Bitcoin Forum

Ebay Expands Accepted Digital Currencies, Says PayPal May One Day Incorporate BitCoin

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-03/ebay-expands-accepted-digital-currencies-says-paypal-may-one-day-incorporate-bitcoin


its zerohedge so probably crock - but......

Err, the source is Financial Times, douchewad   ;D ;D

EDIT: Lately I've seen more bitcoin supporters in the ZH comments section. And the stackers are a little more reserved in their ignorant criticisms...

this isn't anything new right? didn't ebay say something like this 6+ months ago? twiddling thumbs type stuff? better to post a news source and not a blog like zero hedge....

There is far too much posting and not enough reading around here...

TL:DR!!

+1

(1) This article was from Financial Times. Which you can easily figure out if you look at the article. 

(2) In the second post of the thread, the poster KINDLY informed the OP that this was, in fact, from a "Credible News Source (TM)" and ZeroHedge was not the primary source

!!!!

You have no excuse  ::)

 (For the record, 90% of ZH posts are news presented from other sources except with Tylers' "Spin." The only notable exceptions are op-ed pieces which are not really presented as news articles anyways and do not present anything that is not already known - i.e. recently released market data, etc)


Indeed, my friend.

no my point was that there is no reason to post spin from zero hedge. if there is anything to the news, we can speculate on it. but a blog post =/= threadworthy. so yes, i have an excuse for expressing an opinion, drop your attitude, geez.

OTOH, the FT article is behind a paywall and generally it is considered against forum etiquette to post news articles behind paywalls and expect that everyone can read them.

Also, people link to blog posts all the time. Get over it. We can still discuss a blog post and the author's opinion of the relevant subject. In fact, it happens all the time on the internet.

 ;D ;D ;D

(As for the actual news article, it seems like the same thing they said 6 months ago. So, nothing important. Just another excuse to buy.)

This is the real take away which makes the ZH re-post interesting. The tide is turning against the PM-only crowd. It seems like it is 50:50 on ZH now that Bitcoin deserves to be considered sound money alongside gold and silver. This is a major shift from March 2013 when the ZH commenters were almost unanimous that Bitcoin = ponzi.

Yeah, that was really irritating. Glad it's finally shifting.

Thanks for pointing this out; yes this was the main thing I "got" from the article (funny how the comments section is more important than the article itself.)

And still, a lot of the arguments from the goldbugs against BTC are entirely incorrect i.e. based on the most basic misconceptions of BTC (for instance, that it's a ponzi despite not meeting the criteria for a ponzi, or underestimating the difficulty in stealing coins based on misinfo they read in an MSM news article.) This is a good thing! It indicates that overall, their resistance is not increasing. The "smart ones" have already hopped on the BTC wagon and are dutifully stacking "electrons" as well as metal, while the dumb ones will keep making their tired old arguments until they get beat over the head with reality.

Continuing visible acceptance in the "diehard gold bug ZH commenter community" is definitely bullish.

Realizing that forums and comments are taking over from mainstream journalism/analysis is yet another aspect of decentralization. The comments are more important than the article.