though im hoarding alot a coin, i dont care much for the price drama. i dont even look at the price unless i have been prompted by other people drama.

those that understand bitcoin and in it for the long haul dont care much either. but i do have to agree a steady progressive price is better than a rampant price rise.

but with that said the up's and downs are to be expected.
if you are a trader do not panic/cry when the price drops. think of it as a discount day to buy more while cheap. if the price jumps treat it as a bonus day to sell at profit to then buy in later when it settles back down.

if your not a trader, then dont worry about the price

when the price drops. dont be letting fear get to you making you worry about should you sell.. instead think about it as a discount day and get excited about buying more while its cheap.

the altcoin prices are based on bitcoin prices.. which are then based on fiat prices

EG
lets make up a crapcoin for this example..
when bitcoin was $1000,
1sh*t=0.001btc      .. thus worth $1

if bitcoin went to $950
1sh*t still=0.001btc    .. but now only 95cents

so they sell the sh*tcoin to get to bitcoin to then sell the bitcoin to get fiat. hoping to do it in time to get ~90-95cent.
then hope to buy more than 0.001btc if the price continues to crash below the ~$900-$950 they sold their 0.001 at.
and then buy more than 1sh*t coin while that crashes.. in the hope that when bitcoin goes back to $1000 and 1sh*t=0.001 again they will have more than 1sh*t to get more than a dollar.

however by just holding the 1sh*t coin and not selling.. they are at a double loss during the crash because others sell their sh*t coin making the btc<->sh*t less than 0.001 and then the dollar<->bitcoin less than $1000 . meaning while the crash is happening their 1sh*t may be worth far less than 90cents even if the bitcoin<->dollar was still over $900 .. so it doesnt pay to hoard altcoins

fiat number is from Statistica, credicards.com and several other sources
i prefer to grab info from one site and compare it to lots of different sources to check and double check

it was something like (not verbatim so dont quote me exactly) 12tx debitcard 10tx credit card 7 wire transfer/billpayment 8ATM and the rest was cheques and other(paypal/WU/unionpay) per month

i found some other sites suggest debit/credit card usage was only 5-6 a month. but it didnt account for people with multiple accounts/card types where average person has 2 debit cards 2 credit cards.

yes some people only have one card, while others have 6+...

it also didnt account for wire transfers cheques, ATM usage, which means based on per person(not card) the numbers also substantiated the ~42tx a month stat.

in 2012 it was about 40tx but more recently it was 42tx a month (from memory)

then i also looked at my own life and all the bills i pay and amount of times i shop and done some checking with others too and came to similar numbers.

statista is a great source but i like to double check things.
EG
look at your own lifestyle
rent, local taxes, water rates, electric, gas, phone/internet - thats like 6 wire transfers
then think how often you would buy a coffee or sandwich with debit card each week. and do your grocery shopping.. that can be over 20 a month
for your credit/debit usage. think about how often you visit an ATM. i averaged 2 a week so that was 8 a month. then the left over is other payment methods.

yea some people stay in a basement and do 2 grocery shops using debit a month and have 6 wire transfers. totallying 10tx
yes some people love to shop every day and do 60 shops a month (visit 2-3 stores a day) and have many wire transfers to swap money from debit/checking account over to repay the credit and store cards. totalling 100tx

but an average of 40-42 seems to work out right based on multiple sources

---

as for the bitcoin 5tx stat.
well thats more simple..
~2500tx*144*28=10mill tx
2mill users/10mill tx=5tx a month
which looking at the lower 300,000 bitcoin merchants compared to the number of fiat merchants.. seems about right.
yes some people are faucet raiders and daytrading, gamblers.. but then there are hoarders too.. so 5 seems right.

hyperinflation does not rob everyone.... not at first
people on a fixed mortgage win... initially
the only problem is the banks lose out because the mortgage contract ends up only buying a loaf of bread.
people on a variable mortgage lose...
they end up having to pay ever increasing amounts. thus draining the person dry..

what then happens, which has been seen to have happen in africa(Zimbabwe) and the middle east(iraq/iran) in the past and isreal, syria right now) is the bankers then start a war, to force people out of their homes. (thank washington DC (IMF) for this)
the bankers then take the land and build new sparkling apartments to sell at profit.

check out all the new banks that were created in the middle east AFTER the bombs started striking those countries

you can see this happening now in isreal, syria. its a mass land grab. you can see what happened in zimbabwe and iraq/iran in the past.

the IMF will always win eventually

if you're asking about supply in regards to the price of a single bitcoin.
you have to check the supply of bitcoins on the order line of the exchange you are look at the price of...
each exchange has its own supply of coins in reserve and each exchange has its own bitcoin price

if you are asking about the market cap $ statistic.
this is an ESTIMATE statistic based on whatever site your looking at getting an average bitcoin price from multiple exchanges. and then multiplying that average by the total coins ever created.

the $$ market cap is a statistic.. it is not a true value. there is no billions of dollars attached to all the coins in existence.

the $ market cap and the exchange price are two separate things.
the $ market cap statistic is an after thought and not important

soft forks - (high pool consensus(95%), high node consensus)
does not need node consensus to activate. if activated by majority pools. those minority nodes that did not upgrade are not fully validating anymore, and basically passing on data it cannot check. low risk of issues due to high node acceptance to validate blocks

soft forks - (high pool consensus, low node consensus)
does not need node consensus to activate. if activated by pools. those majority nodes that did not upgrade are not fully validating anymore, and basically passing on data it cannot check. higher risk of issues due to low node acceptance to validate blocks

soft forks - (low pool consensus, low node consensus)
does not need node consensus to activate. if activated by minority pools, then the majority of the network are not fully validating anymore, and basically passing on data it cannot check. extreme risk of issues due to low node acceptance to validate blocks

---

hard forks - (high consensus(95%), low minority, low controversy)
IF node counts for it is high enough and pool count is high enough the new rules get activated and anyone left unupgraded is left unable to sync and not receiving any new blocks. they are left in a stalled/halted/stuck state. not in a separate network.. just dead in the water.

hard forks - (over 50% consensus - medium controversy)
If pools pushed a hard fork without a high majority node count and with out a pools high majority count. this will cause LOTS of orphans. these orphans eventually sort themselves out until only one chain remains. and once the orphan drama pushed the blockheight of the new rules ahead of the opposition anyone left unupgraded is left unable to sync and not receiving any new blocks. they are left in a stalled/halted/stuck state. not in a separate network.. just dead in the water.. be wary of low confirm transactions during the orphan drama

hard forks - (under 50% consensus - high controversy)
If pools pushed a hard fork without any majority node count and with out a pools majority count. this will cause LOTS of orphans. due to the low consensus the remaining (old rules) would win(eventually) and orphan off the new rule blocks. but the orphan drama could continue on for a while.
be wary of low confirm transactions while pools continue to try pushing.

---

hard forks - (intentional controversial split, no consensus)
if pools intentionally added a blacklist opposition function by literally avoiding connecting to nodes that oppose a rule. this WILL cause an altcoin.

no one is officially proposing the "intentional controversial split, no consensus"..
the official proposals for hard forks are high consensus.

core unofficially want the opposition to do a controversial split but thats pure stupidity.
also core have hinted if core dont get their softfork activated they will do a controversial split intentionally to get their softfork added. but officially they are holding back on that idea because if they have to intentionally split then that's a worse decision than just doing a consensus hard fork (something they are stupidly avoiding to offer the community the chance to vote on in the first place)

as for ethereum. this was NOT a high consensus. this was an intentional split. ethereum actually added a blacklist to ignore opposing clients
--oppose-dao-fork

in localbitcoins funds are locked into escrow.
only you and the other trader can unlock it. i presume the other party simply ignored your request to cancel and instead accepted the trade.

meaning they have your bitcoin.

NOO

the price is based on whats available on exchanges.
not all 16mill coins are on exchanges

it has nothing to do with market cap.

EG an exchange may only have 100k of coins on the order lines. and trades are done based on the coins on the order lines.
the market cap $$ is calculated AFTERWARDS, based on the price of what the small order lines are selling at.. not the other way round

where:
the exchanges indicate the price.
how:
people who have bitcoin sell it for fiat
people who have fiat buy bitcoin
if there is more bitcoin(high supply) the prices are not fought over as much so either stagnate or fall
if there is less bitcoin(high demand) the prices are fought over more so the prices rise.

prices can be artificially held or moved by putting in resistance walls (large orders to scare other traders from going in that direction)

why:
well that is speculation.
sometimes it can be 1 person with a large basket of bitcoins or it could be lots of people with small amounts that can sell to make the price drop due to high supply.
sometimes it can be 1 person with a large amount of fiat or it could be lots of people with small amount of fiat that can sell to make the price rise due to high demand.


at the moment, lets say $1000.. its been noted that true resistance levels (prices people refuse to impact) is around $600ish. the other $400 is the speculative area that can move up or down for any random reason.

no one can predict what the price will be , but some large players can use their funds to cause a price change for no reason anyone else could understand.

newsweek followed by fox news

other war of words are bitcoins own invented words.

wallet.. does it mean the client or just the keybackup file
wallet.. but its not a leather thing in your pocket that holds bank notes
bitcoin.. does it mean the node network, the protocol code rules or the currency unit
bitcoin.. but its not a coin. its a unit of measure, infact its a ledger entry of value.

i think things need to change.
EG
measure the currency in satoshi's and bits(100sat) that way the currency vs protocol are distinguishable. its inevitable we will at some point be measuring value in bits and sats so maybe time to get used to it now to help avoid confusing the currency with the technology

a wallet storing the private keys. should we rename it as a keyring (a thing you store your keys on)

now for those that just want a number.. to the OP's question
population= 7bill
tx per month=42(based on real fiat use stats per month as a bases for comparison)

7bill x 42tx=294000000000tx a month
294000000000tx/28/24/6= 72916666.66666667tx/block(10min) = 121,528tx/s (14,468tx/s based on average bitcoin use stats)

now lets clarify

we are not going to have bitcoin as a one world currency - so no doomsday speaches please. bitcoin being a one world currency is worse than 200 fiats combined.

we are not going to have 7billion permenent users tomorrow - so no doomsday speaches please. bitcoin will gain more users but it wont be 7billion tomorrow. bitcoin can grow naturally at a pace that can cope and it certainly wont be 7billion in the next couple decades.

please chillout and refrain from doomsday speaches of short term exaggerations

---

now that is said.
real world stats show the average fiat citizen uses fiat 42 times a month.
at the moment bitcoin users only use bitcoin 5 times a month. which while looking at the amount of merchants accepting bitcoin (300k) is small and manageable.

anyone shouting that we need to lock peoples funds into LN hubs requiring hub managers to sign off on transactions out of fear of 7billion people piling into bitcoin.. seriously needs to wake up.
we dont need to turn bitcoin into bank2.0 via LN.. we do however need to realise that now that core have deemed 4mb 'safe' we should get core to sort out dynamic blocks to allow for real growth of the expected 7tx/s to 28tx/s which will still be under cores recent backtrack(4mb good)
in the form of 4mb base
or
in the form of 2mb base 4mb weight. (14tx/s) thus they also get their segwit feature they love so much.

as for that 28tx/s this would allow
the current 2mill userbase to do 20tx a month instead of 5tx
or
the current 2mill userbase to grow to 8mill userbase, still doing 5tx a month.

then in a few years(before 2020) look at the 'state of the network' to use consensus to grow the block buffer sizes again to allow more potential growth.
and slowly and naturally grow at a pace that can cope.


oh and if you are going to shout doomsdays of datacentres and excess costs.. please refrain from spewing out those delusions.
bitcoin can happy run on a raspberry pi with a data store the size of a fingernail.
technology of normal cheap desktop computers is superier to that so not an issue.
even telecommunication companies 5 year plan has shown to not be an issue for rational onchain growth.

---

now then.. there are 4032 bitcoin blocks a month.
average tx=400byte
294000000000tx = 117600000000000bytes a month
117600000000000byte/4032 blocks= 29,166,666,667bytes = 29,166mb blocks = 29.166gb blocks(3.5gb blocks based on average bitcoin use stats)

most will think 29gb(3.5gb) blocks is crazy. but be realistic. no one in reality will see 7billion people jump into bitcoin tomorrow.
but here is the thing...

only 20 years ago
if you told people that were on dialup when a song(3mb) took 10 minutes to download, that in a game running in HD while livestreaming it to twitch would require 1megabyte a second.. they would shout dont bother making the game online. it would fail.

if you told people that had a max hard drive of 4gb that a game would require 80gb, they would shout dont bother making the game. it will fail.

yep thats right 20 years ago 4gb hard drives were the max available at consumer level.. thats currently 1000x less than todays consumer level
yep thats right 20 years ago 56k internet was the max available at consumer level.. thats 100x less than todays consumer level

so imagine it like this.. 29gb(3.5gb) in 20 years will have the same 'feel' as what we envision as 29mb(3.5mb) today. we will think its childsplay and not an issue.

but as i said even in 20 years we wont have 7billion bitcoiners. and those that are using bitcoin wont be using it 42x a month like they do with fiat.
so that 29gb(3.5gb) block is just a doomsday number of worsecase scenario but has no place in reality and should not be part of any debate today or anytime soon.

the bit in red is wrong.
firstly the pools most are racist about have already mitigated the risk of being "pulled". they operate multiple stratums in other countries. the asic farms are not all in china. the managers of the pools are not in china. yes they may speak chinese. but dont let that fool you

PoS is not the best algo out there.. its simply the fantasy of holders getting paid for doing no work.. but the reality that only the rich will get richer. plus PoS is not as secure as PoW

what i think would be more beneficial for bitcoin.. and helpful to the world economy.
stop measuring bitcoin in dollars.

imagine bitcoin being measured in the 'cost of living index' thus making the bitcoin<->goods/services more direct where fiat becomes the side issue sat in the corner where people think of it as an afterthought just to calculate taxes once a year

if you think the revolution will be a happy event. you are fooled.
firstly the IRS will request your income amount. even if you list that you only have assets(bitcoin) they will still ask for FIAT payment of tax on those assets.
if you do not comply by suggesting you dont want to touch fiat. then expect a court order with excessive penalties added on.
if you still dont comply expect a knock at the door from the local sherriffs office to sieze goods and arrest you for tax fraud and unpaid fines.

end result is people end up paying tax or using the governments hyper ledger to avoid all that hassle. but ofcourse they wont know its hyperledger, they will just see it as normal bank/government money that is taxed and inflated.

---

but here is something really interesting.(a scenario)
you know the xx trillion dollar national debt. most of those finance agreements are contracted to repay in dollars.
so when a government moves over to its 100% controlled hyperledger.. the old dollar can happily be hyper inflated to such a point that 10 trillion dollars only amounts to a slice of bread. thus literally wiping the slate clean.

citizens wont care about the dollar hyper inflation as their funds would be measured in hyperledger coin value not dollars.
but the citizens own credit agreements /mortgages will have the terms re-wrote before that happens so dont expect citizens to gain from a switch.

and dont expect government to turn to bitcoin.. as i said they cannot control bitcoin so the future will be minimum wage laws, income tax, fines which will be payable in hyperledger coin. requiring converting bitcoin to hyperledger and most citizens ending up still required to pay hyperledger coin(fiat2.0) to stay within the law.

i think this forum needs a subcategory next to altcoins where the category is named hyperledger. so we can throw all these topics about government/banker blockchain stuff in there.. as its all to do with hyperledger

governments have laws inplace.
1. income tax
2. minimum wage
3. fines

even if 99% of america used another currency (whether it be bitcoin, euro, pound, hyperledger) the people will still need to convert to fiat to remain within the law. to pay taxes, fines etc.

at the moment although bitcoin is being thrown around as the saviour of human rights and the next best thing since sliced bread. america will stick to having laws to protect THEIR 'PRODUCT'. AKA dollar.

they wont introduce bitcoin into being legal tender.
they wont introduce the euro, brics or other national currency into being legal tender.

because they cannot 100% control it.
however you will see the government join the IMF to have something america can control. which will be a sidechain of hyperledger. though average citizens wont notice the difference when using payment methods as the hyperledger sidechain will be hidden in the background.

forget trying to convince governments to accept bitcoin.
bitcoin should remain free from government control. otherwise it becomes commercialised and simply another fiat currency the banks can boom and bust..

leave bitcoin as the free and open choice for people that want an alternative to fiat.