Mt. Gox to Hold News Conference | Hacker News Reader

Mt. Gox to Hold News Conference

online.wsj.com

19 pointssillysaurus318 comments

Open articleView on HN

Please STOP linking to the Wall Street Journal. Their paywall is infuriating.

bump

Paywall. Anyone got this on a free source? And can we stop posting paywall sites here? This is getting ridiculous.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:WDBmFVt...

can you always bypass their paywall this way?

Both WSJ and NYT (maybe also other publications with a paywall) will display articles if you are coming from Google. Just entering the article title (article URL tends to work, too) into Google will get you there without any paywall. (I guess this is also why looking at the cache works.)

It’s a form price differentiation, really. Also, I’m guessing this is probably the reason why many are not aware of the paywall and link to these articles.

In this case alternative and equally good sources without paywall exist so it doesn’t make much sense to link to the article with paywall (but that might have been a mistake). However, I do not understand objections to paywalls in principle.

My objection is that people attempt to publicly share private articles. If you're a member of a private website (which for all intents and purposes, a paywall is), then by sharing it with the public you're assuming they can read it. Which without circumventing the paywall, many won't be able to.

Sure, some people will have subscriptions, others will have found the article unlocked in one form or another, but still I think it's pretty poor form to share something closed source, if you will.

Here, look at this: http://www.checkupdown.com/accounts/grpb/B1394343/

Personally I don't have a strong opinion either way. It's interesting that manipulating the URL you will get through the paywall anyway. Another submission uses http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/SB10001424052702303...

"Bitcoin Exchange Had $63.6 billion in Outstanding Debt"

.. and ..

"...that Mt. Gox had outstanding debt of about ¥6.5 billion ($63.6 million)"

... right under.

These numbers are off by a factor of 1000, so which one is it? It's pretty horrible journalism and/or editing to get simple things like that wrong and expect me to pay them for the privilege of reading the remaining of the article I now I don't really trust the numbers in.

Heh. Looks like someone confused the amount of Yen with the amount of dollars.

Didn't they lose about BTC700,000? Ie, about USD$400M? Which would suggest that neither of those numbers are anywhere near right.

Hey, what's a few orders of magnitude between friends?

I think that it's pretty safe to say that Mt Gox didn't run up $60B in debt.

I seriously resent WSJ with their paywall. I don't even bother to click the link... Anyone got a mirror?

This works for me:

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web...

An announcement at 7pm on a Friday night at a court? If this is good news, it sure is a strange place and time to announce it.

From Twitter:

"MT GOX MAY HAVE LOST NEARLY ALL OF ITS BITCOINS -MT GOX LAWYER"

"MT. GOX LOST 750'000 BITCOINS OF USERS - TEIKOKU DATABANK SAYS."

Here is a chart showing market value of "Gox BTC" - I'll be watching this as the announcement is made.

http://bitcoinity.org/markets/bitcoinbuilder/GOXBTC

Down 10% in the last hour.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com