/biz/ - Business & Finance

Buy $3000 of Chainlink now instead

>>19825355
Fpbp

>>19825349
no

>>19825349
I won’t. Link is a good buy as long as you have iron hands.

BTW You make money buying a token when it first releases, not waiting until it’s popular and then buying.

Don’t stay poor biz, buy low sell high for once!

https //discord gg/ 2g 2F tWM

>>19825349
I'm a developer and I looked over the Chainlink white paper and documentation, as well as the blog post by Google. Here's a few reasons I would not use Chainlink for my own apps:

The current "mainnet" is not decentralized. there's no way to decentrally assess if an oracle is any good or not.

It took them 2 years to basically build centralized oracles, which is extremely unimpressive (and already exists). I do not have much hope for the future or the competency of their engineers.

The white paper doesn't coherently describe how they plan on making their centralized design decentralized one day. They broadly go over their "decentralized" reputation strategies as if creating sybil resistant decentralized reputation is something of an afterthought, when it's actually an unsolved computer science problem. They've had 2-3 years and 30mil in funding to actually publish technical specifications for this and instead they decided to build trivial centralized oracles. Extremely worrying. It kind of reminds me of IOTA "we'll remove the coordinator later". No you won't. You don't know how.

News outlet and journalists keep reporting on "partnerships" with Google and Swift. But if you actually read the source for the "partnership", it's just a blog post by Google Cloud that promotes their own service (BigQuery) and shows an example about how Chainlink users can use Google Cloud if they want. In no way is Google partnered or planning on using Chainlink themselves. The Chainlink codebase is extremely trivial to rebuild if Google wanted to get into the blockchain oracle space.

While there's certainly profits to be made by trading Chainlink, I recommend you do not HODL it with the hope that one day developers will adopt it as their source for decentralized oracles. That certainly won't happen.

>>19825367
>BTW You make money buying a token when it first releases, not waiting until it’s popular and then buying.
This isn't my first buy
>>19825355
No

When BTC moons it instantly drops the BTC/LINK value value is currently about 0.00044 so put a buy order in the 0.000425 region and you will get more Link if BTC moons. When BTC drops Link drops double initially as there is a panic sell off after so again you can buy More Link. Last week BTC dropped 2.5% so link dropped 6%. So if you by right now you will have less link than you could have when BTC moves. Alternatively you could just buy and swing trade using these philosophies.

>>19825349
I have an 8x long position with $2000 collateral of Link right now. Anons here leverage trading always get rekt, so Chainlink will go down.

>>19825459
Does this really work?

>>19825349
scam

>>19825349
ok. are you a retard?

>>19825563
When BTC goes Bear Alts go Double, On the flip side next time it Moons $200-$300 check what link does on the Link/BTC chart. I’ve been doing this for months. Depending on how I feel about the market depends on how many link I plan to gain from a swing. Occasionally I have to wait a few weeks to make gains in link but if your patient and don’t FOMO your gambling is pretty safe.

If I had a spare 2k I'd probs do

1k btc
500 eth
500 link

Just depends on you though, 2k is quite a lot of money to me. If 2k means nothing to you then I'd go with the riskier option and put it all in link

>>19825349
stoink go up

Do it

>>19825349
I'm actually more qualified to talk about this than most anons. I'm employed with a cyber-techno machinations company, I do a lot of security analyst programming type work. Open source, decentralized, APIs, partnerships, you name it. We'd be one of the first companies in line for something like Chainlink, if the decentralized smart contract space had more value over traditional data exchanges. There's a catch though, an underlying flaw more deeply embedded in the bedrock of LINK than the very code itself. The flaw is with the concept, and it's this: Companies won't actually go through the hassle of trusting their data API's through crypto.

Now I can already hear your keyboards going frantic, but hear me out. /biz/ hates banks, and traditional data providers. But actual companies, businesses, and investors do not. There's an old saying you might have heard of: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!". The idea that any of our bosses would give us the go ahead if we approached them to put our companies valuable data in a smart contract on a cryptocurrency called Chainlink, that they've never heard of, we'd be laughed out at best and fired on the spot at worst. We already have API data buyers and providers we trust.

'But Chainlink is trustless!' I hear you cry, but is that really a good thing? Just listen to the sound of it. Businesses don't want to spend millions of dollars on something that is trustLESS, they want something trustFUL. 'But the reputation system!', doesn't that defeat the whole point of your coin? If companies only trust nodes with high reputation, what's the difference between trusting banks and data providers that already have reputation, but in real life not on a computer screen.

The fact is, LINK is going to share the same fate as ETH will. A lot of 'real world application' hype, with a lot of 'crypto world application' reality. Only, this billion supply coin isn't going to come close to the $1k that Etherum hit.

>>19825772
>riskier option and put it all in link
Lmao

>>19825349
Because link isnt worth it. It has already mooned and everyone that bought early sold. STA is the new link and can ez 10x

>>19825374
Lol

>>19825349
Why should i care if you are so stupid to buy a random shitcoin after the 2017 hype is long gone.

>>19825349
It’s up over 2500 percent. Only fud I can think of that makes me nervous. Someone please walk me back off the ledge.

>>19825349
wait for the next time the creater dumps another 2 mio worth of chainlink so the price goes down a bit

>>19825349
It always worth it to buy link pre $1k.

>>19825349
how 2 dollars sound?

>>19825374
you must hold so much link, i'm jealous

>>19825367
Hah I joined this discord to see what it was about for a minute and its just some retard shilling his retard coin who has a grudge against some other anon in their for calling him out for being retarded. That being said

>BTW You make money buying a token when it first releases, not waiting until it’s popular and then buying.

Once I read that, I knew he was definitely mentally void.

>>19825364
this

>>19826401
But it already 300x'd

>>19826148
That is one of the few sensible things i've read in here

>>19825772
That's why you're poor, what a dumb fuck hahaha

>>19825349

>>19825374
Well said + the average user who is an underage cryptofag simply does not understand the concepts. Your point concerning alphabet is also valid. The structure of chainlink is quite easily reproduced, there's no reason why pre mined tokens should have any value apart from speculation. The only people who could profit are the developers if they get a job offer from google, but that's about the best it could get.

Thanks for the discussion all. Just sold everything. I’m out of crypto completely.

>>19825349
You probably have so much to live for

>>19826148
Why won’t Ethereum Dapps be applicable irl. For example, with an Afterpay-type usecase—Why would a retailer outsource this type of lending service to Afterpay, paying a substantial amount of money, when they could just plug into Ethereum infrastructure for minimal cost. If companies are always looking for new ways to be cost-effective / maximize profit, I don’t see why they wouldn’t consider something like this.

>>19827355
it fucking pasta you retard, how new r u?

>>19825349

Crypto produces no real value.
Except of monero Pedos more CP to buy via monero to be honest

>>19827359
Been here everyday since 2017. Never seen this pasta. Usually only see “Eth is spaghetti code” pasta

Don't fomo, anon. This shitcoin already moon x1000 since it's initial start....wait, until it dump which it will.

>>19827375

This
>>19826148

and this
>>19825374

are pastas, they changed the role to establish credibility but the substance and formate is the same as previous posts.

>>19827359
It's not pasta idiot. Realize there's no investment thesis in pre mined tokens of one of the countless shitcoins.

>>19827401
you're retarded if you think I haven't seen the pasta, go fud some newbie you mongoloid.

>>19827407
Ok young token investor, maybe you are mixing something up. You also got some arguments against it?

>>19827426
If its not a pasta, then refute my argument for the utility of Ethereum that I stated in a previous post

>>19827426
Can't escape archives

>>19827426
You want me to smack you down more retard?

>>19827465
Autistic searching skills anon, now to the point, your argument for chainlink token to be anything more than a speculation object? You apparantly believe they have some inherent value making them worth buying them?

shut your fucking mouth. you are obviously either new or retarded for not recognizing the pastas which have been around since chainlink first got popular on biz. quit talking like you know. go do some research and keep your mouth shut.

>>19825349
dont, scam

>>19825349
Crypto is not an investment class asset.

It’s simply gambling anon. If you’re going to gamble at least by BTC which is by far more safe than any alt coin

>>19827923
nigger gambling on XRP and chainlink is smarter than BTC at this point, it's only around due to being the memecoin