GBL, a Chinese bitcoin trading platform that claimed to be based in Hong Kong, recently shut down – an event that might not be worthy of note had ¥25m ($4.1m) worth of users’ money not disappeared with it.

http://www.coindesk.com/4-1m-goes-missing-chinese-bitcoin-trading-platform-gbl-vanishes/

Picked up quickly from Coindesk by many other sites.

http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-exchange-gbl-holding-41-billion-vanishes-2013-11

http://pandodaily.com/2013/11/11/fraud-at-this-chinese-bitcoin-exchange-cost-clients-4-1m-but-the-broader-market-barely-noticed/

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/521557/20131112/chinese-bitcoin-exchange-gbl-vanishes-takes-coins.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/06/people-have-bought-or-sold-100000-in-bitcoins-from-a-vancouver-atm-firm-says/

Not much news here, the article is almost like a stub.

http://readwrite.com/2013/11/06/why-small-businesses-have-the-most-to-gain-from-bitcoin

Informed and level-headed article, overall tone is positive, just more of the same details regarding small businesses.

Initially found on Flipboard, a mobile news feed app.

I was contemplating on the idea of splitting the press hits board into two boards and was wondering if anyone else had the same opinion or enlightenment on the idea.

The idea being to split Press board into two, both still serve the same purpose but list the press hits from two distinct(mostly) sources. One would list press hits generated by sources that are distinctly interested in the Bitcoin or cryptocurrency communities in general, such as CoinDesk. I loosely refer to these sources as internal, to the Bitcoin community. While the other would list notable press hits by the general media, external sources.

Inidividual sub-boards may not be the best way to separate these types of sources, though I think some distinction would be very helpful. I am in no position to make any changes to the forum but am merely proposing the idea. What do you guys think?

http://www.indystar.com/article/20130630/BUSINESS/306300014/Bitcoin-gains-believers-despite-risk-digital-currency-could-bust

This article was given the front page of the business section on June 30. Seems well written and informative, aside from claims of anonymity.

I see a large number of posts having to do with confusion or regret at the inability of their transactions to confirm due to a very small fee applied. Would it not be possible for a wallet to estimate the time needed to confirm a transaction of a given amount and fee from looking back at the waiting time for similar transactions over the past few weeks? Or is the volume just not there to make a reliable estimate?