/biz/ - Business & Finance

(2/2)
Now, we can begin to summarize our calculations. $50.000.000 get distributed to 500.000.000 LINK tokens every year - this means that every LINK token generates $0.1 in yearly revenue. At 8% interest, this means that a LINK token will be valued at $1.25.
$1.25!
Now, keep in mind that this is the absolute best case scenario for LINK. Anything above that is just baseless speculation detached from reality.
Cheers!

Didn't read your blog post Manvinder, but nice try.

drns

hmmmm
le me think
hmmmm
paa puu
no
pêbi pabu
no
ah
pee pee poo poo

Suck my rock nigger. Max price of LINK is over a million.

You’ve forgot to add the “DR;NS” to your equation.

you had two years faggot

Link can work on BSV and its scale.

>>16288848

FUCKING LMAO IMAGINE TAKING THE THE TIME TO TYPE THAT OUT JESUS CHRIST HAVE SEX YOU FUCKING VIRGIN INCEL LOSER LOL

>>16288881
>>16288883
>>16288891
>>16288896
>>16288897
>>16288904
>>16288913
that's a lot of inane shitposting. so far, no one has refuted my post :)
>>16288910
no, it can't. bsv doesn't even enable loops.

>>16288923

BUD BUD DING DING MR INDIAN STREET SHITTING MAN.

>>16288848
This is now a rolling thread
ROLL

>>16288848
ily anon

>>16288848
Wow, a utility value of $1.25?
This is massive considering that LINK also performs as a hard asset such as Bitcoin.
Each bitcoins utility value is probably 5cents, but from that it's price has spiked to 20,000.
I really admire you factful calculation but I am going to skip straight to the conclusion here for clarity:
This means that LINK will go to at least 20,000,000 per token (conservative)

>>16288941
role

>>16288955
re-role

>>16288941
roll

>>16288958

Time travel anon already confirmed LINK > $81k in 2026 and so does this.

>>16288960
>>16288941
need to study anyways, pce

>>16288951
LINK tokens were generated out of thin air.
LINK doen't have the decade-long history of BTC.
LINK is entirely controlled by a private company.
LINK relies on another blockchain for security.
You can't really compare Link and BTC.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ1DTeexpvA
link can work on BSV stop lie.

>>16288974
cope

>>16288848
The white paper says otherwise

>>16289012
Turing completeness on it's own is basically irrelevant. PowerPoint is turing complete too, yet no one is developing on it.

>>16288848
>>16288850
You actually bothered to type that out, lol.

Just disrupting the profits of cme, ice, and some minor western exchanges at 3-5x valuation puts link in 150-300. Not factoring the much larger otc trades or eastern/new (africa, me, jungle asia) markets. Then there's defi/debank, shipping/trucking, insurance, sports betting/gaming, escrow, and ten other things that haven't been invented with the newly available resources.

1k is fud bud.

>>16289107
did you read my post?
it disproves pretty much everything you've written.

>>16288848
>he didn't buy

>>16289116
its a coping mechanism
he missed out
now he needs to cope

>>16289040
Thats fake

>>16288941
Rollin

>>16289123
It's real, go read it for yourself

>>16289040
What the fuck is this reverse FUD bullshit?

https://bitcoinexchangeguide.com/nchain-receives-approval-for-blockchain-smart-contracts-patent-will-ethereum-start-paying-fees/

HAHA

>>16289168
It's supposed to be tied to the price of a big mac fag boy

>>16289123
Is the benefit of being obese that you never have to wear clothes?

>>16289191
>nchain just patented space and time, will the known universe and reality itself start paying fees?

>>16288850
I really enjoyed your calculations, Thanks anon.
I don't have much time to verify it, but if you provide your references of those number you started your assumption, it would be great. I can remake your calculations e see if I get on the same values.

>>16289250
I think I've explained my reasoning for choosing these numbers pretty well.
Is there any specific number you have a problem with?

>>16289114
Cme has an income of 6 billion, ice even more. Something in the 20b range, and that's for futures and commodities...not even stock broker normie faggot shit.

It's closer to 5 billion annually (to save 15b in fees vs normal) just from that. Plus China, Japan, ausfaillia, nigger, and jungle gook.

Then add the entire sports betting/gambling industry at an estimated, and growing 250+b revenue. Decentralized trustless (or completely transparent trustful is a better explanation).

Etc etc, wasted my time anti fudding a retard when I and anyone that can dyor already know what's up.

>>16289277
all these fancy theoritical use cases don't matter when the only relevant blockchain is limited to 6 transactions per second.

>cant even reach 5, 10 or 15 after 2 years

>>16288848
Chainlink is blockchain agnostic...so whichever blockchain wants to use it aka a higher transaction per second can implement it. A cup of coffee varies from place to place...was he talking Starbucks or a cup of coffee that you can make at home? You are ASSuming a lot of thing here and are trying to FUD so hard it is cringe. Are you priced out?

>>16289286
It's 15, soon to be 1500 or 15000 with threshold sigs. Every relevant SC chain has already ported the adaptors over (even shitcoins like jizzem feet). It's a copy paste for shit that can interpret solidity. You're trying to fud interoperability and blockchain agnostic when projects whose sole goal is to accomplish those things has to use chainlink to do them (quantniggers btfo)?

Cmon kid.

>>16289307
>>16289343
"blockchain agnoism" isn't magic.
>ethereum is still the only platform people want to develop for
>there's no way to distribute link tokens to holders on a new blockchain without going through a central intermediary
>splitting link into seperate blockchains ruins the network effect
>individual chains aren't secure and can be attacked easily
the last point is by far the most important one.
imagine trying to secure a trillion dollar stock exchange on a garbage-tier chain like dag or ethereum classic.

>>16288850
Honestly saw your block and decided not to read even a sentence

Hope it was worth your time tho

>>16288923
Seeing as you pulled numbers out of your ass there's nothing to actually refute you fucking shitposting idiot.

>>16289470
all numbers are very optimistic predictions, but still realistic.
is there any number in particular you want to criticize?

am i beeing correct with the assumption that link isnt designed to settle anything low value in terms of USD. like the example that you can choose the type of node operators and how much of them you want tailored to the economic size that has to be settled. like with low value transactions anything below 100USD it would easily take a vast percentage of this on top of that to make the sure the settlement is valid. paying a low settlement fee for node operators would bring all kinds of incentives from all sides to do malicious things. this could easily turn out into a wildfire destroying the reputation of link itself. i cant image thrust worthy node operators agree to settle contracts or anything like that with a transaction value below $100K. this number is out of the blue who knows maybe its 500k-1mil

>>16289579
The size of the settlement fee is almost irrelevant.
It only increases the security of the network by indirectly pumping the price (and therefore the value) of the staked token).
Besides, very high settlement fees would make it unviable even for it's target markets (derivates/betting/supply chains)

>>16288848
DR;NS

>>16288941
rollin

>>16288941
RSR

>>16289277
Ok then you'd have to agree that anything above $3 a LINK is completely overvalued. I'm not sure why people have a problem with this. It's basic math.

>>16288848
Max price of LINK is $4.5 it has already been achieved it's never going back there. People that didn't sell are fucking retarded bagholders
YOU HAD ONE CHANCE

>>16288941
Hitler was right about the kikes and the holocaust never happened

>>16289607
how is the size of the colleteral from the node operator adjusted/realized then? wont their be service, industry, or business specific node operators specialising in handling different kind/sizes of txs? like for example someone charging you your monthly car insurance fee of $80 and some other settling 8-9 digits worth of derivatives. will it be irrelevant which size of transactions they settle - the colleteral is always very high? a wanted high barrier for emerging only thrustworthy node operator businesses?

>>16289698
>like for example someone charging you your monthly car insurance fee of $80 and some other settling 8-9 digits worth of derivatives. will it be irrelevant which size of transactions they settle - the colleteral is always very high?
no. the client decides the value of collateral and the nodes can either accept or reject that offer.
the size of the collateral scales linearly with the value of the transaction. the fee does in a very minor way (to cover the value of the collateral), but it'll be still pretty cheap (max. 5 dollars for a multimillion dollar transaction). decentralization is archived by increasing the number of the nodes, not by increasing the settlement fees.
at least, that's how it's supposed to work. i could go on an argue why it's a terrible concept, but it's 2 am and i'm tired.

>>16289668
here's the real equation to calculate LINK's value:
(poo + poo) / (pee - pee) = $1k eoy

It's hilarious to me you dumbasses keep shilling Link on /biz/ every single day. If any one of you had a basic grasp of economics, you would know that new money would need to pour in for link to be worth anything in the future, and based on the desperation shill posts I see everytime I come on here, I can tell you with a near 100% certainty this shitcoin isn't going anywhere. Then again, if you're stupid enough to buy link, you deserve to lose your money.

>>16289777
cheked
so you are longterm bearish on link?

>>16288941
Rol

>>16289846
isn't their a sub reddit you usually shitpost in or maybe a twitter feed you like to sperg. either way pee pee poo poo

>>16289862
yes.
i do think that a new ath is probable when staking gets announced, but the coin will slowly die once staking is actually released. the rewards will be disappointing, and it will either be semi-centralized or insecure due to many well known vulnerabilities (e.g. the classic "request data from an api you secretly control. generate 6 right results and 4 wrong results. collect the collateral from 4 nodes and give the remaining six a tiny fee").

AWS guy made it official

https://pages.kaleido.io/webinar-ondemand-kaleido-on-aws-thankyou?submissionGuid=68a3dd47-631c-4ad9-acf0-d54c52e1dc7c

1:01:40

>>16288848
No one Cares about your gay opinion blog, europoor.

>>16289909
>once mr. Ford releases his new model T, I think the price of ford stock will decline because after everyone has this new product, they won’t want it anymore. Too bad, the automobile seems like a promising idea.

>>16289668
U wot. Just the two things I looked up put staking returns over 500 per year per link. Of course, they're only doing the backend transactions...but with almost zero overhead and upkeep, and shit like the hackathon squadstack and beth allowing (making) users design their own betting contracts...Casino dexs with 30 second cash out and depositsn with no regional enforcement/restrictions and full transparency/real randomness. Node operators and contract designers can literally print money with the only overhead being gas fees.

Even at 10%, x3-5 is 180 to 300. Before insurance, Shipping, full otc swaps, blah blah.

>>16288923
>Blockchain
>Agnostic
/Thread

>>16288941
Roll

>>16290257
Converting from fiat into link/eth as the account balance/wagering "chips" alone would drive the price to insane numbers. North of 1 billion usd incoming daily, even at 90% cash out rate that doubles and compounds the daily volume (much more without wash trading).

>>16288848
>We can also assume that about 500.000.000 tokens will be staked.
150m max in the near future; MAYBE 500m will find their place somewhere in 15 years

>At 8% interest, this means that a LINK token will be valued at $1.25.
They don't disintegrate after a year. Stake for 5 years for example and you're at 1.08^5 = 47%.

With my numbers we'd be closer to 20 usd. I can't really comment on node payments since I lack the background. I imagine banks will pay higher and higher fees as DLT becomes more mainstream and with that a bigger target of abuse.

>considering that the majority of jobs would be simple API requests that wouldn't cost more than a few cents.
I'd imagine banks have more traffic than random dApps

>>16289808
My man

>>16289777
>(max. 5 dollars for a multimillion dollar transaction)
Could you explain why 5? Is there a service to compare it to and use as reference?
Where would you peg a 250 million dollar transaction?

>>16288941
roll

It has always truly been 700K linkies to make it. That's why our great Lord and savior SERGEY has bestowed this sum upon us. May his blessed release drown us in his name.

>>16288923

Stopped reading at cup of coffee you tranny fudder.

Can’t believe you typed all that out. Low iq, never going to make it tranny.

>>16290637
>>16288941

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWCFU8ABdy4

Good song

>>16288941
Yeet

>>16289040
That’s not real, here’s the real white paper.

>>16290709
OK thats it
im selling

>>16290647
This pic cracks me up every time.

>>16289277

>Etc etc, wasted my time anti fudding a retard when I and anyone that can dyor already know what's up.

This

>>16290709
>>16290761
You faggots made me screenshot, consider yourselves lucky.

>>16290621
Openlaw estimates a simple swap contract to cost 5k up to 25k+ with more complexity. Majority of that is legal council to draft it and the army of rubber stampers/accounting that make 60k and up a year each. The actual fees are pretty convoluted (at least for a brainlet like me) but can be found on cme or ice's websites. Again, the human overhead (plus office space) is the issue...and getting rid of 90% of them is going to make a lot of yang gangers.

>>16290983
FUCK I JUST SOLD MINE

FUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

>>16291315
You can't be this fickle if you want to make it. buy back in and never sell again until we unironically hit $1000, if you're a pussy, sell at $200.

>>16291100
In 2014 the average otc interest rate/credit swap was about 105mm euro per transaction, almost 14 euro per mil fees for central clearing, or 1400 eur per swap transaction. And this has a clearing time of about 5-10 business days depending on the regulatory body/clearing house.

Non centrally cleared (so b2b) fees were 170.5eur per mm.

Another 50-85 eur per 1mm in collateral financing, and an extra 120/mm average charge (100-240 depending on type) for otc trades due to risk.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/uk/Documents/financial-services/deloitte-uk-fs-otc-derivatives-april-14.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwis9YXx6fLlAhWSlp4KHbWrDGAQFjAKegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw0NZFX5MWgwKFjWf1CZxA4f

>>16291375
FUCK!!

FUCKING EXCHANGE FEES!!!!

NOW I HAVE HALF OF WHAT I HAD AN HOUR AGO

FUCKING FUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

>>16288941
roll

>>16288941
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00020/full

you guys got a gem, I hope you appreciate it

>>16291594
Please tell me your ethnicity/race and IQ, this is for research purposes.

>>16291613
>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00020/full
Black/Nigger/69

FUCKING FUCKKKKKKKKKKKKK

>>16291625

kek, gotcha

>>16289286
Good thing it runs on hyperledger

>>16288941
Roll

>>16291651
ok seriously now, how long till you think this happens? >>16291375

>>16291680
Less than a year.

>>16291692
ok ill hold onto my last 10 linkies

>>16289696
Fucking based.

>>16291747

>>16288941
lets see it baby

>>16291769
Well my portfolio is all LINK now, but the top 5 ive ever been in is

BTC
ETH
BAT
REQ(dont worry, i traded it to LINK when they were still similar mcap)
0xBTC

>>16290664
good song desu

>>16288941
Roll

>>16288941
rolling for self-dox

>>16291811
>>16288941
re-rolling

>>16288974
You're comparing a unique, one of a kind asset like LINK to a fucking currency like BTC?
Christ you truly do not comprehend what a collateralized contract asset is (hint: its LINK) and thus cannot grasp the value as a blockchain agnostic middleware that acts as collateral for contracts collectively worth the GDP of planet earth.

Buying LINK is like being able to by a share in the internet if such a thing were possible at its inception.
>$1000 is fucking fud

>>16291813
guess where I am/what I do

>>16291833
>>>/x/

>>16289432
>imagine trying to secure a trillion dollar stock exchange on a garbage-tier chain like dag or ethereum classic.
Imagine being so goddamn retarded that you'd assume major financial entities wont use their own in-house proprietary blockchain.

>>16291765
If only the boomers knew.

>>16288941
$1000 EOY

>>16291850
This, unfortunately, is where I ultimately see things going. Crypto has earned a had reputation due to the amount of scams. Many large companies and some countries are already developing their own blockchains for everything from currency to supply chain. The only thing I can see that would stop this is if all these separate blockchains are unable to work between each other, in which case it would likely end with one being made into industry standard. I just cant see the worlds established institutions using the system developed by an autistic Russian dropout that looks like he's spent half his life in a concentration camp when they could use one built by jewgle or kikebook.

>>16291609
Reality is an immutable ledger that distributes atoms per the consensus of the observer.

>>16291890
FUCK YOU MAKE ME WANT TO SELL AGAIN

FUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

>>16291833
JIDF mothership

>>16288941
Rolling now

>>16288850
It was good bait at the start, but you ended on a poor note by ending so abruptly. It would have been a better troll to keep typing. $100 is FUD. Look at ETH just 4 years ago

>>16291904
learn to hold
only strong hands make it

>>16288941
Reroll

>>16291929
>says the +Sell ID

>>16291890
>The only thing I can see that would stop this is if all these separate blockchains are unable to work between each other, in which case it would likely end with one being made into industry standard.
Thats why LINK is blockchain agnostic middleware. So that it can connect ANY FUCKING CHAIN to the rest of the planet.

Chainlink is the God Protocol.

>>16291904
Quit being retarded. Link will go to at least $25

>>16291944
What's to stop these companies from developing their own version of an Oracle system, one that doesnt allow their ideological enemies to gain wealth? I'm just speaking my mind here. I'm all in on link and still putting every free penny into it, but I do not see it as a 100% sure thing like many here do.

>>16291939
My ID says something else that I'm not allowed to post on this board

>>16292020
whats that?
Kg?
Heil Hitler?
Sieg Heil?

>>16292020
mod here. post away u have permission this one time

>>16292018
First movers advantage. The companies that utilize the LINK system before others have the chance to develop their own will reap huge advantages over their competition. The gulf will grow larger and larger fairly quickly and so companies will have to switch to LINK or take huge losses against their competitors/ go bankrupt. This is what linkies say anyways.

>>16292058
Yeah I understand that by being the first successful project it gives a huge advantage to link, as long as a decent amount of adoption comes before a major competitor. However, I have a hard time believing that no other major competitor will emerge before link has enough adoption to not be a threat. If the potential industry disrupting power of link is indeed true, huge companies would be retarded to not at least attempt to gain control with their own tech. This idea is what worries me. I cant think of any major technology or industry where no competition arises. I just hope link is the Microsoft of oracles and not the Myspace.

>>16292109
cant they get a patent or trademark for their idea or work?

>>16290069
more like "once the segway gets released, their stocks will dump".
>>16290536
congratulations, you discovered compound interest
>>16291850
proprietary private blockchains are fundamentally useless. they have all the negatives of an open blockchain (cost, efficiency) without the positives (decentralization).
besides, staking needs an open blockchain to work.

>>16292121
>proprietary private blockchains are fundamentally useless
Thats retail thinking
We use them where i work, because they solve a specific problem

Sokaklarda kaka yaparım

>>16292018
Sure, then you need a development team (32 mil) to program adaptors to get your data, adaptors to output your data/interact with payment options. Then hope partners like swift or PayPal don't limit your access for being competition. You did the prerequisite 8 month+ security audit like the industry standard right?

Set up 10-50-100 geologically diverse servers on different clouds/isps to retrieve your data. Premium subscription access to data feeds for each instance.

Sacrifice privacy and security of tees, mixicles, zkps (mostly not needed internally to be fair, besides mixers/obfuscation).

Keep in mind everyone else uses CL and your solution can be blackballed easily from interacting with partner companies on CL oracles.

Or pay 10 cents a transaction. Pick.

>>16292114
A patent only goes so far in technology. All it takes is a slight improvement or change to the tech and it can be used.

>>16292154
I dont mean each company develop a blockchain and Oracle system, but rather one of the many large tech companies that currently exist and have near unlimited resources to make a competing system to chainlink for control of the entire market.

>>16289222
checked, kekd, rekt

>>16289913
"We chose an Oracle called.. Chainlink"

Absolutely based.

>>16290709
It'll be the cost of warehouse coffee which is equivalent to $0.69.

>>16290069
keked and 69ed

>>16292018
Basically network effect. It is easier to use Facebook than to create competitor for it.

>>16292445
In it's current state, yes but Chainlink today is like Facebook 13 years ago. Actually its more accurate to say it's like Myspace in 2004.

>>16288941
sure.

>>16288941
surex2

>>16292207
Google, Microsoft, and AWS all confirmed using CL. A lot of their tech innovation is just acquisitions...development cost is waaay too much for the shareholder kikes nowdays.

Plus there's no revenue/income from CL's side, just some free tokens...it's not profitable from a publicly traded company perspective of expense/revenue. The data providers are going to see a huge jump in data monetization (and server rentals), for free. Hundreds of millions, if not billions of free money...no advertising costs or infrastructure changes.

They're unironically trying to help CL succeed more than they would ever want to steal it. Plus I'm sure the free staking tokens (potentially worth billions) they'll get come with non compete clauses.

Every other intended oracle project has already bent the knee. Our combined board autism will be way ahead on the bail point ala MySpace v Facebook.

>>16292799
I sure hope so, because I'll be wealthy if this shit really takes off. That's precisely why I have a bad feeling that someone else is gonna come along and fuck it up though. I dont have good things happen to me.

>>16292829
We all feel the same fren. Nothing is ever guaranteed (besides trustless execution of SCs powered by off chain data delivered by Chainlink oracle nodes).

But...this is quite clearly the closest we'll get to a sure thing/shot at making it in this lifetime. Uncertainty and doubt are ok and understandable, but don't fear. Iron hands, and an educated mind is all you need now.

>>16292867
And memes.

>>16288941
rulling

>>16288848
>Ethereum can handle 6 transactions per second.
Stopped reading here.
Ethereum will can handle ~15 TPS, and is planned to support way more TPS, up to potentially 270,000, in the very near future.
Chainlink will also be blockchain agnostic, so even if ETH2.0 doesn't work out, TPS count can come from other cryptos.

>>16288848
So you're telling me that if Eth v2 is 8x faster (as planned), link's most optimistic utility value will go from $1.25 to $10?
And that's disregarding the possibility of other, faster chains in the future, or sidechains etc. Remember link is chain agnostic. This makes $10 a conservative value.

>>16289913
> Chain link mentioned
1k is fud

>>16293115
I'd estimate $150-250 or so for average, maybe higher if it becomes the industry standard. Wait and see game here.

>>16288941
Herrt

>>16291100
>>16291470
Thanks for doing the research.

>>16292121
>congratulations, you discovered compound interest
I'm pointing out OP didn't account for it, what are you on about?

>>16293221
Meh, I don't know how much it helped. I tried to find newer and real dollar figures not that fag shit, but they always use percentages not real numbers on the multiple hundred page documents I skimmed.

300 per ticket on commodities (no idea what quantity a ticket is or if it's avg per trade).

And the US outstanding interest rate swaps were 268,078,000,000,000 in 2018. Couple hundred trillion in other swaps.

So something like 21.5 billion in fees and financing, conservatively, using the euro numbers. Obviously much much more OTC. Halve that and toss some more in for China uk etc...60ish per link per year and still in my original guess of 180-300 valuation just off swaps. Then there's 5 other comperable industries.

Keep in mind that's just reducing fees, not payroll savings on automating the process and the increased use by making breakeven trades now profitable.

>>16293345
Whups in the US it's 60/40 cleared uncleared...meaning almost 35b (just fee and low financing). Making it almost right at 300-500ish valuation just from swaps. Conservatively.

>>16293153
silsiladdu waxay iskuxirtaa kun doolar dhamaadka sanadka

>>16288850
1.- Assuming Ethereum can not scale, Chainlink is blockchain agnostic and it will serve requests for several smartcontracts blockchain platforms, not only Ethereum.

2.- Threshold signatures reduce the amount of transaction needed in ETH since it transfers the on-chain aggregation load by tens of thousands fold.

3.- You are forgetting (or ignoring on purpose) the collateralized stack of the nodes, whose purpose is to serve as a deposit of a percentage of the value of the smart contract. If derivatives enter the game, we could be talking about smart contracts which offer several thousands dollars as a payment.

4.- You are a retarded faggot mouthbreather semen-slurper streetshitter.

>>16288941
roll

>>16293345
Butt.

>>16293927
>1.- Assuming Ethereum can not scale, Chainlink is blockchain agnostic and it will serve requests for several smartcontracts blockchain platforms, not only Ethereum.
read >>16289432
>2.- Threshold signatures reduce the amount of transaction needed in ETH since it transfers the on-chain aggregation load by tens of thousands fold.
thereshold signatures only combine the transactions of a single data request. besides, they don't exist yet and have never been tested.
>3.- You are forgetting (or ignoring on purpose) the collateralized stack of the nodes, whose purpose is to serve as a deposit of a percentage of the value of the smart contract. If derivatives enter the game, we could be talking about smart contracts which offer several thousands dollars as a payment.
"No!". You're severly overestimating the value of a collateral stack. Clients basicaly rent the collateral from the node operators (since the operators can't use it while the job is ongoing). this isn't expensive, since the rent duration is so short. as such, it's already included in the $1 fee. (which is already extremely expensive, considering that aws costs like $0.000002 per request)
>4.- You are a retarded faggot mouthbreather semen-slurper streetshitter.
seethe

>>16294343
>thereshold signatures only combine the transactions of a single data request
Wrong
>"No!". You're severly overestimating the value of a collateral stack. Clients basicaly rent the collateral from the node operators (since the operators can't use it while the job is ongoing). this isn't expensive
Read the official derivatives contract blogpost in the chainlink blog, I'm not spoonfeeding you any more

>>16288941
Roll also faggot OP forgot derivatives

>>16288941
k