/biz/ - Business & Finance

>I have confirmed there will be no chainlink announcement at dreamforce.
Larp confirmed

>>11126397
there will be no chainlink announcement at dreamforce

https://www.salesforce.com/dreamforce/trailmaps/

there are quite a few blockchain related talks that may interest some people

>>11126368
Good post, although theres 0% chance link is coming out this year.

I don't get it

What is clause

Is $10 link happening soon

I need to eat and pay bills...

>>11126423
You should probably follow your investments closer or no you won't be able to eat.

>>11126423
Clause is the Accord Project founder. Accord project partnered with IBM and Chainlink. IBM's Hypledger will be demoing a salesforce integration at dreamforce which will include chainlink as an oracle option.

On the 26th Clause rebrand goes live and shows demos of chainlink in use with none other than hyperledger.

Hyperledg"er" ad"ds" Chainli"nk" Orac"le"

>>11126368
anything associated with accord is using LINK.
£342,857 eoy confirmed

>ctrl + F "chainlink"
>0 results found

Almost had me there OP

>>11126368
>Oh by the way look who has liked that tweet.
Literally who?

>>11126449
Dude wtf you know this is more bullish than chainlink announcing something haha. We all knew chainlink wouldn't be at dreamforce. But to hear that all these big names consider Chainlink as a viable option is fucking sick.

>>11126470
Are we gonna make it....

Will I be able to eat.....

>>11126368
ok here is where you distinguish yourself from a normal larp:
When you say "Hyperledger is adding chainlink oracle..." what does that mean?
Announcement?
Hyperledger the company is running a node on the testnet?
Third parties are writing data to hyperledger using chainlink?

>>11126470
>consider chainlink
>as a viable option
>not as THE oracle solution

Chainlink confirmed for useless, its only being considered speculatively

>>11126403
B-but why would janet lie to us?!

>>11126449

>there will be no chainlink announcement at dreamforce
>On the 26th Clause rebrand goes live and shows demos of chainlink in use with none other than hyperledger.

so what, chainlink will be running in the background and those viewing the demos will be none the wiser?

Listen I genuinely care about about Anons financial well being. Its hard as shit to get ahead in life now, not just working 9-5 for the rest of your life. The sooner you start saving the sooner you can get ahead in life.

Chainlink is a meme started by 4chan (an infamous trolling board) to lead people to financial ruin. This is NOT A JOKE. Don't let your saved wealth be thrown away over night.

Vitalik Buterin the creator of ethereum said himself the days of making x100 or x1000 are over, that right the guy who created the second most popular crypto said himself those days are over.

Now 4chan is trying to get people to lose even more money after the December/January bloodbath. Smart money already exited the crypto world. Crypto is basically a highly specialized database, companies don't need this. They will just create their own private blockchains. There is no need for crypto chainlink isn't even needed to run the nodes. Think XRP when you think chainlink. The company ripple (smartcontracts) is doing well but the coin XRP(chainlink) isn't even needed for the companies technology.

Considering what Vitalik said "The days of making x100 or x1000 returns are over." Chainlink needs a 399900% increase in price over the next couple of months to reach $1000 this is ludicrous. Don't fall for it, chainlink its a meme to fuck you over.

Consider this for chainlink at current price to reach $1 you need an increase of 700% or a 233% increase every month until EOY.

This is a 4chan meme to siphon money out of the hands of the already vulnerable.

>>11126500
janet who?

>>11126523
Janet “based rostie” stimac

>>11126504
yes. They are not promoting Chainlink which is part of the smart legal contract architecture. Chainlink will be backbone for smart legal contracts and protocols.

If you guys need any more confirmation just ask if clause is attending

>>11126368
Give us more info. How do you know all this?

>>11126650
More and more session info and conference leaks as we continue to get closer to Dreamforce. Attendees, speakers, booths etc. There is a lot of planning involved ;)

>>11126671
How many linkies do you hold?

>>11126516
This is the best pasta

>>11126685
0 but that may change soon

>>11126449
>Hyperledg"er" ad"ds" Chainli"nk" Orac"le"
So you're the er ds nk le anon?

>>11126564
>Janet “based rostie” stimac
The roastie with the most-ie

>>11126701
I'm saying if hyperledger adds chainlink oracle was the clue, he was right but off by 11 days.

>>11126671
what is being demoed?
reading from hyperledger?
writing to hyperledger?
will chainlink contracts be running on the main ETH chain by then?
or will it still only be on the testnets?
rinkby? ropsten?

>>11126692
wut
are you prohibited from owning any bcuz of insider trading or something

>>11126726
From what I understand the demo will include eth and hyperledger smart contracts that will interact with both salesforce and docusign.

Chainlink will still be testnet version. Will try and get more info on this

>>11126740

>>11126740
>ctrl+f Chainlink

>Since when is swag like stickers and shirts VITAL to a product launch?
What did you mean by this?

>>11126749
How much do you trust your source? Or are you a turbo autist doing his own research?

>>11126760
If they were simply hosting a webinar stickers shirts etc are not necessary. They will be giving them out at Demandforce.

>>11126782
trusted

>>11126740
>>11126750
Holy fugggggg. Most of /biz/ will miss this. Most of these retards don’t even know what open zeppelin is

10k EOY

>>11126740
>>11126750
Auto executing smart contracts made possible thtough the representation of an interlinked chain.

>>11126449
>On the 26th Clause rebrand goes live and shows demos of chainlink in use with none other than hyperledger.
Pure larp, the team hasn't even start working on hyperledger integration

>>11126368
>https://twitter.com/danielselman/status/1041014024866025473
>moot liked it.

>>11126824
The chainlink team has not. They expect a third party (in this case, clause) to create. It will all make a lot more sense for you on the 26th.

>>11126861
They are beta keys for clause correct?

>>11126861

you got any leads on the reputation contracts? there's a theory floating around that industry first adopters will be creating their own reputation contracts rather than relying on chainlink's. this would allow mainnet to go live once aggregation is complete. 3rd party reputation contracts have been confirmed by thomas.

>>11126843
Haha. I wonder if moot is a linkie.....

>>11126906
> there's a theory floating around that industry first adopters will be creating their own reputation contracts
That's not a theory, it's the plan right now that there will be multiple third party reputation contracts offered.

>>11126824
what is an adapter?

>>11126485
no YOU aren't, we don't need rich retards

>>11126516
spicy pasta to shake out weak hands

>>11126824
You don't understand the blockchain agnostic term then. Hyperledger's smart contracts can interact with Chainlink just by building external adapters, which is pretty easy and fast to build.

>>11127018
no, it's not an external adapter, to write to other blockchains requires a core adapter that only the chainlink team can deploy. Anyone saying link will be tested on hyperledger any time soon is larping. This anon is retarded larp preying on the misinformed.

>>11127041
Thomas explained it pretty clearly the other day on discord, someone uploaded the summary of the AMA in a giant .png file. Search it on warosu

>>11127041
Nigger what are you talking about

>>11126403
>>11126403
>there will be no chainlink announcement at dreamforce

if there is no chainlink announcement at dreamforce then what is the hype surrounding dreamforce about? just integration with hyperledger and clause?

>>11127041

>>11127041
And this...

>>11127041
Oh, and this

>>11126937
Exactly this.

Have they confirmed mainnet will most likely be out this year?

>>11126403
>>11126403
>there will be no chainlink announcement at dreamforce

isn't hyperledger and clause using Chainlink an announcement? Or are you saying there will be no mainnet announcement specifically.

>>11127078
Chainlink is allowing smart contract protocols to take the credit. IE clause and openlaw.

>>11127078
All the yuppy business owners who attend dreamfarce wouldn't give a shit about chainlink if they could even understand what it does. They are there to network and get sold CRM and other business software that helps them sell more dildoes with lower overhead. Chainlink will INVISIBLY enable some new salesforce SaaS solution to interact with the blockchain. All these yuppies will see is 'HOLY FUCK, YOU CAN MANAGE CUSTOMER CONTRACTS ON THE BLOCKCHAIN NIGGER, GET AMPED!!!' and hopefully they will think it's a good idea. Benioff seems to be good at pitching that bullshit, so it's probably bullish even if chainlink isn't mentioned once.

>>11127227
I don't expect to hear the word chainlink at demandforce. I do expect to see its functionality.

>>11126449
Sound unrealistic now

>>11127240
yeah remember, retail investors are meaningless to LINK. It's an industry token.
Sergey leaked the coin to us against SWIFT's wishes (they actually don't know it was he who did it and he has plausible deniability). He realized that for LINK to work, it had to be a true decentralized network and not an incestuous group of S&P500 companies.
That's where the $1kEOY meme comes from. He's warning us not to sell into the greedy hands of banks and salesforce or else the whole project fails. You have to hold and run nodes.

>>11127248
Hes butt hurt a bunch of neets knew about link before him.

>>11127251
Thats dissapointing. So Chainlink could go unnoticed at dreamforce even though there may be hyperledger and clause integration.

>>11127396
(edit )
disappointing.

>>11127216

>reputation + aggregation = mainnet
>reputation contracts will be created by 3rd parties
>aggregation almost done

i dunno, you tell me.

>>11126933
how about Consensus mechanisms? will they also be developed by different industry players to make sure they're suitable for their use cases?

We already know the basic reputation will be available on chain +3rd party rep providers

The team is currently working on node aggregation if I'm not mistaken so all we have left are consensus mechanisms and it makes sense to have different ones, for different needs like interest rates consensus, weather consensus, each thing requires different levels of response similarity

>>11126516
>>>/biz/?task=search&ghost=&search_text=Listen+I+genuinely+care+about+about+Anons+financial+well+being.+Its+hard+as+shit+to+get+ahead+in+life+now%2C+not+just+working+9-5+for+the+rest+of+your+life.+The+sooner+you+start+saving+the+sooner+you+can+get+ahead+in+life..

At least be more creative with the FUD man.

>>11127453
I can't really think of a situation that consensus wouldn't be on the contract creator.
"fetch me this value in this format from the following ip/port"
there isn't a whole lot of wiggle room there.
If you want "temperature of city" you still tell the node where to fetch. So you could have multiple contracts calling for multiple APIs and then aggregate them yourself.
But consensus doesn't seem harder than majority rules.

>>11126756
> dazzle with fanciful coding technique

>>11127519
>attach vector
Pajeet textbook, market sell all smart contract technology

>>11127507
I was thinking about the ranges of passable responses
let's say you need usd/eur rate or temperature, someone has to set upper and lower limit of acceptable responses outside of which every node gets penalized. I don't mean a range of specific numbers but a range of possible deviation between nodes

>>11127253
he upset their little surprise is leaked or what?

>>11127248
lol this faggot's twitter is chock full of really retarded liberal bullshit

>>11126368
>>11127292
I plan to run nodes and set local companies up to run through my nodes at $500 setup fee with 30 day free customer support. You guys should be paid money to make money while your money becomes worth more money.

>>11127814
where you gonna host nodes anon? Interested in doing similar to this as well. gimme a run down

>>11127832
I'm not doing the metrics on equipment or outsourcing hosting (don't want to but might need to for stable internet) until ChainLink is actually up and fully functional, seeing as I can get sued once this becomes a reality, but my plan stays the same and I'll go over full logistics when they release everything. In the memetime I'm keeping my day job and accumulating Link and Eth (don't talk to me about Eth, it hurts).

>tl;dr I don't know shit yet and won't research it until the methods and requirements are clear

alright im about to FOMO into chainlink

/biz/ wouldnt lie to me right

>>11128517
don't do it. Some whale is just messing with you, this isn't organic growth.

>>11128517
>sees weeks of juicy larps and insane breadcrumbs
>"no way this can't be true"
>witnesses one pump
>goes all in

and thus another bagholder joins our ranks. Larp threads are both a way to kill time and how linkies reproduce.

>>11127248
fuckin normies cant enjoy some dark humor npc fucks

>>11128548
It is funny. So many breadcrumbs literally all week.
But one little listing pump....

>>11128593
The thing is, if chainlink actually delivers, buying now is a bargain...only 33 cents. It's like arguing buying eth when it was a dollar vs 80 cents.

>>11128681
wow, only buying 100 can change your life forever.

>>11126906
Translation: it's not possible to have decentralized reputation, so instead there's going to be a small list of trusted nodes with public owners.

>>11128797
It's still decentralized no? I understand that big suits may not want to use a node that belongs to some neet from 4chan.

>>11126821
Enlighten me anon?

>>11128833
why would your node tell people you shitpost on 4chan?

>>11128851
You know what I mean...if you were some big suit, would you trust some random node vs one with a public owner that is very well known and respected.

>>11128797
Except the opposite of that lol

>>11128517
Buy buy buy buy buy!

>>11128797

lol no, it just means a service requestor can use whatever criteria they desire for determining a nodes reputation when oracles are selected to fill their requests.

>>11128833
It's not decentralized, it's going to be 'set your own oraclize'. A common protocol for centralized oracles. Link owners are getting so shafted and they don't even realize it.
The original (retarded for security reasons) idea was to choose nodes randomly from a network, with link as the native token for that network. If you manually choose nodes to trust, what's the point of the token? None, it's redundant.
It's the xrp situation all again. xCurrent doesn't use xrp, but it's regularly used to pump xrp.

>>11128952
Hmm...can someone refute this?

>>11128952
I have similar concerns and was arguing with someone about it yesterday.
If contract creators only use nodes based on trust and reputation manually it's probably not gonna require collateral, technically it could skip the token all together if they set up payments with that entity running the node
but this market is retarded and normies on reddit will be buying our bags at $20 thinking it's going to $500 after they fomo in late as always, just like xrp is sitting at $10b with a useless token.

>>11128952
>>11129002
The main point of decentralising this stuff is to stop hacks and tampering with data. If you have a handful of nodes that do all the traffic they will get hacked and fucked with.

>>11129040
This still doesn't refute what the other anon said...especially if it was confirmed that this was how reputation is going to work. If the other anon is right, chainlink is basically like oracalize with an extra step...that extra step being choosing which node to use.

>>11129069
stop parroting rick and morty episodes, child.

>>11129076
...what?

>>11126565
would it be correct to say that the service for sale is smart contracts facilitated by chainlink and provided by /ourbigmac/ sergey?

>>11129069
you will still be able to choose the nodes randomly, or choose a specific node yourself, or mutliple nodes of 1 operator, or multiple nodes from different operators, link will allow everything from centralized to decentralized, so free market will decide how this whole thing is gonna work.

Forcing random node selection would only result in someone forking the network and ditching that condition (and the token probably too) so it's not a bad thing neccessarily

>>11129024
>just like xrp is sitting at $10b with a useless token.
Ripple are masters at pumping + they have their own network. Link is always going to be an erc20 token, it's never going to a separate blockchain.
Well known oracle providers will start demanding eth, not link. Link is too illiquid to bother + you need eth anyway to pay fees.
I can't see any way to force oracles to use link.

>>11129103
>choose a specific node yourself
This pretty much guarantees that serious companies will use nodes that are owned by big suits...so it's not truly decentralized. For example would you choose to use a node owned by Microsoft that has 0 link staked vs a random node with 50k link tokens staked? Most would choose the Microsoft node just based on the name alone...making the tokens redundant.

>>11129096
no...... he owns smartcontract.com so he can sell his 83 Datsun online. It still runs like a champ.

>>11129040

>a handful of nodes

what makes you think their reputation contracts will be so stringent that it will only come down to a handful of nodes fulfilling smart contracts?

yes, a service requestor can use a reputation contract that only qualifies a handful of nodes to fulfill smart contracts, and they can also use a reputation contract that qualifies tens of thousands of nodes. they get to decide just how decentralized they want their selection to be. but because these parties are willingly adopting a decentralized oracle network in the first place i'm sure they understand that the benefits of the decentralized network will be lost if they don't utilize it as such.

so yes, if you use the network in a retarded way it isn't going to work out very well for you. who knew.

>>11129106
Why would they need to force people to use link? Its objectively the best project, people will be lining up to use it...

>>11129106
what does the token standard have to do with volume on centralized exchanges? giving link a usd pair would put in on the same level with eth in terms of user friendliness, also link has some specific features since it's some other standard than erc20 I don't even know if using eth would be suitable.

also link will giveaway free tokens to large companies to incentivize the usage, and many node operators have interest in LINK like linkpool so it's not just big whales crypto haters that are gonna run nodes

>>11129133
yea but that's like getting angry that people don't really want decentralization. You cannot force people for example to use eth over permissioned blockchains like hyperledger, maybe after a few hacks they will learn or maybe the future will prove that full decentralization indeed was a meme? Chainlink will allow you to choose the level of decentralization you need, like I said forcing full decentralization would only result in someone stealing the code and using it in private environment.

>>11129140
Remember when the internet first started, traffic was very "decentralized" in the sense that multiple websites got visitors...look at the internet today...a handful of websites gets all the visitors. Who's to say the same won't happen with link and it's node selection?

>>11129169
The project is good, my only concern is the token itself may be redundant...which means investors like myself and many other anons get the shaft.

>>11129133

>For example would you choose to use a node owned by Microsoft that has 0 link staked vs a random node with 50k link tokens staked? Most would choose the Microsoft node just based on the name alone...making the tokens redundant.

i would take the node with 50k because it'd be able to pay a penalty if something goes wrong. wtf is wrong with you?

the benefits of utilizing the oracle network in a decentralized manner outweigh the benefits of using a single oracle or even just a handful of oracles. never mind that you're all missing the point that because chainlink can function both in a decentralized manner and a centralized manner that it's innately better than any oracle provider point blank because of this optionality. everything else is redundant.

>>11129106
>I can't see any way to force oracles to use link.
>Hello sergey this is swift. We would like to use ur thing but we want to use eth
>Hello swift. Ive got MASSIVE LINK bags and all our faggot neet node operators do too so LINK is what we use

>>11129189
This is what I anticipate too. Some nodes will certainly be more trusted than others, and over time consolidation and maturity of the network will occur. The early years will likely be the wild west, and that's where the fun will be.

>>11129076
... how immature. Stop being so emotionally invested and if you're not ready to discuss a token economics go to plebbit to scream "moon hurr durrr!".

>>11129227
>i would take the node with 50k because it'd be able to pay a penalty if something goes wrong.
I get a feeling that boomers that run the show in the finance world don't think like you do.

>>11129252
your theatrics aren't for me. i don't get anything out of playing your game.

>>11129230
Isn't this pretty much a very polite way of forcing someone to use a token?

>>11129227
Thanks to smart contracts, it's trivial to copy all penalty conditions and use eth for them.

>>11129227
>i would take the node with 50k because it'd be able to pay a penalty if something goes wrong.
well to play the devil's advocate if you only choose one node it doesn't matter what data if feeds you you're not gonna get any money from penalties.
To get that penalty links you need to choose multiple different node operators and their responses must deviate from eachother significantly.

>>11129076
Is that quote really the first thing you think of when you hear that x is something with extra steps? Ooh la la someone is gonna have to go back

>>11129189

>Who's to say the same won't happen with link and it's node selection?

it won't happen because literally all an oracle does is write external data to the blockchain. reputation in this context comes down to how reliably a node can accomplish this, and the benefit of decentralization is that you don't have to worry about your oracle failing. yes, these big name companies' oracles will likely be used in a disproportionate number of smart contracts, but they will be used in conjunction with a ton of other "random" oracles. service requestors would be at a disadvantage otherwise.

pee pee poo poo

>>11129169
>no facts
>people will use it because I bought a shitload of it and I hope so

Pathetic. Argue with facts or don't argue at all.

>>11129271
>>11129288
The crucial point is what do the node operators want. Would they be happy to accpet eth, or would they prefer link?
Depending on how they seed the ecosystem I feel the native asset should have the edge in terms of expected roi.

>>11129306
>but they will be used in conjunction with a ton of other "random" oracles
My worry is the usage will be so heavily favored towards the big names that the tokens will be seen as redundant...it's like using a centralized oracle with on extra step.

>>11129291
you can't explain chainlink without making rick and morty references.

>>11129174
>and many node operators have interest in LINK like linkpool so it's not just big whales crypto haters that are gonna run nodes
How many people are interested in linkpool? No, really.

Do you even have any hard numbers or are you talking out of your anus?

>>11129331
I'd reckon node operators would be happiest to accept USD.

>>11129253

and i've got a feeling boomers won't be the ones deciding any of this.

>"just make sure that the smart contracts work. don't fuck this up."
>"ok, then we need to use a decentralized oracle network. if we rely on just a couple oracles, even if their big name oracles, we could get seriously fucked over."
>"i don't know what any of that means but sounds good to me."

>>11129331
Why would anybody prefer link over eth? You need eth for fees, so you need to sell some link anyway. Users prefer eth too, they already have it. Most utility tokens are a nuisance, shoehorned just to get ico money. Link is one of them.

>>11129363
>and i've got a feeling boomers won't be the ones deciding any of this.
too optimistic, even if I am wrong, everything that has been discussed is legitimate fud because the tokens may be redundant...similar to how 99% of crypto projects are good ideas that don't need a token in the first place.

>>11129343
yea but that's assuming that either those big node operators will feed data for free to eachothers or you will have to contact them IRL and set up a different payment based on trust, not a smart contract, or you're assuming that the entire network will get forked on day 1 and the token will be ditched

>>11129356
What the fuck are you talking about yoy asshole? I'm politely discussing and you're coming here like I owe you some explanation you stupid fuck.

You might as well say
>how do you know anyone needs smart contracts, are you taking it out of your anus?
LinkPool is the only entity so far that we know of is planning to run a node, if they are successful and establish a good reputation why not?

>>11129265
Good. Stay out, adults are talking.

Don't even bother replying to me, brainlet. I'll just ignore you since I'm better than you.

>>11129368
Because ETH is dropping under 3 digits soon

>>11129343

>My worry is the usage will be so heavily favored towards the big names that the tokens will be seen as redundant

those big name nodes will only take up 1/n out of n nodes on any given contract (eg. 1/100 out of 100 nodes). what are you talking about? how are you all still not getting this??????? FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

>>11129361
If you think that you're missing the point.
>>11129368
For gains. If this shit takes off it could be the biggest gainer. Why not accept the asset of the ecosystem you're contibuting to? ETH could 5x, but Link could 10x easily from here.
Add to that that node operators will alreasy be holding link bags.

>>11129411
>day 1 and the token will be ditched
I honestly think the token will be ditched, but by the time that happens you and I will most likely have cashed out.

>>11129368
did you expect Sergey and co to develop Chainlink out of pure altruism and let everyone use it for free without any contribution? lol

>>11129384

alright, you're all fucking retards. i'm out.

>>11129411
You said there are a lot of people interested in using linkpool to stake link.

I asked you if you had any hard numbers, or if you were talking out of your ass.

You evaded my question with female victim tier logic.

If you don't have any hard data and facts don't even bother. You're just hoping and making shit up at this point.

>>11129433
>those big name nodes will only take up 1/n out of n nodes on any given contract (eg. 1/100 out of 100 nodes). what are you talking about? how are you all still not getting this???????

How do you know that big company's nodes will get a minority of the request ? Network hasn't even been deployed yet.

Ok I m back what did I miss?

>>11129458
I honestly hope I am being retarded, I have 53k linkies and I hope we go to tau ceti.

>>11129461
you motherfucker I said that LinkPool itself has interest in Link going up because they hold a lot of it for collateral purposes.
You ask me if people want to stake with them which is a different question, but yes people do want to stake with them, go to their blog and check how much link they've already accepted from people, I'm too lazy to search that for you

>>11129502
If Linkpool exit scams I will die of laughter, holy shit that would be the just'ing of a lifetime

>>11129517
do you even now how smart contracts work? they cannot steal the link you stake on their nodes

>>11129537
If LINK actually takes off, think of how much money is on the line...it would make people be able to do things they never thought possible.

>>11129502
>I'm too lazy to search that for you
>I'm smart but lazy

Pathetic, if you don't have all the facts about your investment don't even start a discussion, you'll get wrecked.

>>11129537
... that's it, you're retarded. Gtfo.

How can linkpool exitscam? Unless you guys are talking about the 1000 ETH they got. The link never leave your wallet to be stacked. Its complete trustless

>>11129565
>>11129576
Lmao, go cry somwehere else you retard. You just came here to shit on everything with 0 understanding whatsoever

>>11129564
well yes, but like I said I agree that the token economics may not play out the way most people hope that's why I would advise starting to sell as soon as we reach mania levels with plebbitors worshipping link the way they worship ven/nano/eth or whatever

>>11127361
GOAT

>>11129579
Linkpool is a dangerous actor because if a lot of link holders put their link in linkpool, and linkpool decides what APIs to retrieve data from (even if they decide to retrieve an incorrect answer), they can manipulate the smart contract. And thus, the money in it (Address, time, amount $$$, etc).

They are a risk to link's decentralization. I won't be putting a penny in linkpool, I'd rather run my own node.

>>11129607
Pathetic. Ignored.

This thread makes me want to sell

>>11129189
Mate I don't care as long as long I get my lambo, a comfy house and some pawg teens on my dick 24/7

>>11129773
True...by the time the link tokens get slowly phased out, I will have cashed out already.

>>11129785
and that's the plan,
If I don't see link being used for collateral I'm jumping out at the hype-driven bubble too

>>11129368
The Chainlink token is an extension on the ERC20 standard and thus has functions ETH does not. Not to mention the fact that Chainlink will work across multiple blockchains, so it's nice to have the separate token to facilitate that rather than being tied to whatever ETH does. Also there's economic reasons to have your own token, the token value will stabilize around the worth of the Chainlink network, not some mix of the value that Ethereum provides and the value Chainlink provides.

>>11127698
He is a total fucking idiot. I hope he doesn’t use link so his project can fail.

>>11129319
>people will use it because I bought a shitload of it and I hope so
You're fucking retarded if you think Link wont succeed based on all of the people working behind and with this project. You will unironically never make it.

>>11130191
What a fucking cuck

>>11130269
Pathetic, you won't ever make it with your sheep mentality.

>>11127247
This. All these anons thinking there will be massive partnership announcements and shit like that are dreaming. CL will silently be integrated in the background of everything going on. You think CEOs and even some CIOs give a fuck about oracles? No way. They don't have time for that. They just need to know that it's a secure solution and that it's saving/making the company more money. They don't give a fuck about CL, nor do they need to for CL to moon. Every transaction will look like USD (or whatever fiat) to them regardless anyway. It's not like they will be checking fucking coinmarketcap for LINKs price before deploying a smart contract. Some of you anons are so dumb for being smart enough to find LINK.

>>11128843
paper shills openzeppelin, chainlink is partnered with them

>>11129230
>I can't see any way to force oracles to use link.
>Hello sergey this is swift. We would like to use ur thing but we want to use eth
>Hello swift. Ive got MASSIVE LINK bags that I'm giving to you for free to use the CL network.
>Swift. Ok. We'll pump eet.

>>11130538
But how will CL moon then if people don't even know it exists

Did anybody else see the picrelated thread that got deleted instantly? What the fuck is that cube?

>>11130807
This is it

>>11130791
There is a type of person that needs to know it exists in order for it to moon and that type of person has a networth approaching the billions with a substantial network of similarly valued individuals/corporations. Normies and regular business owners ain't gonna do shit for Link.

>>11129133
lmfao you are such a brainlet. YOU CAN USE BOTH

>>11130191
>>11130278
I hate cars too, fuck you

>>11130807
Fuck

>>11127248
Cringe at all the comments, it's like they want to prove him right.

>>11130791
We don't need people. We just need several large financial entities. They will find it. Just remember how early in the game it is right now. The network hasn't even launched yet. LINK is unironically the first real utility token the world will see.

>>11129133
you could just name your node like "main microsoft node"

>>11130977
Checked.

>>11130807
Nice try faggot.

>Makes this thread.
>Deletes it.
>Hurr Durr Dreamforce conspiracy

Kys.

>>11130978
The shills with 1k LINK are going to push away several potential users of CL network. These zoomer faggots think they are helping when in fact they hurting the credibility of LINK. This is some VeChain level faggotry.

>>11130807
Cube is here:
https://chain.link/providers/

>>11131164
Hmmm, is this just a larp, or are we actually going to see some fucking action up in the house.

>>11130807
>>11131164
I can feel it

what really gets my noggin joggin is the potential money saved by the companies that adopt this technology would be massive. it will be interesting to see what they do with the extra money and if these companies will invest it into R&D for new technology themselves.

>>11130978
Cringe at theLinkMarine twitter account too

Yeah TheLinkMarine is such a cringeworthy cringefestingly cringy little cringe minge bag

>>11127248
Lmao, I love this place/you guys

>>11131028
I really didn't make that thread so please kys back.

>>11127292
this sounds too good to be true

more smart contract shilling today:
https://bitcoinist.com/could-smart-contracts-become-an-essential-tool-for-business-in-the-future/

>>11131253
It goes into the pockets of the execs, duh

>>11129317
pee pee poopoo ID
$10k confirmed

>>11131253
What gets me hard is all the jobs that will move from lawyer chads to coders for smart contracts. Revenge of the nerds...we taking over

>>11132227
only because you're on the right end of life this time.

Why do you idiots feed Astro?

>>11130807
>>/biz/thread/S11130418

>>11134102
>>>/biz/thread/S11130418
Shieeeeeettt

>>11134102
Please translate

>>11133709
B-b-but I’m a lawyer and have 20k LINK

>>11130791
>what is b2b

>>11134153
Way to hedge. Well done.

>>11134153
Learn solidity. Become the ultimate lawyer

>>11134204
Where to even start (middleagefag here). Havent coded anything other than HTML/CSS/MySQL and that was years ago. At least want to run a node to start

>>11134204
My best friend's in law school, I've been learning solidity. Considering starting a shitty smart contract focused consulting group when we get up to speed. Feel like there would be so little competition that even our lack of experience wouldn't be an insurmountable barrier to entry to working on a small scale

>>11128873
Yeah that’s how and why big suits little suits and everyday average suits trust bitcoin and ethereum. You trust a lot of people you don’t know who are spread out and can’t collude. I want to call you a fucking idiot but I understand where you’re coming from because it seems strange. That’s the nature of decentralization though.

>>11131341
Yeah that twitter handle needs to calm the fuck down.

>>11134405
Trustless is hard to grasp for some people. The "who do i yell at if something goes wrong".... with a smart contract, if written correctly, nothing can go wrong or the contract won't execute

Can you fucking faggots just stay off Twitter and in your sperg containment zone that is 4chan. You literal retards are flushing your only chance of making it down the drain.

>>11129317
cringed and bluepilled

>>11134787
This, or we'll make it and have our funds frozen because we made money off "the racist investment". Stay here faggots.

>>11129133
I’ll choose the node with 50k staked or 50 million usd because I’ll have guarantees he doesn’t want to game my contract. This is also how bitcoin and ethereum work. You trust a lot of people you don’t know who are spread out and can’t collude. I’d call you a fucking idiot although I understand this seems strange but it’s just the nature of decentralization.

>>11136590
ok let's say I choose a node that has high collateral, and then I choose 2 more nodes that I run myself, those 2 nodes will deliberately feed different data than the other one, doesn't matter who provides the correct data, the honest node gets penalized simply due to being outvoted and loses everything. Sounds like a good way for penalty farming

>>11126937
its what connects the chainlink network to a blockchain. chainlink will natively support ethereum, bitcoin, and hyperledger. I believe a 3rd party already created an adapter for iota as well. any other blockchain that wants access to data provided by chainlink will need to build an adapter (basically converting into a format your blockchain can read)

>>11136590
I don’t care what YOULL choose I care what THEY choose. They will just call us chink scammers and safe Microsoft is safer

>>11129809
best answer. you can't have a blockchain agnostic platform whose value is tied to whatever eth does. ethereum may not even be the main blockchain in the future.

>>11126368
I tried to understand how you valuate link to be double or triple digits in near future (or 1000$ eoy) and can't figure out what would cause token price to rise so much in exchanges.

It seems Chainlink's team still has 350 million tokens. If you need, let's say 20k for a node. They could then run 17500 nodes by themselves.

Then there are 6 addresses with each having ~5% of tokens. If those will be distributed to big companies (5% for Salesforce, for example, with custom price), they can each run 2500 nodes all around the world.

So now we have tokens for +32k nodes (or to be sold to customers with custom price) and no one hasn't bought any of link from the exchanges. Even with current shitty transactions per second (based on ETH), +10k nodes can handle billions of transactions each day.

Single person can put up his own node, but can't compete with the reputation of those corporate nodes and won't probably even get transactions.

If you can get those, you might get 1-3% ROI per year. Let's say one link is 1$, you will have to have 20k$ worth of link to get 200-600$ profit annually, and it is paid with link tokens.

If link price somehow rises, the transaction fee will still be adjusted against fiat currency and you still get only 1-3% ROI per year. You just get less link.

With those 32k nodes, large companies and Chainlinks team can keep most of the tokens in their hands and distribute them anywhere.

If companies won't be buying link from the exchanges, ever, then who will buy link tokens for 1$, or 5$ or 50$ each? Why?

>>11137201
>ever
you're forgetting third tier corporate fomo happening when sergeys tokens are all distributed

>>11129250
Certain oracles will be more popular but you will still need multiple oracles to work since the whole point is to have decentralization for trust and security. Also, over time, open source api's could make hosting nodes more decentralized.

>>11127041
>https://github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink/wiki/External-Adapter-Registry

>>11126368
kill yourself filthy shill

>>11139242
Every single thread you call people to kys. Universe in return will probably kill you.Remember totalbiscuit called people to get cancer but ironically died from ass cancer.You are messing with powers beyond your imagination.I would be careful if i were you

>>11126368
Lenocinium detected

Holy shit the autistic website fud is insane. Believing shilling on biz would have an effect, and equally they "revealing" it would have an effect. Biz is tiny

>>11139283
I agree, karma will bite back all those filthy shillers like you who try to lure in dumb people into your pathetic scam. Do you sleep well at night?

>>11129174
They won't give tokens to companies for usage, they will give them low price service, maybe even free, and will use some of that uncirculated supply to compensate the Nodes.. companies pay in fiat, nodes get paid in Link.

>>11129230
Swift likely owns a huge interest in Link and will make a shit ton of cash from Links success, they aren't going to slay the golden goose. Tell u another thought, there will end up being an exchange very much focused on exchanging fiat for Link and Link to fiat to make it easy to buy Link to become a node, and for node operators to get their fiat. Guess who will own that exchange and make the money from each transaction? SWIFT is my guess. Mo money, mo money, mo money

Link team your shills promised us $3 in March. Tick tock tick tock

>>11139726
I will add, just remember who always ends up making the money, then think about who actually owns SWIFT. Thousands of Banks.

anyone have the supposed "leaked" Teeka pics?

link 0.0001 EOY

>>11139770
Bingo! LINK is how they will remake themselves to keep power and profitable in the decentralized economy

>>11130807
>>11131164
Notice how it's right above "larger enterprises can partner with us". It seems like he's implying a Salesforce partnership will be announced.

I made a chainlink painting. Posting after I finish the details. Commemorating a special occassion.

>>11137201
1. Smartcontract creators using Chainlink will need to pay fees to node owners in LINK tokens.
2. Smartcontract creators will use nodes based on reputation and has LINK collateral value that equals to a portion of the contract

Some smartcontracts value will be into the 10s of milliions. that means the nodes used will need to have a proportional value to the contract. Yes, They will be buying massive amounts of LINK.

And there is great incentive for LINK market cap to be astronomical once smartcontract are used for bonds, derivatives, etc...

>>11141378
>opular but you will still need multiple o

Also, you are not taking into account the fact that 90% of the supply of LINK will not be sold on the open market. It will be staked in Nodes never to be sold and if they are sold larger Node LINK stakers ill buy it hoping to land bigger and bigger smartcontracts.

Now do you see?

>>11141378
Why is a token necessary for all this?

>>11141420
The absolute state

>>11137201
There’s also day traders, speculators and other individuals who may want to run a node

>>11130807
I NEED MORE TIME

>>11141420
It isn't necessary and neither is it having an insane valuation. $1.50 link in this market would be euphoric.

Try not to be so gullible.

>>11141587
Save your wet blanket to keep the flies off your face while you shit on the street, pajeet.

The next time I vote for Donald Trump, it will be to protect my millions. LINK’s destiny lies ahead boys.