/biz/ - Business & Finance

wow thanks for this blogpost but i didnt read it
>buys 100 more linkies

>>55853303
Let's see how your reply ages. Current price of LINK: $6.86

NEVER
SELLING

RENT
FREE

KEK
FUDDIES

Hows this make you feel?
>August 12, 2020:
>LINK: $17.25
>ETH: $390
>BTC: $11,800
>BNB: $21.77
>DOGE: $0.003
>ADA: $0.14
>SOL: $3.77
>MATIC: $0.02
>TRX: $0.02

>August 12, 2023:
>LINK: $7.44
>ETH: $1,848
>BTC: $29,415
>BNB: $240.15
>DOGE: $0.07
>ADA: $0.29
>SOL: $24.86
>MATIC: $0.68
>TRX: $0.07

>>55853284
didn't read; never buying

>>55853303
>I'm the main character!

>>55853402
Well I mean a bunch of third world npcs are obsessed with our investment 24/7 and want us to sell
Link holders are the main characters in this case

>>55853439
oh right I forgot in b4

>esl fudders!

Thanks for the reminder.

I am honestly convinced you dickheads are the actual paid brigade.

>I'm never going to sell! I'm a sworn Sergey paypig!

Just to get innocent anons to buy/hold so you can dump on them. Fuck you, you're not a real human.

>>55853284
This is the worst fucking thing to enter my life. Held 135k link tokens to $50 and back, (2017 link faggot), and was ready to capitulate in early January 2022 only to get the Sergey wagmi like this year announce with CCIP and staking due in '22. Lost so much fucking money, my sanity and my belief in this cursed project. If anyone from chainlink labs reads this: FUCK YOU. I HOPE YOU GET CANCER SERGEY

>>55853487
jesus 135k anon, that is significantly more than I was able to accumulate. Are you still holding the whole stack?

>>55853479
aww sorry little guy did i strike a nerve?
my bad
fudcucks are actually super smart and competent at their 24/7 assignments here!
just sold 100k for sure!

>>55853284
Imagine if you were to sell your LINK tokens right now at $7.

Imagine that 3 months later, the price is at $4.16. How would you feel about your decison to sell at $7? Would you be happy that you basically preserved your networth from being cut in half? My guess is that being proven right in this instance is not going to make you feel a whole lot better.

Now imagine if you were to sell right now at $7, and the price in 3 months is at $9.59. How would you feel? Would you be feeling regret? Nervousness or even fear? How are you going to feel when it is back to $15?

The situation is indeed fucked, but the only logical thing to do is to assume the market will correct to fair value over time. In the meantime, enjoy your staking rewards. Treat yourself to something nice. If you've held this long you deserve it.

Indeed my fellow OG ICO Chainlinkers, I also am fearful, uncertain and doubtful of my investment and I will be shortly heading to the Binance cryptocurrency exchange to market sell all of my Chainlink (ticker: LINK) there because I've made such a bad investment and I urge every other OG ICO Chainlink (ticker: LINK) investor to do the same because I, an anonymous poster, care deeply about your financial well-being.

We've all held for so long, but in all honesty it's time to stop the cope and just market sell our Chainlink (ticker: LINK) tokens immediately. I'm just so tired. You tired too? Let's sell together

The usual discord nufudders are actually a lower form of life than unpaid internet janitors::
>constantly making 50+ pbtid fudding in discussion threads over 10+ hours whenever they're up
>the rest of the time they seem to be seething, samefagging, and monitoring in up to 6 fud threads at any one time during their "rush hour"
>sometimes when they're really upset because no one takes them seriously, they'll spam the board with nikado avacado's asshole threads
>they have been doing this possibly since 2021, when a lot of them bought the top and never recovered
>others lost their stacks on bancor and celsius
>some even think that they're "fighting the wef" by posting on here - yes they're that retarded
>lets be generous with the math and say that they've only done this for five days a week (including holidays) for one year (50x52=2600 hours spent doing this maybe, not including the time they've spent making low quality memes and looking at pictures of the best cock cages to use)
>all over an apparently shitty and unimportant crypto
>on a board that doesn't even affect the prices
>all for FREE

>>55853502
No. Had to sell some to keep the lights on and then the Chainlink-endorsed team at Bancor took the rest. Down to 65k

/biz/ has collectively learned the hard lesson that being early is tantamount to being wrong. We're correct about the fundamentals and the importance of the project, always have been, we just underestimated (seriously) the time it would take for cash to start flowing to token holders. Unironically we're like <1 year out now, though. Would be stupid to sell at this point. You can literally see testnet CBDC transaction happening on CCIP as we speak

>>55853532
You already know where I stand on this. 6 years now. It’s just fucking infuriating is all.

>>55853564
That’s a good stack still. Hope we make it soon, anon. I’m so fucking tired of the shenanigans.

>>55853593
I think it’s fully possible CCIP is a dead zone for a long time. Only time will tell. I can’t imagine SWIFT etc onboarding in the next year, that would be very fast movement for a behemoth dinosaur organization like them.

>>55853487
Chill man Sergey needs to sell 800k todens to fund the project just hold on wagmi brother

>>55853750
Who knows mate. All we can do is sit back and hope. At least on paper the project is doing fine.

>>55853769
Better than ever actually. I just wish it wasn't necessary for Sergey to sell so much to fund the project that's all. Apparently he's in the Caymans? That's kinda sketch. Oh well still lots to be hopeful for :)

I'm sitting on a 1k stack which is larger than my savings account lol.

>>55853479
it's so lame at this point...biz sucks ass now. Like how the fuck can someone look at the above prices now versus then and sit there and defend this bullshit. We got FUCKED

>>55853487
similar boat... that piece of shit teased feature releases knowing full well he had ZERO intention of having anything ready. A true piece of shit

>>55853593
definitely more than a year out... who even cares anymore. I've been set back a lifetime with the opportunity cost. I agree it's dumb to sell now but not for the cult reason you're listing. Might as well wait to the overrall market turns and drags this piece of shit back up. Maybe we get one more scam pump who knows.

>>55853284
From 11 cents to $7? Go fuck yourself faggot crybaby

>>55853284
>I'll never live down not selling at $40+, ever, will I?
Doesn't seem like any of us will. They sure tricked us in 2021.

> You had your chance in '21 to sell and you blew it
> You never bothered to consider the absolute shit tokenomics - this is the same thing that trapped the AVAX baggies on here

>>55853284
>Doesnt know about the FED balance sheet.

NGMI

>>55853284
yeah it does suck how low we are despite how longs it's been. it also sucks that there's a bunch of delusional newfags who think you're a paid fudder just because you're unhappy with the way things are. we were unironically too early. i thought the crypto market would mature after the 2018 bear but 2021 was just as stupid as 2017. i've accepted that i probably won't make it next bull with my 1X,000 stack.

>>55853284
>post staking, post CCIP
Bitcoin dumped vigorously on all of this news. It was never priced in.

>>55854554
>2021 was just as stupid as 2017
It was a lot stupider.
2021 was dog coins and meme stocks.
2017 was at least vaguely about fundamentals and adoption ("partnerships")

Dr:Nb

>>55854533
Qrd?

>>55853303

People have also been making fun of BBBY baggies for a long time now. That must have been a conspiracy as well, right?

>>55855218
Jews printed monopoly money so the excess liquidity flushed into the crypto markets, thats why we had bullrun. Fundementals dont matter because Crypto has no inherent value.

>>55853284
The problem is that Chainlink has built the infrastructure, but regulations prevent the trillions of assets out there that are in traditional markets from being brought on chain. You can have a PoC project like SWIFT's collaboration with Chainlink built, but it can't be used for anything because they are prohibited from interacting with any Ethereum address that isn't KYCed because everyone in the traditional systems have had their identities verified and and greenlit by some kind of compliance department either within the banks, credit agency or some other institution. That can't happen on chain, because it's all anonymous by design. Even DECO is basically just a ton of encryption for delivery of KYC credentials but not actually an identity source itself. And Chainlink doesn't want to take that responsibility on due to the fines that are imposed whenever an infraction occurs. The amount of fraud that happens in the normal world is unacceptable in an environment where transactions aren't reversible. What everyone in the space, Chainlink included, needs is an identity source that draws on something you can't easily fake like biometrics and that requires the user to authenticate the identity each time they log in to transact. This stuff is out there but will take a few more years to come to the wider market. Once that happens, you can expect to see migrations of assets on chain and Chainlink will actually be able to see their stuff used in the way it's intended to be used.

>>55855279
>People have also been making fun of BBBY baggies
I bet BBBY has never had a single 50pbtid psycho screeching for a dozen hours straight.
Link has had one those every other day for years now.

>>55853284
It's a great liquidity coin, it's practically a $6 stablecoin. Never really goes down, never goes up. Great for farming. I don't get the problem, really.

>>55853284
making it for stinkers always has been staking, not the price.

>>55853593
It's going to take longer than you think as usual

>>55853284
Linkies are winning

I have a sincere question to all Anons itt who argue that LINK is so low because cash isn't flowing to token holders: why is LINK held at a higher standard than every other crypto? Let's look at some of the coins that are above LINK in ranks: DOGE, ADA, TRX, DOT, SHIB, TON, and UNI. Now, why is the market valuing these above LINK, even though fundementally Chainlink is more important and wildly used in this space than any of these coins?

>>55855345


Took me about 15 seconds to find this fellow autist:

>>>55844925

>>55854874
2021 was just more honest about how worthless it all really is. Nothing from 2017 has led to a single ounce of actual adoption

>>55855486
He's not fudding. He's literally talking about buying more.

>>55853593
Its going to be a LOT longer than that you're still underestimating it. Try 5-10 years as an optimistic flightpath. 20 and you make it if you can hold and stay alive.

I hold chainlink (LINK) and im gay

>>55853284
Next week $5 handle will be hit. You can quote me.

i go by emotions,

and this is the time im buying back in


i sold link at 30-44 dollars...

i started to buy back in during the SBF crash.

so many og's are gonna dumo this crap at 24-34 dollars. and then

BAM we are in triple digit link turf 2024 2025


all the nu-linkers will finally get their taste of profit accumulating over the last couple years.

>>55854278
Diamond hands marines :) repeat after me:
>never selling
>never selling
>never selling

>>55853284
Adem K4yser
He shut down his twitter @chainlinkthomas immediately after the pic was posted along with his name. His twitter used to be @geoxadem when his porn addiction posts were discovered and he shut his account down and scrubbed it the first time. Matched up on linkedin with netherlands location and "crypto investor" role at a very shady looking netherlands company (The Success Factory) that apparently tried to run a failed DAG ponzi.

>>55853303
>>55853325
$6.69 you ok mr knife catcher?

>>55856163
at least a few of the cockroaches behind this fud spam will be found, tortured slowly and horribly, and then killed eventually

i can guarantee it

>>55855570
I think you’re right a lot of people will dump if it hits 20-30s again, but triple digit by 2025 seems unlikely.

>>55856163
>>55856248
Lol which one of you is the Chainlink advocate that Thomas/Adem pumped and dumped? Hilarious that he pounded your asshole and then ghosted you, your lashing out just confirms that you're absolutely seething about it.

>>55853284
STFU pussy

>>55853284

> why does btc always dump when link pumps?

Price is run by bots. Every altcoin tends to peak before bitcoin dumps. Additionally, every bagholder has this conspiracy about their shitcoin.

> then why isn't ccip or any other release pumping the price?

Because it isn't profitable at the moment. Institutional investors are very unimpressed with the current crypto landscape. Not that they don't see the potential, but a pricefeed for aave doesn't drop jaws.

> why does all this garbage in the top 20 perform better when they release nothing of value?

Because speculation drives hype, while chainlink's clearly shown their hand. Additionally, the main things left for chainlink speculation are negative. Such as how much super linear staking will decrease the token price or where the team dumps are being allocated.

> but chainlink has speculation with swift, iso2022 etc

Yes, however, that is years away. The majority of crypto holders do not have long time horizons and see the years of poor price performance. Also, a strong social media presence is needed to spread the hype.

> but link twitter is huge

It's more of an echo chamber inside of a large bubble. Anytime chainlink integrates with something in the concrete world, all the outside sees is a swarm of racist frog profiles; along with weird, creepy and blasphemous memes. This does more damage than one might think.

> what can be done then?

Unfortunately the vase has already been broken, so to speak. I suppose the best thing the link community could do is change their image from pepe to something more mainstream, especially for main spokesmen (CLG). Disparage the less sociable crowd from participating and contribute intellectual thoughts instead of the stale memes.

>>55856860

> Don't trash CLG he's a genius!!!

That might be true, however he has done irreparable damage to the brand by his blasphemous name and racist profile picture. Furthermore, CLG has a history of shilling rugpulls and various failed projects. As a person, CLG is great, but should create a new account and rebrand.

> should I just sell?

That's a personal question that mostly depends on your financial goals and patience. Chainlink does have a good foundation, but it will likely take years to reach a fraction of the communities insane price targets.

> well if they have a good foundation I'm guaranteed to make it

Not necessarily. Chainlink has a high likelihood of falling victim to the first mover disadvantage.

> what do you mean disadvantage? These new projects can't come close to the number of integrations

First mover disadvantage is due to them investing a high amount of capital to shift businesses over to using a new product. Because of this, a competitor can invest capital into developing a better product instead of luring in new users. For example, Facebook vs MySpace.

> won't the community be loyal since chainlink has funded their development?

In reality, businesses are typically unloyal and go with the best or cheapest option. You can even see various business turning their backs on chainlink while being funded by them. Will the overall industry stay loyal? Unlikely, but only time will tell.

>>55853487
>Held 135k link tokens to $50 and back
You had $6,700,000 and didn't fucking sell??
This is the prototypical linkbaggie, the mongoloid that gets mercilessly and rightfully mocked like the retard he is.

test

Our NIGGER (AS IN BLACK AFRICANS FROM FUCKING AFRICA) 4channel janitors shoah'd my LINK shitposting thread.

>>55853593
>We're correct about the fundamentals and the importance of the projec
no sergey fucking lied and told us staking and ccip in 22, know full well they were not even close to being done. If

>>55855338

>>55857380

>>55857897
You are making some high quality posts lately. Hopefully they'll get through to someone.

>>55857930
You never know who is lurking

>>55855561
>You can quote me.
k

>>55853564
I feel your pain bro. I’m a poor as fuck fag and kept my 400 Link and 1 Eth staked on bancor just so I wouldn’t panic sell or some stupid shit and earn some apy while I waited for the singularity. Fuck those bancor Jews. Lost .45 Eth and 200 Link.

>>55853284
>I'd be just sitting around wondering where it all went wrong

>>55855338
They have their own blockchains and their own personal CCIP network running right now. The identity source isn't as big of a limiter as you make it out to be.

>>55859342
Notice how this paper uses terms like "verge," "short road" and "not-too-distant future"

It's because they are anticipating regulation forcing identity on crypto. None of the assets they're discussing here will be traded openly on Etheruem or any other open chain. It will never leave centralized custody, because that's where the banks can ensure no one using their networks is sanctioned, on terror watch lists, flagged for fraud etc. If you want CCIP to be used the way 99% of LINK holders imagine it will be, you need airtight identity sources. Regulators are going to bring that to crypto and defi in particular within the next few years.

>>55859955

>>55855338
True. Systems like mobile bank id already allow people to kyc and buy with coinbase, and systems like koinly that analyze your wallet to help with taxes also play a part in linking a real person to a crypto wallet. These tools exist and are being put into use by people now in the land of the tax cuck, Sweden. Just a matter of time...HOLD, buy more etc.

>>55853532
>your networth
>>55853383
you retards think we're 1000% in Chainlink with 0 income, 0 sources of other things to sell.

>>55861883
and for those who do have their entire nw in cl, they have so much & bought so early price dips don't matter.
i'm just not selling.

>>55855432
>higher standard
the same standards are applied to all tokens that claim fundamental value. it's just that the market thinks link isn't doing a good job

>>55861982
>it's just that the market thinks link isn't doing a good job
This. Every coin that is ranked higher than Link is doing a much better job.
Just look at Shiba Inu and their successful Shibarium launch last night.

>>55862009
i mean, that's just a shitcoin not doing anything fundamental, so the value comes mainly from people believing that other people will pay more in the fiture, because they are similarly dumb. there is no fomo for link, it's boring, which could be a good thing

>>55862133
>launching an L2 isn’t anything fundamental

>>55853593
Someone like SWIFT will want to see stability in that platform for at very bare minimum of 12 months. You're talking about the backbone of the worlds financial system.
As soon as SWIFT transacts, the public system will be attacked by foreign governments - on a scale we likely haven't yet seen in crypto.

It's why the team is so focused on TVS + total value transacted.

>>55853786
He has to payoff the initial bankrollers and pay the bribes to fund back-end organisation development. The big banks and insurance companies aren't experimenting with blockchain tech for free or out of self interest. They aren't just building rome, they are also paying for the people to come.
It's about critical mass and diverting the river of attention.

>>55854554
Too early, right, but too early. Fudding also unironically harmed the token value gains. It did keep a level of interest through infamy however.

>>55862009
>their successful Shibarium launch last night
heckin' kek

>>55855526
>DUDE JUST WAIT 10 YEARS FOR 3X LMAO
chainshit holders are mentally ill

Serious question, are there any projects actually leveraging any of the products chainlink has been making?

>>55862296
We're literally far too early. The final iteration of chainlink will lead to a cambrian explosion of financial products in crypto that people haven't imagined yet. If you're browsing this thread and stick around, you've already made it.

>>55857271
What part of never selling do you not understand? Were never selling our stacks. They go intact to our grandchildren. We live or die from staking.

>>55862296
Is this a joke?
The past three years have been one big cautionary tale for cryptos that they have two choices: use Chainlink or lose all your money.

The vast majority of Defi etc. has been running on Chainlink for like two years now.

>>55862320
Holy kek.

>>55862296
Yes. But nothing that is of any significance at present and it may well stay that way.
>>55862336
Are you a joke?
You can go the third option - don’t use crypto at all and avoid the explosive train wreck.

>>55862452
>don’t use crypto at all
Soon that won't be an option for people... because of chainlink.

>>55862452
>either use Chainlink or don’t use crypto at all
Sounds about right.

>>55859955
I am not understanding because you will be able to trace the source from the private blockchain to whatever protocol on the public blockchain. Someone wants to use the lending protocol on Aave through Citibank, they'll have traceable transactions from Citibank's private blockchain and they'll just disclose the address used on Aave. The identity information will come from the user disclosing the information to Citibank.

What I don't believe will happen is banks allowing my anonymous NEET address to do banking on their chain through CCIP. I'd have to get permissioned.

Is this what you're referring to regarding the identity source? Being able to receive permission to use a private banking chain from an open blockchain?

>>55862336
>price feeds
>>55862314
Kinda wondering if Im not delusional at this point
>>55862452
Apart from synthetix, I dont really see any other protocol doing anything interesting

>>55853284
>post staking
>post CCIP

Both of those things are still in a very limited beta.

The fact that CCIP is actually in the public testing phase is actually great news for us although it does mean we are still waiting around with our dicks in our hands.

>>55856163
>mfw my assassination contract receives a bid on the CCIP enabled 1m TPS DAG chain

>>55862553

>>55862577
>>price feeds
You say that like they’re not important.
Using the wrong price feed can cost you hundreds of millions in the blink of an eye.

has anyone on /biz/ ever considered the possibility that your knowledge of things are so inadequate that you are not even close to be able to pick what is a good buy?
I see these threads about the FED, and everyone opine on what mistakes the FED made and what the proper policy would be/ should had been.
But what you know is so insufficient that it's borderline satire. It's literally the Dunning Kruger effect, you know some shit about econ and finances, probably way more than normies, you still know less than Jim Cramer (apart from TA, this is the one aspect where /biz/ outshines everyone, identifying cup and handles Wyckoff patterns - although everyone on /biz/ agrees TA is mostly meaningless).

No insurance agency would EVER utilize any scheme that pays out automatically if certain criteria is met, they profit from arbitrary conditions. Ever considered how much money an airline company would lose if every legit claim of reimbursement for delayed/overbooked flights where paid out?
Let me guess, that is not what chainlink is all about?? this about some behind the curtain inter/intrabusiness contracts at scale; none of you know any of this, I doubt a single one of you could come up with just one example of how smartcontracts would improve the business you are working for - not some hypothetical field you never worked in, but at your actual job. How can smart contracts do anything other than lose you money.

Has it ever occurred to you guys how unique you truly are? i mean you mastered the blockchain, TA, macroeconomics, you know the mechanics of the corporate world.
Yet this collective of polymaths tend to express their ideas through infocharts? the equivalent of laminated flow charts on how to use a computer, you would find in a retirement home?? touch grass, seems appropriate.

>>55862724
>No insurance agency would EVER utilize any scheme that pays out automatically if certain criteria is met, they profit from arbitrary conditions. Ever considered how much money an airline company would lose if every legit claim of reimbursement for delayed/overbooked flights where paid out?
>Let me guess, that is not what chainlink is all about?? this about some behind the curtain inter/intrabusiness contracts at scale; none of you know any of this, I doubt a single one of you could come up with just one example of how smartcontracts would improve the business you are working for - not some hypothetical field you never worked in, but at your actual job. How can smart contracts do anything other than lose you money.
is this pasta lol good work but uh yes blockchain philosophy is that we have bad agreements with service providers and if you offer a user a better guarantee, it won't matter if your competitors don't want to "lose money", they will adapt or die a death by one-thousand cuts.

>>55862724
>No insurance agency would EVER utilize any scheme that pays out automatically if certain criteria is met, they profit from arbitrary conditions. Ever considered how much money an airline company would lose if every legit claim of reimbursement for delayed/overbooked flights where paid out?

Of course they don't want to switch to a deterministic system. The point is that companies who refuse to make the switch will have their marketshare swallowed by companies that have made the switch.

Pay up.

>>55862851
hello fellow based anon linky stay stinky

>>55862724
>No insurance agency would EVER utilize any scheme that pays out automatically if certain criteria is met, they profit from arbitrary conditions
Now what will happen when just ONE (1) company offers it? People will start going to that company for their insurance when they realise how much better it is to have the money automatically be paid out. The other company will lose customers if they don't also adopt the tech. Customer demand dictates what services/products are sold.
So all it takes is ONE company to take the initiative. Are you telling me no one will take that first step when trying to get a competitive edge?

>>55862607
2 more years unironically.
1 more year to finally transition out of CCIP beta and then another year after that to pick up steam. Around that time they'd probably expand the staking pool too which is a major catalyst for pumpening.

>>55862201
o, I am laffin

>>55853556
the "rent free argument" is the same one trannys use

>oh posted a trannyjak? why do you think about us trannys 24/7?

it takes less than 30 seconds to point out a linkcuck on /biz/ also its cathartic

>>55863002
Consumers are not rational, article related. The vast majority of normalfags will just go with whatever giant insurance company they've always used.
https://awrestaurants.com/blog/aw-third-pound-burger-fractions

>>55854241
You whiny little faggot get a job find a girl and live your life holy fucking shit

>>55862296
basically the only feature that sees frequent use are the price feeds, but to get market share, they made them free to use. they are in a bad spot right now, if they try to make projects pay more than a lip service sponsor amount, they get backlash and sergey just rolls over when that happens

>>55863395
>they made them free to use
No they haven't, they've been charging for the price feeds since the beginning.
Pic is Compound's quoted price feed cost back in 2021.

>>55863157
That's because there is virtually no difference between the top 5 insurance companies. They all offer the same exact service. They all pay out to policyholders at the same rate. The free market has taken all of these variables into consideration which is exactly why the top 5 charge the same premiums.

Now try to imagine what the insurance market looked like before the top 5 had established themselves as the leaders. You had scam insurance companies that flat out refused to ever pay out. You had insurance companies that were legit, but nonetheless were leaking money somewhere in their unique buisness model. You never hear of these companies because they went bankrupt. The only insurance companies that survived are the ones who sustainably provide their service at a fair price, and at a payout rate that is fair enough to be accepted by customers.

The reason that it looks as if all insurance companies are the same and customers don't care which company they are covered by is because these insurance companies individually adopted a higher standard. The insurance companies who failed to adopt this higher standard were forgotten.

Chainlink is the highest standard. In 10 years, people won't even remember the non-determistic insurance companies of today. They will just assume that deterministic insurance is how it's always been because after all, why would anyone in their right mind prefer the alternative?

>>55853593
I'm trying really hard to not sell based on sunk cost fallacy and your post isn't helping.

>>55853593
>You can literally see testnet CBDC transaction happening on CCIP as we speak
It is pretty funny that nobody seems to care about this and VC owned media outlets refused to cover it at all until they were called out.

>>55862724
>No insurance agency would EVER utilize any scheme that pays out automatically if certain criteria is met, they profit from arbitrary conditions
They would probably pay way less than the number of people they employ to check these demands manually.
Your argument is basically that online e-commerce would never work because of how easy fraud is despite the fact that it's still much cheaper than having a brick and mortar store.

>>55862553
They don't just want tracing, they want total control. Ability to block anyone out at will if they wanted to. This is especially true for the US. And again, they aren't going to just take your word for it if you disclose your addresses on scout's honor. That will still result in a level of fraud that is way too high for compliance departments and regulators in an environment where transactions can't be reversed.

You will have to get permissioned to use those kinds of chains and actually most public chains if you are a local user in the future. It will eventually look like going through a KYC process and then biometrically providing proof of identity and humanity each time you access a wallet to do a transaction so that there's ongoing authentication. It won't just be to access private chains though, the G7 regulators are going to force their users to do this to access all chains and DeFi protocols, and all of those projects will comply by implementing a layer or contract to query KYC status because that's much easier than getting the Tornado Cash treatment.

>>55863433
>hey've been charging for the price feeds
that's not true though, everyone can use them without paying anything. here are the official docs, notice the lack of payment. it's like winrar, you definitely can pay, if you get around to it, after using for a decade for free
https://docs.chain.link/data-feeds/api-reference

>>55864677

>>55853284
I do feel bad for anyone struggling with porn addiction

>>55862724
lol well said. I always laughed at the African farmer example.

>>55862851
why would an insurance company want to lose money switching to a system where payouts are automated and they can't fuck the customers re: a certain technicality. Computers can't go through all the subjective information. Do you also think le blockchain can replace humans interpreting generally accepted accounting principles.

>>55863002
what happens when the adopting insurance company goes out of business the first year because every claim pays out

>>55863183
>projection

I have both. I'm probably better looking / more jacked than you too. Has nothing to do with wanting to make money here though

>>55863685
Do you understand how insurance companies make money? They hold onto premiums and invest it. The payout % has to stay at a set % or else there's no more profit. If the payout % rises dramatically it's unsustainable.

>>55864607
>They would probably pay way less than the number of people they employ to check these demands manually.

How? Tell me how Chainlink or blockchain can go to the site of an accident and determine the circumstances of that particular case.

>>55853284
Chainlink with CCIP is only half of fully working god protocol.

Look at the image, encrypted inputs and outputs over mutually trusted network. What's missing? Everything on the outside: The users.

Chainlink is the internet without the Home computer.

Identity needed.

>What about my crypto wallet?
Everyone can make infinite crypto wallets, need to determine who someone is on an individual level.

>>55853284
Imagine following crypto markets this long and still not understanding how they work

>>55865012
>The payout % has to stay at a set % or else there's no more profit.

If the company can't make a profit without placing it's thumb on the scale, maybe it deserves to go out of buisness.

>>55865134
Remember that it took 1.5 years for the ETH price to do anything. It launched in 2015 and was less than $20 until 2017.

Chainlink is launching major products in 2023, two years after the 2021 high just like Ethereum launched two years after the 2013 high. LINK is primed to reach a new ATH in 2024 and peak in 2025.

Floundering like this in the depths of a bear market is perfectly normal. It's what every crypto does, promising or otherwise.

>>55865173
>incel revenge fantasy
It doesn't matter what a company "deserves". The reality is that no insurance company would touch this blockchain crap with a 10 foot pole because it simply wouldn't be beneficial to them. Businesses exist to make money, and they won't use a technology unless it can help them make money.

>>55865210
>Chainlink bad because its too good.

>>55865102

>>55853487
Sergey moved wealth from baggies to himself, thats all that's happened here
look at things objectively instead of subjectively next time

>>55865134
I use coinbase one and set my daily purchases to 3 dollars a day. I can make coffee at home or adjust my lifestyle to accomodate 3 bucks a day. I'll probably sell when it hits 20 bucks for a small vacation and wait to seed VTI and S&P holdings. If BTC goes to zero then 1.5 Trillion dollars vanish from the world economy. Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Paypal are prime examples of real deliverable products that survived the dotcom bubble.

>>55865040
>How? Tell me how Chainlink or blockchain can go to the site of an accident and determine the circumstances of that particular case.
the solution is to pay academics without morals to write a whitepaper that claims to solve the problem, but does so in such a convoluted way that retail dummies don't notice that it still delegates to some blessed offchain arbiters of truth in the end. then you can parade it around and claim to have solved "the oracle problem". it works splendid for chainlink, look how much money they extracted from retail without any repercussions

>>55865550
>it works splendid for chainlink, look how much money they extracted from retail without any repercussions

With only pricefeeds data Chainlink created a cryptographically guaranteed rigged shit Casino that the haves can use to extract funds from the have nots.

>but muh fundamentals token wouldn't happen to me, Im smart
3AC, FTX, Celsius, Nexo ect all CeFi scammers that got to freely extract value from the perfectly functioning DeFi that Chainlink enabled. Doesnt matter how smart you are.

>>55853383
homicidal

>>55864677
>And again, they aren't going to just take your word for it if you disclose your addresses on scout's honor. That will still result in a level of fraud that is way too high for compliance departments and regulators in an environment where transactions can't be reversed.

I mean the transactions will disclose the addresses. A user using Citibank to interact with Aave on Ethereum or public L2 will have no idea how Aave or Metamask works or even how a blockchain public address/key pair works if they see it at all. That will all be obfuscated from them as CCIP will allow Citibank to do one click options to send their money from Citibank blockchain to Aave wherever it is to be lent on there. And you'll be able to view everything from etherscan or whatever blockchain scanner there is.

Now if you need to get whitelisted to have your personal ETH address be used on Citibanks private blockchain, I can definitely see them demanding you walk into their office to open an account, complete with X,Y,Z pieces of identity information before you can submit addresses to be whitelisted.

Again, I don't see this being an issue at all.

>>55853303
>a straight male would never say linkies
enjoy your vaporware cuck

>>55866554
Just transacting isn't good enough for them, and they won't allow their users to interact with protocols that are allowing non-KYCed users to mix into the pools because of the risk. You can go listen to any DeFi related event where central bankers, World Bank, BIS etc. are speaking for the last few years and hear them all say this.

What you are describing will be implemented, sure. The problem is that if you only have attestation upon account creation or one time whitelisting it isn't sibyl resistant and there will be the same amount of fraud the currently exists in traditional finance. Which isn't acceptable to financial institutions and regulators when you can't reverse transactions. There will need to be ongoing attestation of identity. That's where biometrics come in, they make it far more difficult to create fraudulent accounts or buy and sell verified accounts on a secondary market.

>>55866554
>Again, I don't see this being an issue at all.
wew boy are you in for a fucking surprise

>>55866554
This is quite the misunderstanding of ccip

>>55866739
Okay dude I'm retarded. You gotta spoonfeed me here. But first I'm going to label two populations,

The first population is the normies who have no idea what blockchains are beyond buying BTC and ETH on Robinhood. These normies will be the target audience of financial products regular banks introduce that are retard proof but heavily guardrailed and restricted that allows them to play with DeFi in a very safe and controlled manner.


Then the second population is us the current users, which I'll refer to as l33t hackers since we know what a private/public key pair is and can generate one ourselves.


Are you saying the central bankers want to attack open and decentralized protocols (DeFi) to gain full control of it?

Do they want to ensure the l33t hackers can't transact with DeFi as a whole, or just purely on their private blockchains without their explicit consent and full identity disclosure of who the heck those hackers are?

>>55866853
>>55866816
>>55866739
>>55866554
>>55865393
>>55865102
Holy fuck can’t believe ever jeets are still here lmao nobody gives a fuck about identity and even if they did why would they let you profit off of it lmao delusional

>>55866933
>nobody gives a fuck about identity
ok

>>55857354
>sergey fucking lied and told us staking and ccip in 22, know full well they were not even close to being done
either he knew and he lied, or he didn't know and is a terrible ceo

>>55866913
You are thinking of those two groups as separate and not part of the same financial system. Think about how CDOs contributed to the housing crisis. It represents risk of contagion and regulators aren't going to allow it.

They won't attack open protocols they will just pass regulatory requirements that they have to adhere to within a time frame, just like is currently happening in the EU right now. Anyone who doesn't comply by the deadlines they set will be arrested or fined. They already know exactly where all the devs for most major protocols live. They have been openly talking about it since 2018 but no one in crypto pays any attention because regulators move slowly, until one day they don't.

>>55853479
>paypig
Just outed yourself. Fuddies' poor impulse control can never stay hidden for long. Kek.

>>55866984
this guy fucks harder than anyone in this thread and is singlehandedly making this board worth lurking

>>55866997
Look at the price

>>55867010
oh no muh price is at 1c how unfortunate that i get to buy some before regulations force everyone in crypto to use this shit

>>55867021
Not ever gonna happen baggie

>>55867190

>>55864761
Look at the pic. Compound has been paying for the feeds since day 1.

>>55866984
I separate the two groups because the first will be easily controlled. The leet group will be harder to control. However the regulatory crackdown on DeFi protocols, as far as I was seeing, the US government had been leading the charge, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that EU is in support but not openly fumbling about like the US.

>>55853284
It’s dumping HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH

>>55868088
hahahahahah

>>55868068
Guys in crypto who are trying to stay off the grid will quickly find that they have very few avenues to cash out of and will have to live like North Koreans to avoid the law in Western jurisdictions. Only a few die hards will actually try that. The simple fact is that regulators are not going to allow a bunch of guys who were in crypto before regulation kicked in to have billions collectively floating around on the markets without KYC. I would not be surprised if many large holders haven't already been doxxed by intelligence agencies, most dev teams have been.

You should be watching what the EU is doing with MiCA because they're the canary in the coal mine for what the rest of the G7 are wanting. The US crackdowns have just been flexing of the muscles so far, and targeting fiat on/off ramps. By 2025-6 everyone will have either targeted DeFi or signaled their intention to take steps to do so. The consolation is that once that happens, you'll finally start to see mass tokenization of real world assets.

>>55853303
$6.16 how are you doing with your 100 link at $6.86?

reminder

>>55866973
of course he knew. He flat out lied, they didnt even start working on ccip then.

>>55868810
>>55868747
It’s funny thinking how both you baggies are in the red rn lmao

>>55868846
i bought below that, but there is more to life than immediate gains, such as being right

>>55868899
You probably did buy below but your overall buy in is still in the red. Don’t jinx yourself everfags

>>55868928
i lost more in unrealized gains on link than you will ever know, pajeet
everest doesnt faze me

>>55868899

>>55868949
heh. my man

>>55863685
rare good post

I work for one of the largest insurance companies and they have dedicated teams looking into blockchain solutions. There’s a huge push for IOT within the industry. It’s all coming together in time.
The balance between increased claim payouts, reduced G&A, premium increases and reserve limits relative to the opportunity for increased marketshare is an interesting problem, though.

>>55869193
Eric is that you?

>>55865012
There are insurance companies that cater to high net worth individuals. They cater to them in a sense that they reliably pay out their claims relative to your typical insurance company. The other side of that equation are increased premiums. Wealthy people are willing to pay these premiums for the peace of mind in knowing that their claim will likely be paid, and that they are not going to be screwed around by the insurer. These are some of the most lucrative markets within the insurance landscape.
Food for thought.

you don't see any new link memes anymore. the magic is gone. it really is over.

>>55870013
Um okay uh let me see just wait a second

How about.. Sergey Pantsarov, hey sergey, how about putting some trousers on!