/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>16127629
Yes, this. Linkies do not understand how it works.

>>16127629
When staking is released does this mean Eth and everything on its network (LINK) would sink since they are going to increase the volume?

>>16127629

If you run your own node, yes. If you are part of a giant node network that guarantees your linkees, then no.

>>16127629

this is why i am scarred of stacking my chain link token. i think i will sell at 2.70 dollar. kindly suggest biz does same so they not loose money.

Thats where linkpool comes to offer trustless staking for plebs. Profit is less but bad-node risk is somehow eliminated.

>>16127819
that makes sense. it will take a fee to act as a sort of insurance against losing linkies.

>>16127733
thank u very much good sir u r very good vishnu bless u

>>16127679
Wouldn't I still lose some of my links, only a smaller amount, since collatersl would be divided by the users in the pool? If link is used as collateral, how can the pool guarantee our links? Legit question, hadn't even heard about that possibilty before.

>>16127872
>>16127872
>No.16127872▶
>>>16127733 (You)
>thank u very much good sir u r ver

no problem sir

>>16127679
>If you are part of a giant node network that guarantees your linkees, then no.

Either they're lying or those nodes won't be taking on any lucrative or valuable contract requests, which means they'll be barely profitable, which means you won't be making much returns on your staking.

Shit costs money. I have my node up on testnet and every transaction requires gas and every transaction that matters requires Link tokens.

>>16127629
Are you implying there is some sort of economic incentive for all parties to send good data?

>>16128397
kek this

>>16127629
oh boy it's been a while since I got to use this pasta

>steaking starts
>weirdos launch nodes and start looking for jobs
>I post a job
>Wow it's a contract moving $80MM of ETH
>Collateral required for each of the 10 nodes: $8MM LINK
>No problem, that's only 8k LINK these days (early January)
>Nodes query the API in the smartcontract
>Whoops I own the smartcontract AND the API
>API programed to give out correct answer of "1"
>API also programmed to give out false answer of "0" 4/10 times
>6 nodes submit 1, 4 nodes submit 0
>Contract closes ($80MM eth sent to my other wallet)
>6 nodes get a pittance of a fee for answering right
>4 nodes get their $8MM collateral swept into my contract as penalty for trying to defraud me
The first week is gonna be a lot of fun before this whole thing collapses.

>>16128463
that's some good classic pasta, i remember that

Staking will take 1+year to come around. Link will have dropped like 90% by then so even if it doubles, holders will be fucked

>>16128113
So you’re throwing money away right now?

>>16128463
Anybody can debunk this fud?

>>16128463
Oh no not this again

>>16127733
>its november
>smug auska has failed you
>the repo man cometh
>long since past are the days of 2017 when summer fags spent their allowance on crypto with pipe dreams of having enough for a ps4 and a hand job from a 3/10 lady who has the aids behind a abandoned applebees dumpster
>you still hear $1k in your mind
>it scratches at your heart
>you weep like a faggot

sounds ghey desu why you faggots wont use better gains crypto i will never understand

you don’t lose your link if the contract executes correctly even if your node supplied bad data, that would be retarded . Only the consensus data is forwarded to the contract.

almost all contracts will have 99%+ consensus and wouldn’t execute beyond a particularly low consensus threshold. Collateral is only posted as a safeguard against system failure to make sure the transaction remains solvent, the likelihood that collateral will ever be necessary is extremely small

>>16127629
Then don’t send faulty data brainlet.
You want to comprise the integrity of the network? You lose your money. Tough shit, faggot. Go cry to mommy and daddy while my node stacks link.

>>16129698
Not even close.

wtf does that meat "if contract executes correctly"?!? How would you tell? Would the contract owner review each use of the contract and then email Sergey personally every time a contract executed correctly? Of course nodes going against consensus will be punished.

I wrote >>16128463 this FUD and I have the antidote. The answer should be pretty obvious but I use it as a filter to see if I'm dealing with moonboys or someone who has actually sat down and teased out how the systems works.

>>16129772
did you lose money from the contract? No? Then why would you get the collateral? Your “example” is painfully retarded