/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>26044135

>>25578804
>I'm consider injecting another ~$9k fiat into ETH
someone talk me out of it
or talk me into investing in another coin

I was thinking of using fiat to get more of something I already have in my folio:

>>25577977
>chainlink
>linkpool
>polkadot
>reserve
>uniswap
>ethereum
>bitcoin

>>23558915
>no one had a chance to ask thread was 42'd
you're a liar
42 indeed
>>23547142

If you ever find yourself having to "trust" someone or some team to do something, you will get fucked. Make sure you are always in a position where you have to trust NOBODY. Think of it like Chainlink, create your own trustless ecosystem. For example:
>i trust CZ, my funds are safe!
>i trust that Sergey and Steve won't exit scam!
>i trust Nomi!
>i trust
Whenever I see someone get "scammed", it is typically because they were in a position where they had to "trust" another human to uphold their end.
Do you not understand why smart contracts are so fucking powerful?
They are trustless.

https://pro.coinbase.com/trade/LINK-USD
This is fun to watch

>>22497098
>I know you know why
few understand this || siht dnatsrednu wef

https://youtu.be/N0WjV6MmCyM

Link

Bog

God

8

Chainlink will be the world's first true QUANTUM COMPUTER (QC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement_problem

https://blog.chain.link/what-is-the-blockchain-oracle-problem/

"The measurement problem in quantum mechanics is the problem of how (or whether) wave function collapse occurs. The inability to observe such a collapse directly has given rise to different interpretations of quantum mechanics and poses a key set of questions that each interpretation must answer.

The wave function in quantum mechanics evolves deterministically according to the Schrödinger equation as a linear superposition of different states. However, actual measurements always find the physical system in a definite state. Any future evolution of the wave function is based on the state the system was discovered to be in when the measurement was made, meaning that the measurement "did something" to the system that is not obviously a consequence of Schrödinger evolution. The measurement problem is describing what that "something" is, how a superposition of many possible values becomes a single measured value.

To express matters differently (paraphrasing Steven Weinberg),[1][2] the Schrödinger wave equation determines the wave function at any later time. If observers and their measuring apparatus are themselves described by a deterministic wave function, why can we not predict precise results for measurements, but only probabilities? As a general question: How can one establish a correspondence between quantum and classical reality?[3]"