/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>10362402
Not possible sorry

>>10362417
thanks for your contribution you $%^&ing failed abortion

im trying to retire here

>>10362402
My only fear is that even if mainnet launches successfully, and it's used - the prices stays flat.

>>10362875
Link pool is taking 25% of profits it better be valuable or no one will run nodes

>>10362875
I think that’s a reasonable concern but I just can’t see that happening. The 18 decimal aspect almost guarantees that. If the price to use the network remains the same you can still see an increase in the price of the link token. The increase in usage won’t necessarily mean the cost in fiat, and an increase in the price of the link token will only mean you’re making less LINK per request. That’s also why it’s paramount to set up a node at the start of main net, you could be raking in cheap link early on before the price grows significantly

>>10363023
How would you stake link if you're not providing data?

M8 I have all these kinds of thoughts every single day every single hour. Every time I fall asleep I think about LINK. I'm like "ok if LINK even hits $20 that'll be very good for me. Even if it hits $5 that will be good as well and that's only *takes calculator out* $1.7b market cap" "It will certainly reach that".

And then I start thinking about smart contract usecases and it goes into a deep deep rabbit hole.

I'm turning crazy here fellow LINKmarines.

>>10362402
5. The industries/companies that chainlink can disrupt and give the link token insane value won't be disrupted by it because they have a monopoly and they won't give up on it because there is no consumer demand for them to do so (SWIFT, Bloomberg, etc). Link will be useful for meme oracles.

>>10363244
First good reply ITT.

Yes something I've thought of but forgot to include. If a crisis hits its gonna make companies even more wary to adopt blockchain stuff.

Basically the technological development and capabilities are going to precede the demand. We may be too early. And if that's the case it's going to drag on until funds dry up and it dies

>>10362402
Sergey dying is my main fear aswell. We should take care of his safety and hire a team of armed private security guards. Possibly a team of medical experts to keep him healthy.

>>10363042
Are you serious? You called someone a failed abortion in this thread and you don’t understand how staking link works? KYS you fucking 12 years old faggot

>>10363244
Here another refuation of this: right now swift is a bit wary of xrp and other competition, they even poached an exec if I recall correctly.

I think every major corp is scrambling right now to get some exposure to blockchain/decentralization just as insurance in case it blows up and replaces them. The smart thing for swift to do would be take advantage early on while they can still set up the system in a way that allows them to seek rents, as they currently do.

If they come in too late they may get JUST'd and permanently screwed. If I were an exec there that's what I would be thinking

>>10363277
That "blockchain stuff" will save them a lot of money. That's the whole point of it. If you can automate stuff with some code and save money then why not do it? Big corporations don't just stop during crisis.

>>10363318
How mad r u rn?

Yes I'm guessing there will be pools of people providing data, but then you'll have to trust the data providers youre using to not screw up.

Either that or you could run your own node based milking data from random useful apis, but that level of decentralization isn't available yet if understand correctly

>>10363364
you don't understand anything correctly, correct.

>>10363277
>We may be too early.
That's what I've been saying to linkfags for almost 1 year now. I like this project and at some point I will probably buy it, but it's way the fuck too early and for a long time it was even overvalued as fuck.
People FOMO-ed into this expecting that a mainnet release will push it to 1+ billion. That's not how things work. After you have a working product, then people start evaluating it based on adoption. Unless link launches the mainnet with like 5 partnerships from the start, there won't be any price action (besides the usual crypto shenanigans).

>And if that's the case it's going to drag on until funds dry up and it dies
This could be a reason for concern. I don't think it will ever die completely unless Sergey spends all those 32 millions from the ICO, but this project could go through a rough patch before it slowly gets adoption and reaches a decent valuation. By that time most of the bagholders that FOMO-ed in early will be long gone.

I see this project as a 10 year hodl. I don't doubt linkies could become millionaires one day, kinda like the Bitcoin OGs did, but I doubt it will happen in the time frame that they hope.

>>10363433
Well look at eth. It may rise just because of anticipation and speculation.

Does anyone thinking eth deserves the current valuation it has based upon it's usability? No. But because there's so much easy fee QE $$$ floating around people are chasing yield and willing to speculate on revolutionary shit like this

>>10363433
>I see this project as a 10 year hodl

>>10362402
you are hopelessly unequipped to handle this question. this is a waste of time.

even the reasons you have bring nothing new to the discussion. they are completely obvious and the actual reason for chainlink's failure will likely be something no one sees right now.

>>10363414
This
>how mad r u?
>>10362455
Definetly not this mad. You seem like someone who will panic sell before the singularity

>>10363476
Thanks retard. Had no idea.

I'm just trying to think of random reasons *because * the reasons things fail or succeed are usually completely unpredictable. Have read plenty of nassim taleb and understand probably won't come out with the real reason here. Just interested in speculation

>>10363533
You’re tying to think of random reasons link might fail when you don’t even have an elemental grasp on what link is trying to accomplish or the decentralized infrastructure of the nodes.

>>10363533
if you understand this, you realize why your post is dumb.

>>10362402
Companies don't give a fuck about decentralized oracle's. They would happily buy their datafeed from Oraclize.

>>10363630
They will if the market forces them to.

>>10363116
I know the feel. I was able to stay away from /biz/ for about a month until I got dragged back in. I have too much fun reading about this project and speculating on its future. The mysterious dot connecting, and radio silence of Sergey makes it that much more interesting, like a detective novel. This will either be the greatest success or biggest disappointment in our lives.

>t. Deluded bag holder

>>10362455
>>10363042
newfag pls go home

>>10363298
Weekly reminder that Sergey is almost 50

>The thing is, this has possible the most potent duo in the history of internet finance: SWIFT, which basically controls the entire banking system, *and* 4chan, which is basically the soul of the internet, with hundreds if not thousands of random NEET spergs who have skin in the game to bootstrap the network.

Fuck this gave me a boner

>>10362417
He's right. Aggregation down to the millisecond will be different coming from different nodes that are pulling the same data from the same complex APIs. The team can't figure this out right now because it's impossible to pick "the right" answer even when thousands of nodes are pulling the same data. If they take a the majority in a few milliseconds, that will be the attack vector because a bad actor can spam an API within those milliseconds just to effect the majority of nodes pulling that data, creating a false answer while simultaneously ruining (potentially great) node reputation. This is an insurmountable task for Chainlink.

>>10363433
Nah. Things move too fast now. In 10 years, DAGs will be secure and some other shit will be happening. LINK is a golden ticket for 2020-2023.

>>10363469
>That thirty year old boomer who wants to be forty

>>10365885
damn, you know your shit.
I appreciate the research you've put into this, and thank you for sharing it. I hope others seriously consider your warning.

>>10363433
>That's not how things work. After you have a working product, then people start evaluating it based on adoption.
LOL is this your first day in crypto or what?

>>10363433
10 years seems way too long but I honestly hope it doesn't moon overnight before I've accumulated desu

>reason 5.

>>10363433
you can thank AB for that. and even he said theres no need to FOMO yet. then bunch of anons went all in at 70c. top kek.

reason 6

THEY ARE WORKING WITH ZAP LOOK AT DIMICHI ROCHE

https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/uber-go/zap
>>10367412
forgot the link

ALSO LOOK AT THE PIVOTAL TRACKER
FUCKING PAJEEEEEEEEEEEEETS

CHAINLINK IS OVER

Dimitri Roche and Akshay Shah
Ability to build logger with custom Sink (#572)
24 days ago

FUCK YOU DIMITREE REEEEEEEEE TRAITOR

>>10367419

>>10362402
Do you think LINK holders who do nothing but FUD can affect the success?
Serious question
t. All in on stinkies

I do wonder if trump fucking with the globalists will have repercussions, good or bad.

>>10368665
Yes, absolutely. In fact, they already did. Normalfags are too dumb to recognize ironic FUD. There will never be a speculation hype surrounding LINK. Either it'll gain value through utility or fade into oblivion.

>>10368718
I honestly think it was a mistake. Sure, at the time of 15k-20k BTC, when this place was flooded with redditors and the like, I get it. But now the board is slow as fuck compared to then, every single normie and redditor has probably left or has been assimilated into biz culture. Why deny those, who are still here, the golden ticket? What is their mistake, that they weren't here when the ICO happened? Fuck that.

>>10364200
holy fuck I love the sentiment of LINK holders. Unlike any other investors in this space.

Cheers mate.

>>10363476
>chainlink's failure
you mean success, mongoloid fuck

>>10365885
No one aggregates down to the millsecond.
Aggregation could easliy be over a 5 min period.
The variation in the data over milliseconds would be negligible.
Im guessing a sweet-spot will trigger the smart contract