/biz/ - Business & Finance

are you serious dude? everyone I know has sole are very close to selling.

>>50283273
When steak

How complicit do you think Sergey/CLL were in the activities of celsius, bancor, etc.?
When will our suffering end?

>>50283289
I remember when the paid pajeets on this board could at least form someone coherent sentences. Are the fudders running out of funding?

>>50283273
how does ccip work?

Will "staking" suffer on other chains because most liquidity is still on ETH? does CCIP somehow fix this?

Does link on other chains need to be moved back through ETH to get on a CCIP bridge to be moved to other chains again?

sorry for being dumb

Why has there be no comment from the CL team regarding Celsius? For two years they shilled this service for users to gain yield, with the end result being the decimation of those users holdings via lower token price as they were shorting it and also not being able to get funds back from Celsius.

Any they go completely silent on it. WTF man

you make this thread every other day and either answer every questions with meme answers or told them to read the white paper. honestly if you cant be bother to put some heart into it then just fuck off and dont make any thread from the start

>>50283273
What happend to deco, candid and mixicles? Why is there nothing in the github regarding these features? The whitepapers go a bit over my head but someone in their team should be competent enough to code a prototype.

>>50283273
Is Chainlink sneeded when everything is on chain? This is an honest question, I am willing to learn.

>>50283273
why do linkies defend Sergey despite him dumping extreme amounts and killing any pumps? Some dumping to pay for infrastructure is acceptable but he takes it to BSC shitcoin pump 'n dump levels.

>>50283289
If they're also too stupid to spell sold then it's likely bullish for the asset
>>50283298
Looking more and more like q3
>>50283314
I think he absolutely made a mistake by giving any non-auditable, non-defi protocol a shot at being associated with the chainlink name
Sergey is a smart and humble enough guy that he'll learn from this
Suffering is a good question. Things make a lot more sense now: it's likely that every user deposited link on celsuis, nexo and likely half on bancor have been sold over the last year or two. this effectively turns some of the projects long term holders into bears. Were it not for this mistake I would guess chainlink would easily be in the top 10 at current
The question then is when are those blowups over? Celsius is likely done, nexo who knows and bancor will likely try to revert to their prior model with a very long ILP period that will never be reached as nobody will trust their AMM ever again
The good news it all of the positive drivers for the rest of the year are intact and unaffected
And after staking on eth/usd is rolled out, expect it to continue to roll out just like integrations with a new one (say BTC/USD etc) increasingly frequently
>>50283367
CCIP is just a DON as a messaging bridge with another DON acting as a watcher for both chains, able to freeze the messaging bridge with any amount of fuckery on either side of the bridge
This is the kind of trust that's needed to expose high value enterprise assets to blockchains
I also strongly suspect that both DONs in every instance of CCIP will need a fair bit of stake
>>50283451
On a purely moral side I totally agree with you. Giving a stage to mashinsky should be an immediate mea culpa
However
In the coorporate world the right answer is to make sure the situation has completely resolved prior to saying or doing anything
For a myriad of reasons legal pr ndas etc
Expect that from CL

>>50283451
>For two years they shilled this service for users to gain yield
Did they?

>>50283568
Can you show me where I've done either of those things?
>>50283602
Those things are needed for enterprise use
CCIP has to be live first
I would expect discussion of their development in the jan 1 2023 video
>>50283612
The chain is a near perfect trust machine that can't touch the real world
You need a layer that can touch the real world with the same trust assurances as the chain
That's chainlink
>>50283687
Sergey's dumps were on the way up
The dumps you've seen over the last few years are almost certainly cefi dumping retail and fund link in a desperate attempt to keep themselves alive

>>50283451
because it was a honeypot. Ill never understand how people can see shit staring them in the face and pretend to not see it. mother fucker led you into a booby trap and then pretend "nah just coincidences" I fucking hate humans!

>>50283273
what's the biggest hurdle the team needs to overcome to make this 4IR a reality

>>50283819
The implementation
The bad news is the same hardcore testing cycle that went into OCR, CCIP etc also will go into DECO, candid and the like
When CCIP launches all of the defi native stuff like AMMs, lending protocols, derivatives protocols etc will be able to use it and it will be up to their security standards, but institutions wont shift all of their derivatives volumes until the whole stack is live
The good news is the kind of brutal delays from outside parties (eth failing to scale as primary example) are now likely behind them
For chainlink the meat is now all on the proverbial table
Again, the team has basically taken 3 straight years of their partners fucking them and failing to deliver, their launch partners backstabbling them and they've continued to produce value and expand
The underlying human quality to do that can't be overstated
And for their work they now own the whole fucking thing: All the inputs, all the outputs, all of the enterprises, all of the executions except L1 eth
The ball is now fully in their court

>>50284019
> the kind of brutal delays from outside parties (eth failing to scale as primary example) are now likely behind them
How? This is entirely the limiting factor behind chainlink's performance. It is ENTIRELY dependent on ETH to scale to have any value whatsoever.

>>50284145
Eth is moving forward as POS with most traffic going to rollups
Arbitrum is the best rollup by far and runs on chainlink nodes
After CCIP, chainlink can be easily frozen on eth and bridged onto any l1 or l2 people want, without building bespoke bridges
Hence that the teams reference implementation of CCIP is the programmable token bridge

>>50283273
>we are releasing staking because the nodes have become profitable
How are nodes profitable if the price of the token has fallen considerably?

>>50284272
Nodes are paid in link but the cost of jobs is generally pegged to USD
If anything a global crypto crash decreases the cost of gas on chainlink's l1 networks and may increase profit margin (the downside being that fewer new projects will be launching in a bear that would add new integrations for chainlink)

>>50283273
im a single digit iq fag which after making a x10 on it still doesnt know what does this shit do.

Explain me in short simple plain english words what is chainlink for and why token is needed as if you had to explain to your grandma, why does your grandma need it?

>>50284352
Blockchain is highly trustworthy but can't do anything in the real world
Chainlink takes blockchain and lets it do things safely in the real world

>>50284308
Thanks anon!
In regards to staking, what did pic related mean by this? Does this mean staking will be released in Q3?

>>50284390
I don't know but if I had to place a bet on a quarter for the v0.1 staking to start it would be q3

>>50284438
Are you not concerned about the lack of official documentation on how CCIP will operate? It's not in either of the whitepapers and is nearly the most important feature that chainlink promises to deliver. Do you not think this will be another empty promise from the CL labs team?

>>50284438
We are in q3 brother

>>50284602
We're in the beginning of q3
We still have 11 weeks left
>>50284515
Not at all, OCR was the same trajectory
I'd argue that if you listen to jhonny's talks and ben chan's talk we know more about CCIP than we did about mainnet before it launched

what are the chances that individuals holding LINK since 2017 can stake in v0.1?

>>50284637
I'd argue that if you listen to jhonny's talks and ben chan's talk we know more about CCIP than we did about mainnet before it launched
Why can't the team just outline their developmental roadmap like the Ethereum team does? Do they have that much contempt for their investors? No wonder the price of chainlink is tanking.

>>50283687
>why do linkies defend Sergey despite him dumping extreme amounts
Because Sergey dumped comparatively little.

>>50284701
I'd guess they'd just look at non team non exchange wallets and time since transfer
for 75mm link
Best guess would be you could fill up 25mm with ico buyers
And through 2017 for the 75mm
But honestly just go do it on chain

>>50284736
You're asking why chainlink doesn't promise stuff like eth promised scaling for years
And then fail to deliver?
Sounds like you like being lied to

>>50284736
>Why can't the team just outline their developmental roadmap like the Ethereum team does?
oh god please no

>>50283273
My position in chainlink is that it is an investment in a vision and less so a product.
What this means is it's literally a supremely high risk investment and I wish anons would know this. There's heaps that are quoting much 1% of derivatives market
At the end of the day, it's so early, and monumental, that is similar to an investment into theranos back in the time before ppl know it's an obvious scam.
Yes it's great if you can do all the tests with over drop off blood and apparentlyn you have the initial prototype and heavy backers behind it
What I'm trying to say is that chainlink is still not past the stage where it's "just a matter of time" and they're still massive cliff faces that they have to scale such as adoption, and progressive scaling.

What is your comment on this ?statement?

>>50283273
Do you think staking yield will be higher than 5% regularly or will they have to subsidize for now to get it there? When do you think the average bizlet will be able to stake since the 25m and 75m pools will probably be filled by og whales?

Link is a joke. Suppose to be the most important crypto after eth and btc and still rank 23. Its pathetic.
And in the upcoming winter people in europe might freeze to death and people in africa will have no bread to eat. Its all going to shit and nobody will give a flying fuck abou the complex gibber jabber that is chainlink.

tl. dr. Winter is coming and token not needed

How can proof of reserves mitigate systemic risk of the kind caused by the 3AC loans situation? Thanks.

People keep saying the enterprise abstraction layer was confirmed for this year, but I've never seen anything about that. I also read that it needs staking 1.0 to launch first. Would they really launch staking 0.1, 1.0, ccip, and abstract layer all within 2 quarters?

>>50284826
This was true at the ICO
At current chainlink is in the top three in terms of protocol fees
With less than 10% of its TAM online
At current we have a working, profitable proof of concept that billions of dollars are dependent on
And that will only expand
>>50284858
I think they'll subsidize only the "public good" feeds like eth/usd, eur/usd, btc/usd
And will require stake for things like CCIP, VRF, arbitrum validation, but won't subsidize these
I would guess the subsidies will last maybe a year
And after that the network will be adequately profitable that they will never be needed again
>>50284885
Africans have been starving since the beginning of time
Europeans have lived as serfs forever
Globally available cheap trust services are
completely new and world changing

Cope

>>50284826
This is a retarded comparison, theranos was literally vaporware that did not exist, while chainlink unless every major DEFI protocol is lying about using it, is a service being used by the majority of defi today...

>>50284979
Have you read Mastering The Market Cycle by Howard Marks? I am asking since I failed to protect my capital the last euphoria phase of the cycle. My question is if it is worthwile to create exit targets for the next cycle and if so how to set the targets to exit? I am torn between set and forget and stake and taking profits "next time".
Thank you.

>>50284308
Since the price of chainlink can move up or down 30% or more a week, the dollar value of the collateral can also move as much between initiation and end of a contract. Which customer would take that risk?

OP, any opinion on The Graph in regards to chainlink? Does it really have a place, or would it be wiser to just own Chainlink?

>>50284911
People see 3ac, celsius etc and don't trust any fund/cefi
Solid funds say: hey wait, you can trust us and we're willing to prove our assets with CL POR
Any fund not doing this can't attract capital

Chainlink becomes the standard for yet another vertical
>>50284965
https://youtu.be/YShbzR7mlog?t=3461

>>50284979
My second quesiton is what you believe will be the largest price driving force behind chainlink in the next 5-10 years and how and where the project will be by 2030 in terms of adoption, price and the public awareness around the project as a potential additional FAANG.

>>50284911
Shit like Luna, Celsius, Bancor, ... collapsed because they weren't actually able to pay users their shit back.
In other words: they used "fractional banking".
So when enough people want to withdraw, suddenly there's nothing more to hand out.

Proof of reserve shows just how much (or how little) of the user holdings are actually covered.

>>50285078
Stupid small timers try to time the market
Truly wealthy people focus only on finding and capturing value

We've discussed this more in depth a few times in past threads but the practical application is to buy high quality projects with high human quality teams early
Wait a few years
And then very slowly deleverage out of those positions
Never fully selling your stake

>>50285083
We've talked about this a lot
If a network needs X dollar amount staked it can easily buy or sell link via smart contract/AMM to maintain that level
Those actions across the network are price stabilizing
Which is another non-often-discussed bullish aspect of staking
>>50285106
I never talk about other projects on these threads but i did look into graph and decided not to buy
>>50285129
The largest driving force is the tokenomics outlined in the whitepaper
Specifically
When every job, every DON, every instance of CCIP, every price feed and every new node wanting to join the network and earn fees needs to stake, there is a huge pressure to acquire chainlink
The existing holders of chainlink, on the other hand, have default passive income streams
And so are highly disincentivized to sell chainlink
That combination leads to very high prices

Early on in crypto people talked about how it was natural for decentralized networks to have much higher dollar values than f500 companies because they don't have parts to buy, buildings to lease etc
I'd guess by 2030 all major verticals for chainlink will be built out
And it will be bigger in total network USD value than any traditional company

OP; I hate predictions, but still. What do you think link will cost in some years?

>>50283700
>Looking more and more like q3
Why q3 and not q4?
Also checked.

>>50285264
Sorry no
>>50285289
Huxtable has been discussing it on twitter and the blog post screenshotted above

>>50285289
In the recent staking blogpost it was said that a key initiative that required the release of some tokens would be happening in Q3, people are speculating that will be v0.01 staking

cultist thread
I guess at one point someone can become addicted to buying sergey's bags
sad stuff
>muh securing $gorillion derivatives market
we all know it's never happening

>>50285503
Protip: there were no issues with Celsius' wrapped assets.

Are you at all concerned with the announced token sale here at the bottom? We just had a huge cap raise last year, and in retrospect it looks like a smart move given they sold near the top. But this sale down here at $6 scares the crap out of me as an investor.

>>50285343
How long do we have to accumulate? I hope I’m not priced out of Link by September. I remember when mainnet launched we went from 3-5€ to 20€. Will staking have a bigger impact?

>>50283700
>he absolutely made a mistake by giving any non-auditable
are you aware that Celsius had been using PoR for warped tokens and vault holdings? what do you think of that?

>>50285685
see >>50285519

>>50285693
what about vault holdings then?

>>50285721
source?

>>50283273
Ok. My questions:
>Are you an insider or just an interested anon?
>What's your opinion on the rumour that staking release is waiting for the Ethereum Merge?
>Is the SWIFT partnership-thingy still going ahead?

>>50285525
Can you provide a link for this token sale?
>>50285545
No idea
>>50285685
Show me the feed
I'll wait

>>50283700
>Looking more and more like q3
>2 weeks bro
I'm preparing myself for a preliminary version of staking, not available for me, to be released at 23:59:59 on 31 December. I don't think I can handle anymore disappointment after the consensus nothingburger

Ok.
How much do I need at current price?

Does it matter what blockchain I have it on? I have them on polygon and arbitrum

What would be a good "sell price" next bull run?

Is buying the coin the same as investing in chainlink labs?

>>50285764
I'm nobody
It's possible, but more recent statements make it seem like q3 regardless of what eth does
SWIFT has sergey speaking at their conferences
And sends reps to speak at his
And the most important part of the outputs portion of the chainlink stack is bank payments
So yes

>>50285742
if you don't know such things, should you be the one answering spoonfeeding questions?
>https://blog.chain.link/proof-of-reserves/
>https://blog.chain.link/using-chainlink-proof-of-reserve-to-unlock-cross-chain-liquidity/
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ex_QeptIC_E
>Celsius is a leading centralized finance (CeFi) protocol that recently integrated Chainlink PoR to help secure and audit wrapped versions of ADA, DOGE, and ETH currently available on Polygon, with more tokens planned for release in the near term. Not only does Chainlink PoR enable the real-time auditing of Celsius’ wrapped tokens, but it also checks the collateralization of its vault reserves to help trigger the minting, redeeming, and burning of smart contract functions.
>>50285774
there you go

>>50285789
If that's how you need to frame it to protect yourself, ok
>>50285793
Depends on how much you have to your name
If you're young putting something like 10% of investable assets into high risk stuff is fine
Setting sell prices means you don't understand the value prop of chainlink

>>50283273
Since a token is legally just a donation and a tokenholder has no ownership what prevents the team from issuing a replacement token later in rhe future once this project becomes a Cash cow to just big companies and insiders to rob the small holders?

>>50285837
Link 1 is just chainlink's site on POR, so meaningless
Link 2 is chainlink's blog about using POR as an assurance for cross chain bridging
The video you linked discusses how celsius X (a supposed arm of celsuis) used POR to ensure wrapped tokens were collateralized across polygon
Celsuis itself failed because it gambled with users funds, which were not undere celsuis X and were not being used with POR
Ironically if they had used POR none of this would have happened

If anything everything you shared illustrates the value of chainlink's offerings
Good job

>>50285837
>but it also checks the collateralization of its vault reserves
This refers to Celsius' Enzyme vault reserves exclusively:

https://medium.com/@CelsiusX/celsius-integrates-chainlink-proof-of-reserve-por-to-help-secure-cross-chain-wrapped-tokens-aed328e7abf4

Sorry I was referring to the announced token sales later this year and early next where they announced 50 million being sold. That just seems concerning to me given we are at absolute rock bottom (I hope) I’m not a whale and I’m already over invested. Yes I can wait, but a token sale at these levels does get my radar up.

>>50285948
I quoted the relevant part about Celsius, what the fuck are you even talking about, it explicitly states they have been using PoR.
>>50285955
but that was announced on Feb 22 this year, my links are from 1-2 years ago, are you sure they're referring to the same thing?

>>50285993
>but that was announced on Feb 22 this year, my links are from 1-2 years ago
Your link that said "also checks the collateralization of its vault reserves" is also from Feb 22 this year.

So yes, this refers to the same thing.

>>50286015
>ne of the unique features of Celsius’ Chainlink PoR-powered wrapped tokens is that strategies in its custom-designed Enzyme vault help offset user costs, meaning users can bridge their assets cross-chain without incurring major fees. While the Enzyme vault is initially managed by Celsius, it is planned to be controlled by a community DAO in the future to help further decentralize the wrapped tokens and remove single points of failure.

By integrating Chainlink PoR to create fully auditable wrapped cross-chain tokens, Celsius has effectively created a high-performing and decentralized CeDeFi application that unlocks liquidity across the blockchain space. The Cardano, Dogecoin, and Ethereum communities can now seamlessly lock up their tokens to access a wide range of DeFi applications on Polygon, including lending and borrowing protocols, prediction markets, and yield farms. In its V2 integration, Celsius plans to use CCIP to further decentralize their wrapped tokens and unlock cross-chain liquidity across the entire DeFi space.
nevermind it's there

>>50285933
People ask this every thread and never listen to the answer
If you're asking why the link team wouldn't destroy the value of everything it has created then you should first ask why every miner in BTC doesn't just decide to 51% the network and give themselves all the BTC?
Link is game theory optimal because the best way for the team, participants and token holders to make money is to not do exactly what you're proposing

>>50286022
The only reference to a Celsius vault using PoR is Enzyme.
Enzyme isn't what happened to Celsius.

>>50285964
These are not being sold, they are possible tokens for node incentives for staking
You are intentionally lying about this and should not be trusted
>>50285993
Read my post
Ironically, again, chainlink succeeded in the portion where it was used
You are lying

>>50285848
I understand the value but I dont want to be a bagholder forever

>>50283273
Did ari really set out an assassination contract on Chad O'Forke? If not, why hast nobody heard of him since 2018?

>>50286047
yeah I was agreeing with you
>>50286062
>you're lying
Celsius could have lied, Chainlink could have lied, you could be lying, I am certainly not lying
>https://blog.chain.link/proof-of-reserves/
november 2020, almost 2 years ago, it does not refer to Celsius X or something else, it simply states "Celsius"
>Celsius is a centralized finance (CeFi) protocol that integrated Chainlink PoR to help secure and audit wrapped versions of ADA, DOGE, and ETH on Polygon. Chainlink PoR enables the real-time auditing of Celsius’ wrapped tokens and checks the collateralization of its vault reserves to help trigger the minting, redeeming, and burning smart contract functions.

>>50286125
>yeah I was agreeing with you
ah

>>50286095
So speaking honestly your strategy is to ask anonymous people on the internet to tell you what to buy, when to buy it and then when to sell it?
Do you see any problems with this approach?
>>50286102
Just another body for Jason Parser

>>50283273
Will number go up? Good time to but?

>>50286125
So you being unable to do a basic search makes your incorrect statement correct?
Is that how truth works?

Whoa, no I am being sincere I am sorry if there is a misunderstanding. My understanding was the 50 million tokens yes some of them would be used tas rewards for staking but even at 75 million tokens staked that would only mean under 4 million of the 50 would be as rewards. I believe even in the release they made they said some of these would be sold to bootstrap development but would theoretically be offset by the 75 million locked up by staking. I’m a genuinely suffering Chainlink owner looking for hope, but trying to FUD or pass on any misinformation.

>>50286166
can you read? it says right there that Celsius used PoR.
the other anon explained it thoroughly, what the fuck is wrong with you?

>>50286186
Can you show me where it says that?

>>50283273
Can you spoonfeed me how much is Sergay going to dump until EOY?

>>50286191
Because the truth is that celsuis used POR for a small project involving token bridges and did not use it for user funds
The use case where it was used did not fail, despite celsuis failing
Anyone discussing this would be mislead by what you said, because it is incorrect

Where is Steve Ellis? Why is his presence so hidden?

Will they ever share any info about Korean Banks or BSN? Was it all a fugazi?

Why no high level people talk about chainlink besides Sergey?

Chainlink has destroyed me mentally.

>>50286250
then blame Chainlink for not clarifying that Celsius only utilized PoR for a small project involving token bridges and did not use it for user funds
>I'm nobody
oh, then what the fuck makes you capable of making a spoonfeeding thread, when you don't even know what the team has announced in the past

>>50283273
It’s common knowledge that 90% of LINK OG’s came from /pol/, and are thus unironic Nazis and extremely racist. This is evident when you look at the chats whenever Chainlink presents at conferences such as consensus or smartcon. It’s always N word this, N word that.

I personally don’t want to put my money into a project like that and keep that sort of company. Moreover, I question the intelligence of people who shill LINK given their backwards and racist political views.

>>50283273
how do people know if the information given from oracles is accurate?

>>50283273
Tell me about this man, how is he important for chainlink

Sure no problem.

https://blog.chain.link/sustainably-growing-chainlink/

>>50283273
1. What exactly is the enterprise abstraction layer? To me, it sounds very much like CCIP, or at least it will utilize CCIP.
2. How close do you think CLL is to completing their product as outlined in the white papers? I know we’ll get staking, CCIP, abstraction layer, possibly DECO in some kind of testnet by Q4 2022, so I think it would be reasonable to assume that they’d be matured and production ready by Q4 2024 (which coincides with v2 staking). Could Q4 ‘24 really be the beginning of the singularity? Is there anything that CLL is missing that could hinder this? I assume Arbitrum will also be ready by then.

Relevant text

To create clarity for the Chainlink community, and as a critical part of Chainlink Economics 2.0, the Foundation expects that no more than 5% of total supply (50 million LINK tokens) will be moved into the circulating supply, over the next 9 months, through the first quarter of 2023. These releases to circulating supply will support the growth of the network, including the upcoming launch of staking later this year. It is expected that the upcoming launch of staking should have an indirect offsetting effect to these token releases, partly depending on whether the amount committed by stakers reaches the planned initial cap of 75 million tokens. The Foundation expects that these token releases into circulating supply will be small in the near term and will be focused on the already occurring oracle rewards, until additional deployments are required for additional key initiatives in the third quarter of 2022 and into the first quarter of 2023.

>>50283273
Can you debunk this fud I found on another thread?

>No staking 4 years after ico
>93% of nodes are used for DeFi equivalents of pressing F5
>$32 million ico will flag an SEC investigation
>Based in Cayman Islands so they're not paying tax
>CEO sells $10,000,000+ a week to fund shell company
>Oracle turned out to be 30 shell companies used to funnel token sale laundering
>Ribeiro and Keane went dark after receiving portion of 500k cash outs
>Paid Ari Juels multiple times for "features" that never made it into mainnet
>Company held a "conference" which was an entire weekend of podcasts
>All of the biz larpers have gone dark (assblaster, riddle, drunkanon, wallet autist)
>Bloggers being paid in grants for wordpress pages
>None of the breadcrumbs (Vanguard, Fidelity, SWIFT, PayPal, Salesforce, Docusign) were real
>BTC has basically sucked up 2/3 of LINK's sats in a few months

>>50286263
I would also like to know more about Steve Ellis. It’s extremely difficult to find any info on his background, even before the archives were nuked

>>50286346
There have been 0 clues for the release date of v1 or v2 staking. Not sure where you've pulled Q4 2024 from

>>50283273
Have you given any thought to what might happen with Chainlink (and decentralized systems in general), if the current version of globalism ends and gives with to a multi-polar world?
For example, China's BSN uses Chainlink. What happens if there's a conflict between China and the West, which is fairly likely in the next decade, and the internet becomes fragmented?

>>50286186
Shut up and hold or just sell cuckboi. CL has always been a longterm investment, so maybe you should invest in dogcoins instead.

>>50286263
Steve Ellis appears to be one of those high iq introverts who hates public facing stuff
You can still see him active on the git
I'd guess that all the bsn stuff is waiting for what everyone else is waiting for like ccip and deco
High level people from swift talk about chainlink and the former CEO of google is about to talk about it
>>50286277
You're free to leave at any time
>>50286315
The oracles are incentivized to provide good data as if they dont they lose future fees
And in the future will lose some staked link in the form of slashing
>>50286346
1. Agree. It sounds like CCIP + bespoke adapters from the hodge for whatever legacy backend system needs it
2. The skeleton of the entire offering including use specific slashing and enterprise integration likely not until 2023/24
However the amount of the stack needed for early movers to start taking the space seriously is likely this year after CCIP and enterprise abstraction
>>50286387
So exactly zero mention of selling and a clear outline of subsidizing node rewards in staking?
>>50286425
All of these points are either untrue or simple arguments based on price which could be made for almost any asset in crypto
>>50286559
He's just making good faith guesses
>>50286576
Right now you can make a phone call between two countries who are at war
This is a good thing when there are international standards that are resistant to even multinational wars
>>50286581
He's either misinformed or trying to mislead
Give him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise

I’m sorry I thought you read English. It specifically says that they will ever deployed for further developments in q3 and onward. 50 million tokens are not needed for rewards unless a full billion are staked at 5% are you being obtuse? How else can you possibly read that other than a majority of the 50 million will be sold?

What happened with linkstorage? They won a grant, their website had a countdown timer to launch and now the website is gone.

>>50283273
shit spoon feeding

>>50283289
>sole
kek

>>50286425
“fud” is now literally just the timeline of exactly what has happenned lol. Not selling this scam at 50 was worst mistake of my life

>>50286912
Hahahah exactly. Shut this fucking thread down. Dude isnt even current on how were about to get dumped on again.

Remember when everyone last year dismissed the weekly dumping as muhhh fud and it ended up costing us the entire bullrun? Fucking christ this timeline couldnt have been any worse

>>50284019
>has basically taken 3 straight years of their partners fucking them and failing to deliver,
this has been sergery pushing it back the whole time you get that right? arb was waiting for staking so was aave and bancor. all three of those teams flat out said that was the case wtf are you talking about

Did you see this recent post below and if so what did you think?

The amount needed to run an eth pos node will drop over the next 12 months. This of course will just be window dressing and nearly all nodes will be run by professional IT teams but it is part of what was negotiated in the name of fairness in exchange for institutional/governmental backing
- The performance of eth pos will likely never really change except for increasing calldata storage that will continue to increase as disk space continues to drop in cost
- Bank/swift volumes will nominally be run over public infrastructure but practically the vast majority of traffic is account to account transfers that will be entirely within their r3 system
- Any "smart" functionalities will run through pos eth using chainlink's technology for obfuscation. That will be their entire dev plan for 2023
- Chainlink's team is going to take over most of the important ongoing mantainence and development of eth after the pos transition, again as part of the above agreement. They already have impressed with core level integration eg ccip read for ENS and people like vitalik and prysm will either join or become public facing cheerleaders

Since he left, Ill do the price estimates. Staking 1.0 release, December 31st 2023:

Nasdaq - $5,000
Eth - $400
BTC - $10,000 and then dumps to $8,500 after CL tweet
Link - pumps from $2.75 -$3.50. 3 days later, $2.50

do you hold any tokens other thank LINK ? If yes, which ones and why ?

>>50283289
this, but in english

>>50283314
Link is a failure, that’s why it only works with so many obviously and overtly shady projects like ladyluck etc. But hey, ladyluck was willing to pay, so Sergey was okay with it. The price was right. Same goes for celsius and bancor, the offer was right so Sergey took it regardless of wether it was a scam or not, in fact it’s better if it is a scam because they’ll pay you more.

Now you understand link. That everything link does is based solely on how it can enrich sergey, which is why every single partner or associate they’ve ever worked along has been a scam artist, some big, some small, but all scams nonetheless

>>50287423
It seems obvious to me that Sergey is a man without vision who clearly only cares about receiving money over a long-term goal of his project.

>>50287192
important part of that post was that if CCIP will work a lot of whales will ape in, but they are waiting until

>>50287651
whales don't give a fuck about chainlink.

>>50287685
they do but nobody cares about you, now kys

>>50287703
Nah I know a few high level whales and they fucking hate chainlink (They're all ETH maxis).

>>50287729
>They're all ETH maxis
>hate chainlink
wow you don't say

>>50285545
>I hope I’m not priced out of Link by September.
kek

>>50287768
Their opinions have a certain obvious authority since they're all multimillionaires and chainlink bagholders are all fucking broke. Their advice to anyone investing in crypto is to pretty much put 100% into ETH. Everytime I mention chainlink to these people they just laugh.

>>50287083
>>50287128
>>50287201
>the usual reddit spacing
>visibly upset at something he claims is an allegedly unimportant scam
are you angry because you know that simeon won't be able to pay you for much longer now that he has nothing for his own customers to withdraw?

>>50287729
>I know a few
>few
And your conclusion is that all whales think alike.

>children samefagging on 4chan
holy fuck go back

>>50287794
cool. how did laughing off ETH maxis work out for BTC maxis?

Why does literally no one talk about chainlink on crypto Twitter? It's like everyone has an NDA or something. Any prominent person on there does not say one word about chainlink. They mention all kind of L1s, DeFi tokens etc etc. The only chatter you see is from obnoxious link marines. Why is this? Do they just don't have a clue about the project or the caliber of the team, no seed bags, or knowledge of upcoming releases? It's pretty hilarious.

>>50287794
appeal to authority will certainly work out well

>>50287847
You seriously think LINK is as comparable an asset to ETH or BTC? Are you retarded or just being ironic?

>>50287891
the question is are you retarded, but thanks for bumping the bread

>>50287891
Citibank seems to think so

>>50287938
>March 2021
You people really are desperate for hopium aren't you? I'm sure Citibank have changed their mind because of the recent price action.

>>50287956
ah yes, the ancient historical era of 1 year ago

>>50287973
1 year in crypto is a long time...

>>50287956
>I'm sure Citibank have changed their mind because of the recent price action
kek. almost thought you are serious. no one could be this stupid. right?

>>50288025
If anyone of any repute thought highly of chainlink it wouldn't be 6 fucking dollars. Saylor and Musk pumped BTC and Raoul pumped ETH because they were important assets. No-one gives a fuck about chainlink, so just fucking sell.

>>50287997
>One way to achieve this would be to reguarly post content that looks genuine (using the right language, imagery, etc.) yet is meaningless - this would dilute the message of these boards and make their threads uninteresting, thereby reducing their attractiveness and sense of community."
shoo faggot. we know why you're here

>>50288047
hahah not selling. you are desperate

>>50288047
>The crypto market is perfectly rational and does not buy into hype or miss gems with actual fundamentals, it's textbook efficient market hypothesis at work
If you are going to FUD, could you please try a little harder.

>>50286912
>it doesn't say what i want it to but im sure it means im right!!!
Leave
>>50286967
I dont know
I have a strange suspicion that this was link's eth workaround just like arbitrum was for eth failing to scale
and the threat of the data availability layer being under chainlinks umbrella was enough to make Skelly push for more calldata availability

>>50287083
>>50287128
Thanks for bumping the thread
>>50287132
Show me where arbitrum said they were waiting on staking
Seeing as they're live now
>>50287192
Sounds generally reasonable but oversimplistic
Too bearish on eth development
Highly doubt CL team will take over eth development, at least not in a public-facing way
>>50287238
I dont discuss that here
I only ever recommend buying projects where the human quality behind the project is high
>>50287857
A lot of this has to do with the fact that early token buyers spent a large amount of time and effort destroying the perception of the project on platforms they didn't like
>>50288121
>>50288124
Really surprising how much they care about a project they don't like, huh?

>>50288252
Once CCIP and staking goes live what's next? Are you aware of any major features they've teased that haven't gotten much attention?
Obviously development will be ongoing for some time but when do you suspect it would be "complete enough" for real world usage?

>>50288378
They've previously focused on trusted execution environments which have morphed into DECO and things like CanDID for use of sensitive data in smart contracts
I think once all of that is live there wont be any objections left and the enterprise adoption race will be off
And to be clear the only reason a legacy enterprise would want in is that their blockchain native competitors are chomping at their heels
And they need to get on board or die

>>50288252
>Show me where arbitrum said they were waiting on staking
it was in the discord. Its not live yet FSS comes with nitro. if you were paying attention deeply you would know that

>>50286023
A 51% attack doesn’t give attackers your seed phrases, they can’t “give themselves all the BTC”. So you are this well versed in Chainlink but don’t even know the most basic fundamentals of crypto. Interesting.

>>50283273
I kept my 5000 ICO Links in the same wallet until early 2020 when I moved them to HW which i've been adding to since. Think I'll be recognised as an OG when it comes to v0.1 staking? Is there some way for me to prove this?
Also, I have tons of Link but no LPL. WHere do you stand in the debate about needing LPL or not? LPL holders are always bleating about how we're all fucked unless we have LPL. I thought it too risky compared to just maxing Link.

>>50287956
>I'm sure Citibank have changed their mind because of the recent price action.
I'm starting to believe the anon that said OG stinkies come to these threads just to fud newfags

>>50283273
If you had links trapped in Bancor V3 what would you do? take the haircut now or hope for the best? If we stay, can we lose it all or at worst 50%?

>>50288771
You don't need LPL to stake, but if you really wanted to use Linkpool, they will have a lending mechanism that will work like AAVE to allow you to stake. I think it'll be a first come first serve for providers that will have a cap that is adjusted to their rep.

>>50288861
I'm starting to believe that you guys are unironically becoming the xrp 2.0 cult
>https://ir.moneygram.com/news-releases/news-release-details/moneygram-announces-strategic-partnership-ripple
guess what happened next

>>50283273
What stops a node from reporting an incorrect price feed, profiting off of it, and leaving stakers to pay the collateral. Obviously no one will ever use that node, but would they care if said exploit made 50 gorillian dollars.

>>50283273
1. How is Sergeys mental state atm? Is he at risk of burning out?
2. Seeing Steve Ellis has a massively reduced contribution on github since May (only 3 contributions since May 11), has he burned out?
3. What is the current mood of the remaining team? Isn't the massive price drop extremely demoralizing for many, assuming that they get a fair chunk of their comp in LINK-tokens?
4. Any interesting future partnerships to look forward to?

What are the odds Vitalik presents at Smartcon? Him presenting would be a validation of a lot of the biz rumors about the ethereum foundation bending the knee to chainlink.
Any guesses on who else they might announce?

>>50289137
he has explicitly stated that he's not an insider, how the fuck do you expect him to answer these questions? do you want a larp?

>>50289147
It's the opposite. Chainlink is Ethereum's bitch.

>>50289120
1) A single node reporting an incorrect price wouldn't do anything to the aggregate DON price. If the exploit made them stand to gain 50 gorillion dollars then there is probably a ton of nodes in that particular DON (e.g. the ETH/USD price feed).
2) Implicit staking: the promise of future fee revenue for good behavior incentivizes them not to ruin their entire reputation, which might have been built over years
3) Nodes are going to have to put up some of their own collateral even if they have high reputations if they want to attract delegators, see: any PoS node system, The Graph, etc.

>>50283273
hope you will answer this. Eric Wall is FUDDing me out of my iron hands, can you debunk this please: https://ercwl.medium.com/whats-wrong-with-the-chainlink-2-0-whitepaper-for-simpletons-d50f27049464

"... if a trusted tier of nodes is backstopped by another trusted tier of nodes that don’t even have any stake that can be slashed, the whole model degrades back to a trusted system without any cryptoeconomic assurances."

>>50289147
>ethereum foundation bending the knee
https://entethalliance.org/eea-members/
ctrl + f chainlink
please, do better, that's the fucking question you wanted to ask?
the state of this board

>>50289186
now that's just absolutely wrong

>>50289209
>Eric Wall is FUDDing me out of my iron hands
that's it, I'm taking a break from this fucking place, I'm done

>>50288547
Again, show me proof
>>50288582
This is a ridiculous argument that dodges my point
It is not economically advantageous for them to take the actions proposed, this is part of the security stack
>>50288771
Dont know re staking
Re LPL it was always a texas hedge for CL to me
I can see their most profitable element being their staking framework
>>50288861
That is almost gone
Now its all bitter anons who lost it all on leverage and aave
>>50288871
Per above post I would get out asap
Even if they try earnestly to fix the situation there's a good chance they cant
>>50289071
Chainlink is all build and no hype
Xrp is the exact opposite
Good try
>>50289120
Stakers take the risk that a node, that has for years been completely honest, is going to suddenly become malicious
>>50289137
1. No idea
2. More likely supervising lots of jr coders
3. Most who have joined link did it because they wanted to, not because they needed the money
That should tell you a lot
4. No idea

>>50289209
>Eric Wall is FUDDing me out of my iron hands
kek just stop

>>50289218
>https://entethalliance.org/eea-members/
how curious

>>50283273
Told you...in few months they would be close to Ethereum technology
WHy? because ((they)) are helping link, they are the guys who caused the fall of crypto and idk why would you want to help those pieces of shit
Dumbfucks they stole your money and you are happy to give them more lmao

>>50289236
>Chainlink is all build and no hype
no shit, I was merely pointing out to the newfag that he shouldn't rely on "reports" of any kind, they could end out to be entirely meaningless.
also do a better job

>>50289147
Likely zero
They've already bent the knee to rollups
They will likely never do so in public
>>50289209
This guy is borderline retarded
It totally disregards the future fee opportunity that such a node consortium would lose
And also the fact that all watcher nodes are compensated
And chosen from nodes that have their public reputation on the line and have been flawless for years

>>50289262
also just noticed the steel perlot website has gotten a major overhaul

>>50283273
Where does Chainlink get revenue from?
I'm not referring to where do nodes get revenue (from Chainlink).

>>50289291
could you please go into more detail this article is top tier FUD and watching some debates of his I think he is quite smart tho.

>>50289218
>our partner

>>50288861
muhhhh secret investment. Let's miss out on any gains ever so daaa nuuuuufags can't make money!!! Meanwhile half the newfags crushed you last year on dogcoins.

Btw is the "short squeeze" still happening? I remember last hearing we were two weeks out (that was two weeks ago)

>>50289262
>>50289392
interesting, ty

>>50287857
simple, there’s no reason to talk about it

>>50288861
that may be true but that also doesn’t change this>>50289443

>>50289392
>Reality: Advisor to our partner
>delusional link or mind: Our partner
kek

>>50289218
Jesus Christ dude, you really are dumb
so dumb that you're making me dumber

>>50289392
>Reality: Advisor to our partner
>Delusional linkie vision: Our partner
kek

>>50283273

> imagine holding LINK when there's KENSHI

>>50289624
still not quite english, take another crack at it

>>50289624
>umm sweaty, "advisor to our partner, chainlink," doesn't actually mean chainlink is a partner
you're really good at pretending to be retarded

>>50289679
DELUSIONAL LINK OR MIND

>>50289660
>you can’t use the functions 4cuck makes available to you!!
i will

>>50289702
KEK

>>50284019
So many betrayals from CeFi, DeFi and L1 developers.
Sergey is a saint compared to them enduring everything.
Finally all this waiting and suffering will come to an end.

>>50284265
I still don't know how CCIP is going to be implemented.
Did you get more info on this?
I don't think they found a magic way to remove the risk from bridging which would mean they will need staking a lot more than we can imagine as a counter party to risks, but I don't understand their business model for supporting bridges.
The risk reward is not worth it if you are not at the funding level of a L0 combining ETH and BTC.
It's the equivalent of taking on all the risks of the space in order to become the ultimate layer for fees in exchanges.
This only works if they found a way to make it 100% risk proof and can accumulate enough fees on a long time frame to outweigh the risks. The optimal solution would be if this risk could be taken by the one creating the bridge and not Chainlink. Or maybe this allows a new business to compensate for those risks.

Who will bear the risk of a bridge failure if an incompetent dev for a DeFi scam builds something full of mistakes?
The best solution I see is that Chainlink nodes with staking ensure that everything works according to the contract, but that they will not share responsibility in a bridge hack if this hack was caused by the failure of the Defi dev doing it, like getting his wallet hacked.

>>50289717
sirs, have you lost your delusional link or mind?

>>50289702
>>50289660
>what is autocorrection
It’s quite sad this age old meme still needs to be posted but newfags will be newfags and lessons must be learned

>>50287685
It is literally the only thing they care about

>>50289768
>"link or mind" -> "linkie vision"
>typo

>>50289768
>>what is autocorrection
KEK
who the FUCK says "autocorrection"
autocorrect you dumb ESL benchod basterd
>delusional link OR mind
why the FUCK does it autocorrect to "link or mind"
my fucking sides

>>50289702
>>50289723
>>50289739
>>50289827
Kek look at this absolute state of denial. Complete derailment of their own
discussion by their own hand KEK
The perfect summary of how dogshit of an investment link is.
>linkie says something stupid to promote dogshit investment
>investment gets pointed out as dogshit
>derails own thread with nonsense
the equivalent of saying something stupid then covering your ears and screaming
kek

sorry to derail the thread based spoonfeeder. just can't help but dunk on these fudfags when given the opportunity.

>>50285545
mainnet was the breaking out of the 0.2-0.4-0.6 $ crab cycle to 3.5 $ in summer 2019
i was in berlin and bought a big mac

>>50289908
ahahahahaahahahaahahahahahaahaha
holy shit he's still going at it aahahahaahahahahaahahahahaha
DELUSIONAL LINK OR MIND
>>50289929
alright I'll stop

>>50289837
>HAH! You used the ACTUAL word!!???
>WE USE THE WRONG ONE
>RETARD!!!
wow you sure got me you stupid fuck
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207525

>>50289950
>support.apple
AHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHA HE'S A FUCKING PAJEET AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

>>50289975
kek based benchod did the needful

>>50289837
>ZOMG HE USE DA BIG BOY WURDS WAT A RETARDS HEHA
>THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DOTN DRINK BRAWNDO GUIS
The level of stupidity is astounding, let this be a clear example of why you shouldn’t buy link or trust the judgement of anyone that is telling you to buy it. It’s holders are all retarded
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207525

>>50288433
Hi spoonfeedy. Let me just start by saying that I always highly appreciate your threads. From what I can tell I've read all of them going a year back at least, including your human relations series of posts. You have to deal with so much bad faith shit in your threads, you must be made of steel. Anyways, you give a jaded anon like me hope with your determination to help all those with eyes to see

Now my question, -I know- you constantly make a point about only talking about LINK in these threads, but since the topic I'm asking about is very related, I'm hoping you'll make an exception

I have accumulated enough linkies over the past few years to be relatively comfortable with my position. Anytime I want to buy anything else, I just think, "I should just buy more LINK instead". It just has the best risk/reward profile in perhaps all of the investing world, at least that I can see. Anyway, the only other project that gives me pause when making such a calculation would be ROSE, and your post here about canDID brought this question to mind. So;

How would you compare the risk/reward profile of ROSE to LINK? Do you have an opinion on ROSE in general? A large part of me thinks I should just throw money at whatever Ari touches.

Much thanks friend. Always know there are anons like me in the shadows who read your posts like a hawk.

>>50289975
>Haha spam
nice..very convinced you’re not a giant coping faggot and those “hahas” arent actaully panic fueled psychotic laughs because your mind was broken by your failing investment kek

>>50290018
>It’s holders
Holy fuck you illiterate esl moron. Just stop.

>>50286250
The past tense of 'mislead' is 'misled'. Just thought you should know, as I've seen you do this before. I'm a stickler for spelling.
Carry on.

>>50290164
Can Rose even reach a fraction of what Chainlink can in terms of price?

>>50283289
...what

>>50290211
>you DONT understand you need to say HODLER like the diamond handerinos on plebbit!!
no, kys

based spoony thread

>>50290327
>So ESL he doesn't even know what he's being made fun of for

>>50290350

>>50290350
Kek. What a retard!
I’ll stop responding to them now. Thanks for another good thread nfcdl

>>50290298
In the long term, no- definitely not. But considering their respective prices at the moment, as well as short term gains, ROSE could be the better bet to take some profit, say, a year from now

Ultimately I don't know, no one does. I know LINK is king long term.

>>50290350
holy shit are you such a faggot with no actual selling point that you’re still doing this >>50289768 on the “it’s” to derail from your own thread because it got btfo?
This is why you will lose everything. You’re not investors or spoon feeders. You’re cope artists. Meme investors. In fact i bet your first investment was gamestop. Kek.

>>50290411
>What a retard!
>Amiright guys??
KEK

Thanks for always putting in the effort, much respected.

>>50290492
The thread is done my friend. There is nothing to derail. See you same time next week?

>>50290492
jfc, is this some kind of brainlet AI? you can't be real

>>50290655
it's outsourced FUD

>>50290387
see >>50290165
and picrel

>>50290626
It’s not over, it needs to live so everyone can see you retards fall apart into “lul” spammers at the slightest resistance

>>50283273
why is chainlink partnering with centralized exchanges who are using its users money to manipulate the price of chainlink?

>>50290857
>slightest resistance
Sorry what was your 'selling point' in this thread again? That link is a scam and going to 0?

>>50290018
>there is no reason to talk about it
Why are you talking about it then?

>>50287891
Give me one real world application of, or use case for BTC?

BTC is worthless in the most literal sense.

>>50291240
Only with BTC can I buy the surveillance info on 1 billion people.

>>50283273

how do i transfer my links from exchanger to my wallet. is it enough to send everything bto an ethereum wallet ?

Which Russian mobster(s) is Sergey Nazarov laundering money for through this bullshit crypto project?

>>50290164
>Always know there are anons like me in the shadows who read your posts like a hawk.
+1

>>50283273
How stupid was it of me to 5x long LINK/BTC yesterday with ~50% of my net worth?

>>50283273

ser wen 1000

>>50291788
you tell us

Man this is the worst one of these threads in a very long time. The pressure is really on, huh

Thanks as always for doing these spoonfeeder, I just wanted to chime in to let you know that the real human beings on this board appreciate it

>>50288582
You don't need someone's private key if you control the entire ledger. Who doesn't know the most basic fundamentals of crypto again?

Thanks for doing these spoonfeeder. Not gonna lie feel pretty shit (yeah yeah have fun sentiment miners), my first buy was early 2019 under a dollar but I remember the first time interacting with you in one of these was around June/July 2020 on that crazy run to 20 dollars. 2 years later, we're somehow below those price levels, and the feeling is pretty much the exact opposite of what it was at that time. The fundamentals are all still there, nothings changed, but this whole market is just a massive clusterfuck that still needs to implode for me to start feeling bullish again (how the fuck can you be bullish on link when dogcoins are still sitting in the top 15? including fucking shiba inu?).

So thanks I guess for sticking around and doing these. Not sure what else to say really, I know you don't talk about price but you have mentioned before you took enough profits already to be comfortably retired, so you have to at least understand how difficult it is for those of us who aren't there yet. This would be a lot easier to swallow and laugh at if I had already retired from a small % of my stack. The fact you don't realize this and just passively tell anons to be zen about it all is illustrative of how disconnected you are from the rest of us.

Oh well, another year in the books, time to pray September is finally the catalyst, but it probably won't be.

>>50292828
If it's any consolation, I think we put too much stock in the relative position of DOGE/SHIB in order to determine what direction the market is heading. Certain assets have a cult-like following, I mean nobody is seriously looking at GME still being overvalued a year and a half later to prove that the stock market must go down. There are too many other factors at play, and those cult-like reddit bagholders buying all this shit are only going to stop if they literally lose their jobs. Certainly a possibility but it's by no means a requirement for Chainlink to finally get some positive price action.

>>50284736
Etherum devs are famous for not delivering. I've been hearing about ETH going PoS for 5 years now. We'll see when the Chainlink team delivers staking and CCIP but Etherum devs are not something you should try to emulate.

>>50292897
While I agree, the reason dogcoins haven't gone down is because the whales that own massive amounts haven't moved back into bitcoin or other plays yet. That's usually a sign they believe we still have further down to go for the overall market. Doge did ok in past cycles as well, but it always crashed miserably when it was all over.

The longer whales resist exiting scams and moving their capital back to bitcoin, the more I think we have at least one more good leg down to go int he bear market. Otherwise this makes no sense for them.

>>50287685
>whales don't give a fuck about chainlink
>link is the most traded token among the top 100 ETH whales
https://www.whalestats.com/analysis-of-the-top-100-eth-wallets

>>50293274
>most held token is a pump and dump scam