1 mBTC to BTC (Milibit to Bitcoin) convert, exchange rate

Tasks4Coin

Tasks4Coin is a place where bitcoin rewards are offered for the completion of small tasks.
[link]

Bitcoin Raffle

A weekly Bitcoin raffle!
[link]

The place for all Bitcoin related puzzles!

This is the place for all of your Bitcoin related puzzles and scavenger hunts.
[link]

1 mBTC (milli Bitcoin/0.001 BTC) is worth $11.73

Friendly reminder before it goes parabolic to $1000
submitted by fillet_b to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

1 mBTC (milli Bitcoin/0.001 BTC) is worth $11.73 (x-post from /r/Bitcoin)

submitted by ASICmachine to CryptoCurrencyClassic [link] [comments]

Just a reminder that it costs $11.15 to buy 1 mBTC (x-post from /r/Bitcoin)

submitted by ASICmachine to CryptoCurrencyClassic [link] [comments]

Why use mBTC and uBTC? Let's just skip to using satoshis.

A satoshi is the smallest denomination of a bitcoin.
mBTC and uBTC are confusing for most people.
This is why I would prefer if people just skipped to using Satoshis. We'll have to eventually anyway.
1 BTC = 100 million satoshis.
Or, 1 BTC = 100M satoshis.
Similar to how 1 USD = 100 cents. (Maybe that's not a coincidence.)
0.01 bitcoins = 1 million satoshis (or 1M satoshis).
0.001 bitcoins = 100K satoshis.
0.0001 bitcoins = 10K satoshis.
0.00001 bitcoins = 1000 satoshis. (How many mBTC is this? How many uBTC is this?)
Moving forward, it will be really easy to talk about giving satoshis to people, compared to switching from BTC to mBTC to uBTC...
It's tough to price something at 0.000001 bitcoins, but it's easy when you write that price as 100 satoshis instead.
submitted by ferroh to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Thought experiment: what happens to Bitcoin market cap if mBTC is the base unit (1 mBTC = $13.08)?

I've recently been thinking that a lot of the price action has been driven by new market entrants feeling 'priced out' of BTC – meaning they feel that if they can't afford a 1 btc, why bother. That has driven a lot cheaper, less fundamentally promising (imo) coins to insane levels.
If exchanges moved to mBTC as the base unit, do you think Bitcoin market cap would explode and accelerate adoption? Or do you think this has nothing to do with it, people genuinely believe in the underlying tech of other coins.
submitted by rab_eye to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

The median Bitcoin transaction fee breaks the $1 level, while the average blasts through 1 mBTC and nears $2 📈

The median Bitcoin transaction fee breaks the $1 level, while the average blasts through 1 mBTC and nears $2 📈 submitted by Har01d to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I just looked at my phone and... at 4:44, it was 44° F, and 1 mBTC (1/1000 of a Bitcoin) was worth $6.44.

Did I miss my opportunity to do something?! Heh.
submitted by Turil to wholisticenchilada [link] [comments]

The median Bitcoin transaction fee breaks the $1 level, while the average blasts through 1 mBTC and nears $2 📈

The median Bitcoin transaction fee breaks the $1 level, while the average blasts through 1 mBTC and nears $2 📈 submitted by Har01d to btc [link] [comments]

Bitcoin mentioned around Reddit: I just looked at my phone and... at 4:44, it was 44° F, and 1 mBTC (1/1000 of a Bitcoin) was worth $6.44. /r/wholisticenchilada

Bitcoin mentioned around Reddit: I just looked at my phone and... at 4:44, it was 44° F, and 1 mBTC (1/1000 of a Bitcoin) was worth $6.44. /wholisticenchilada submitted by SimilarAdvantage to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

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!

Summary
http://www.numbersleuth.org/worlds-gold/
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:
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:
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 Back u/adam3us and CTO Greg Maxwell u/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
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5xjkof/im_angry_about_axa_scraping_some_counterfeit/
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/
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/4klqtg/people_are_starting_to_realize_how_toxic_gregory/
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.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5i4885/greg_maxwell_unullc_says_the_next_miner_afte
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?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mlo0z/greg_maxwell_used_to_have_intelligent_nuanced/
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.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4degqk/the_biggest_threat_to_bitcoin_is_blockstream/
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??
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/47fr3p/4_weird_facts_about_adam_back_1_he_neve
Artificially Limiting the Blocksize to Create a “Fee Market” = Another Variety of Lifting the 21 Million Bitcoin Cap - Bitcoin Economics
Chinese version:
www.8btc.com/tan90d124
We will look back on 2017 and realize that every time we did a bitcoin transaction, we were paying 1/3 of an ounce of precious gold in insanely overpriced fees - similar to the notoriously overpriced "10,000 BTC pizza" of yesteryear.
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
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5lzez2/1_btc_64_000_usd_would_be_1_trillion_market_cap/
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)
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/48gcyj/i_think_that_it_will_be_easier_to_increase_the/
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
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3xhejm/the_nine_miners_of_china_core_is_a_red_herring/
Coders shouldn't get "more power" deciding the economic properties of Bitcoin. The entire Bitcoin community should decide.
The economics of Bitcoin already worked fine when Satoshi first released it - and have worked fine for the past 8 years.
Starting in late 2014, a bunch of central bankers including the insurance giant AXA (the second-most-connected fiat finance institution in the world) gave $76 million to a bunch of anti-market central planners (Blockstream CEO Adam Back, Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell) - and now every time we want to do a transaction, we have to pay an insanely, astronomically, artificially high fee corresponding to 1/3 ounce of gold.
Coders should provide the economic features that the Bitcoin community wants - and the economic features that Satoshi originally designed.
Coders should not have "more power" to change Bitcoin's economic parameters - suppressing Bitcoin volume and price and artificially increasing the fees - basically destroying Bitcoin's original value proposition as "sound money".
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
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3xdc9e/nobody_has_been_able_to_convincingly_answer_the/
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.
https://medium.com/the-publius-letters/segregated-witness-a-fork-too-far-87d6e57a4179#.jc04xwtmt
Core/Blockstream's current code with its centrally planned 1MB blocksize:
  • is artificially suppressing Bitcoin volume;
  • is artificially suppressing Bitcoin price;
  • 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.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5ejmin/coreblockstream_is_living_in_a_fantasy_world_in/
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
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3yeypc/if_there_are_only_20_seats_on_the_bus_and_25/
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.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5dz7ye/letting_fees_float_without_letting_blocksizes/
Core/Blockstream's proposed "solution" (SegWit), would be a disaster:
  • 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 Back u/adam3us and Greg Maxwell u/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.
  • Bitcoin will be worth much, much more once it is liberated from the toxic influence and price suppression and central planning of economic idiots like Adam Back and Greg Maxwell.
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:
  • higher volume
  • higher price,
  • lower fees
  • 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).
Conclusion
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.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/43lxgn/21_months_ago_gavin_andresen_published_a/
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"
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/57brcb/bitcoin_unlimited_is_the_real_bitcoin_in_line/
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.
~ You Do The Math - u/ydtm
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

I thought that if $/BTC broke $1,000, Bitcoinity.org would default to mBTC.

What happened to this? I expected a switch once both BitStamp & Mt. Gox exceeded $1k, with the option to still display $/BTC if desired.
I feel like this would be a good initial movement in the community to initiate the conversion.
submitted by Submersed to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

FortuneJack lets you spin for a free 100 mBTC everyday (0.1 Bitcoin) also they're RNG-certified and approved by "Ask-Gamblers"

submitted by KyleSword1701 to BitcoinGambling [link] [comments]

Solve this puzzle for 1 mBTC! [ and, more importantly, lots of fun :D ] /r/Bitcoin

Solve this puzzle for 1 mBTC! [ and, more importantly, lots of fun :D ] /Bitcoin submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Kbit is so much better than mBTC for 1/1000th of a Bitcoin

Just realized this checking btcc poker chips (don't see the point of these unlike their previous collectibles, so please don't take this for an hidden ad but credit is due where credit is due).
They used kbits for what we usually use as mBTC. I.e 1/1000th of a Bitcoin. And I thought it was so much better.
First, people are much more used to count up rather than down, nobody has ever used the milli prefix for any currency EVER. We always stopped at cents.
Second, people are already used to bits for data and it sounds even better than Bitcoin. Spacecash here we come.
submitted by Taidiji to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

If you wanted to buy Bitcoin right now... Would you want to pay 1 USD penny for 6 bits or $1.80 for only 1 mBTC? Which argument wins this debate for the next future step?

If you wanted to buy Bitcoin right now... Would you want to pay 1 USD penny for 6 bits or $1.80 for only 1 mBTC? Which argument wins this debate for the next future step? submitted by PASSO3058 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Should we use the term 1 mBTC to treat bitcoin? Psychological barrier for new users...

http://www.btcsatoshi.com/
submitted by eumeich to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

1 MBTC is around $10 bucks. /r/Bitcoin

1 MBTC is around $10 bucks. /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

10-06 14:02 - 'I want to buy 1 mBTC with PayPal' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/Techius2 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 23-33min

'''
Where can I do this?
'''
I want to buy 1 mBTC with PayPal
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: Techius2
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Should we use the term 1 mBTC to treat bitcoin? Psychological barrier for new users... /r/Bitcoin

Should we use the term 1 mBTC to treat bitcoin? Psychological barrier for new users... /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

10-14 16:33 - 'A donation of 1.7 mBTC ($10.03) was made to fund the defense and reverse bad precedent of Ross Ulbricht's conviction. #FreeRoss' (twitter.com) by /u/kybarnet removed from /r/Bitcoin within 30-40min

A donation of 1.7 mBTC ($10.03) was made to fund the defense and reverse bad precedent of Ross Ulbricht's conviction. #FreeRoss
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: kybarnet
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

[uncensored-r/BitcoinMarkets] Thought experiment: what happens to Bitcoin market cap if mBTC is the base unit (1 mBTC = $13.08)?

The following post by rab_eye is being replicated because some comments within the post(but not the post itself) have been silently removed.
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/ BitcoinMarkets/comments/7n60ay
The original post's content was as follows:
I've recently been thinking that a lot of the price action has been driven by new market entrants feeling 'priced out' of BTC – meaning they feel that if they can't afford a 1 btc, why bother. That has driven a lot cheaper, less fundamentally promising (imo) coins to insane levels.
If exchanges moved to mBTC as the base unit, do you think Bitcoin market cap would explode and accelerate adoption? Or do you think this has nothing to do with it, people genuinely believe in the underlying tech of other coins.
submitted by censorship_notifier to noncensored_bitcoin [link] [comments]

Article states that Litecoin is "vastly more affordable" than Bitcoin due to lower price of 1 LTC vs 1 XBT. Even people writing articles about Bitcoin don't understand divisibility -- this is why we need to switch to mBTC.

Article states that Litecoin is submitted by ferroh to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoins Erklärung: In nur 12 Min. Bitcoin verstehen ... so bekommst du deine ersten mBtc ohne 1 cent auszugeben Bitcoin BTC Adder - YouTube Bitcoins & Gravy - YouTube Calculadora de Bitcoin, Satoshis, mBTC y Dolares

Dezimal(BTC) Maximale Anzahl Bitcoins: 20,999,999.9769 MBTC megabitcoin 1,000,000 kBTC kilobitcoin 1,000 hBTC hectobitcoin 100 Initiale Block Vergütung 50 Aktuelle Block Vergütung 25 daBTC decabitcoin 10 BTC bitcoin Min. Bitcoin value was $11,700.37. BTC price increased by 2.3% between min. and max. value. Certainly it is good news for all. The Bitcoin increased by 3.15% on Monday 19th of October 2020. And we have data for yesterday. The average value Bitcoin price for convert (or exchange rate) during the day was $11,553.23. Max. BTC price was $11,802.82. Min. Bitcoin value was $11,430.56. BTC price ... What Is Bitcoin (BTC)? Bitcoin is a decentralized cryptocurrency originally described in a 2008 whitepaper by a person, or group of people, using the alias Satoshi Nakamoto.It was launched soon after, in January 2009. Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer online currency, meaning that all transactions happen directly between equal, independent network participants, without the need for any intermediary to ... BTC/EUR: Aktueller Bitcoin - Euro Kurs heute mit Chart, historischen Kursen und Nachrichten. Wechselkurs BTC in EUR. Min. Bitcoin value was $11,700.37. BTC price increased by 2.3% between min. and max. value. Certainly it is good news for all. The Bitcoin increased by 3.15% on Monday 19th of October 2020. And we have data for yesterday. The average value Bitcoin price for convert (or exchange rate) during the day was $11,553.23. Max. BTC price was $11,802.82. Min. Bitcoin value was $11,430.56. BTC price ...

[index] [39745] [37299] [2695] [29900] [883] [29963] [5967] [47871] [40507] [22892]

Bitcoins Erklärung: In nur 12 Min. Bitcoin verstehen ...

Gana Dinero Con bitcoin 2017 - +0.03BTC/DIA (+35$/dia) Invertir En BITCOINS 2017 VER VIDEO - Duration: 13:11. Jose Toledo 157,818 views What it really takes to mine a Bitcoin in 10 Minutes. Firstly I'll show you a special free method to mine Bitcoin and send funds directly to your wallet in 1... Bitcoin MINER 2020 Hack unlimited BTC every day to any your Bitcoin Wallet - Duration: 7 minutes, 59 seconds. Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. Die erste große Anwendung der Blockchain und der Pionier unter den Kryptowährungen

#