/biz/ - Business & Finance

Also, if it matters, I hold both

What?

>>49830442

>>49830319
It's not going to be just one token or crypto anon. Is going to be a basket of them. However, they will have different purposes;
XRP: will be used for remittances and international settlements between financial institutions
XLM: will be used for retail payments
LINK: will bridge some of the blockchain bringing some of the other ISO2022 to other cryptos.
ALGO: Seems that is going to be used for some CBDCs and for things like digital identify.
Either way, if you can make a ISO2022 portfolio just DYOR on which ones will have a bigger market cap. XRP seems to be one of the top ones just because of the remittances/settlements market. However, that doesn't mean the other ones won't have a considerable big market cap. Time will tell

>>49832173
Thank you anon. happy someone had something to say

Government I think wants its own tethers. On its own chain. What use will these l1 block chains have if they can just cookie cut paste there own.

>u will see tethers crash
>u will see government issues digitized dollars
> they will be connected by chainlink
>bitcoin will be like gold just sit there hardly be transacted
>xlm and xrp are most likely the best options for back and forth transactions (they already have proven track record) all cross chain migrations, all database info migrations from blockchain to real world data base will be transacted by chainlink. None of this works w out chainlink. An argument could be made this last pump was mostly due to chainlink.

>>49833502
I do think XLM will be closely interlinked with retail and grocery transactions. One big thing I was wondering is if banks will not mind transactions taking a couple minutes to go through LINK, and pay a higher fee, vs using XRP which is faster/cheaper. Realistically, if LINK becomes that big, how much would transactions cost to go through? Any math anons know?

>>49830319
>>49830386
>>49830461
>>49833351
>>49833894
link is for retards and xrp is for twitter niggers with no brain whatsoever
fuck off back to your containment thread, faggot

>>49833958
nobody cares what (you) think, we've heard it before. you're irrelevant to this. also, post your 50-90% down bags I know you have them

>>49830319
>XRP boasts much faster transactions and lower fees than LINK, and is entirely focused on cross-currency payments, while LINK has much higher fees and is slower

Chainlink isn't a blockchain, the transaction speed and fees are limited to what blockchain chainlink DON's write to, if it sends the transaction to a centralized permissionless chain it would be near instant and almost feeless

>XRP holder asks whether a blockchain and a not-blockchain can coexist

bruh

>>49830319
>link has higher fees and is slower
chainlink operates on ethereum, but can also operate anywhere else
the base speed/fees of any one chainlink DON (decentralized oracle network, which are really what chainlink is) are defined by the ledger (blockchain) that the DON is reporting to (and the dapp or whatever that ultimately uses the services), but that means that if the ledger is really fast and really cheap to compute on then chainlink's fees can be really low and still give the nodes in the DON good margins, meaning good margins for all

>will LINK and XRP coexist
yes; even in a hypothetical scenario where LINK ultimately had absolutely no users in existing major industries, it still serves whoever wants to build whatever using trustless technology, permissionlessly
chainlink DONs can be programmed to serve data that complies with any standard, including but not limited to ISO 20022

>codius
no idea what this is

>chainlink bringing other projects together
yes; it's inevitable
chainlink's appeal is its modularity, and reliability
if you find a way to make money and inputs that you don't have to trust are required to make it happen, chainlink is the answer

>LINK fees paid to nodes less attractive to business
it shouldn't; businesses that find and implement consistently-profitable automated operation strategies will likely find that the fees they pay for any chainlink services they integrate are as predictable as the underlying network of blockchains permits, and can easily be covered by their fees to the user without the user facing discomfort
instances where existing chainlink data providers are not offering competitive rates are simply someone else's opportunity to run their own node, and provide the same data cheaper

>>49830319
This is why biz is dying.

>>49833502
>bitcoin will be like gold just sit there hardly be transacted
>>49833894
>I do think XLM will be closely interlinked with retail and grocery transactions.

the absolute state

>>49830319
Honest to god anon, where is HBAR in all this?

>>49836373
XLM is already being used retard

>>49836430
Hbar is scam

>>49836447
>XLM is already being used retard
the preferred currency of grocery shoppers everywhere. ive seen the moneygram demo. not impressed

At that point I will be rich and I will sell all my NWO tokens and then refuse to transact with anything other then precious metals.

I HATE THE ANTICHRIST