This article has to be one of the worst examples of financial reporting I've ever seen. Honestly, it doesn't even deserve that label. What’s up with the title? It's something we often chat about here, especially since this is the place Satoshi once dropped his knowledge while working on his thing.
So here’s my question: What the hell is this?
Just look at this jumbled mess of nonsense. It’s packed with some of the craziest made-up terms that could only come from some loudmouth online. To keep up the illusion that they know what they're talking about, they drag the poor reader through a confusing maze of nonsense. Seriously, they could have just said it straight instead of leaving this huge pile of garbage for us to deal with.
And how wild is it that bitcoin is so mainstream now? It's being reported on just as much as the latest hot stock. I never would have guessed this back in 2015.
I am happy that yapping heads like that are mostly on TV, and it has become less relevant for the newer gen of the peeps.. Though imagine how many people from the previous age would take all of these points to heart.
I watched the video, hoping to see how they would discuss "The disadvantages of institutional investors adopting crypto", only to see that they only talked about how now nobody cares about what Bitcoin actually is anymore, everyone just wants profit.
And he says he has been doing this for 10 years. Very funny. Even funnier that I sumeraise all what he said in one line.
People do not understand that you can actually talk about bitcoin without trying to to sound overly deep or intelligent.
"We are not hardwired as humans for scacity, were hardwired for abundance"
What has humans ever had an abundance of? In what context exactly can this saying be justified? Maybe he was talking about oxygen.
I have learnt a new word
this whole thing is cyclical, pops up every time the price gets interesting... i remember the same debates back in 2017, watching those so-called experts on CNBC stumble over the word 'blockchain' while just staring at charts. guy with 10 years probably rode the 2013 wave and just got stuck in that trader mindset forever.
the deeper stuff about institutional downsides - like how their massive ETF inflows create insane sell pressure on futures during the roll, or how their compliance will push for more chain surveillance - gets buried every time.
it doesnt generate clicks, I saw this before with the Blocksize Wars... the actual technical debate got lost in a flood of memes from people who just wanted cheaper fees.
media simplifies, the crowd gets distracted by profit, and the real systemic risks get ignored until they bite. we saw this not so long ago.
Reminds me some years ago when a lecturer stated that using Algorithm in your sentence make uneducated feel you are well learned.
I have made it an habit not to visit the so called news outlets
The only thing they can really talk about is Bullish, Bearish nothing more.
Good thing Bitcointalk exist and certain platforms or we would be filled with shits from so called experts
Mind you they have the worse ability to predict the market.
Yahoo! is shit and lost their piece of cake in Internet industry many years ago. I remember that pooya87 used to wear a signature with a mascot peas on Yahoo!'s icon. It now gone as poooya87 worn another avatar for his campaign but history about Yahoo! is on the Internet, Wiki and many places.
By getting the news notifications from Yahoo! Finance, it seems you use Microsoft Explorer that surely gives you such notifications but if you use other browsers, you will not give such ones from browsers.
I hope I am not wrong but if you actually use Microsoft Explorer, is it time to migrate to other browsers?
It's possible that some aggregators send their articles too. Some search engines also show Yahoo! News on their results, so I don't think using IE is the only way to get news from them. Not to mention Microsoft is pushing Edge hard these days (with MSN too). CMIIW.
Regardless of how they stumble upon this article, it's not hard to get a similar result from another website (especially those that just repost quoted news on the internet). No surprise, given that some tweets or Reddit posts are "newsworthy" these days.
You've probably made at least one assumption too many about me--there's no way in hell I'd be using IE for a browser in 2026. I am down with Netscape Navigator, my sweet summer child.
Seriously. I know Yahoo Finance is out of date; old habits are hard to break and sometimes I just gravitate to websites that I've been using for a long time. Not something I should stick with for reasons that should be obvious from what I posted here initially. A lot of the good finance news sites are behind a paywall (like the WSJ if I'm not mistaken) and although I know there are ways to bypass those paywalls...I just never got into the habit of doing that.
I ought to just slap myself, right? I get it.
Oh man, that shit drives me up a vertical wall. When I started seeing talking heads quoting random comments from youtube/reddit/Twitter/whatever, I knew the media was dumbing everything down to a kindergarten level. And that's just sad.
You know what? I'm glad you did. Seems like people's vocabulary has constricted to words the average Mr. Beast wannabe on youtube uses, and not much more. Christ, if you pick up an actual physical English dictionary, it's bound to be hefty and dense--and I tell you, it's worth it to learn a few words you might want to use should you choose to do any sort of writing. Hopefully the reader will do just as you did when they come across what looks like a strange-looking word they've never seen before and look it up to see what it means. I do not like dumbing down anything or that practice in general.
I am sorry to The Sceptical Chymist, as I did not recall rightly between IE and Microsoft Edge. Thanks to joniboini for his post and correction too. I wanted to say about Microsoft Edge, but used a wrong name as IE. I knew that Microsoft no longer provides IE in the latest Windows versions but as said, I forgot the name of their newest and mandatory browser on Windows, Microsoft Edge.
I did not assume anything about The Sceptical Chymist as personally I only see Yahoo Finance! appears when I use Microsoft Edge by any chance. Honestly I almost don't use Microsoft Edge but anytime by any chance I open Microsoft Edge, I see Yahoo Finance! there.
@joniboini, about aggregators can send articles, honestly, I did not know about it, so thank you for this insight too.
Oooh, Yahoo Finance, I don't even know when I last read articles from them. Most of those legacy and mainstream media platforms have looked for every way to try and bash Bitcoin since time immemorial. Reuters, Bloomberg... name them all. I don't even bother reading and watching their videos when they talk about Bitcoin/crypto these days.
When I looked at the Host's brief profile, nothing shocked me at all
You have now discovered the journalistic equivalent of sig spamming
Personally, I love IE. It's like 2x lighter than Edge, and I think it even still loads Bitcointalk. Really useful for low-memory computers. It's just missing a password manager, though if you're using that old hardware, you're probably already using something standalone like KeePassXC anyway.
That's about it, but most journalism these days is essentially just that. Mindless humans that resemble NPCs and pretend to be experts on a variety of topics, when they are actually completely clueless. Overall the society is still stuck with the wrong assumptions and in the basics. Titles don't matter, number of years in some field does not matter either. What only matters is the quality of work that you produce, and this idea is most strongly rejected by the majority as they are mediocre. As you can see in this case, "Julie" has been a financial journalist for more than 20 years. I could do better after a 5 day masterclass in journalism. Never forget that in the democratic charm, these idiots can always outvote you and lead everyone else to ruin.
Such things are not good choices from a security nor a privacy perspective. It does not change the fact that Edge is complete trash though. One must be really old or incompetent to use something like that.
As others have said, the quality of Yahoo's articles has declined. They make it possibly to be clickable but do not focus much on the quality of the content. Right now, from what I am seeing, it's possible that the writers are being monetized to produce high-traffic but not in-depth analysis.
For sure, there's a decline in financial journalism anywhere prioritizing
Their job is hard for sure, but most of the mainstream media focuses on BTC only when there is movement with its price and not its technicality why it's important. This is probably one of the reasons why BTC in the media is shit.
mainstream media are extremely biased. they cant seem to balance the negatives with the positives at least. maybe they are trying to get as much clicks and are ragebaiting people thats how they earn their money anyway the more people click on their news whether or not the people agree with them at the end or not
She kept asking on every sentence end... "Like wall Street don't care right? They just want numbers going up or down depending on....bla bla bla right? (Continues the balderdash). Makes me sick to my stomach every time.
Meh. Those wannabe analyst still buy and HODL low-key anyway, but choose the most unconventional ways to spread FUD.
Ruins. Just ruins to any nation that such people dictate their affairs (as the majority) in any subdivision. Somehow, they've been able to blend in that charisma to whomever wants to get their shit stuffed up in their head. Good lord, in 2026?
Interestingly, Jay Juan Gee [argued] this on his famous thread. An inexperienced person should never invest, but if they must, they should learn a little bit of the technicalities-- just enough to make them repudiate these type of gibberish on the interweb.
It is not limited to Yahoo, journalism has experienced an extreme loss of quality in the past decades.
Who is at fault with this, the chicken or the egg? If serious articles no longer get as much views and clicks as some sensational bullshit, who should we blame more? The one that is fulfilling the demand or the one that is demanding that bullshit? I expect that they have fairly decent data on these things and that it is the main reason why quantity and sensationalism is served over quality content.
It is one of the easiest jobs.
Sure, but it is just a reflection of the average person in society. How many people do you know that are not biased on a daily basis? How many of them are not biased when they are extremely upset? You probably do not know a single person, and at best know one or two examples if you are lucky. Mainstream media won't stop being biased until people stop being biased and until it becomes forbidden to manipulate the story based on who is financing you. As long as both of these things are happening there is no chance for this to become very different.
We need a better system where there is accountability and in which the majority of the stupid does not dictate the rules to everyone else. Everything would start changing for the better in such an environment.