/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>27477827
Link is great, but you're not going to pull money off newer x5 projects just to get back $30 bro.
Hold forever and be happy.

>>27477827
AVAX:
>hardcapped supply
>needed to run nodes
>needed to delegate to nodes
>needed to take part in governance of the network
>can use it to delegate to nodes for easy passive income
>tx fees are burned
>everytime subnets, blockchains or assets are created avax is burned
>Chainlink and AVAX are close to each other and Chainlink will soon move its entire infrastructure to Avalanche

>>27477827
Both AVAX and GRT look to be very important in the near future.

If you can't differentiate between AVAX/GRT to Rubic/FTM/Whatever then you're 100% ngmi.

This board is filled with people like you that just embarrass themselves with their midwit reasoning

>>27478575
>>27477827
Emin Gün Sirer:
>Cornell CS Prof has been in crypto since BEFORE BTC
>Co Director of IC3 which is 180+ researchers and 6 Unis
>EGS shills Link & is in close partnership with the Chainlink team
>Vitalik endorses EGS & already acknowledged Avalanche is a Breakthrough on par with BTC
>like Sergey EGS toured around the world for years educating People about decentralization

Avalanche protocol:
>The third consensus protocol after Nakamotos PoW and Classical
>basically consensus is reached by probabilistic sampling thousands of independent nodes over multiple rounds
>This is not repackaged shit with minimal tinkering here and there its a completely new type of Consensus Protocol
>4500+ REAL TPS (no bullshit tricks, batching, or centralized L2)
>it can scale to MILLIONS of Validators while maintaining high tps & sub second finality
>more decentralized than everything else
>running a Node is easy & hardware requirements are low
>Resists 51% attacks (would need 80%)

Tokenomics & Profit:
>hardcapped
>AVAX needed for staking & delegating
>needed to participate in governance of the network
>fees are burned & is burned when Subnets, Blockchains or other assets are created
>currently 10% APY
>only requirement to receive the rewards is 60% node uptime
>node costs ca. 20 bucks a month on a VPS

Subnetworks:
>sub networks can be launched on Avalanche with near infinite customization
>plug in and use the Avalanche Consensus for your already existing Blockchain so you dont have to build your own (like with decentralized oracles)
>Chainlink already moving to Avalanche
>AVAX node may be a member of many subnets & earn rewards from them!

Full EVM support:
>All ETH infrastructure can work on AVAX out of the box
>athereum.avax.network/
>Big picture: in no time the best parts of the entire crypto ecosystem can be mirrored on Avalanche and giving it all the TPS, scalability, speed and interoperability that it needs for the next stage

right now it trades for $13.07

>>27478813
>right now it trades for $13.07

>I'll wait for the dip to buy for $6
>I'll wait for the dip to buy for $8
>I'll wait for the dip to buy for $10

>>27477827
>I have seen a few anons shilling their shitcoin as the "next LINK"
/biz/ is full of fucking poorfags to the surprise of literally no one.

The difference is GRT is actually not a shitcoin and its fucking obvious to anyone with more than 70 IQ. All those in that picture are scams and useless wallet coins

>>27478575
>>27478813
>>27479348
None of this addresses this point:
> Under staking, if more total collateral, in $, is needed than is available at any given time across the network, then the token price MUST increase to cover demand.

THERE IS NO REASON FOR YOUR SHITCOIN'S PRICE TO INCREASE.

Ask yourself, would the network function with a low token price?
Does the network stop functioning with a low token price?
Is a high token price actually built in to the staking model, like with link's collateral?

With Link it isn't just "hurr durr this shitcoin is gonna be so popular buy buy buy". The token price is ultimately tied to collateralization.
Your generic shilling points are UNRELATED to TOKENOMICS.

>>27479703
Ask yourself why ETH went from $10 to $900 you fucking stupid faggot

I want to be proven wrong here. The "aha" moment I had with LINK went like this
>token price is a function of collateral needed
>collateral needed is a function of the size of the market

Here is an example for brainlets:
A financial institution, such as a bank, wants to run a smart contract, the value of the money being transferred when the smart contract is triggered is $1 million.
Let's say there are 10 banks with the same smart contract, so $10 million in total.
They don't want to lose money in case of an oracle failure. So they set collateral (i.e. link stake for the nodes doing the job) to be 100% of the value of their smart contract.
That means $10million is needed, in LINK tokens, to be locked up in nodes.
So what happens when the above example is repeated, but the total collateral required *exceeds* the marketcap of LINK?
The price of the LINK token MUST increase to cover it.

i am not interested in your generic shilling points, if you can't explain why the token price would need to increase in order for the network to function, then it's not the "next link".
I would love to be proven wrong, please give an example like i have on how token price is related to network activity for your chosen shitcoin.

>>27479348
That's what I'm thinking but here's the catch.
I'm an absolute fucking newfag fresh off the Doge boat(at least I made some money on it), chances are I got baited into a scam rather than bumbling onto a lifetime opportunity right away as the GRTroopers would have me believe.
Still considering going in with another grand during the Wed/Thurs dip though.

>>27479703
>Ask yourself, would the network function with a low token price?
yes it would but token price is not going down because the demand is high and only going up from here for AVAX.
>Does the network stop functioning with a low token price?
nope, as long as they can cover the cost to run a node it wont stop functioning. running a node is very very cheap.
>Is a high token price actually built in to the staking model, like with link's collateral?
yes you need AVAX to run a node. right now you need 2000 AVAX to run a Validator.
Nodes will be able to vote on that minimum required stake to lower it or increase it.
there are also other parameter you will be able to vote on.

so yes Avalanche is indeed the "next Link", ideally you hold both tho.

>>27480584
>nope, as long as they can cover the cost to run a node it wont stop functioning.
Then there is no reason for price to go up.

>yes you need AVAX to run a node. right now you need 2000 AVAX to run a Validator.
Sure, but it doesn't matter if 2000 AVAX is worth $2 or $200. While with LINK, it DOES matter how much node stakes are worth. Therefore the price potential is not there. Sorry.

It seems like you just don't understand what I'm saying wrt collateral and token price.

Be honest with me. Will AVAX dip to $10? I really want to get a 500 stack that I plan to hold for years

>>27480509
>Wed/Thursday dip
Enjoy buying at 90c, you got 72c yesterday, that was the best you'll see nigger

>>27480333
so what's the next link?

>>27477827
Comparing avax and grt to a pajeet coin rubic.

Kekekek Ngmi

>>27480974
LINK

How can you not see that the marketcap of link is equal to the size of the markets using it? Do you not know how big these financial markets are?

>>27480333
Do some research into GRT. For DeFi apps to use GraphQL API they need to stake GRT and pay Indexers. Only 1 subgraph has moved to mainnet, literally theres going to be 100's by the end of the year. The Graph benefits from the Network effect

>>27480915
>Then there is no reason for price to go up.
see >>27478575
>but it doesn't matter if 2000 AVAX is worth $2 or $200.
yes it does matter
>higher avax price = higher reward for your node
>higher rewards = more incentive to run nodes for rewards
really simple.
>It seems like you just don't understand what I'm saying wrt collateral and token price.
It seems you dont understand what Avalanche is, better read the pasta again until you do >>27478813

Chainlink solves the Oracle Problem
Avalanche solves the Scalability Problem

solving these problems is worth trillions each.

>>27478738
>If you can't differentiate between AVAX/GRT to Rubic/FTM/Whatever then you're 100% ngmi.

Yea AVAX and GRT have the potential to become part of the standard "enterprise stack" along with LINK that institutions will all use. Rubic is just a flavor of the month that is trying to build a better DEX. Gains are to be had but it won't probably be world changing unless you got in at ground level.

>>27478454
>>27478575
>>27478708
>>27478738
>>27478813
>>27479348
>>27480161
>>27480509
>>27480584
>>27480917
>>27480973
>>27481105

All completely irrelevant.
If you can't give an example for why your token should increase in price, it's not the "next link". It will pump this bull market and dump 98% when BTC finally crashes later this year.
Meanwhile, once staking is out, LINK's price will be tied to total collateral requested, not bitcoin's price.

>>27479703
>>27480333

Basically you are trying to say that for LINK network growth is directly tied to and inseparable from token value growth. Idk if the same is true for GRT but its services provided appear to be important.

>>27480973
There's no fucking way it breaks ATH before the weekend though.

If you think these things don’t apply to GRT then you are just wrong. Lazy FUD

>>27481234
Wanna know how I know you bought in this month?
The real link marines are in another thread talking about whether aave or celsius is the better place to pile 15k+ token to get 6%+ apy per year. They already made it, and don't care what today's 24hr looks like.

>>27481505
>disagrees with Sergey Nazarov and IC3 gigabrains
ngmi

>>27481234
thx just bought 5 link

>>27481234
to reach its full potential Chainlink need a Platform that can scale.
that Platform is Avalanche.

>>27481246
>For DeFi apps to use GraphQL API they need to stake GRT and pay Indexers.
In what way does this mean token price needs to increase? Sounds to me like everything would work just fine with low token price.

>>27481251
>higher avax price = higher reward for your node
>higher rewards = more incentive to run nodes for rewards
So when the market crashes at the end of this cycle it will destroy incentives, destroying the network.

>>27481980
>at the end of this cycle
Avalanche is a new paradigm when it comes to how Consensus is achieved.
Like Chainlink it will be a top performer in the bear market.

>>27477827
Agree on GRT. But the tokenomics of AVAX are quite good, it absolutely is needed. Also LINK tokenomics are not as good as you imply, the price of link is not driven by utility demand but speculation- like almost every crypto.

>>27482329
Chainlink isnt a finished product yet, there still needs to be lot of work to be done from building it, expanding the network to doing research on it.
It also needs a platform to scale because Ethereum cant handle it anymore.
there is even already a grant out by Chainlink to port over every component of Chainlink to Avalanche.

>>27481980
According to GRT shills, GRT burns a bit with every query and most whales will just delegate their GRT to make more money, which will keep the actual MC rather low and deflationary. Not supporting any of these claims, just regurgitating what I've read.

>>27482839
If you have 5k or more and dont delegate it youre not making money off of having money.
>t. Holding link, grt, and nu

>>27482552
https://blog.chain.link/protofire-receives-a-grant-for-native-integration-of-chainlink-on-avalanche/

>>27481569
>network growth is directly tied to and inseparable from token value growth
Network growth has 2 aspects. One is the number/volume of transactions occurring. The other, which I am talking about here, is the SIZE, in dollars, of markets. When we talk about these financial markets we are really talking about $$$ being sent back and forth when certain conditions are met. Once this is moved to a smart contract, the smart contract creator will need to select their insurance policy, the collateral needed. If there is an oracle failure that causes them to lose the $$$ they were gonna send as per conditions in the smart contract, then the chainlink node pays out collateral instead. The risk is transferred from the smart contract creator to the chainlink node operator. How much risk (as a % of $$$ being transferred in the smart contract) will vary, but ultimately, if the total amount of $$$$ needed in LINK tokens exceeds the mcap of LINK, price of link must increase to meet it (which it obviously will due to simple buying/selling pressures.)

>Idk if the same is true for GRT but its services provided appear to be important.
Yeah, I'm not saying the services are not important. I am saying that the services can be provided without a token price increase.

>>27481704
I bought in 2017 and I am waiting for linkpool staking.
I would actually LOVE to see another project to buy into. PLEASE convince me. I have so much money in link, I can sell 1000 LINK to go in on another project, I just haven't seen one with the same price potential.

>>27481685
>>27481705
>>27481848
Doesn't address my points.

literally no one can provide a simple example on how token price needs to go up that is comparable to link

>>27479348
GraphQL is not deterministic
Any attacker can always bring down any graphql server just by forming a query which never terminates

absolute fucking retardation to believe GRT is not a scam shitcoin made by plebs for plebs

>>27483334
GRT tech is absolute shit. 5 billion marketcap for being able to index ethereum events and txs. They don't even index the state and storage tries where most the data is kept.

>>27483334
>>27483607
Thank I wanted to hear some good FUD about GRT, I was getting really worried cause there's not much of it around.

>>27481952
>that Platform is Avalanche.
Ok? But that has nothing to do with AVAX token price.

>>27482329
>the price of link is not driven by utility demand but speculation- like almost every crypto.
Yes but only because staking is not launched.
Once staking is launched the token price HAS TO BE equal to or greater than total collateral. It has to be. Must. It is inexorably linked.

>>27482552
Yeah all that is great, i am specifically talking about the token price and how it has built in price increase, or not.

>>27482839
Generic shitcoin shill points. Token burning and hardcaps and all of this is absolutely meaningless.

>>27483044
Again, not saying the project isn't needed. I'm talking about built in token price increases. Link's token price will increase BY DESIGN.

>>27483941
>token price HAS TO BE equal
Sorry I meant marketcap, i.e. token price x supply

>>27483231

Yes I understand I've been holding since 2017. The market they are targeting is worth trillions and routinely millions to billions of value will need to be secured in smart contracts via node collateral. This will undoubtedly require LINK to be worth thousands per token one day. When you couple the collateral necessity with a guaranteed that less LINK will also be available in circulation due to staking AKA network growth you have a recipe for untold positive feed in token value. I just tried to summarize your point for others who didn't get it.

>>27483231
>same price potential.
Ok, I'm going to give you a big up here.

Crypto is maturing and you're being left behind.

Stop fixation on $XYZ EOY!!!!!! and start focusing on realistic compound dividends connected with real world work now.
Price movement is basically secondary at this juncture. If you're balls deep in link (you're not), get that shit earning interest asap, and move over to staking when/if they ever flip that switch.
Gambling on price action is for tiktok tweens in doge.
You want to be an early in investor in some low market stuff. Get on the crypto venture blogs and read about where they're excited to put their millions.

>>27483231
>I just haven't seen one with the same price potential.
Check ETH fees
Check BTC transaction fees
Check UnI trade fees

LINK needs a L1 consensus layer which is scalable, decentralized, and secure.
AVAX is the only coin which fulfills those. Ive read papers and talked to people about, NEAR, DOT, SOL, ALGO, EOS, BCH, you name it.

AVAX is finally the holy grail when it comes to achieve high transaction per second AND low latency while doing so. AND decentralize and secure as fuck, more secure than bitcoin.

The remote code exploit FUD, was just FUD to buy in early.
A very simple solution is just to make more node implementations, not just one in go. There, solved, no wormable remote code exploit will ever damage the network.

LINK value will and is limited by ETH not scaling beyond 15tps
LINK needs a L1 consensus layer.
LINKies will pay in AVAX to go from 15tps and 1 minute wait time to 5 000tps and 1s wait time.

>>27484352
Thank you for posting that picture. I don't understand how anons don't understand these points about collateral and staking. Link either moons to $81,000 or it crashes to 0.

Sergey set out to target large financial markets from the outset.

>>27483334
This is nonsense and not even a top 5 list of common graphql vulnerabilities
>>27483607
Nonsense again, not even a 1b mcap. Show source. This is just anons trying to scare brainlets while they accumulate

>>27483919
>I was getting really worried cause there's not much of it around.
Usually that means the sharp eyes dont even bother looking.

Fucking 6s are gone. I wanted more and missed the 7s

>>27484945
> In GraphQL query and depth limits dont exist, hurr.

>>27484736
>Stop fixation on $XYZ EOY!!!!!!
Strawman, you know very well that's not what I'm talking about.

>Price movement is basically secondary at this juncture
Agreed, the LINK network is not fully matured.

>If you're balls deep in link (you're not)
I have over 500k in LINK with an average buy in price of 43 cents. Please accuse me of being a larp.

>get that shit earning interest asap, and move over to staking when/if they ever flip that switch.
I actually agree with you, but this has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

>Gambling on price action is for tiktok tweens in doge.
Again, you know very well that isn't what this is about. Stop being disingenuous.
>You want to be an early in investor in some low market stuff.
I already was, thanks, with LINK.

The future token price of link being high is literally inevitable. It is similar to bitcoin in a way, with price being a function of different forces that can be calculated with mathematics.

>>27484815
You're shilling AVAX as a useful project. Maybe even essential. Again, that has nothing to do with AVAX token price. All of your points would still be true with AVAX at 1 cent versus 10 dollars.

>>27485854
> You're shilling AVAX as a useful project. Maybe even essential. Again, that has nothing to do with AVAX token price. All of your points would still be true with AVAX at 1 cent versus 10 dollars.

The same can be said of you shilling LINK token price, all your points would be true if banks put in 1 cent instead of $1m into their contract thus making LINK worth about 2 cents.

>>27485590
Input and process validation and injection prevention is day 2 of any query language class. If you are concerned that GRT is vulnerable to these attacks, you’re actually just making up FUD cause you hold parsiq

>>27483231
>I bought in 2017 and I am waiting for linkpool staking.
>I would actually LOVE to see another project to buy into. PLEASE convince me. I have so much money in link, I can sell 1000 LINK to go in on another project, I just haven't seen one with the same price potential

I suggest you LINK into ZCN(0Chain). The market they are targeting is smaller but the tokenomics are exactly what is enticing to you in regards to LINK. Its kind of a hidden gem I found from doing research for LINK actually. It was in the Oracle pdf that listed the LINK integration. Seriously go check out the white paper on their tokenomics you won't be disappointed. I bought nearly 50K at .22. The more data they store the higher ZCN must be coupled with circulating supply being decreased from staking and network growth. Best I've seen since LINK but its only like a 70 Billion market that will double in the next 5 years though. I wish I had LINKPool its so expensive now. I might buy UNN but it has some redflags and its tokenomics are mediocre as well.

Just buy LINK and RUBIC. RUBIC will solve the gas fees problem with L2. This will be realeased THIS MONTH.
There can be no smart contracts enviroment with 20$ fee per transaction. That's worse than FIAT. Rubic solves that.

>>27486105
>if banks put in 1 cent instead of $1m into their contract thus making LINK worth about 2 cents
See
>>27484352

You are correct. Everything I've said about token price and collateral hinges on LINK being adopted by large financial markets.

If you have been following Sergey from the start of chainlink you will know he designed link with large financial markets in mind. If you think LINK will never be adopted at that scale then fair enough, but I disagree.

>>27484815
Cardano KEVM?

>>27486309
>ZCN(0Chain)
Thanks, I will check it out.

>>27486486
Shoo shoo pajeet

after reading this thread I decided to buy AVAX.

>>27486213
Show me the proof which can tell if a GraphQL query will terminate or not
Congratulations you solved the halting problem

GraphQL fags work around this issue and just "limit" query size or depth

>>27486594
> If you think LINK will never be adopted at that scale then fair enough, but I disagree.

Financial markets, Swedish Central Bank looked at Bitcoin with real serious intent. Then they laughed at 7tps, they looked at ETH they laughed again louder.

You must be deluded to think even a fraction of financial market can move to anything on ETH, even if ETH2 actually happens and isnt another Raiden and Plasma

LINK for any real usage requires massive amount of tps on the L1, and only AVAX has that, for a very small fee

>>27483941
>Ok? But that has nothing to do with AVAX token price
see >>27478575
plenty of utility and use for the AVAX token.
>i am specifically talking about the token price and how it has built in price increase
see pic related

>>27486603
PoS doesnt scale horizontally.
PoS is improvement on PoW, sure.
Add more stakers more nodes, and you run into limitations and have to resort to nominations and delegations, which means centralization.

Any PoS protocol has ran into that same issue. ALGO is best one out there, sorry Cardanofags. Yet its also centralized.

AVAX can add nodes without suffering degradation in throughput.
Do you understand that?

>>27478813
tell me will dip 4 again? Is 1k enough to make it?

There's anything cheap right now? LTO or MANA?

>>27488641
Proof of Stake is a Sybil Control mechanism and says NOTHING about how Consensus is achieved or if it scales or not.

>>27488717
LTO is top 10 in transactions but under 60M mcap. Do with this information what you will.

>>27479348
GOOGLE
OF
BLOCKCHAIN

>>27488717
>Is 1k enough to make it?
suicide stack is 500 and make it stack is 2000.
at least right now, with the Governance features people will be able to vote on that and the amount to run a node will be very likely lowered.
Avalanche can scale to millions of nodes so who knows, in a couple years even 10 avax could be enough to run a node.

>>27488786
> Proof of Stake is a Sybil Control mechanism and says NOTHING about how Consensus is achieved or if it scales or not.

True. Correct.
All those coins use some kind of leader-election and use PBFT like consensus at best which is still centralization.

Only AVAX uses PoS for Sybil prevention, while consensus is by random subsampling.

>>27481505

They don’t understand LINK is the only “crypto” in this space that isn’t a “crypto.”

They don’t understand that the limit of the cryptocurrency market cap is not the maximum value LINK could possibly have.

They don’t understand that LINK IS Web 3.0 and that holding LINK tokens is akin to buying pieces of the internet and getting paid dividends for traffic.

They don’t understand any of this, but one day too late they will.

>>27488623
Generic shilling points, hundreds of shitcoins have the same tokenomics as this. not even remotely close to the tokenomics of ChainLink.
Tell me why avax actually needs to be high price in order for the network to function in the form of a worked example like >>27480333

>>27489572
I am really confused how they don’t understand that once we have staking LINK price = collateral = mcap = quadrillions of dollars.
Is it actually really hard to understand? am I not explaining well?
What about it do they not get?
$81,000 per LINK isn’t even a meme

>>27484736
>crypto venture blogs
any suggestions?

>>27490260
>hundreds of shitcoins have the same tokenomics as this
they dont tho
>not even remotely close to the tokenomics of ChainLink.
its in some ways even better.
>Tell me why avax actually needs to be high price in order for the network to function
It doesnt need a high price to function but the price will be high regardless.
see >>27478575
all this reduces supply on the market.

also Avalanche is already a working product, you can already stake and make easy passive income.

>>27490710
>once we have staking LINK price = collateral = mcap = quadrillions of dollars.
Chainlink cant reach its full potential without a Platform that can actually scale.

>>27490260
Here is an example for brainlets:
A financial institution, such as a bank, wants to run a smart contract for their customers, the value of the money being transferred when the smart contract is triggered is $1 million.
Let's say there are 100 banks with the same smart contract, so $100 million in total.
They don't want to lose money in case of an oracle failure. So they set collateral (i.e. link stake for the nodes doing the job) to be 100% of the value of their smart contract.
They don't want to lose customers or money so each transaction has to go through without high fees or delay.
That means $100million is needed, in LINK tokens, to be locked up in nodes.
That means those LINK needs to be secured by paying fees in AVAX and to pay for the smart contract execution.

>>27491856
Linkies expect the platform will be provided to them for free.

>>27492229
>tfw they have to pay their transactions in your token

>>27492229
Avalanche is your chance to get paid on the consensus layer while chainlink pays you on the oracle layer.
you can get paid twice.

>>27492741
I know bro, LINKie here since 2017 Oct bought all the way down from $0.6 to $0.14
dont want to see my linkies limited by that fucking piece of shit muh RAIDEN muh Plasma muh SideParaChains shit coin

AVAX + LINK

>>27493084
most early AVAX bros were also early in LINK and thats not a coincidence.
its because the Linkies understood what IC3 is and to watch this space and whatever comes out of it.

>>27493557
I just got into crypto last month and the first time I read about AVAX I instantly bought, sadly it was already at $8, but I still made a neat profit.

>>27494904
you are a lucky guy
keep accumulating, run a node and use node rewards to accumulate Chainlink.
do this long term and you will become rich.

>>27495156
Fortuna favors the bold.

>>27491539
>It doesnt need a high price to function but the price will be high regardless
Oxymoron. Emphasis on moron.

>muh supply
Not even comparable to the collateral=mcap tokenomics model
Literal hundreds of shitcoins are shilled with “muh low supply”

>>27491856
Not tokenomics. Again for the millionth time it’s not about how useful the project is. We are talking about token price increase being built in to the networks success.

>>27491957
Lmfao

>>27492229
>>27492452
>>27492741
Token price can still be $0.01. There is no guarantee the token price will go up. It will just fluctuate with bitcoin’s price.

>>27495665
and if you understand Chainlink and Avalanche you are already smarter than 99% of people in this market.
>>27496098
>We are talking about token price increase being built in to the networks success.
see >>27488623
>It will just fluctuate with bitcoin’s price.
until it doesnt. its a new paradigm, a new breakthrough in how consensus is achieved.
>Not tokenomics.
see >>27478575
AVAX token has plenty of Utility as already stated many times ITT, what do you not understand about that?

>>27496917 >>27488623
so what happens when you've burnt all your AVAX tokens from transactions in 20 years?

>>27480915
>Sure, but it doesn't matter if 2000 AVAX is worth $2 or $200. While with LINK, it DOES matter how much node stakes are worth.

can you explain why sensei, i don't get it

>>27496098
> Link price can still be $0.01.
(You)

>>27497114
That will 200 years by then all AVAX holders get rebooted by aidrops into new upgraded network
Same as bitcoin model

Does chainlink want to stay on eth?
You have to pay 2000 transaction fees to move link

>>27497114
it will take much longer than 20 years and price will go up while it scales to millions of Validators.
also fees are dynamic and something node operators will be able to vote on.

>>27497552
Chainlink will go to Avalanche, its already in the works.
see pic here >>27478575
and read >>27483044

The GRT FUD here is so weak it justifies my holdings even more

Is this the best you can do? Might as well go back to calling it a tranny discord PnD

>>27480333
>The price of the LINK token MUST increase to cover it.

Lol you clown

>>27498241
GRT is also working with Avalanche

>>27498665
proof

Crypto noob here, I have no idea who is right or wrong. This thread makes my head hurt, I'll just invest in ETH

>>27498902
BTC ETH is the way to go until you understand.

Avax new eth

What's the minimum amount for running an AVAX node?

>>27496098
why do link smart contracts require collateral but others don't? that's what you're saying right? pls explain to simple frog

>>27498902
AVAX+LINK is a sure bet.

If you really just don't know, buy BTC and forget about it for a couple years.

>>27477827
yeah AVAX is the new LINK

>>27499110
You need 2000 AVAX mate

Just want to put here that I am very bullish long term on AVAX. Gonna accumulate for some time.

AVAX to the moon

Avax hodl

I have a GRT stack worth $12k now, initially $2k. Should I put an additional $5k into LINK, $4k into AVAX?

>>27499268
They were going to reduce it in future right?

>>27497274
Except it literally can’t because token price = mcap = collateral = size of financial markets.
WHY is this so hard for newfags to understand?

>>27499625
Most likely to 500, yes.

>>27477827
Yes, Avalanche will not be next Link because in two years the whole financial system will run on Avax so there will be no need for Link as we know today

>>27498600
This has been established since 2018. Tell me why it isn’t true. You can’t.

>>27499821
Link will still be needed but it'll run on AVAX.

>>27499192
Staking. Link’s staking model is unlike any other, there is no other project using their tokens as collateral for oracle failure or anything similar to that. See Sergey’s remarks about “implicit and explicit staking” on twitter/YouTube/warosu.

>>27500044
Exactly Avalanche will be the underlying asset for all

>>27499821
Even if this is true, there is no requirement for AVAX to be worth more than 1 cent.
When bitcoin crashes, AVAX will dump 98% because it’s price is just tied to overall market sentiment.
LINK, when staking is launched, will have its price tied to its own network. It will be immune from BTC dumps.

>>27500263
Even if true, no reason for token price to rise.
Retard newfag shills just keep repeating the same points. Absolutely no one has addressed OP.

avax sounds like anti-vax. kinda shit marketing

>>27499717
> because token price = mcap = collateral = size of financial markets.

What makes you think any bank would put anything worth more than 50 cents into that formula of yours? When LINK without AVAX would only manage to piss of their customers and lose money on high fees.

> hey Ive transported my skiis on top of my car of course its wheels will hold to transport a SpaceX rocket on it just hang on...
thats how you sound

>>27500558
> there is no reason for ETH price to rise

>>27498891
https://thegraph.com/blog/evaluating-multiblockchain
>>27499192
depends on the Smart Contract and what kind of security it actually needs, defense in depth approach etc.
basically people can insure and secure their contracts how they see fit.
>>27499470
put it all into AVAX, AVAX will go to top 5 and its ranked 47th right now.
put that AVAX to work by delegating to a node and use the node rewards to accumulate chainlink and defi tokens. thats the low risk comfy way to make it.
>>27500263
and if you hold LINK and AVAX you profit from their symbiotic relationship.
its comfy.
>>27500594
it doesnt even need marketing to succeed
success is already guaranteed.

>>27500594
found the reddit retard

>>27501111
checked & based

>>27501111
witnessed

>>27501083
even better if you put in defi tokens which arent simple smart contracts which anyone can copypaste

>>27501443
He is doin this to shill GRT 110% guarantee it

OP, you claim LINK price is correlated with network size (collateral value).

AVAX price is correlated with network size. More transactions, more tokens burnt. More tokens burnt, less supply.
Less supply, higher price (ceteris paribus).

>>27502258
And how will a higher price be sustainable for gas fees?

>>27502395
Lower fees can be voted.

>>27477827
defi shitcoins can be staked and you can provide your token as liquidity. that's good tokenomics. you get paid to share your stack with the market. why do you think YFI exploded?

>>27491856
Link runs at the protocol level. Think https/ssl/tls. Want true accurate data about anything(uID, balance, wallet info) in a secure way to be put on chain or off chain? Chainlink does that, but to provide accurate data, node operators need to be paid. But why would a company pay a node operator? Bc the node operator has link at stake(sooner than you think) and is risking their stack to provide the best data possible. Now think about how many markets there are and how many use https/ssl/tls in today’s internet. LINK token price will scale to meet needs. If the connection hasn’t been made yet, I suggest you sell your stack and just want from the sidelines. LINK isn’t an instant 1k/81k, it requires the world to buy into blockchain tech, which is happening all around us.

>>27502395
tx fees are always low in AVAX and can be managed through Governance feature.

>>27502542
>node operators need to be paid.
yes and Node Operators need to get paid FAST and at SCALE.
if things clog up too much like they do on Ethereum and Oracles dont get paid its not good for the network or the Security.

>>27489572
Is it too late to buy LINK

Solid thread anions, twas a good read

>>27500112
thanks. it is really weird how there were so many posts in this thread that were completely unrelated to the point you're making, just random shilling other coins. literally no one even touched your point. thanks for enlightening me further as to the future value of my linkies.

>>27503020
They're talking about LINK $81k, what do you think?

>>27503171
*anons. Wtf was that autocorrect

>>27503349
I think thats a wildly exagerated meme

>>27500112
Can't find anything about an exact date for LINK staking, know anything?

>>27503526
It isn't if the entire financial system moves into crypto. >>27484352

>>27499866
the same exact thing is true of GRT. If I am using the coin as a medium of exchanging service then I will be increasing the market cap.

>>27502927
This is only because ETH is main network used by everyone when it comes to smart contracts. We’ll begin seeing faster and cheaper SC platforms being built (AVAX etc.), but Chainlinks blockchain agnosticism is the deciding factor here. It doesn’t matter whether link is on Eth, AVAX etc. the idea here is that CL is the https etc. of blockchain & web3. OP isn’t wrong when he say there will be no next link. That’s because AVAX and LINK do completely different things. However, that doesn’t mean that the two combined won’t change the world. Just dyor, look at the teams and buy what you feel comfortable buying. We’re beginning to see L2s on eth that help is scale so thats a good sign. Just be comfy fren. It’s not a 100 meter sprint, it’s a marathon.

>>27503526
So youre an idiot who will stay poor. 81k is 2026 territory. We're going way higher than that.

>>27503526
I wouldn’t overlook it. CL allows secure data(which can be anything digital) to flow in and out of blockchains. Blockchains allow the entire world to communicate for a fee. Think a little bit outside of the box. We are super early, but the rate of tech improves at a rate of a century for every 3-5 years moving forward. As much as I’m not a fan of /biz/ tier shilling, this article gives an insight as to why we will never see another opportunity like this for as long as we’re alive.
https://hackernoon.com/is-chainlink-the-one-ring-to-rule-them-all-lf163283

>>27477827
i dont know pajeet but avax about to explode.

>>27483231
GRT tokens have to be invested in delegation and indexes for the system to work and when they're in there, they cannot be traded. the only way to increase indexes is putting more tokens in which means buying up more which means raising the price.

Link competitor can arrive at any moment which is cheaper faster and actually decentralized.

>>27506247
First mover advantage, network effect advantage, not to mention some of the greatest minds in Cybersec are working on it.

>>27477827
In May 2020 DXdao was worth $40.
In August 2020 DXdao was worth $490.
Easy 10x.

>>27506874
Are you def serious with that greatest minds in Cybersec working on it?
Begin to sound deluded like wsb, its just an oracle network which has made us rich its not Gretas wet dream and Trumps sidefuck all at same time.

Where to buy AVAX? Live in the peoples republic of tejas so Binance doesn't work

>>27507993
Voyager but can't withdraw yet.
Binance with a vpn.

>>27507654
Listen up newfags, I'm a tcp ip developer at a fortune 50 big data company with 25 years experience in database infosec, I've looked into chainlink and all I can tell you if that the cryptographic measures implemented in regards to the decentralized security paradigm in the API and IoT structure of chainlink's github code is fundamentally flawed after the Pivotal tracker server crashed due to the core attacks on the network enabled by its corrupt data inputs and outputs, what this really means is that by attempting to solve the oracle sybil resistance issue it instead allows customers to bypass the encrypted hardware and even hack into the smart contract Intel SGX mainframe, unless they manage to increase the signatures and scalable nodes, which isn't likely considering the Google backend isn't compatible with the legacy JSON systems and Solidity language from the EVM in the Truffle stacks, that's why the ic3 and SWIFT engineering teams developed the ISO 20220 standards but it's centralized and susceptible to the 51% front running program so yeah basically Sergey didn't foresee that the enterprise customers and cloud blockchain dapps would never allow their protocols to rely on these permissioned host mechanisms thus rendering the LINK ERC 677 token obsolete and no serious developer would consider DLT technology in these conditions, sorry linkies I'm just telling it how it is.

>>27508346
Pastaman strikes again

>>27507654
Take your meds

>>27507993
>>27508199
Does registering by email not work? Fuck what vpd do you recommend?

>>27508939
I have no idea, I'm Yuropoor. It's what I've seen others have done.

>>27477827
>Please tell me how your shitcoin
Do you literally not know that 20% of the FULLY DILUTED supply of GRT is already staked and the coin is less than 2 months old?

>>27487059
Good lad. Now go back, and buy more.

>>27504539
>It doesn’t matter whether link is on Eth, AVAX etc
actually it does matter, if node operators dont get paid the system cant work properly.
ETH is a bottleneck and AVAX solves this Bottleneck problem.
>That’s because AVAX and LINK do completely different things.
they need each other.
>We’re beginning to see L2s on eth that help is scale so thats a good sign.
L2s are centralized and only as fast as the underlying protocol. DYOR.

>>27504156
>. If I am using the coin as a medium of exchanging service then I will be increasing the market cap.
You clearly do not understand OPs points.

>>27503323
Yep, it’s because they’re dumb money newfag shills. All shitcoins will dump 98% at the end of this cycle and they’ll be left holding bags. Meanwhile, link will have staking and price will be uncorrelated to outside market forces.
The fact that several anons read this thread and decided to buy into AVAX shows that biz is not what it used to be. Probably an organised discord group, it makes no sense that anyone would read how link is basically guaranteed to hit $1000 yet they would conclude not to buy in, must be discord trannies. My opinion of these shitcoins is now even more that they’re shilled by pajeets

>>27510899
you dumb nigger you are supposed to buy both, LINK and AVAX.

>>27510899
Fuck you I'm not the badddie!!!@@@
>I'm unironically working on a 1k link stack. I think I can do this year if the price stays the same which it probably won't.

>>27511376
This, it's pretty obvious.

>>27507654
If you don’t think ari jules isn’t a cyber sec genius you need to lurk moar newfag

>>27511969
Who is the inventor of btc? Its either him or sergey. Ive seen evidence to support either. But theyre partnered on chainlink so idgaf which it was. I bet on a winning horse. B)

>>27510899
LINK was also a shitcoin which dumped 98% newfag

>>27512377
Apple also once dropped basically 98% until Bill Gates bailed them out and then they brought Steve Jobs back in.

>>27512091
>Who is the inventor of btc?
Sergey was too young at the time and Consensus Protocols isnt Ari Juels area of expertise.
I think EGS knows who Satoshi is and its probably someone that came from IC3 too (maybe it was a group effort involving multiple people).
Actually any big innovation and technological breakthrough in this field comes from IC3.
did you know that Vitalik had the Idea for Ethereum after a trip through Israel?
What is in Israel? The Technion which is a University connected to IC3.

>eth
>oracles
>third breakthrough in consensus
is it really that unrealistic that BTC comes from there too?

Ari Juels and Emin Gun Sirer are co directors of IC3. I wonder if the subject of a decentralised scalable platform with fast tps hosting a decentralised oracle service ever came up between the founder of a decentralised scalable platform with fast tps and the chief scientist for a decentralised oracle service that also purchased the DECO tech under his control at cornell when they both work at cornell and are codirectors of a cryptocurrency and financial organization. Do you think they ever discussed this possibility? Im wondering myself, but it just doesn't seem very likely, you know? Oh well, I guess we'll have to wait and see. Maybe someone will get priced out from making it. We'll see. Only time will tell, I suppose. Gosh, there really is no way to know about these things, right? I'm just going to twiddle my motherfucking thumbs and wait and see. I'm really interested to find out more about the relationship between these two entities, but there is just NO WAY i have enough information to put MY money at risk on such wild speculation. No thanks, count me out. Nice try, roach. You're not getting a single red cent from me, buddy. I hate to say it, but ANYONE that wants to speculate on Avalanche and Link is just asking for trouble. Simple as.

>>27483334
Considering they have to pay for queries I'd assume they would have to pay for their attack.
BULLISH

>no one actually addresses the points op made
>multiple posts saying “wow im definitely buying avax after reading this”
doesnt add up. definitely discord trannies.

>>27487957
People who aren’t retarded:
> let’s set timeouts on our queries
You:
>:-(

>>27510899
You’re pretty biased, anon.
>it makes no sense that anyone would read how link is basically guaranteed to hit $1000 yet they would conclude not to buy in, must be discord trannies
Easy, they do exactly what you’re doing; ignoring valid arguments because of your confirmation bias.
Take the same arguments you’re applying to AVAX and fairly apply them to ETH. Is ETH worthless?

>>27477827
>AVAX
just another retarded kiddie meme coin with retarded meme use cases like the meme defi the meme platform ethereum has no serious business will ever use and instead use hashgraph

>>27477827
Listen spastic, nobody with an IQ > 100 ever said AVAX or GRT are "the next LINK".

They are complimentary. If you have a brain and actually assess what's required for dApps that don't suck to use and are secure you need these three.

As such your portfolio should contain some ratio of these. Whatever split you decide for that is purely up to your own intelligence.