/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>8101993
>Name a single coin with a working product, that does what it's supposed to do.
>Peer to peer digital cash
>Smart contract platform for tokenization and ICOs
Those are pretty significant, but of course you will minimize them to make your argument sound smarter than it is

>The craze is over, faggot. I cashed out in december and you're holding my bags and will be holding them forever.
I knew you were a nocoiner. It's easy to tell the difference between "r/buttcoin" bait, and salty nocoiners who think they made the right decisions in hindsight.
>Every smart contract has to have a textual agreement anyone can read and understand
You're not reading; the point is to augment contracts by making them data-driven where possible, NOT REPLACING ALL TEXTUAL AGREEMENTS THAT ARE SUBJECTIVE.

But of course you're no longer reading any arguments or looking at the research I provided, because you've drilled it into your brain that you made the right decision to sell after a bullrun

>Haha, now you're resorting to LARP. Pretty pathetic, brainlet.
I just happened to be in the right place at the right time, and around 1,000 people in the industry who were interested in learning about fintech through MIT. I'm not gonna pretend I'm an insider, but I spoke with enough people at banks like HSBC, Lloyds bank etc., and fintech startups like pic related, to know that they're looking long-term mate: 2019-2021, for adoption. Not like your ADHD gambler-mindset timeframe.

>What's the goal? Make every smart contract have a textual agreement, that is compliant to existing laws and regulations?
I don't think you're bothered to read the info I provided. Sergey stated that the key goal since the beginning was to ensure smart contracts could be considered kosher under the most stringent guidelines. He's been hinting that, should the LINK network work as intended, with t as is laid out in the whitepaper, it will be compliant with regulations related to data-driven agreements