper terminology should not be "inflation control" - it should be "distributed permissionless Nakamoto Consensus based on Satoshi's brilliant solution to the long-standing Byzantine Generals trustless coordination problem" - which Adam Back not only did not invent - but he also apparently does not fully understand, because he's trying to abolish Nakamoto Conensus_ for the blocksize, and replace it with his centrally planned blocksize.
Greg Maxwell knows cryptography and C++ - but this should not give him "special powers" to dictate the economic parameters of Bitcoin. Only the market can do this.
Fortunately, you don't need to run Core/Blockstream's crippled code any more.
We can revert to Satoshi's original 32MB blocksize (which would probably provide enough transaction capacity to support "million-dollar bitcoin" - far beyond "bitcoin-gold parity").
Or we can install Bitcoin Unlimited which would also allow the Bitcoin blocksize (and Bitcoin volume and price and fees) to be determined by the market.
Market-based blocksize will naturally lead to:
plenty of profits for miners (from the block reward alone, based on much higher Bitcoin price - plus also based on more total fees for miners and lower individual fees for users - due to greater volume, due to more transactions per block).
21 months ago, Gavin Andresen published "A Scalability Roadmap", including sections called: "Increasing transaction volume", "Bigger Block Road Map", and "The Future Looks Bright". This was the Bitcoin we signed up for. It's time for us to take Bitcoin back from the strangle-hold of Blockstream.
Bitcoin Unlimited is the real Bitcoin, in line with Satoshi's vision. Meanwhile, BlockstreamCoin+RBF+SegWitAsASoftFork+LightningCentralizedHub-OfflineIOUCoin is some kind of weird unrecognizable double-spendable non-consensus-driven fiat-financed offline centralized settlement-only non-P2P "altcoin"
AXA/Blockstream are suppressing Bitcoin price at 1000 bits = 1 USD. If 1 bit = 1 USD, then Bitcoin's market cap would be 15 trillion USD - close to the 82 trillion USD of "money" in the world. With Bitcoin Unlimited, we can get to 1 bit = 1 USD on-chain with 32MB blocksize ("Million-Dollar Bitcoin")
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5u72va/axablockstream_are_suppressing_bitcoin_price_at/ If you want Bitcoin to continue to succeed, and if you want the price to continue going towards the moon, and if you want to stop paying exorbitant artificially high fees corresponding to 1/3 ounce of gold, and if you want miners to still get rich from the block reward (while they also earn some extra money based on higher total fees due to more transactions per block, while users pay lower individual fees per transaction)... ...then the best roadmap would be:
Reject Core/Blockstream's current centrally planned blocksize of 1MB, and their proposed SegWit 1.7MB centrally planned blocksize with its unnecessary, dangerous "anyone-can-spend" soft-fork semantics;
Continue using using Satoshi's original market-based blocksize, by installing Bitcoin Unlimited - which lets miners continue to set the blocksize as they always have, using emergent consensus.
Reaching Gold Parity Price Will Be One Of The Biggest Psychological Steps For Bitcoin.
Gold is currently $1242 per troy ounce. It has historically been the most widely known and well regarded transnational store of value in the world. Even though the units don't match in any way there will be a day of reckoning when Bitcoin pushes out past Gold in it's fiat value because Gold is valued around the world as a commodity. That is all :)
In honor of this incredible achievement if you visit our site (www.amagimetals.com) between now and Monday and make a purchase with Bitcoin you will get a chance to win a 1 gram Valcambi Suisse Gold Bar. So come spend your Bitcoins with us and get a chance to win.
Gold Parity. Posted on March 2, 2017 by 247 Bitcoin. 24 7 Bitcoin. Bitcoin News Search. 1 News -24 7 News -24 7 Bitcoin -1 Search. Search for: submitted by /u/TRWNBC 24 7 Bitcoin. Bitcoin News Search. 1 News -24 7 News -24 7 Bitcoin -1 Search. Search for: Posted in Bitcoin News, News, Reddit Tagged 247 Bitcoin, Bitcoin, Bitcoin News, Bitcoins, BTC, Reddit. Leave a Reply Cancel reply. You must ... Flucht in den Bitcoin. Bereits im Zuge der Iran-Irak-Attacken zeigt sich live am Kursverlauf, dass der Bitcoin ähnlich wie Gold immer mehr als „sicherer Hafen“ in Krisenzeiten gesehen wird ... Gold and bitcoin have no ‘owner’ or central entity keeping it together. In gold’s case, it is a part of the planet. as for Bitcoin, it is an open source software that is maintained by a network anyone can transact on. Attacking or manipulating these decentralized currencies is likely to result in financial loss for the attacker and an increase in perceived value of the asset once it ... Bitcoin Gold price today is $7.78 USD with a 24-hour trading volume of $5,437,592 USD. Bitcoin Gold is down 1.61% in the last 24 hours. The current CoinMarketCap ranking is #78, with a market cap of $136,326,956 USD. It has a circulating supply of 17,513,924 BTG coins and a max. supply of 21,000,000 BTG coins. You can find the top exchanges to trade Bitcoin Gold listed on our Chart: How Bitcoin Reached Parity With Gold Charting the fast and volatile rise of bitcoin. The Chart of the Week is a weekly Visual Capitalist feature on Fridays. Would you rather have one bitcoin, or a single ounce of gold? The answer used to be obvious. Even at the climax of the legendary 2013 rally, bitcoin was never able to reach unit-for-unit parity with gold. However, since an off-year ...
Bitcoin, Gold and Silver: Once and Future Money - presentation by Alasdair MacLeod
Have you ever wondered what goes on at a major Bitcoin Conference, and what is involved. Who are the people that make up these conferences, what is involved, and how does everything come together ... This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue Open your Goldmoney account today. The Peter Schiff Show Podcast - 217 Sign up for my free newsletter: . Thanks for ing !!! Please Subscribe & Share video. Open your Goldmoney account today. The ... Discord (Krowns Crypto Cave) - https://discord.gg/hzKU7qe Twitter - https://twitter.com/krowncryptocave?lang=en https://krowntrading.net/ - The digital hub o... • Bitcoin, Gold and Silver: Once and Future Money - A presentation by Alasdair MacLeod of GoldMoney, - Hosted by Godfrey Bloom MEP, UKIP - Sponsored by Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group