/biz/ - Business & Finance

And yes, I totally subscribe to Sergey paying all of those people with dumps to short the token, especially SBF. He probably directly sent him the tokens to his Alameda slush fund. Sergey is the ultimate villain and his silence during everything that's happened speaks louder than words

>>53194616
anyone know what's wrong with usdc? it's not letting me swap

what the fuck, July? Someone NEEDS to confront this fat faggot

>SmartCon won’t be a landmark event and nothing will be covered in the media

what the fuck what the fuck I hate this scam so much give me my money back

>>53194692
That's how you know it's real, everything leading up to SmartCon was that it was the event where the world would find out what LINK was, that it was going to $60 in one candle, this insider btfo all of the shill posters but more than that

>Sergey wanted to keep the price low and out of the spotlight

Exactly what has happened. Literally since July there has been no catalyst or positive news to push LINK into double digits. Sergey tweets every 3 weeks or so, the hackathon wasn't publicized, and none of the people involved with Chainlink (Balaji, Schmidt, Gonser) have said a peep about Link

>>53194860
Sergey doesn't care if it takes until 2030. HIS position as an innovative giant is secured. And he is rich beyond measure. Link baggies have a delusion that their bag holding leant any measure of aid or success to Sergey, the truth is he never needed us and by all measures does not want us, especially the fringe OCD autists who will never stop flooding twitter and his replies with low IQ "meme" posting shit which acts as an astroturf to the legitimacy of the project

>>53194988
>2030

He won’t see 2030 if he doesn’t start delivering soon

>>53194616
What's more likely
>Sirgay being an evil puppetmaster spending his time doing everything he can to make his project fails by purposefully linking with jewish scams
OR
>Sirgay being a scammer shilling other scams then trying to pull it all under the rug on they inevitably fail
?

>>53195072
kek, why not both? Clearly it's all out in the open. Look at the LinkPool saga. Everything involved with this project traces back to Sergey

>>53195103
What i'm not understanding is why would he want to keep the price low (taking huge risks for his legitimacy in the process)? It doesn't serve any meaningful purpose.

uncleoldfag fud thread #32646

>>53195072
>Provide infrastructure for entire ecosystem
>Provide a platform to give people fair shots at being contributors to said ecosystem
>Some are inevitably bucket shops destined to fail
Yeah I'm gonna go with confirmation bias for $500, Alex. Fair mention of Swift and Eric Schmidt. Though I commend this fud attempt for trying extra hard, I'm not selling.

>>53195245
and then you remember linkpool happened, and that johnny is an actual employee of Chainlink, and then your narrative goes out the window
>confirmation bias
lol at the irony

>>53195145
Same reason price discussion is banned retard.

>>53195161
Clearly I'm not fudding, this was an inside post I saw reposted. You people are schizos thinking everyone is bulgarian or uncle

>>53195145
If what the insider was right, hiding method. Or as we've seen with Sam and his recent Sergey connection, a chance to be greedy at expense of all others. Why operate out of the Caymans otherwise

>>53195145
because the project is kingmade. remember when Eric Schmidt referred to the blockchain industry as "your chains" during the fireside chat? every so often the mask slips.

>>53195370
>Eric Schmidt
This psycho is the most demonic piece of globohomo shit i've ever seen. Legit drinking kiddies' blood in his dungeon while fapping at the idea of enslaving mankind.
His fake ass face of serial killer says it all. Looks exacly like Kevin in Sin City.

>>53195285
You gotta break some eggs to make an omelette. Color me surprised there are bad eggs in web3. If you think subsidiary companies going belly up is a reasonable criticism of the parent then go ahead and have fun making yourself look like an idiot for free for years to come. Maybe you will find something worthwhile to do though.... Maybe.

>>53195929
>Color me surprised there are bad eggs in web3.
The absolute state of your omelette when 99.9% of the eggs are rotten.

>>53195967
>he doesn't know that the crypto "industry" solely exists to stress test Chainlink

>>53195998
This sounds like something a schizo would say, and similar arguments were made for XRP, GME, AMC. Always about "testing the limits of the system" and then nothing ever happened.

>>53195967
It is a drop in the bucket and free dev testing as other anon said. The value unlocked by link onboarding legacy institutions will make everything up until seem like child's play, which it essentially has been on the liquidity provision side.

>>53194616
especially the part about smartcon was spot on, it turned out into a major disappointment, similar to the announcement of the staking details and the disappearing build token rewards

but what really strikes me is how the discussion on here changed, back in summer it was really anons talking some people tracking the transactions to see the trapped shorts on chain
but then in the runup to smartcon and especially in the run up to staking it was very different, very paid for posting
right now the board is in a terrible state where any criticism is struck down instantly with pasta talking points
now did anons truly went insane over the PA of this token or are we getting spammed by a different kind of paid jeets right now

>>53197210
>tracking the transactions to see the trapped shorts on chain
it was a psyop anon, it has been right from the start, shills were pretty straight forward about this as well, (((they))) didn't want (((us))) in their little club and that's precisely why this token was pushed so hard on this board
all the suckers staked, the astroturfing campaign of the last 5 years on /biz/ was a resounding success
shilling is no longer needed and that's why you see all these jeets resorting to low quality pasta shillposting

>>53197277
i am still wondering about that
the initial pool didnt fill up near instantly it took a while on the general access pool too
and in the lead up to staking their were many anons who voiced concerns about the 2 year lock up period but instant shout down with shit talking points, add in the factor of the few whales doing a lot of the pool
in the end i dont think all that many anons fell for it, i mean to be in link after all this you have to be pretty paranoid about your coins and giving them away for 2 years doesnt fit in with that

the discussion here is totally organic and absolutely not automated

>>53197392
>it took a while on the general access pool too
Wasn't it filled within 3 hours?

>>53197562
Chainlink bad, get with the program

>>53197562
A huge 180 from people saying early access would fill most of the pool, and whales would instantly fill the rest in general. And there are no institutions or announcements post staking, another sign that >>53197210 is on the money

>>53198602
How could whales instantly fill the pool when 7000 was the maximum for each connected wallet? It took me a good 40 minutes or so to stake 9 wallets. The bs about it filling instantly was likely to discourage anons from splitting their stacks into new 7k wallets with gas. I had that all prepared in advance, and it still took time.

>>53198602
the very obviously paid for shilling in the days right before the staking release was sooo bad here
i truly despised the jeets that shat up the tax implications threads about it, for some of us that was a major concern not to be shouted down with cries of bulgarian
but yes the general sentiment was even early access people would need to fight for a spot and after that insider whales take all, while in reality you had plenty of time in general access to go in

>>53198602
Oh hang on, are you Michael? Forget I spoke. Go and fuck yourself.

>>53195072
Sergey ‘give em enough rope’ Nazarov.

>>53197562
Yea they are advanced level bashers. Ignore them.

>>53198952
nah many anons had/have legitimate concerns about staking v0.1. the fact that the staking shills had the same demeanor in threads that the regular paid fudders have was a major red flag that something was off.

>>53199343
what are the legitimate concerns though? it's just a sugar hit for long-term holders really + a bit of utility (reporting and slashing mechanisms) to satisfy regulators

>>53199343
That's not even pretend-believable kek

>>53199464
plausible deniability for something going wrong with staking contract because it's in beta, missing out some some obvious top while tokens are locked up, project failing and not having the ability to liquidate at a loss, etc.

>>53199499
just don't stake all your stack then? 40-60% was the amount talked about here. most are never going to sell all of their stack given the potential. pretty simple really
as for the other stuff then they are pretty extreme and unlikely situations.

>>53199576
i agree. the problem is that if you held that mindset the past few years all of these projects that have been shilled/directed at link holders have done nothing but chip away at our stacks. being paranoid at this point is a very reasonable response to that. extreme/unlikely situations happen constantly in crypto and if you haven't learned that yet you will.

>>53199464
as mentioned taxes, people come here from many different places and locking rewards while still technically giving them would have fucked me over
the more link would moon in the time between now and unlock the more it would fuck me over as i dont have the outside crypto cashflow to pay them and paying them would require me to sell unstaked linkies again at capital gains tax so doubly fucked

>>53199634
but we can assume that chainlink won't be airdropping the rewards to you so you can control when you receive the LINK and optimise it for tax? one of the best things about it is the tax situation - a simple deposit into the contract doesn't trigger disposal in any jurisdictions.

>>53199604
yeah i agree that wise to be very paranoid but this staking is just link being distributed from the token supply which is very different from bancor playing with our link (this one hit me) and of course the cex black box gambling with deposited link.
the only risk is smart contract risk and after all the audits that is very, very low

>>53198762
There is a whale with 150 wallets staked.

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/12/12/chainlink-whale-oldwhite-used-more-than-150-wallets-to-avoid-staking-limits/

>>53194616
Daily reminder that THE ONLY WAY to win with Chainlink is TO SHORT it.

>>53199776
kek this has to be Thomas Hodges or someone OG

>>53195245
Your post is very disgenious you little snake weasel. You disgust me. He advertised Celsius as a trusted partner and even had the Link treasury on their platform. Coward.

>>53195929
>Enron did nothing wrong because the real problem was Andy Fasdow’s subsidiary partnerships

You have no honor as a man.

Smug reminder to fudders that I (and others) have 9 such wallets and you lost all yours on stupid shit like Bancor. Such a shame.
Seeeeeethhhheeee lol

>>53200344
this post and the 100's of similar ones are why i said this board is going to shit

>>53200740
Well no wonder you're crying. Your greed brought you to this. You deserved to lose and now you can't even take it like a man. All you can do is try to share your misery and loss. Get fucked. We made it. You didn't.

>>53200848
he says without a shred of understanding of what he did

>>53194616
>>53194643
>>53194860

Honestly surprised this thread is still up as we know mods here are link fudders...

>>53200969
We know. We know you'll never get it back and it causes you so much pain. It tears at you. Every day when you awaken you feel it, don't you? The bitter regret. It fills you with hate for everyone, especially those who still have what you lost. But hey.. tough shit lol

>>53201026
you do know the price is at about the same value right now, nothing is lost
like i said low iq people such as you are killing this board for now the other low iqs think they belong here in the company

>>53195370
I missed that line. "you're on somebody's list" was rather ominous.
"your chains" could have double meaning (golden handcuffs)

>>53194616
docusign lel
so this is the power of a link tardnership, everything tied to link just goes down the shitter
OOOOH TRANNIESSS

cope the thread

>>53201047
>lending gambler making 7pbtid about other people's iqs while hes screeching about a token he claims he doesnt care about
Hahahahahahh
Hahahahahahhaha
See pic related to understand why these retards spend so much time trying to fud on here

>>53202908
you do realize this is insanity basing your capital allocation on this right
and again i am all pro chainlink just at a little later time than this
i am really surprised that many anons lost it all to the jewish scams, like really did you learn nothing at all
still even at these levels link has to pump above 9 before i buy back in at a loss

>>53199464
The crux of it was the absurd juxtaposition of Chainlink branding themselves with TRUTH > TRUST and making a smart contract that had an enormous trust-based agreement. The original proposal was deposit a maximum of 7000 tokens, and maybe in 2 years you’ll be able to withdraw them. The scope of v0.1 was so pathetically small it’s hard to comprehend when Chainlink actually started working on their staking implementation. Based on what we got it seems like they only just started, which would be absolutely ridiculous if true. I don’t care if it’s a v0.1 early access pre-pre-pre-alpha-beta. What they released was a complete joke and the fact that they ended up responding shows how pissed off people are since Chainlink has never give a single fuck about their token holders.

Half a decade later and we got a staking contract that’s just staking in name only. It’s not even close to what any of us have been hoping for, and based on Chainlink’s own estimates it appears we’re YEARS away until we get the staking we actually give a fuck about.

>>53201626
Kek holy shit

>>53197392
>>53198770
your esl is showing, but your fud is transparent either way

>>53203654
Truth > trust is laughable when they force everyone to trust them with multisig, staking unlock and node picking

look let's get down to it, what is 3k LINK going to get me in 7 years?

>>53206777
digits confirm

>>53194860
I’ll be the first to admit that I was totally sucked in by the Smartcon hype because it was the only beacon of hope for link holders.
The amount of disappointment I felt when I saw that fucking bucket drum circle open up the thing seriously made me want to puke.
Then one after another the talks were god awful to the point where it reminded me of the time a yo-yo troupe came to my school to talk about not doing drugs. So low level that I still think it had to be on purpose.

22 Smartcon pushed my expectations back another 5 years, and I stopped DCAing because we’re going to have a lot better opportunities to accumulate much cheaper link in the next year or two.

The rumblings about SWIFT and CBDCs all point to link being involved, but still we’re talking at least a decade away before you see anything come of it.
In a way, Smartcon freed my mind of being obsessed with Link breadcrumbs, and now I’m focusing on my business and other ways to make money.

>>53206889
>but still we’re talking at least a decade away
kek

>>53206889
This pretty much rides along with what I said in my first few posts, this was definitely done on purpose, especially when we learned that CCIP was nowhere near what was originally said in 2021. The insider post literally says SmartCon was going to be a sell the news event and that's exactly what happened

>>53200344
Checked
So what? LINK rewards won't be my only passive income, since staking I've been able to move onto other income generating projects.
If you're not buying more LINK to reap as much early compounding rewards as possible when it opens to 75m you're a retard

>>53206889
>>The rumblings about SWIFT and CBDCs all point to link being involved,

SWIFT directly confirmed it fwiw.

>>53194616
Too much of a brainlet. QRD?

>>53210129
2 more weeks am I right. The narrative just keeps changing...
First we were waiting for arbitrum the game changer, then we were waiting for staking for "the switch to be flipped" next were gonna be waiting for le epic swift partnership tweet.


6 fucking years of nothing yet the hopium bong just keeps being passed around, while the price tanks and underperforms..
Lmaooooo

>>53200101
Don't forget that cel branded themselves as defi when they had a defi arm that did nothing. Had it done something out would have been powered by chainlink, but they were scammers and it never did anything

>>53201494
Or that Serg owns all the chains because they are linked

>>53206939
>The insider post literally says SmartCon was going to be a sell the news event and that's exactly what happened
It's been a sell the news event every year