/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>18145402

Why is this significant?

>>18145478
oracle is huge company and they are integrating link?

>>18145501
ok thanks.

>>18145402
>>18145478
>>18145501
>>18145510
>ibm partnered with stellar
>IBM went all in XLM
>Intel went all in RLC
>Microsoft went all in Tierion
Oh look it’s another nothingburger that will go nowhere episode

>>18145501
and what does oracle do thats important to anyone? nothing?

>>18145478
Oracle is the second-largest software company in the world.

>>18145600
once again who gives a shit

>>18145600
And that’s why tierion is the largest crypto going atm kek

>>18145526
>IBM went all in XLM/Stellar
IBM was going to use XLM for a limited trial on some islands. They always said the use of XLM was going to be temporary
And XLM went over 400x.

>Intel went all in RLC
No they didn't.

>Microsoft went all in Tierion
No they didn't.

>>18145586
Writes banking software for most of the banks in US

>>18145621
Tierion is an Azure "connection" you dip.

>>18145611
>who gives a shit
The names in pic, for starters.

>>18145622
>he thinks proving these were all nothing burgers changes the fact that oracle and link is nothing burger
Kek, how many months have anons been posting that screen cap? How many updates have we heard since then? If you didn’t sell at 4+ you missed out. Link has maybe another pump left in it (only when btc pumps though because that’s all it does anymore, track btc) but other than that it’ll hold the same position as any of those other coins with big company “””””””partnerships””””””

>>18145631
>>18145635
once again who gives a shit

>>18145586
my gf started working from home recently as a copywriter for a large company, i’ve seen her laptop work environment and it is literally a suite made by oracle.

>>18145642
None of the examples you gave can hold a candle to actual integration.

>>18145648
>who gives a shit
The names in this pic for starters: >>18145635

>>18145586
>>18145611
>>18145648
>w-w-who g-g-gives a-a s-shi-t-t
>t. seethingnolinker.jpg

>>18145653
>>18145657
>>18145660
i know english isn't your strong suit raj but seriously no one wants your designated shitting coin

>>18145667
>no one wants your designated shitting coin
Except for companies like Google Cloud and Oracle, mirite?

>>18145657
>he actually thinks it full integration
Kek now I know you’re only source is that screen cap which you probably got from another thread. Try digging a little deeper newfag you’ll find it’s not much different than any of the other “partnerships”
>ibm built worldwire on stellar
>still a nothing burger
>arguably more significant than oracle’s supposed semi integration of link which has been in radio silence for months

>>18145679
>he actually thinks it full integration
That's what Oracle says.

>>18145677
>google cloud
Ah I see I’ve been wasting my time all along on a newfag that gets all his info from /biz/ if you actually believe the google cloud thing is a partnership

>>18145677
>names two poo companies

>>18145686
Yes, Google Cloud.

>>18145695
>two of the absolute biggest companies the world has ever seen
>"th-they are POO POO"

>>18145402
>WAAAH WAAAH MUH ORACLE PARTNERSHIP
who the fuck cares
IBM went all in XLM. Does anyone give a fuck?
Intel went all in RLC. Does anyone give a fuck?
Microsoft went all in Tierion. Does anyone give a fuck?

All these "blockchain" sectors of major companies are just desperate attempts by boomer ceos to ride the technology craze. ChainLink "partnerships" are the biggest sign that a project is shit. Its always dead in the water shitcoins with no purpose "partnering" with chainlink like polkadot and icon

i remember when IBM partnered with stellar, everyone thought that was it, Lumens was going to control the world, only for it to be a big nothingburger. And thats exactly what this oracle shit is.

>>18145701
apple exists lmao

>>18145702
>>18145526
lmao the fudbots all acting on the same memo again

>>18145696
>a year old blogpost by a single “developer advocate” presenting a possible case where contracts can potentially be handled via ethereum
>nothing since then
>partnership
You need to stop relying on /biz/ screencaps anon

>>18145710
>"no they are not among the biggest companies, because other big companies exist
Congratulations on brain anon.

>>18145402
FAKE
and even if it was reason, it means nothing

FUCK OFF LINKER SCUM

>>18145711
>if I say it’s fud that will make it go away
Throwing the thermometer in the bin doesn’t make the fever disappear anon wake up and smell the year old coffee

>>18145721
Look at all this cope.

>>18145723
nice reading comprehension, now reply to me again

>>18145731
>caught copying pre-agreed talking points
>starts seething

>>18145696
> 10 posts by this ID
Lmao

>FAKE
>and even if it was reason, it means nothing
>FUCK OFF LINKER SCUM

>>18145728
I’m so excited

Something beyond the realm of common sense is coming in the near future, and it's going to absolutely obliterate anyone that isn't holding ChainLink.
We've seen little signs of this along the way. It is coming soon. Mark my words.

>>18145733
>he doesn’t know these three twitter posts are literally for the same article
>hasn’t even read the other google cloud
blockchain blogposts which dont even mention chainlink
Stop wasting your time with old disproven /biz/ screencaps anon and more importantly stop wasting my time

>>18145402
all the previous partnerships had infographics like this. yet they've all been proven fake 12 months later. How low is your IQ to fall for the same tricks over and over again?

>Swift
Chainlink won some competition 3 years ago, literally not a single news since -> PROVEN FAKE
>Google
1 blog post 10 months ago, never used on mainnet, nothing else since -> PROVEN FAKE
>Oracle
10 months ago, gravelcoin, fernando demoted -> PROVEN FAKE
>E&Y
recent news, will be proven fake soon
>Microsoft
recent news, will be proven fake soon

>>18145799
>disproven
Imagine being this desperate.

>>18145810
I do love me some pasta.

>>18145799
your time is worthless anyway

>>18145811
>he still can’t provide an actual argument other than through biz screen caps
>doesn’t even have links to any of these google articles he thinks mean jackshit
Kek they’ve mentioned bch and stellar in some other blogposts as well, now since I know you’re a post $2 newfag I know you don’t know that but I guess that should be a sign to go all in on stellar and bch huh
>mfw stellar has literally had more significant big company exposure than chainlink
Well it’s been fun anon, seeing you progressively reveal how little you actually know and how much of a bag holder you are kek

>>18145622
>IBM was going to use XLM for a limited trial on some islands.
citation fucking needed. from ibm.com:
>Using blockchain technology and the Stellar protocol, IBM Blockchain World Wire makes it possible for financial institutions to clear and settle cross-border payments in seconds.
>And XLM went over 400x.
is 4x. not 400x. and it soon crashed.

>No They didnt
https://medium.com/iex-ec/intel-and-iexec-collaboration-privacy-preserving-offchain-computing-198bd6799c36
>Intel and iExec Collaboration
>iExec is the first company in the cloud and blockchain industry to leverage Intel SGX technology.

>Not They Didnt
from tierion developer
>Tierion CEO here. This post is wildly inaccurate.
>Microsoft is a customer. Microsoft and Tierion are also working together to create new technology. We're not just putting a blockchain solution in the Azure marketplace.
>Here's the announcement from Microsoft: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/blockchain-identity-proofs/?cdn=disable
>Here I am onstage at Consensus 2017 with Microsoft's Head of Decentralized Identity presenting the Decentralized Identity Foundation.
>https://youtu.be/l5laRZfn8AI
>The folks at Microsoft have been very good to us. They've even let us occasionally have large meetings at their offices in San Francisco.
>Ridiculous.

Why would anyone pay for a jason parser that's slow and expensive? Because once spygate, pizzagate, and trustgate come out people will demand trust be assured through decentralized oracles. The writing is on the walls

Ill tell you whats a partnership thats
>No They Didnt
R3 Corda and Chainlink. linkies have been stating R3 Corda is in the been with link and that all R3 Corda oracles are chainlink powered.

No its not. There is no evidence or proof anywhere in the world of R3 Corda using chainlink in some way. yet, linkies shill this partnership everywhere

>>18145635
these arnt partnerships. these are usecase examples. Of course Oracle would want all these companies theoretically to use their product. does that mean its in the bag?
Why would a company use Oracles oracles instead of Corda or CoCo?

>>18145721
They had a conference at Google HQ in Brussels in October. Cope.

>>18145837
>citation fucking needed
Sure thing boss:

"currently limited to cross-border payments involving British pounds and Fijian dollars"
https://www.coindesk.com/ibms-stellar-move-tech-giant-use-lumen-cryptocurrency-payments-rail

"We’ve started with Lumens, which is the native asset of the Stellar network, but we already have the capacity to introduce other cryptocurrencies that could include Bitcoin or Ether. We will add more digital assets based on client demand and participants on the network,” said Lund."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelwolfson/2019/03/18/ibm-launches-a-blockchain-based-global-payments-network-using-stellars-cryptocurrency/#31292b0e53ec

>is 4x. not 400x
So 0.8 divided by 0.002 is not 400?
Are you sure?

>>Intel and iExec Collaboration
This is iexec announcing they're using SGX.

>Here's the announcement from Microsoft: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/blockchain-identity-proofs/?cdn=disable
Azure, exactly like I said.
Azure makes a point of working with tons of blockchain initiatives.

>>18145832
>biz screen caps
lmao, you mean images of official Google Cloud and Oracle documentation.

>mfw stellar has literally had more significant big company exposure than chainlink
Stellar had IBM, and did a cool 400x as a result.

Link has direct ties to/integrations by a lot more big companies (Google Cloud, Oracle, Swift, ...) as well as half of all crypto, and most it ever did was 40x.

>>18145985
>Of course Oracle would want all these companies theoretically to use their product.
All of those companies ARE using their product.
The examples in bold are already being implemented (using in-house centralized oracles to be replaced with Chainlink in Q3).
The examples not in bold are being developed.

These are just examples too. Plus there was a second slide with things like smart insurance.

>>18146207
>Link has direct ties to/integrations by a lot more big companies
no, it has blog posts/fake partnerships that have been debunked ages ago.

It has 0 users. The blockchain is public, everyone can see there's literally not a single dapp making request to Chainlink KYC oracles.

>Swift
Chainlink won some competition 3 years ago, literally not a single news since -> PROVEN FAKE
>Google
1 blog post 10 months ago, never used on mainnet, nothing else since -> PROVEN FAKE
>Oracle
10 months ago, gravelcoin, fernando demoted -> PROVEN FAKE
>E&Y
recent news, will be proven fake soon
>Microsoft
recent news, will be proven fake soon

>>18146162
>https://www.coindesk.com/ibms-stellar-move-tech-giant-use-lumen-cryptocurrency-payments-rail
this article was published in 2017. lol. Meanwhile, on the ibm.com website currently, it says
>Using blockchain technology and the Stellar protocol, IBM Blockchain World Wire makes it possible for financial institutions to clear and settle cross-border payments in seconds.

So, what should we trust, THE CURRENT OFFICIAL IBM WEBSITE, or an article from coindesk in 2017
???

>Are you sure?
400% return means you 4x your money. x is not %. If you have $100 in a coin. it goes up 400%, you now have $400. not 400x you retard. You go up 400% when you 4x your money. If you 400x your money, that would be 40000%.

>This is iexec announcing they're using SGX.
yes, after intel and RLC collaborated met up and collaborated on a specific problem, "privacy-preserving offchain computing". Intel need iexec, and RLC needed Intel AKA a "partnership".

>Azure makes a point of working with tons of blockchain initiatives.
and? its still a partnership. Just because there are a lot partnered with Azure it means nothing? Well, how about how google "partners" with other altcoins too? yet chainlink is special?

>>18146226
>extra virgin olive oil in bold
oh yaaaay! proud of you guys
>The examples not in bold are being developed.
k. ill wait for the day general motors comes out and says they are using Oracle's oracle powered by chainlink

>>18146368
>>18146363
You realize we can tell you’re samefagging right?

>>18145526
Oracle is literally integrating chainlink right after you sold. Don't expect to get any sleep because you're gonna need to be fudding harder.

>>18145600
isn't link partnered with all 4 of those?

>>18146442
Kek try reading the rest of the thread newfag

>>18145402
Tell me exactly when this shitcoin will hit 30$ thanks

>>18146368
>Meanwhile, on the ibm.com website currently, it says
>>Using blockchain technology and the Stellar protocol, IBM Blockchain World Wire makes it possible for financial institutions to clear and settle cross-border payments in seconds.
It's said that since the beginning.
And it lines up perfectly with what the 2017 Coindesk article says.

>400% return means you 4x your money. x is not %.
Buddy, Stellar went from 0.002 USD to over 0.8 USD.
That's 400x.
Are you having a stroke or something?

>yes, after intel and RLC collaborated met up and collaborated on a specific problem, "privacy-preserving offchain computing". Intel need iexec, and RLC needed Intel AKA a "partnership".
By this logic, Chainlink also has a partnership with Intel: https://blog.chain.link/driving-demand-for-enterprise-smart-contracts-using-the-trusted-computation-framework-and-attested-oracles-via-chainlink/

Btw, RLC/iexec also partnered with Chainlink: https://medium.com/iex-ec/chainlink-and-iexec-collaborate-to-address-the-complex-off-chain-needs-of-next-generation-702e55ab1ead

>and? its still a partnership
Azure does this with dozens of cryptos.

>k. ill wait for the day general motors comes out and says they are using Oracle's oracle powered by chainlink
Chances are they won't know they're using Chainlink.
Just like 99% of people don't realize they're using Swift when making bank transfers.

>>18146363
>no, it has blog posts/fake partnerships that have been debunked ages ago.
How do you "debunk" a blogpost made by Google Cloud themselves?

>>18146494
>And it lines up perfectly with what the 2017 Coindesk article says.
the statement is on the ibm website to this day. Are you implying ibm just forgot to take it down? loool

>Buddy, Stellar went from 0.002 USD to over 0.8 USD.
>That's 400x.
You outed yourself as a newfag.
On the IBM partnership day, XLM mooned 400%. Im not talking about total lifespan. Just from the IBM partnership, XLM mooned 400% in a day. thats all it did from partnership. All the other price changes had nothing to do with the partnership.

>Chainlink also has a partnership with Intel
yes and thats priced in. nothing burger.
https://en.ethereumworldnews.com/link-price-explodes-intel-chainlink/

>RLC/iexec also partnered with Chainlink:
yes, RLC is shit too. thank you for noticing

>Azure does this with dozens of cryptos.
huh? so does google.

>>18146554
>the statement is on the ibm website to this day.
And it lines up perfectly with what I posted.
This was a limited trial, and Stellar was just an initial example with more cryptos to follow.

>On the IBM partnership day, XLM mooned 400%
Stellar mooned a total of over 400x.

>yes and thats priced in. nothing burger.
So when iexec has a "partnership" with Intel, you say "Intel went all in RLC".
But when Chainlink does the exact same, you say "nothingburger".

Surely arguing in good faith lmao.

>huh? so does google.
lmao no

>>18146510
i take it you didnt actually read the blog post ? kek
you new fags should not drink the cool aid. if you check the archives link has been spammed for two years on here. Its a scam

>>18146600
Oh I did.

>>18146611
checked but you keep responding with screen caps that you didnt even make. you have no idea of whats being shown in that pic

>>18146649
>you keep responding with screen caps that you didnt even make
You're right, Google Cloud made it.

>>18146649
>you have no idea of whats being shown in that pic
you left out this part. You dont have an understanding of what you're posting.

>>18146672
> You dont have an understanding of what you're posting.
Says who?

>>18146692
did you run out of caps ?

>>18146579
>Stellar mooned a total of over 400x.
not due only to the partnership you moron. So why would LINK be different?

>>18146475
Chainlink is never supposed to be high priced. A $10 LINK would be outrageous and go against the LINK whitepaper
1Links only purpose is for running nodes and staking. If speculation caused link to moon constantly then it would make running a node hell. Sergey was going to implement a stablecoin link anyway, but then he realized no one would invest in LINK so he wouldnt have any money for lobbying or partnerships. His excuse is to combat inflation, which is bullshit. Once when Sergey get alls the money he can; expect it to go into stablecoin mode
>thats pretty greedy

Why do you think Vitalik hates this guy?

>>18146810
Good post anon.

>>18146850
>not due only to the partnership you moron
Of course largely due to the IBM partnership.

> A $10 LINK would be outrageous and go against the LINK whitepaper
Fucking lol, do explain why.

>Why do you think Vitalik hates this guy?
ETH calls Chainlink its "resident oracle authority" .

>>18146929
>YES IT WAS
k newfag. guess you werent there for the time it shot up 400% on the news and then tanked the day after

>ETH team
not vitalik himself. Vitalik never brings up Link interviews when asked about decentralized oracles

ChainLink purpose is for people delivering the correct data through rewards and punishments. Its not supposed to be a transfer of wealth.
Theres a rumor the original whitepaper said it was tied to a cup of coffee amd then deleted for investors

Where do you think Sergey gets his money? Whose paying him?

>>18146929
kek you're actually so fucking stupid. if you want in on eaa you just have to pay for it. Look at ubt that toke is useless and its in eaa. Again you are posting things you dont have a basic understanding about

>>18147013
Trying out yet another ID eh?

>k newfag. guess you werent there for the time it shot up 400% on the news and then tanked the day after
Stellar did an easy 400x thanks to IBM.

>not vitalik himself.
Cope.

>>18147027
Chainlink isn't just in EEA, it's the resident oracle authority.

>>18147238
Stellar only went up that high because the whole market was going up you insufferable newfag. You werent here for 2018? pure lol
the actual IBM partnership did nothing but pump XLM 400% before tanking you utterr moron

>one of the most prominent figures in crypto who shill things like Rep Omg and even Pnk didnt even deem link worthy

>this is a good thing

LINK is meant for delivering correct data. Its not for transferring money amounts. Link token is meant to punish and reward correct data. Its supposed to be a stable coin
Sergey only made it a token so he could fund his lobbying program.

again, who pays Sergey? Who gives him money? How does he fund chainlink team?

>>18147294
>Stellar only went up that high because the whole market was going up
"The whole market" didn't bust into the top 10 at peak you dimwit.
Stellar did, thanks in large part to IBM, naturally.

> Its supposed to be a stable coin
It's absolutely not.
It's supposed to scale to meet the collateralization demands of the biggest financial industries in the world.

>again, who pays Sergey? Who gives him money?
Imagine actually asking this.

>>18147294
>2018
look at this newfag

>>18147341
chainlink is supposed to reward and punish wrong data. You dont need a high priced link. Sergey so obviously didnt want a high priced link. Show me anywhere where sergey states link is supposed to be $1000

>cant answer who pays sergey
who the fuck does? where does he get his money to run chainlink? where else except for a fat stack of meme tokens

>>18147367
>You dont need a high priced link.
You need high-priced Link in order to be able to provide enough collateral for oracle computations serving the largest financial industries in the world.
Looking at derivatives alone, that means trillions of USD in collateral, and there are only 1 billion Link; so even if ALL Link are available for collateralization (which will not be the case), that implies thousands of USD per Link.

>where does he get his money to run chainlink?
You cannot be serious.

>>18147402
> trillions of USD in collateral
yes and LINK is not for calculating that amount. LINK is just for punishing and rewarding right data. The collateral thing is pure meme. Go into the chainlink white paper right now and ctrl + F
>collateral

all the shills talk about how a 100 million dollars flow through chainlink right now. Notice how that doesnt effect the price

>You cannot be serious.
>i definetely knows how he gets payed. Im just not telling you!
kek

>>18147618
>LINK is not for calculating that amount
You have no idea what you're trying to talk about.

>LINK is just for punishing and rewarding right data.
Yes, and punishment takes the form of staking, which is where a proportion of the contract sum is locked up as collateral to guarantee proper oracle performance.

>i definetely knows how he gets payed. Im just not telling you!
Imagine unironically not knowing.

>>18147641
Collateral do not exist for the chainlink system. Again, go into the whitepaper right now and try to find any mention of collateral

shills keeps saying a 100 million dollars flow through link network. notice how the price doesnt change

>Imagine unironically not knowing.
entering damage control mode i see

>>18147641
>27 posts by this ID
>27
Kek so how deep in the red are you?

>>18147668
>Collateral do not exist for the chainlink system.
Of course it does. That's what staking is.

>entering damage control mode i see
Imagine ACTUALLY not knowing where Sergey gets the money from.

>>18147670
>kek
kek

>>18147732
>thats what staking is
yet, sergey doesnt mention collateral at all in the whitepaper?

What should i trust more, the official whitepaper or neets overdosing on hopium?

>damage controlling this hard
AHAHHAHAHAHA Sergey so obviously sells link tokens to fund chainlink and you cant admit it. You can provide explanation for everything else in this thread, yet, even though its supposedly obvious how Sergey gets money, you cant explain?

hint hint You now remember ChainLink is located in the cayman islands

>>18147776
>yet, sergey doesnt mention collateral at all in the whitepaper?
Of course.

"When an oracle service provider
bids on a contract, they commit to it, specifically by attaching the penalty amount
that would be lost due to their misbehavior, as defined in the SLA."
https://link.smartcontract.com/whitepaper

>Sergey so obviously sells link tokens to fund chainlink and you cant admit it.
What the fuck is there to "admit"?
This was known before the ICO.

>>18147808
hm, i see the word penalty, like to penalize wrong data. But i see nothing about collateral.

>This was known before the ICO.
alright, spill it out then.

>There are linkers SEETHING and arguing with excellent fudsters in this thread
go back

>>18147882
>hm, i see the word penalty, like to penalize wrong data.
The stake is (partly) taken away as penalty.

>But i see nothing about collateral.
The "bid" is an amount of Link that is set aside (staked) and can be lost due to misbehavior.
If the "bidder" does not get the contract, he simply gets his "bid" back (see the whitepaper: "Penalty payments that were offered during the bidding process are returned to oracles who were not selected").

If he does get the contract, the "bid" remains in place to be taken away as penalty if necessary.
The "bid" is thus collateral, and "bidding" is staking.

>spill it out then
Spill what out?

>>18145799
>blockchain blogposts which dont't even mention chainlink

https://mobile.twitter.com/GCPcloud/status/1139242028498374656

Seeing a lot of mentions of Chainlink. Why are you lying with such venom? What's your endgame, kike?

>>18147953
he clearly says bid instead of collateral.

you have no idea how Sergey gets any money lulz. its so obvious why the hq is in cayman

>>18148011
>he clearly says bid instead of collateral.
There are many ways to describe a concept.

>you have no idea how Sergey gets any money
Of course I do.

>>18148024
he didnt pick collateral. All the shills keep spouting collateral for justification of a high link price. LINK is meant to be stable coin that adjusts for inflation. Sergey only made it speculative because he has no other way of funding chainlink

i like how you have all the time and effort to dig up quotes in the whitepaper. but you dont have the time and effort to say exactly how sergey gets money

>>18148064
There there, lil anon.

you're all delusional - all of this is entirely irrelevant if there is a global recession. no. one. has. any. money. thus includes business. yes link is the future, but right now we are in an exceptional situation which means the trajectory that one might expect during normal service is cancelled. and that therefore holding right now might not be the best short term action. how is this so difficult to understand?

>>18148076
>hes still convinced link is supposed to be $1000
if Link was supposed to be for collateral Sergey would have the supply be in the billions like HOT and NANO, because he knew a high price LINK is outrageous.
but he didnt. because he knew he didnt have to cause the whole point of link is to be stable coin that adjusts for inflation and is used for small penalties.

still waiting to hear who pays him

>>18148140
>if Link was supposed to be for collateral Sergey would have the supply be in the billions
Link tokens are divisible to 18 decimals, anon.

>still waiting to hear who pays him
lmao

>>18148011
>13 posts by this ID
Imagine wasting time typing up 13 posts full of shit...

>>18148156
>Link tokens are divisible to 18 decimals, anon.
whitepaper says it will not make use of dividing a link token. that is meant for trading on exchanges. Link only pays in whole tokens

go look up divisible in the white paper

>>18148255
>whitepaper says it will not make use of dividing a link token. that is meant for trading on exchanges. Link only pays in whole tokens
ebin troll my dude

>>18148291
lol okay.
>still waiting for divisible on the whitepaper
>still waiting for how sergey is going to get payed
and this is why chainlink is a shit investment.

thanks for playing

>>18145501
Why can't link get back above $3 if this is such a big deal?

>>18148316
>>still waiting for divisible on the whitepaper
Look up the token contract

>>still waiting for how sergey is going to get payed
Imagine not knowing this.

>thanks for playing
Thanks for spending 15 posts and 5 hours talking about something you think is shit.

>>18145402
Someone explain why a utility token that moons is in any way going to be viable for 'utility'? Won't it be too expensive to use?

>>18149988
Link could be 1 billion USD per token, and you could still send someone 1 cent worth.

The price per Link has nothing to do with the price of the oracle services.

>>18147953
>The "bid" is an amount of Link that is set aside (staked) and can be lost due to misbehavior.
>If the "bidder" does not get the contract, he simply gets his "bid" back (see the whitepaper: "Penalty payments that were offered during the bidding process are returned to oracles who were not selected").
KEK learn to code brainlet. What you've just described is currently IMPOSSIBLE to do in a decentralized AND sybil resistant way. It defies current computer science common knowledge.

If you disagree, prove it, how would you code such a thing? You can't. It's impossible with current knowledge.

Why do you think it's been 3 years and they haven't written a technical whitepaper on how they're going to do this in detail? Why has it been 3 years and they haven't even started working on the ONLY valuable part of the entire project?

Cause it's a scam retard. Learn to fucking code. You're like an ape trying to play chess. You're parroting concepts you don't understand.

You think you're some sophisticated software investor that know more about software than literal programmers, yet you've never written a line of code in your life. You're literally the incarnation of the dunning–kruger effect.

>>18150522
>What you've just described is currently IMPOSSIBLE to do in a decentralized AND sybil resistant way. It defies current computer science common knowledge.
What in the fuck are you yapping about?
This is a matter of putting tokens in smart contracts.

>>18150522
Ok, when are they gonna exit scam? They would've had a golden opportunity to do it in late 2017 or early 2018.

>>18150551
>exit scam
theyve already been exiting scamming the whole time.

notice how come no one can say who pays Sergey at all? Seriously, how does Sergey get his money? That can only mean the entire chainlink foundation is being funded by selling LINK tokens. ChainLink HQ is located in the Cayman islands and therefor can get away with selling their own product. Why do you think BTC volume has dropped dramatically?
LINK was always intended to be a stable coin that combats inflation at most. There is no recorded evidence or any indication at all that Sergey wants a high price Link. Hes never once gone out and said
>we need a high price link for collateral
Notice how in the whitepaper, there is nowhere about the LINK token having to resort to division because the price is too high. Thats because on the chainlink network, sergey never wanted a division on the token.
But he couldnt say that because no investors = no money to fund lobbying campaigns for oracle.

Every partnership this shitcoin gets means fucking nothing at all (see pic)

>>18150875
lmao the faggot in your pic thinks that "amature-ass looking architectural diagram" came from Chainlink.

>>18145402
>Daily reminder
>HODL
mfw

>>18150875
>who pays Sergey at all?
do you think Sergey needs money? he has already made it long time ago, do you wonder how Sergey pays his employees?

>>18145402
Billionaires hodl and that's what made them Billionaires. Lil skidds try to play the market and end up reckt.