[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

Search: I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern


View post   

>> No.55624169 [View]

>>55624130
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.54495481 [View]

>>54495463
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.49978363 [View]
File: 797 KB, 1920x1080, 1531801786542.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
49978363

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.28849326 [View]
File: 6 KB, 274x184, 2342234.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
28849326

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.25664112 [View]
File: 113 KB, 524x511, A42A1194-7E40-41C5-9A0C-7A1D67ED587D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
25664112

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.24064472 [View]
File: 34 KB, 591x730, 1528443987382.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
24064472

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.23014406 [View]

>>23014371
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.21305532 [View]
File: 62 KB, 736x389, 1539283437861.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21305532

>>21305461
THIS

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.21229470 [View]

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.21229235 [View]

>>21227425
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.21228355 [View]

>>21226888
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.20469245 [View]
File: 68 KB, 640x853, n5zbvhn5fib51.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20469245

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.20386282 [View]

>>20383336
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.19090234 [View]
File: 183 KB, 774x960, 1531790003442.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19090234

>>19090114
oh ya? well I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.18713780 [View]
File: 11 KB, 215x235, 1531788445045.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18713780

>>18712944
who the fuck takes screenshots of LINKFUD?

anyway.... I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.17299590 [View]

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.17277363 [View]
File: 27 KB, 400x300, math-thumb-400x300.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17277363

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.17069407 [View]

>>17069358
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.15869912 [View]

>>15869891I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.15184715 [View]

>>15184633
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.14809544 [View]

>>14809440
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.14034956 [View]

>>14034385

I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.13325418 [View]

>>13324221
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

>> No.12428179 [View]
File: 139 KB, 736x981, 1535736571530.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12428179

>>12426511
I have a PhD in crypto economics and mathematics. Crypto incentives in Chainlink are a legitimate concern. I saw Ari Juels speak at a conference recently where he mentioned tokens and asked him about the token economics of a node staking system like the Chainlink network is planning to use. The problem is that node operator incentives are fuzzy at best and not even figured out fully by the team (see the gitter for Steve stuttering about this). When I brought it up to Ari Juels, I told him that in the way the network is expected to be used, the fees payable to node operators would actually decline as requests become more ubiquitous because as the network grows it becomes cheaper to use. This makes sense if you took a few advanced cryptoeconomics courses. Ari admitted that it was a great question but that they were "actively pursuing research in that area." I sold my LINK immediately after that and saw a significant dump on the binance charts. It's pretty clear these guys are pulling you along making you think they're doing something revolutionary when the incentives aren't even fully determined yet.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]