/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>58404717
why don't you try the official discord?
pretty cool place, you can't even fud

>>58404726
I've been there and nobody talks about anything, it's like a handful of 3rd world devs trying to build their high school coding projects

>>58404730
oh
have you tried the chainlink twitter echo chamber?
you get to block all fudders there as well

>>58404742
twitter isn't really a discussion place, unless there's a twitter group or something?

>>58404749
/biz/ isn't really a discussion place either, you don't like the official chainlink discord, twitter doesn't suit you, I dunno man, r/LINKtrader is your best bet
if not, keep making threads here, but you'll get the same responses as always
>tnn
>cuckolding
>pool's closed
>1000000 banks
etc

>>58404756
are there twitter accounts you'd recommend where people have good discussions on their posts? LINKTrader is dead too.

>>58404762
Zach?
I mean if you don't believe the designated community liaison is doing a good job, I dunno what to tell you
if you're interested in technical discussions twitter is where you should go
there's nothing else left to discuss really, is it?

so far this email shit has cleansed the board a fair bit, so /biz/

>>58404717
baggiemingle.com

its a place where bagholders can meet up with other bagholders and share their DD and schizo ramblings

>>58404717
come to discord, all ogs are here
>discord(dog)gg(slash)eUpVuZbv

>I want a comfy echochamber with a bunch of stupid idiots like me!!! This place is a shithole I can't sniff my own farts in peace anymore!!!
Cry harder go to the discord and stay there nigger I sold for sol and now truf months ago and never looked back grow up

>>58405950
you probably are trying to save up to turn your penis into a vagina, though.

>>58404717
Everyone interesting in comfy chats sold at $50

first time back since the email verification
are the link niggers gone now?

Q1 roundup is out:
>https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-digital-asset-insights-q1-2024/

>>58407111
OK it's not the chainlink product roundup at all. More a brief overview of DeFi yield trends. Weird.

>>58404717
>>58404756
>>58406139
>>58407111

CHECKED BASED AND LPL CHUDDIE KIDDO PILLED

YOU SHOULD HAVE LISTENED ANON

WE FUCKING TOLD YOU

BUY LPL THE ONLY OFFICIAL WAY TO STEAK YOUR LINKIES

WHICH NODES WILL YOU STAKE WITH WITHOUT LPL LOL???

HOW WILL YOU BRIBE NODES TO STEAK YOUR LINK WITHOUT LPL???

NOW THE POOLS CLOSED AND ALL THE BASED KIDDOS ARE CHUDDIE

BASED LPL CHUDDIE KIDDOS STAY BASED AND CHUDDIE KIDDO PILLED LPL

HUH?

LPL

HUH?

>>58407111
I remember some anon saying that LINK won't move until DeFi (Chainlink services) start getting used a lot again and I guess pic related DeFi TVL pretty much confirms this.

>>58407140
Thanks for posting, anyway, fren. Supposedly they're going to publish a Q1 product update at some point. I don't really get why even post this blog, who cares about this stuff actually? What good does this do the team or investors? Do they not already have interest for these things they're building? Why did they build them, then?

>>58407465
Fishy Catfish explains all this, and more

>>58407504
that retard who thinks it's a well worthy endeavor to argue with quant baggies?

lmao

how much LINK does it cost to hire 24/7 pajeets to forward them to their cousins to scam them?

>>58407195
a lot of Defi is also just uniswap and other purely on-chain dapps that dont use LINK tho. and it seems that LINK movement has nothing to do with price anyways as the token is just a meaningless utility in between dollar payments currently

>>58407520
>>58407520
>it seems that LINK movement has nothing to do with price anyways as the token is just a meaningless utility in between dollar payments currently
Same is true for all of crypto, fundamentals are never connected to price. This is true even for Bitcoin.

>>58407530
not really. ETH has a legit proof of stake system with 26% of ETH being staked. BTC at least has the narrative of "store of value" so it makes sense to hold it, instead of swapping in and out of it. and other projects also have clear tokenomics, chainlink has none of that as of right now. staking is just a fixed yield drip from dev wallets, so more of an inflation hedge, although token inflation far outweighs the 4.2%

Is Sergey about to betray us again?

>>58407552
>>58407530
oh and ETH is burnt, of course. so all of that makes ETH of course pump so much harder than LINK and it is visible on the graph. i am just being objective (i hold a lot of link actually)

>>58407552
>>58407558
>ETH has a legit proof of stake system and is burnt
It didn't back when ETH actually made gains.
Ever since PoS, ETH price action has been shit.

>BTC at least has the narrative of "store of value"
It built that narrative from scratch on zero connection between fundamentals and price.

>>58407520
>a lot of Defi is also just uniswap
some of you just spew retarded bullshit. AAVE alone has nearly double the TVL of Uniswap

>>58407565
the halving is enough fundamentals for people to pump it. all sergey needs to do is to announce some utility for the token, that somehow makes LINK more scarce or more bought and used for longer. but he simply won't. who knows why. the supply just basically doubled since 2021, exactly when LINK began to lose all its gains it made until that point

>>58407574
>the halving is enough fundamentals for people to pump it
The halving offers zero direct connection between fundamentals and price.

>all sergey needs to do is to announce some utility for the token
He did that in May 2019.

>>58407574
btc halving isn't gonna pump shit because 95%+ of coins have already been issued
to the extent it would pump anything because of hype or whatever, that's already happened

>>58407571
And Eigenlayer is even bigger than AAVE, doesn't need Chainlink either. Also Uniswap has 4x the fees of AAVE, the most fees of any defi application. And LINK is involved in that exactly with 0.

>>58407586
>He did that in May 2019.
no he didnt.

>>58407588
>>58407586
you can argue this, but the reality is that 99% of maxis believe it is bullish. and it's gonna be tradfi's first big narrative as well, so they will shill the fuck out of it. i am not saying any of that shit makes sense, but it works. whatever LINK is doing doesnt work, and it hasnt worked for 3 years

>>58407465
>Q1 Product update
here I'll write it for you:
>We dindu NUFFIN!

>>58407601
See pic.
It's nodes getting paid in Link tokens for the price feeds.

>>58407607
>99% of maxis believe it is bullish
That's called speculation.
Both miners and maxis are speculating that the price will go up, because it has to in order to keep mining in its current form profitable.

>>58407615
>It's nodes getting paid in Link tokens for the price feeds.
this does nothing for the price of the token. Which is the point of crypto. Number go up = security. i would argue him dumping 14% a yead inflation is actually shit for the network

>>58407596
>doesn't need Chainlink
protocols within Eigenlayer do. a restaking protocol like Renzo (3 billion worth staked) uses Chainlink feeds, automation and CCIP

>>58407596
>Eigenlayer is even bigger than AAVE, doesn't need Chainlink either.
Anon, Eigenlayer is an ecosystem of a whole bunch of projects, the vast majority of which use Chainlink.

>>58407621
>this does nothing for the price of the token
Tell the guy who said Sergey needs to give the token some utility lmao

>>58407636
>>58407636
>Tell the guy who said Sergey needs to give the token some utility lmao
im telling you that you're wrong bro. The token is used to siphon money from the market in its current state. Sergey is dragging this out under the guise of "muh security first" even after the google guy going live is the bet way to test out anything.

>>58407649
My burden of proof was simply to show that the token has utility.
I have alleviated myself of said burden.

Local gas station level revenue for a price feed isn't enough to pump link, nor are the usual boring announcements that the official twitter comes up with.

What is needed is a community merger, which if there is enough pressure behind it will eventually result in a project merger as devs bend to the populist sentiment. This will get attention and build interest because nothing like it has ever been done before in crypto. XRP schizo community can merge with Link's community, because the two groups have so much in common to begin with. Both groups of bagholders for instance imagine that the global financial elite want to pump their bags even though their token does nothing but stagnate for years. This will greatly increase the size of the community and its collective coping ability. The merge can be supported by various memes about what the two will rebrand as. There's no point in denying this is the play for two very old stagnant coins.

>>58407656
that utility is just utility by fiat. you could change it to any token you want. it literally makes no difference if you do not need to buy LINK to use chainlink, and if the nodes don't have to keep LINK. then it's just an atomic swap with 0 slippage, in and out, and no price impact except for some tiny swap fee maybe to somebody. utility would be if value would be somehow stored in the LINK token, and the network would be incentivized to store more and more value in the LINK token when performing well in the chainlink network

>>58407656
yah im telling you its used to fund sergey and nops and not as intended. Im telling you that you are wrong. current utility (selling to cover costs and srgey dumping) is outpacing any buy pressure.

>>58407607
has everyone on /biz/ suffered brain damage recently or something
if 99% of people are bullish about something, it's probably bearish

>>58407657
i have never read something this derailed lmao

>>58407666
>you could change it to any token you want
Same with Bitcoin and ETH.
Hell, crypto doesn't even need a coin. Just make blocks with information only and hope nobody abuses the system.

>the nodes don't have to keep LINK
Same with any crypto mining.

>>58407670
You said Sergey didn't give the token any utility, and I proved otherwise.
I have no interest in your goalpost moves beyond that.

>>58407675
it's not about some narrative of the week, i am talking about those fundamentals. they matter in the long run, and we can see that. the halving is important because it tells people something gets more scarce. the same with ETH burning and staking. LINK is just an inflationary shittoken with none of those long term narratives at play. please explain this image to me with your understanding of whats going on

>>58407691
>the halving is important because it tells people something gets more scarce
There will only ever be 21 million Bitcoin and there will not be any more.
Emission rate doesn't change scarcity.

>>58407691
well, as Fishy would elegantly explain to you, "Sergey's dumps have no correlation to the price and this chart simply reflects the fact that this market is too retarded to understand LINK's value prop"
there, the man said it

>>58407703
>Sergey's dumps have no correlation to the price
Except they do

>>58407690
no you actually can't replace ETH by fiat. you can only stake ETH. only ETH can be used for transactions, and only ETH is burned by transactions. You can however, pay for LINK services in all kinds of ways, and your payment can be swapped to LINK and out of LINK in the same transaction and the same block if you want. Node operators do not want currency risk. I agree with you that BTC has no intrinsic value, but that's a unicorn. Larry Fink bought the narrative, so it is the narrative. LINK doesn't have either. No narrative, and no tokenomics that are redeemable.

>>58407712
>you can only stake ETH, and only ETH is burned by transactions
ETH made all of its gains before staking.

>>58407712
fun fact, only ETH can be used for LINK txs as well, cause you know, ERC token and shit

>>58407703
even if i grant you the wrong claim that the dumps have no correlation to the price (which makes no economical sense even in theory)... what is the value prop.

>>58407690
>You said Sergey didn't give the token any utility, and I proved otherwise.
you're definition of utility is being changed in order for you to win this discussion.

>>58407733
>what is the value prop
Same as Bitcoin's value prop.
Here it is, from the horse's mouth.

Is Link literally your first (crypto) investment?

>>58407733
something about quadrillions of dollars flowing through the Chainlink network and stuff

>>58407703
>as Fishy would elegantly explain to you
people still pay attention to that twat?

>>58407741
Utility means having a use.
Being required to power the price feeds is utility.

>>58407750
apparently

>>58407518
enterprise clients expect customer service

>>58407717
as did LINK before any of the products. then ETH became too inflationary and they adapted. if LINK doesn't do the same, it will simply go to ATL against ETH and BTC. by the way, pic related is exactly between the 6 months of ETH staking and burning launching. still think this has nothing to do with price? are you working for a central bank or something and you think money supply is just a magic number that has nothing to do with anything?

>>58407751
the original utility for the token was used for collateral to high value smart contracts, nothing about OTC sales, nothing about a white paper 2.0 etc etc.

>>58407759
true

>>58407762
>as did LINK before any of the products
If that were true it would support my point.

>>58407767
You keep moving the goalposts.

we're touching $12 again
oooooooooooooooooooooooo

>>58407773
you're definition of what utility is flawed in this case.

>>58407744
except that "users" in this case means something completely different. I use BTC to store my value and to pay for things. That's how I use Bitcoin, there is literally no other use. But when it comes to Chainlink, I can use it without even knowing that the token exists. I know that that's actually a heckin bullish adoption meme but it's really not. It means that the LINK token is just some friction in between payments in needed currencies. Unless Chainlink actually releases a real, crypto-economic system where the LINK token plays a role in securing value, the token is just objectively useless. And I know they're working on it. But really who knows, maybe we get v0.3 this year where the pool grows by another 10 million, and we get 0.1% less yield, and we can withdraw in 2 weeks instead of 90 days. Wouldn't change a fucking thing. The opportunity costs are growing and growing and it looks more and more like the token becomes an afterthought for Chainlink. And to be honest, it could very well become that way. It could become like IPFS where it is a good, decentralized network and it's working but there is simply no need for a token really.

>>58407789
The token is an unmissable key to the price feeds, and has been since day 1.

>>58407796
>I can use it without even knowing that the token exists
Exactly.
Anyone who ever used Defi has most likely made use of Link tokens. Which is exactly why massive Defi adoption is a monstrous speculative boon for Chainlink.

>>58407751
currently LINK is like a ticket for a concert. it really does not matter how the ticket looks like, and it is worthless after you used it. the ticket is just a means to move dollars from one pocket to the other, in exchange for the concert. but do tickets hold value after the concert happened? no you can rip them up, because the relevant value (usd) has already moved and the concert ticket has fulfilled its purpose. that is not value accruing utility, it is just a convenient middleman. now you can argue "but i can sell my concert tickets too for value" yeah but only if the concert space is scarce. that does not apply to LINK. if LINK were a concert ticket, it would be one that you can get for the same price 1 second before the concert starts, in fact at that point you can just pay cash and they let you in because there is no point in the ticket anymore as the transaction is already atomic at that point

>>58407804
yes for selling. Where is the utility?

>>58407819
>yes for selling
No, for delivering the data for the feeds.

>>58407818
>it really does not matter how the ticket looks like
lmao, I'm sure you'll get in bro

>>58407821
ok you were decent up until now, come on dude, that is embarrassing
shitposting aside, if we close the daily below $13ish, single digits are back on the menu

>>58407804
How can it be a speculative boom if people literally don't know that LINK tokens are involved? And even when they learn about it, they notice that the token is just a payment token that is sold by node operators to pay their bills the moment they receive it.

>>58407830
>How can it be a speculative boom if people literally don't know that LINK tokens are involved?
Because everyone keeps hearing that Link powers most of Defi.
People end up thinking Link is involved in things it isn't even actually involved in.

>>58407804
>>58407843
You don't understand how speculation works apparently.

Here's how it goes:
>Wowza Link is used for a bunch of stuff I suppose.. But it does not pump based on that utility use alone? It isn't worth that much then. Oh okay I will go look for something else to buy.

Kek we're gonna need more creative and out of the box thinking to pump Link: >>58407657

>>58407972
Right.
So all you need to do is find a way to keep Link from pumping on things like major Defi adoption news.

>>58407818
So in your analogy with Link being a concert ticket then the way staking factors in is if you hold 1000 tickets to the Tay Tay concert you get a share of her profits and get to stick your tongue up her butthole after the show, correct?

>>58408214
yes, thats why SWIFT (like Taylor Swift in the analogy)

>>58408231
Makes sense. Sure is quiet around here since the email verification thing. Guess the fudders really were just a few seriously mentally ill ranjeets

thread theme song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBIg7LEHs-0&ab_channel=PabloAcevedo

>>58408396
Don't worry, next time SOL and DOGE are making 40% daily gains while the cuckholds of crypto are sitting in the corner with their limp +0.3% gains you'll see a resurgence of fud.

>>58404717
nowhere, that shit is dead. Next line of Oracles to ape into;
>Pyth
>SupraLabs
>Redstone
>DIA

>>58404717
the unofficial telegram is decent, a few smart people and a lot of retards