Tecate, there was no answer, I am left pondering your stance.
I've answered and responded accordingly thereafter. As mentioned before, you don't like the answers that you're getting as they don't fit your world view. Maybe I should just let you write them for me.
I hope you can provide your thoughts on the article you posted per my question in post 595, but I hold my breath.
Keep your panties on - I'm getting to it. I do have the odd thing to take care of in between times.
What are your thoughts? The questions I would ask, who does this benefit? How does it make BTC more obtainable for the everyday person. This is a step in providing easier access to retail investors but is it actually helping the adoption of BTC?
My thoughts are that it's not a panacea (no one such move implicating crypto is). However, it's a building block that strengthens the emergence of crypto.
In the overall context, it is a further measure in legitimising crypto to the general public. Personally, I can't stand Paypal but that's neither here nor there. Paypal is trusted by 100s of millions of people worldwide. All that ordinary people know about crypto exchanges is that they believe them to be dodgy. The largest crypto exchange has around 35 million customers. Paypal has 350 million active account holders. KYC/AML has been a major point of friction in adoption. That changes here as it allows a whole new swathe of ordinary people to have direct access to crypto without lifting a finger.
I would assume that there will be some form of bid/ask spread when paying with BTC to reduce settlement risk for Paypal.
I expect Paypal to be true to form and that the costs will be Paypal-esque. However, that makes no difference. If you talk to many people that have gotten into this space about the first means by which they obtained crypto, chances are they will tell you that it was a bad deal (in terms of fees/commissions, etc.). They went on to use crypto more and became more discerning in how they bought and sold it. This represents an on/off ramp - and an opportunity to on-board new people into the crypto ecosystem.
Imagine if someone offered to sell you something online - and their deal was so much cheaper than the alternative. However, they insist on crypto payment. If everything you heard about crypto is negative and you've decided you don't need it, you don't understand it, nevermind start to think where or how you'd buy it (or go through KYC/AML to open an account just for this one trade) - you're going to say screw this and run with the more expensive alternative. If you have a paypal account - and you already have access - you trust paypal as you've been with them for years - then its probably still a pain in the ass as you're not used to it - but you'll do it to get the cheaper price.
What area of BTC do you think it will benefit the most?
So as per the explanation above - this is retail-related.
is it actually helping the adoption of BTC?
It's not a panacea in and of itself but it is a very large and significant brick in the wall.
In the immediate shortterm as Tecate refers to me as a non proponent, I have just benefitted ~5% on this news. It is likely a good time to reduce exposure.
I've already explained this to you. I have come across plenty that trade btc/crypto while sledging it every day of the week. If you're trading crypto and that works for you - good for you. But that certainly doesn't make you a 'proponent' of bitcoin.
But then feel free to explain yourself a bit more on that if you wish. I invited you to do that previously. Do you believe that there's anything tangible to invest in (as I've yet to hear a single positive statement on btc from you) or you're smarter than everyone else and you feel you're benefiting from all the stupid people that have put some $ in crypto?
This undoubtedly will be the true to test to whether adoption of BTC will happen, so I am interested to see the outcome.
I didn't need this validation - but it's something that I think is useful to point out to you. With this statement, you're saying that this news has potential significance (which could go either way). It's significant - and that's why I posted about the initial (unconfimed) report to this effect some weeks ago. It's in the same vein, I followed up with other such significant milestones.
Lastly, you asked me to describe what my thoughts were as to how I saw the space play out with regard to bitcoin - going forward. I gave you my best guess (my current guess based on an opinion that is always open to adjustment). I provided you with my thoughts. Given that you've worked on blockchain-related projects, I'd be curious to hear your own view (whether that's about BTC, CBDCs or crypto/blockchain generally). How do you see things developing?