/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>55705236
If you think Smart Contracts will be being used; if you think people like the DTCC say what they mean about tokenising everything; if you think Swift will, after 6 years of testing and multiple Smartcon statements to the affirmative, then yes.
If you think they're all talking a load of old shit (as the fudders would have you believe) then no, you should sell now before it goes to zero.

yes in 2030 around 10-15% of global gdp will have at least one foot in the ccip ecosystem. chainlink will be worth at least $8, possibly $9

How does $7.77 sound?

>>55705236
Is $81,000 more than $7?

Is truth>trust?

>>55705236
Jews will never allow something like Chainlink

>>55705236

>>55705857
jews want / NEED something like chainlink
it's a bunch of relatively small players who don't want chainlink (EVM mafia, crypto VC fags, etc)

>>55705857

>>55705236
Yes. $250.

>>55705236
No

>>55705924
delet this

I have never heard of Chainlink outside of this website. That answer your question?

You don't think a guy would have a $5000 budget to shill this coin 24/7 via 200 or so Pajeet's and not make a sizeable return when he dumps it?

LINK has always been a junkcoin. Only coins that /biz/ were right about were BTC, ETH, XRP and XMR.

It just got exploited retard

You are all purchasing a crab coin and this time is no different. You will be at the floor in a month before it goes up to around where it is now again, then repeats.

I'm a developer and I looked over the Chainlink white paper and documentation, as well as the blog post by Google. Here's a few reasons I would not use Chainlink for my own apps:

1. The current "mainnet" is not decentralized. there's no way to decentrally assess if an oracle is any good or not.

2. It took them 2 years to basically build centralized oracles, which is extremely unimpressive (and already exists). I do not have much hope for the future or the competency of their engineers.

3. The white paper doesn't coherently describe how they plan on making their centralized design decentralized one day. They broadly go over their "decentralized" reputation strategies as if creating sybil resistant decentralized reputation is something of an afterthought, when it's actually an unsolved computer science problem. They've had 2-3 years and 30mil in funding to actually publish technical specifications for this and instead they decided to build trivial centralized oracles. Extremely worrying. It kind of reminds me of IOTA "we'll remove the coordinator later". No you won't. You don't know how.

4. News outlet and journalists keep reporting on "partnerships" with Google and Swift. But if you actually read the source for the "partnership", it's just a blog post by Google Cloud that promotes their own service (BigQuery) and shows an example about how Chainlink users can use Google Cloud if they want. In no way is Google partnered or planning on using Chainlink themselves. The Chainlink codebase is extremely trivial to rebuild if Google wanted to get into the blockchain oracle space.

While there's certainly profits to be made by trading Chainlink, I recommend you do not HODL it with the hope that one day developers will adopt it as their source for decentralized oracles. That certainly won't happen.

>>55707844
Checked, you mean it's not a revolutionary alt coin that's going to take the world by storm, despite there being literally hundreds of dead projects that had similar levels of delusion over the years? Gasp

I feel bad for the noobs. Hope they at least get out break even and don't beat themselves up for letting one of their few easy 10x investments in their lifetime slip away because of fucktard moonboys on reddit giving them false hope.

(Yes I've been burned in the past lol.)

>>55707844
>>55707850
>incel manifestos
literally just have sex

>>55707864
>bothered by words
Just sell your LINK

>>55705236
Any thoughts on PRQ?
which is like the opposite of LINK?

>>55705236
It wont exist by then but QNT will be 10k per coin.

LINK is a Russian pump and dump turd

>>55705469
So far, no