Cryptocurrency Prices, Charts And Market Capitalizations ...
Cryptocurrency Prices, Charts And Market Capitalizations ...
Bitcoin price today, BTC marketcap, chart, and info ...
Bitcoin (BTC) Latest Prices, Charts & Data Nasdaq
Bitcoin Price Chart (BTC) Coinbase
How Likely Will Bitcoin's Price Decouple from the Stock ...
Bitcoin - The Currency of the Internet
A community dedicated to Bitcoin, the currency of the Internet. Bitcoin is a distributed, worldwide, decentralized digital money. Bitcoins are issued and managed without any central authority whatsoever: there is no government, company, or bank in charge of Bitcoin. You might be interested in Bitcoin if you like cryptography, distributed peer-to-peer systems, or economics. A large percentage of Bitcoin enthusiasts are libertarians, though people of all political philosophies are welcome.
Why is th Bitcoin market price so much higher in Canadian Exchanges than on International exchanges?
The question I have is: Why is BTC so much more expensive on Canadian exchanges than elsewhere? E.g: right now 2018.10.16 Blockchain.com: 1BTC = 8593.08 CAD Kraken.com : 1BTC = 8404.2 CAD VS CBIX.ca1BTC = 8639.07 CAD (index only) Bitbuy.ca : 1BTC = 9095.85 CAD (Buyable with Fiat) QuadrigaCX.ca : 1BTC = 9095.93 CAD (Buyable with Fiat) So it seems to me if I buy BTC (XBT) on Bitbuy in Canada and start with 10'000CAD worth:
I'll loose between 0.5-3.5% transferring into the exchange (Wire - interac up to Credit Card) (plus any bank per transaction fees: e.g 30 CAD for sending a wire)
Assuming wire transfer using Bitbuy.ca ( 0.5% & 30 wire fee) I'll have 9920CAD show up (50 & 30)
That will buy me 1.09 BTC (9095.9 rate)
Transferred to Kraken (I wan't to buy XRP) I suddenly loose about 600CAD in Value (8404 Rate) ?
Or am I mixing up something obvious? I'm a newby in the Cryptocurrency game. If there is an obvious place to look this up, I'm happy if somebody points a link or search term in the right direction. Many thanks
>I believe there is also currently a risk Bitcoin market price could fall below the required threshold (~$2400/BTC) very soon, which would compromise a lot of what is currently attempted until the price rises again. Still wondering what Mark meant by this.
Bitcoin's market *price* is trying to rally, but it is currently constrained by Core/Blockstream's artificial *blocksize* limit. Chinese miners can only win big by following the market - not by following Core/Blockstream. The market will always win - either with or without the Chinese miners.
TL;DR: Chinese miners should think very, very carefully:
You can either choose to be pro-market and make bigger profits longer-term; or
You can be pro-Blockstream and make smaller profits short-term - and then you will lose everything long-term, when the market abandons Blockstream's crippled code and makes all your hardware worthless.
The market will always win - with or without you. The choice is yours. UPDATE: The present post also inspired nullc Greg Maxwell (CTO of Blockstream) to later send me two private messages. I posted my response to him, here: https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4ir6xh/greg_maxwell_unullc_cto_of_blockstream_has_sent/ Details If Chinese miners continue using artificially constrained code controlled by Core/Blockstream, then Bitcoin price / adoption / volume will also be artificially constrained, and billions (eventually trillions) of dollars will naturally flow into some other coin which is not artificially constrained. The market always wins. The market will inevitably determine the blocksize and the price. Core/Blockstream is temporarily succeeding in suppressing the blocksize (and the price), and Chinese miners are temporarily cooperating - for short-term, relatively small profits. But eventually, inevitably, billions (and later trillions) of dollars will naturally flow into the unconstrained, free-market coin. That winning, free-market coin can be Bitcoin - but only if Chinese miners remove the artificial 1 MB limit and install Bitcoin Classic and/or Bitcoin Unlimited. Previous posts: There is not much new to say here - we've been making the same points for months. Below is a summary of the main arguments and earlier posts:
Miners should use the cryptographic code provided by those programmers. But miners should not use an arbitrary, artificial economic limit ("MAX_BLOCKSIZE = 1 000 000") unilaterally imposed by those programmers - who understand cryptography but do not understand economics.
Blockstream is planning to steal around 90% of miners' fees, by forcing most transactions off the blockchain, and onto an unproven, centralized, off-chain system called Lightning Network.
The Bilderberg Group (major investors behind Blockstream) may be motivated to suppress Bitcoin price and adoption in order to prevent it from becoming a major world currency, and in order to allow central bankers to continue to control the world by infinitely printing their debt-backed fiat.
Independent Bitcoin implementations such as Bitcoin Classic and Bitcoin Unlimited use 99% of the same tested and proven code as Core / Blockstream - but without artificial limits on blocksize.
Bitcoin is not the only cryptocurrency game in town. There are many competing cryptocurrencies. And there is billions (eventually trillions) of dollars waiting to flow into cryptocurrency. Investors will not invest in a crippled coin. The winning coin will be the coin which is free of artificial constraints.
Investors have billions of dollars (eventually trillions) waiting to flow into cryptocurrency. Investors are software-neutral. Investors only care about wealth preservation and profit.
A Bitcoin "spinoff" (based on Bitcoin's existing ledger, but using a different hashing algorithm, to exclude existing miners) can and will be launched, if miners continue to use Core/Blockstream's crippled code.
Because a "spinoff" uses a different hashing algorithm, it would destroy existing miners' millions of dollars in hardware investment.
But because a "spinoff" uses the existing ledger, it would also preserve investors' billions of dollars in wealth.
The market will eventually win - with or without Chinese miners. The market always wins.
If the Chinese miners follow the market, then they have a simple, guaranteed path towards increasing long-term profits due to continuing rise in Bitcoin price and on-chain transaction fees - using their existing hardware.
If miners follow Core / Blockstream / Bilderberg Group, they will lose potential profits in the short term (due to suppressed price), and they will lose everything in the long term (when investors massively move to another coin with another hashing algorithm).
Previous posts providing more details on these economic arguments are provided below:
This graph shows Bitcoin price and volume (ie, blocksize of transactions on the blockchain) rising hand-in-hand in 2011-2014. In 2015, Core/Blockstream tried to artificially freeze the blocksize - and artificially froze the price. Bitcoin Classic will allow volume - and price - to freely rise again.
Bitcoin has its own E = mc2 law: Market capitalization is proportional to the square of the number of transactions. But, since the number of transactions is proportional to the (actual) blocksize, then Blockstream's artificial blocksize limit is creating an artificial market capitalization limit!
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
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" ?
Blockstream is now controlled by the Bilderberg Group - seriously! AXA Strategic Ventures, co-lead investor for Blockstream's $55 million financing round, is the investment arm of French insurance giant AXA Group - whose CEO Henri de Castries has been chairman of the Bilderberg Group since 2012.
Austin Hill [head of Blockstream] in meltdown mode, desperately sending out conflicting tweets: "Without Blockstream & devs, who will code?" -vs- "More than 80% contributors of bitcoin core are volunteers & not affiliated with us."
Be patient about Classic. It's already a "success" - in the sense that it has been tested, released, and deployed, with 1/6 nodes already accepting 2MB+ blocks. Now it can quietly wait in the wings, ready to be called into action on a moment's notice. And it probably will be - in 2016 (or 2017).
Classic will definitely hard-fork to 2MB, as needed, at any time before January 2018, 28 days after 75% of the hashpower deploys it. Plus it's already released. Core will maybe hard-fork to 2MB in July 2017, if code gets released & deployed. Which one is safer / more responsive / more guaranteed?
"Bitcoin Unlimited ... makes it more convenient for miners and nodes to adjust the blocksize cap settings through a GUI menu, so users don't have to mod the Core code themselves (like some do now). There would be no reliance on Core (or XT) to determine 'from on high' what the options are." - ZB
BitPay's Adaptive Block Size Limit is my favorite proposal. It's easy to explain, makes it easy for the miners to see that they have ultimate control over the size (as they always have), and takes control away from the developers. – Gavin Andresen
Core/Blockstream is not Bitcoin. In many ways, Core/Blockstream is actually similar to MtGox. Trusted & centralized... until they were totally exposed as incompetent & corrupt - and Bitcoin routed around the damage which they had caused.
Satoshi Nakamoto, October 04, 2010, 07:48:40 PM "It can be phased in, like: if (blocknumber > 115000) maxblocksize = largerlimit / It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete."
Theymos: "Chain-forks [='hardforks'] are not inherently bad. If the network disagrees about a policy, a split is good. The better policy will win" ... "I disagree with the idea that changing the max block size is a violation of the 'Bitcoin currency guarantees'. Satoshi said it could be increased."
"They [Core/Blockstream] fear a hard fork will remove them from their dominant position." ... "Hard forks are 'dangerous' because they put the market in charge, and the market might vote against '[the] experts' [at Core/Blockstream]" - ForkiusMaximus
This ELI5 video (22 min.) shows XTreme Thinblocks saves 90% block propagation bandwidth, maintains decentralization (unlike the Fast Relay Network), avoids dropping transactions from the mempool, and can work with Weak Blocks. Classic, BU and XT nodes will support XTreme Thinblocks - Core will not.
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??
So what do you think the price of Bitcoin (and market cap) will be at the time of the crash? We're at 294 billion now. I think if we got anywhere close to a trillion people would be thinking, "What the fuck. This shit isn't worth a trillion." Then it bottoms out.
With all the recent talk about big money starting to trade OTC for bitcoin a lot of thoughts start to come to mind. Specifically when considering that these OTC markets are supposedly set up for high networth individuals as to not influence the normal market (lol). I mean WTF does that even mean? From where I sit it means that big money can load up on bitcoin while leaving the markets that normal networth people use unchanged. This is not a free market IMO! I mean I'm sure that there are pieces of this puzzle that I'm missing but here's the scenario as I see it today : Big money finally understands and accepts bitcoin is the future and wants in. They also want to be able to control price as much as possible. In order to do so they create futures products on the CME, CBOE, and soon to be NASDAQ. All of these are regulated by the SEC. Ironically the bitcoin markets themselves are not. Enter OTC markets. Now, while all of the normal people are using the typical Coinbase, GDAXs, kraken etc , they want to buy and sell in a good old boy network that average people are financially locked out of. Worse yet is that these large block trades that would have originally been forced onto the GDAXs Krakens etc are now completely offline and don't move the prices at all! To top it off they try to sell this to the masses as a good thing! This is not a good thing IMO. The big money is pouring in billions of dollars and the value of Bitcoin as seen on the exchanges is barely budging. Furthermore now that they have federally regulated futures products there's nothing stopping them from simply placing huge sell orders with these OTC bought coins on the GDAXs of the world and causing a plunge in the price of bitcoin. I really hope someone can show me how I'm wrong here but I do not think futures or OTC are a good thing at all here.
Even after Bitcoin has lost its undisputed dominance, it remains the largest cryptocurrency, with a market capitalization that fluctuated between $100-$200 billion in 2020, owing in large part to the ubiquitousness of platforms that provide use-cases for BTC: wallets, exchanges, payment services, online games and more. This is a special number, because if bitcoin reaches this price level, its market capitalization will be equal to gold’s market valuation. Jeet Signh An important portfolio manager that worked for more than six years in the cryptocurrency world, predicted this year that Bitcoin could reach $50,000 dollars. The on-chain analyst suggested that the stock market decline will eventually stop pulling Bitcoin’s price lower and that BTC could break the correlation with the stock market and potentially rally higher. Bitcoin and the stock market decoupling? While data suggests that there is a strong correlation between Bitcoin and equities, crypto ... Bitcoin (BTC) prices - Nasdaq offers cryptocurrency prices & market activity data for US and global markets. Market Wrap: Bitcoin Hits $10.7K; Options Market Likes Sub-$360 Ether Daniel Cawrey Sep 24, 2020 Bitcoin’s price popped Thursday while options traders take bearish ether October bets.
Bitcoin Ethereum ETH BTC Price Prediction Today ...
BTC (0:00) & LINK (12:30) Price Analysis. Check out BTCs Bull, Bear & Consolidation cases BITCOIN 💥Another GIGANTIC PUMP Incoming?💥 ️LIVE Crypto Analysis TA & BTC Cryptocurrency Price News - Duration: 27:57. Crypto Kirby Trading 17,557 views 27:57 Get the current price of bitcoin. Article: https://medium.com/@randerson112358/get-bitcoin-price-in-real-time-using-python-98b7393b6152?source=your_stories_... Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. bitcoin is finally breakout from the long lasting down trend channel. Could this be a new begging in bitcoins price? I will address this question in this vid...