/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>23803628
We’re all going to make it.

We’re all gonna make it

Thank you smug big mac man

I bought roughly $300 worth of LINK yesterday, eating the $12 a coin price because I have the same philosophy. This shit is gonna be one to hang onto.

>>23803694
obv one should patiently wait for dips and such, but when youre accumulating fiat at a limited rate and the price is trending upward you will always feel like you are getting the worse price ever, because you probably are. You still do it though, hopefully not because youre FOMOing, but because you've come to an informed belief that the tech/company will proliferate

>>23803816
nopes, I just put my moneys in because Link has always had the best memes

>My useless JSON parser is the same thing as apple apps

Kek deluded stinkie.

>>23803927

thread is blessed with rare sergeys and aris

>>23803628
There are only 1.85M apps in the app store tho...

>>23804133
Billions of dollars, not apps.

>>23803628
>an erc20 token used to subsidise crypto price feeds is similar to a trillion dollar corporation selling apps to billions of customers

>Now apply this smart contracts and Dapps. In the past year alone, defi has gone from basically nothing to protocols with billions of dollars. WITHIN MONTHS. And yet we are still extremely early. Decentralized applications and smart contracts have yet realized their true potential.
You are unironically talking about ethereum. Dapps are built atop ETH. LINK has nothing to do with them, and a price feed that nobody uses is not going to be an integral part of it.

>>23804484
Why do you still even bother. It's $2020.

>>23804484
Smart contracts on ethereum are useless without chainlink. Thanks for playing

>>23804570
What are you talking about? 99.99% of all smart contracts executed on ethereum have nothing to do with LINK. The price only goes up because retards on twitter keep buying, there's no profits being made.

>>23803628
>We are currently in 2008 regarding smart contracts

We're early but it's more like 2010

>>23804643
Why do you keep bullying the cryptoboomer?

>>23803628
neat

>>23804678
I don't mean to. He just happens to be a good example of the kind of people who pump the LINK price. He put his retirement savings into LINK and convinced his family and friends to put money into LINK every week. Hundreds, maybe thousands of people, have done this. As you can tell, these people are probably not very intelligent or even particularly mentally well. They believe that Trump is Q, that there is a global plan to run the entire world on LINK somehow, and that LINK will flip ETH and even BTC. This kind of buyer says outright that he *believes* LINK will be $1000 each and that he will be a billionaire and Sergey will therefore be the richest man on the planet by an order of magnitude. Other people see the LINK price gradually climbing up due to these kinds of people and buy, because the price goes up. This makes the price go up more.

People assume this means people are using the LINK network, and that there are fundamentals at play. They haven't read the whitepaper and they don't really know what a blockchain is, or what it will be used for, but they don't care. They just see their ""future riches"" and keep buying.

>>23804643
I’ve been listening to the same shit with you cunts for years. “Smart contracts don’t need chainlink.”

Currently this space is a ponzi fest with no use case. Rug pulls have become a standard in defi. Smart contracts will eliminate millions of jobs, save companies billions/trillions of dollars, and create mathematically sound contractual agreements.

You either buy, or stay poor. It’s that fucking simple.

>>23804788
I think the flippening is retarded but Link should pump if the GBR ever happens, the question is will he have the sense to sell before it hits the top and dumps 100% or will he hold to zero and sell the bottom before it rebounds?

>>23804643
And no, I’m. It talking about smart contracts needing chainlink to execute, being coded, etc. not at all.

My point is simply this: without chainlink the future of this space isn’t very bright. All that’s being done on eth with smart contracts is moving tokens around on their network. That’s not a world-altering use case.

I’m aware the memes of $1000 EOY and the financial system being run on link don’t hold any substance. They are not true. But chainlink is the start to something special, a beginning of the fourth industrial revolution. It will only continue to grow as it becomes more developed. We don’t even have staking.

Vitalik always had the vision of creating a new financial system. And this is exactly the reason why he hates sergey. Sergey doesn’t want to create a new financial system, he simply wants to improve the current one with smart contracts.

Again, thanks for playing.

>>23804258
Exactly. Makes me want to sell my LINK for CARDANO, desu.

>>23804258
Sorry you missed out. Get back in the cage

>>23804807
>>23805085
>without chainlink the future of this space isn’t very bright.
You can keep giving memeresponses like "buy or stay poor" and "thanks for playing", but the future of link is quite dull, and smartcontracts are quite bright. Collateralised information is a good idea. Collateralised apis are a good idea. Sergey's implementation is shit, isn't taken seriously now and won't be taken seriously in the future. Look at how he's trying to put subjective data on-chain. Everipedia? Seriously? He knows the limitations of his creation and these bandaid hackjobs simply won't cut it.

Kleros is already working on a price feed where apis acting maliciously get removed from the oracle network. This is the real endgame of oracle networks - using apis without paying a middleman. Chainlink has tried to awkwardly insert itself in the middle and will fail because of it.

>All that’s being done on eth with smart contracts is moving tokens around on their network. That’s not a world-altering use case.
The whole value proposition of chainlink is on-chain derivative price feeds. This is where all the hopium about trillion dollar markets comes from. And that is substantially the same thing.
But no, etherum isn't just about moving around tokens. Now that we have escrow and prediction markets, alongside decentrally curated lists, smart contracts can and will finally be adopted for everyday business use. But they won't be paying LINK to tell them the price of useless shitcoin #38479.

>>23805443
So we’ve moved from link is shit and not needed to you shilling your shitcoin bags because you missed out on link.

Everyone has an endgame.

>>23805500
>you mentioned a solution to the problem that link is trying to solve, and that solution doesn't rely on users buying sergey even more lambos
>you're a shill
If you can't look at the bigger picture or follow the technological progress and fundamentals, how are you ever going to make it?

>>23803908
this was literally why I did too, I don't even know what a blogchain is lol

>>23805443
>using apis without paying a middleman
What's the intensive for this?

>>23803628
I took 75% off the table at a 190x. Enjoy those bags tho.

I'm more interested in the DMG pic related bar graph aspect. See ya!

>>23805555
The Chainlink token isn’t used to buy sergey Lamborghinis. It’s used to pay node operators for verifying transactions, off chain computations, retrieving/receiving data, formatting data so that its readable by blockchains, collateralize payments to penalize false transactions, on and on.

>>23805653
>incentive
The incentive is cheap, verifiable on-chain data without paying someone to put that in an aggregator contract for you. It is cutting out the middle man, and therefore providing a cheaper service to the end user, who is more likely to use your information because otherwise he has to pay sergey.

>>23805691
>The Chainlink token isn’t used to buy sergey Lamborghinis
It is, but that's not so important in the grand scheme of things I suppose.

>It’s used to pay node operators for verifying transactions, off chain computations, retrieving/receiving data, formatting data so that its readable by blockchains, collateralize payments to penalize false transactions, on and on.
It's used to pay node operators to provide otherwise useless data which isn't actually relied upon or bought by customers.

Let's use the election example. Sergey wanted to get in on the prediction market hype, so he made a node for everipedia to report on who won the 2020 election. If I made a prediction market with everipedia as the final arbitrator in my smart contract, I would have to pay them to give me that information. But nobody actually used everipedia for their prediction market. Why? Because there's no reason to pay them every single time for information which might not even be in dispute. I could instead just make an Omen market, and if we didn't mutually agree on who won (meaning we pay no middleman to tell us) then I could have Kleros arbitrate it.

Now instead of paying everipedia 1 LINK for every contract regardless of the outcome, I pay absolutely 0, and if anyone disputes it, they're free to pay .21 to have the issue resolved. If 95% of bets do not have the outcome disputed by the parties, then over the course of many thousands of bets, hundreds of thousands of dollars have been saved.

I can make the exact same argument with price feeds. Just use dex pools (verifiable, on-chain price feeds) and if something goes wrong, just use kleros.

>>23805834
So the mechanism of getting data on chain works with zero financial incentive?

>>23805850
The financial incentive is not on the node-end, who are just middlemen collecting fees, but the "real" end - liquidity providers. Liquidity providers in pools have the financial incentive of making money from swaps. You can't cheat these pools because they're so huge, and arbitrators balance out any discrepancies.

The price feed data of any eth token (or btc through wbtc) is always on-chain, far, far, far more reliable than any centralised exchange, and you don't need to pay someone to tell you what the price is because the pools set the price *without* an oracle. It's absolutely genius. The release of uniswap should have tanked the price of link, but of course nobody buying link understands what it does and they just keep buying because 'price go up'.

>>23805834
I won’t be able to convince you, good luck with your shit coin of choice, hopefully you don’t lose everything before the bull run starts.

>>23805912
If you had anything worth saying regarding link then I would listen. We both agree that smart contracts are revolutionary ideas. But you keep giving the properties of ETH to LINK for some reason, and your OP post is flat out wrong.

Be bullish on smart contracts. They are the future. But you should be very bearish on oracles. If the transactions are on-chain, there is no reason for middleware to exist.

>>23805946
>But you should be very bearish on oracles. If the transactions are on-chain, there is no reason for middleware to exist.
Stop with this price feed nonsense chainlink oracles provide ANY data that is required by the smart contract... blah blah uniswap means eth token prices are on chain well guess what? Every fucking thing else isnt on chain dumbass

CHAINLINK DOES MORE THAN PRICE FEEDS

>>23805895
Muh tokens

>>23806089
>CHAINLINK DOES MORE THAN PRICE FEEDS
Everything which it claims to do outside providing price feeds it's shit at though, which is why nobody uses it. Look at the absolute joke of an "election feed" it provides, as exampled above. It has a bunch of other meme uses used to pump token prices (LINK is used to check the value of the assets DMM has, as reported by... DMM, which is why you have $15,000 1995 Honda Accords "collateralising" loans).
If you have a real usecase I'd love to hear it, but at the end of the day all people talk about is "breadcrumbs", fake partnerships, and how I have to buy now otherwise I'm doomed to an eternity of poverty.

>>23806185
That’s not true. Everpedia was used by multiple betting sites such as yield wars, which was used to secure hundreds of thousands of dollars and bring the election results in-chain, and pay the recipients who bet on the right candidate. It was far from a failure.

>>23806379
On-chain*

>>23806185
https://smartcontentpublication.medium.com/chainlink-beyond-price-feeds-and-data-delivery-4e57c43dbf74

>>23806379
>hundreds of thousands of dollars
It's nothing. That doesn't even come close to a single Omen bet, which are each in the millions of dollars (guess who decides in the event of a dispute), let alone bets on other prediction markets, none of which have to pay Sergey or Everipedia anything.

On-chain data is not a bad idea. But AP has publically available, free apis for anyone to access, and paying everipedia and sergey to tell you the answer is just a silly way of doing it. You can and should have a "no dispute" option, in which case you pay nobody anything, but in the event of a dispute, there are many free, clever options even better than kleros. You could even hypothetically hook it to the price of an FTX token (will the value of TRUMPWIN be <10c by x date). It doesn't matter how you do it really, so long as it's on-chain - paying someone to put publically available information on-chain, when the information is *already on chain*, is just paying middlemen for no reason.

>>23806468
You’ll see I was right. I just hope you don’t see it too late.

>>23806587
You're investing in middleware in an environment where on-chain computation is the future and middlemen get cut out. The problem is that LINK isn't even used as middleware, nor has it ever been. It's too inefficient and expensive right now, and will only become less efficient as blockchain technology advances. You might make some very good money based on hype and speculators, just make sure you dump your bags at the top before it bleeds out.

>>23806446
>an article literally written by chainlinkgod
APIs can be listed on-chain in the same manner price feeds are for tangible assets, or calculated on-chain for intangible properties like weather. Mixicles are good but are already done by other projects for free using ring functions. Randomness is good but is simply solved by having a high token price to dissuade miners/stakers from dropping the block. Interbank transfers is useless when transactions are instant. Cross-chain transactions are also useless now that reliable escrow exists, but even that will be outdated by the time you have reliably backed stablecoins on every chain you're transacting.

The end answer is that all this stuff can be done more efficiently on-chain and there is no reason to pay sergey for any of these 'services', although in reality nobody is actually paying for these services, as all the money comes from the 650k incentive wallet (now 600k), and the value of that comes from people gambling on the token going up by buying it.

>>23806742
$4 billion secured in defi. No one is using chainlink?

>>23806742
Over $4 billion secured in defi so far. No one is using chainlink? It’s securing 90% of the entire defi market...

>>23806852
Come on now. wBTC is $2b, AAVE another billion, and SNX the last.
wBTC is proof of rugpull - it doesn't actually stop anyone from accessing the underlying assets like a real escrow service might, it simply lets you know if your wBTC has been made worthless in the past 5 minutes or not.

AAVE and SNX both don't pay Chianlink for their price feeds. They both did strategic partnerships with LINK to use chainlink (right before their own tokens took off), and they were both given huge stacks of link to pay the nodes. They don't pay in real money.

If there were real paying customers who looked around the space, found LINK to be a company that provides them a service they need, for which they are willing to pay money to use, it would be different. But that's simply not the case. It's a hype/partnership machine where nobody actually pays to use chainlinks oracles, they only use it if it's 100% subsidised by the incentive wallet, because they know it pumps their own coins when they say they're a partner with LINK.

We can both be bullish on blockchain but foresee different ways that real-world implementation will occur. I think things will be done on-chain will get their information on-chain, and so paying someone to put external information on-chain will be a redundant service. You think that most things done on-chain will be calculated/found off-chain, so you think differently. It's just different approaches.

>>23806742
>The problem is that LINK isn't even used as middleware, nor has it ever been. It's too inefficient and expensive right now, and will only become less efficient as blockchain technology advances.
I remember when fud use to be that LINK will never crack $10 now it's "too expensive" unless you can provide a better approach to the oracle problem, I would suggest that you look into reading the capgemini report on smart contracts.. two key members of the link team are in it. You seem smart enough to find it yourself.

>>23807050
By "expensive" I don't mean the price of the token. I mean the fact you're paying someone to put data on-chain for you when in most instances that data is already on-chain. .0001c fee to node operators would be too expensive when you can get the information in a more decentralised way for free. The token price I don't even mention, and with enough hype it might even go to $50. I'm just talking about fundamentals and long-term viability of oracles when on-chain computation is our present reality.

>provide a better approach to the oracle problem
If you need the price of tangible assets on-chain, sell those assets on-chain (tokenised shares, NFTs, crypto, wBTC, etc) and if they are sold in liquidity pools, the price of the token is always on-chain, decentralised, and immune to manipulation thanks to the magic of arbitrage.
If you need subjective data, do the calculations you were already doing on-chain, or hook up a public API (you can use the same ones that the link nodes do) and in the event of tampering or any result being plainly wrong, use decentralised arbitration to settle the funds in escrow.

>>23806985
Can't find the tweet but one of the founders from AAVE tweeted way back that they were paying to use Chainlink

Sounds like good I feel about TRAC (Trace).

>>23806742
>calculated on-chain for intangible properties like weather
How would that work exactly? Weather data comes form physical weather stations and is aggregated by centralized weather serves.

>>23807373
Nice ID. No doubt they're paying in LINK to pull data from the aggregator contracts, whether they were given those LINK for free or not is the question. Lets assume for argument's sake that they are indeed paying real money. They're either doing this by taking a cut of all longs/shorts, or they're selling their own token to pay for it.

We can pretty much ignore 2) because eventually they'll run out of tokens or money and have to resort to taking a cut of all trades.
In that case, they're just begging to get cut out of the equation. You can calculate prices in certain pools, and a smart contract which did exactly what aave does, but calculates the price based on the % of holdings in the equivalent uniswap pools to the tokens being borrowed, would be free to access on-chain and save the 1% or so fee for the person shorting or longing the crypto asset.

You could base the price on eth or usdc/t however you liked. You could theoretically long or short any asset in the uniswap pool, which is hundreds more tokens than AAVE offers, for less money. Traders will flock to the new service if it means they pay less money on trades.

>>23807464
Ethereum is supposed to be the world's computer. Eventually, anyway. But in the same way those physical weather stations send data to the weather service, you could have them send that data on-chain.
If the argument is that gas prices are too high for that at the moment and you need a temporary middleman, fair enough. But you could also just stipulate in the contract that x public api or centralised institution is to be used as the data source (which it is on chainlink) instead of aggregating and paying every node, and if there is a clear discrepancy/fuckup, you just adjudicate the result to either return the funds/assets to the original parties or pay out the contract in line with y answer.

>>23803628
>something useful compared to something useless

>>23807547
Kinda wish more linkies would engage in discussion. It's interesting to read

>>23807373
>jew id
not sure who to trust anymore.

>>23807207
you’re not as smart as you think you are

>>23806985
Partnerships don’t move the price. This isn’t 2017 lol.

>>23807817
>1 post by this ID
>ad hominem instead of actually discussing anything
Thank you for your input.

>>23807871
>partnerships don't move the price
In what world do you live, amigo. For low caps, partnerships and listings make or break coins. But even in higher caps like LINK, partnerships and announcements are huge. The pump above $5 was BSN, then deutsche telekom and korean banks to $12-13, then the hype around Dave Portnoy, the news articles, etc, the pump to $20 was speculation that staking would be announced at smartcon, the instant drop to $14 was the release of the article where google confirmed there was no agreement, etc etc.
You can correlate a specific hype event to almost every pump in crypto. Even BTC shot up when Square announced they bought 50m bitcoin, and it jumped again when JPM said they were 'bullish' on it.

>>23807806
Never trust a jew

>>23807919
That’s all speculation. The movement of markets (especially ones as volatile as crypto) are more or less Brownian motion. Not every move up or down has to be tied to a specific event in time. Link has over 300 partnerships, over 200+ of which were announced this year alone. The price doesn’t reflect that. Partnerships were seen as big deal back in the day but not so much now, what matters is integration, usage and speculation.

You can say that chainlink isn’t needed since everything can be sent by a centralized entity on-chain, but that’s also a central point of potential failure, which is highly insecure.

>>23807990
>centralised entity on-chain
No, something like uniswap is decentralised because it uses the value of the entire market. You can't fuck with the uniswap price in any meaningful way because arbitrage bots will fill the gaps. A centralised feed would be like a link node reporting binance's prices. Sure, you might be getting the accurate binance price, but that's a centralised institution well known for using its information advantage to fuck over its own customers.

>what matters is integration, usage and speculation.
Come on. Speculation is 99% of the value of all coins. Even ETH doesn't pay a staking dividend yet. Chainlink provides it's holders with nothing but the promise that maybe they'll be able to sell it for a higher price later (most holders) or that they'll be able to stake it and end users will pay them for staking it (some holders). Why this will happen is never explained.

>You can say that chainlink isn’t needed since everything can be sent by a centralized entity on-chain, but that’s also a central point of potential failure, which is highly insecure.
I'm going to greentext this entire sentence because I want you to read what you wrote. LINK does not provide decentralised data feeds. It *reports* centralised data feeds and packages them on-chain. Even if you think that on-chain information is centralised, LINK in no way has an advantage over it because all LINK does is package that information and put it on chain, then aggregate it. If you think you need to pay someone to put external data on-chain, then LINK is a good bet. If you think that data can be created on-chain, then LINK is useless.

>>23808184
Let’s use insurance as an example. Say I get a smart contract insurance agreement that says if “flood waters raise to x feet, I’m entitled to y amount of compensation.” If you’re relying on a single source for data, chances are that single source can be manipulated, tampered with, and possibly report false data. Now what chainlink will do, is pull data from multiple sources, and verify that the data is true, and execute the contract on chain simultaneously. Instead of relying on a single satellite for the data, you rely on multiple satellites to give you the most accurate data, turning an otherwise centralized point of data into a decentralized system. This is much more accurate and reliable than just sending data on chain.

>>23803628
Meh. LINK gains are minimal now. 200x? what do you think it will do? kek.

ARPA and the MPC bubble is what you should wait for unless you have 6 digits in Link. Get free Bella Protocol gibs while you wait. Bella Protocol will be added to lending + farmies too.

>>23808334
Thanks, I've read the whitepaper. Yes, using multiple sources of data is a good thing. But paying someone to provide that data to you from publically available apis is a bad thing. You also need to remember that nodes are not sources, and aggregation is not decentralisation, especially when most nodes use the same sources.

Let's pretend we're in a future where LINK nodes are hooked up to sensors like your scenario.

>If you’re relying on a single source for data, chances are that single source can be manipulated, tampered with, and possibly report false data.
Even if you're relying on 100 nodes reporting 20 sources, this is still true. If there are sensors on their farm or in their house, they could just splash water on the sensors, or flood their own houses, and collect the money, because LINK said the house was flooded.
If your house floods and you have to make an insurance claim to a decentralised insurance fund, and you're worried about the data, why not just have a decentralised court case instead? Kleros is doing insurance integrations right now. Why pay link to tell you what the news says about the height of the floodwaters, when you can take a photo of the floodwaters and upload it as evidence in your insurance case? You could even stick a ruler in the ground and take a photo, like in real insurance claims. I would read up on Case 302 and how decentralised vetting of institutional sources was handled there.

The former is easily open to abuse because its trying to solve a subjective problem with objective data that can be tampered with regardless of the amount of nodes reporting, because the nodes have no control over the input information.
The latter is much, much cheaper because you can just do mutually agreed payouts, and in the rare case that disputes arise, it's also much fairer because you can subjectively review all the evidence and put it in front of people when making your claim.

>>23807919
you’re a fucking retard if you think the market acts that granularity in reaction to news. you don’t have a clue. you are not as smart as you think you are.

>>23808479
> If there are sensors on their farm or in their house, they could just splash water on the sensors, or flood their own houses, and collect the money, because LINK said the house was flooded.

Not how it works. You wont be able to just “flood your own home” without also having to prove a storm of that magnitude came through your area. Ground precipitation can be measured from space, so flooding your own home when the satellite shows less severe weather isn’t a valid way to cheat the system.

Not to mention, satellite images would be able to be provided to ensure that in fact the weather events did occur, which eliminates the need for any court cases, the evidence is mathematically provable.

>>23808479
The flood insurance concept is ridiculous from the outset and only makes sense to people who have never dealt with a flood insurance claim.
Imagine your basement is flooded. It doesn't fucking matter if a sensor confirms this. You have an inspector form the insurance company come out and assess the damage. They use a moisture measuring devise to check all around your drywall and the floors. They measure the damaged area, determine what materials it consists of and estimate the value of the claim. If you took emergency measures, like bought a water pump, rented a large dehumidifier and bought some fans to help dry it out, they take that into account as well.
Neither Chainlink nor Kleros are suited to replace this role.
Seriously, blockchain and smart contracts have many uses, but this concept is asinine. This cannot be automated so easily.

>>23808603
*device

>>23808520
>I'm angry that you're discussing my investment and I have nothing to contribute to the discussion
Go buy more, tell your children, family and friends to buy more, and fuck off from this thread then.

>>23808603
>The flood insurance concept is ridiculous from the outset
Of course it is. But in terms of decentralised insurance, Kleros can and will be used. Probably not for flood insurance, but for defi insurance and rugpull prevention it is already being worked on. e.g. To create a token and have it listed on a rugpull-proof t2cr, the owner must have x amount of money in escrow, which will be distributed to the holders of the token if someone brings a court case against the fund proving x condition was met (they scammed, they didn't develop their github, they copied elements of their code, or literally any contractual agreement you want)

>>23808603
https://youtu.be/lvKClPTlARc

Watch this video from chainlink about parametric insurance. They explain in more detail of how it would work.

>>23803628
Based and Net`ork effect pilled

>>23808787
Thanks anon, will watch
>>23808755
Fair enough. I'm curious, what do you hold besides Kleros and presumably ETH?

anon, I..

Daily reminder to ignore all API3 CLCG pajeet threads and responses newfags.

>>23808755
i could give a fuck what you do. you talk like retard ledditor fuck off.

>>23808835
BTC.

>>23808787
>the IoT will transfer data on the blockchain
>you will pay Sergey for this data because he will ________ it for you
'Aggregate', maybe? You can't aggregate individual sensors though. You could aggregate sensors across regions, but then again you might as well just read the news to see if there was a flood. Or, you know, provide photos and upload them as evidence like a real insurance case, and have pajeets rule that yes, your house is currently flooded with water.
The other answer might be 'collateralise' but what are you going to do, sue the node if your house is flooded but it refuses to register that? How are you going to verify that the node provided false data, and request a node insurance payout from that node's collateral, without a kleros style case?

>>23809336
>REEEEEEEEEE how dare you discuss crypto on a crypto board
Why are you still here bud

>>23809446
you sound poor

>>23809446
you have a surface level understanding of everything yet feel the need to talk like an insufferable faggot. paragraphs when a sentence would do just to hide how little you know. you will always be poor.

>>23809479
>>23809488
>you sound poor
>stay poor
>you will always be poor
Thank you for your profound insight into Chainlink (ticker: LINK)

>>23809532
if you think this has anything to do with chainlink you can’t be helped.

Waiting for this glow nigger to drop API3. I see you faggot

>>23805946
>But you should be very bearish on oracles. If the transactions are on-chain, there is no reason for middleware to exist.
Are you disputing oracle mechanisms? Or are you disputing Chainlink itself?
If you are disputing oracle mechanisms then 2017 called and centralized data wants its retard back.
If you're disputing chainlink in specific, the goal of Chainlink has always been clear. Become so good, and so far ahead of any competitor that it is the standard.
It has done so to the point that any alternative has done poor copy pastes of the source.

So before I reply be clear on what you're attacking or I'm not going to bother responding.

>>23804258
Creating the next step of our entire financial system is way bigger than SlappyBird

>>23804788
So your problem with link is that it keeps going up in value?
Ngmi

>>23809590
Why don’t you go back to your little cuck corner?

>>23803628
Based and Sergey The Bull Topper pilled

>>23809532
I read through your entire post chain and it was very informative. Thanks for the write-up.
You mentioned Kleros a few times and that you hold PNK. Do you have any predictions for its price?

>>23810799
Checked you realize you're talking to Timo the tranny or another api3 clown? These threads are designed to get you involved in their latest kleros / xdai shitcoin. it's literally the other shoe waiting to drop.

>>23810799
Don't fall for his shit.
Pnk is trash spend half a day looking into link and you will find for yourself instead

>>23810827
This. Cut along story short, they got sidelined by chainlink (who picked linkpool) due to greed and now relaunched a salt cope project to dump on newfags

>>23803628
SSHHHHHHHH

>>23803628
>next decade

Anon crypto is generally thought of as being 4x faster than silicon valley, we could see this in 2.5-3 years

>>23809532

Then what about scalability? Isn't the best way to do this with the help of offchain computation secured by LINK?

>>23804484
>>23804643
>>23804788
>>23805443
>>23805555
>>23805834
>>23805895
>>23805946
>>23806185
>>23806468
>>23806742
>>23806985
>>23807207
>>23807547
>>23807919
>>23808184
>>23808479
>>23808755
>>23809446
>>23809532
2018 called it wants its FUD back.

Seriously though, you’re overthinking things. LINK will hit $1000 purely on momentum, network effects and a general bullrun.

As for fundamentals, LINK is a framework, like HTTPS. It’s current implementations are for showcase value mainly, DeFi (in its current form) is a meme and a ponzi.