/biz/ - Business & Finance

up

DYOR fucking retard

know what the sad part is? its usually really poor anons who post this kind of fud so they can "keep accumulating" putting in pennies from their mcdonald job, greedily wanting the price to remain low because they wish they had 20k to put in at once. One day all this fud will add up and you will wish you never posted it

Deluded linkies.

That said, I bought 200 LINK just in case. Probably getting exit scammed by Ser-gay but I would fucking hate to kms if it ever becomes that expensive.

Also, there's no way LINK could ever hope to become $1k, because why the fuck would a company spend so much money to use LINK when they could just make their own LINK copy or use the myriad of other LINK clones that will surely pop up if LINK is successful?

>>6803287
why? I don't want you and "hundreds of other people" to buy. If you buy, link gets expensive and I want to buy more.

he's a pajeet shill. Literally every fucking thread here that talks about a single coin or token is an echo chamber.

This image tells you everything you need to know about link.
No more research, reading white papers or whatever bs.

>>6803287
The token is like a ticket to ride a plane. The LINK token allows people to use the chainlink network. The decentralized network where smartcontracts are able to be securely paired off to external data. The security that the chainlink network allows theoretically allows for high value usage of smart contracts in remittances, derivatives markets, insurance contracts. The reason we are only seeing smart contracts utilised as token exchangers is because decentralized oracles do not exist and data is not secure enough to trust.

>>6803287
basically this is the direction crypto has been headed toward from the beginning.

currency (btc) --> blockchain (eth) --> smart contracts (link)

It is the first movie of a potentially world changing sphere, and being in the right place and time, has partnerships under NDA with swift and major players.

It makes ripple look like a fucking joke. if we do ripples #s we'd already be worth $150 rn.

whatever led you here, you basically lucked into the next Ethereum

20.000$ eoy

>>6803287
>It's going to $1000/token minimum

Linkies are so fucking deluded
Even more than ARKies

The DEVS THEMSELVES HAVE SAID THAT THERE IS NO POINT IN HAVING LINK COST MORE THAN A CUP OF COFFEE

It's going to maybe $3.50, tops. That's if it REALLY catches on, but I doubt it.

Once smartcontracts infiltrate derivative markets it’s over. Everyone knows this is inevitable. ChainLink is how those smartcontracts can talk to off-chain information. It’s perfect.

Link puts me at a loss for words

>>6803568
it is a bit annoying, but a lot of them think this is some pajeet shit that sounds too good to be true. they weren't around seeing ethereum go up 1000x, what happens when a first mover meets its time.

>>6803641
Hhhmmm. Yummy new tasty FUD pasta!

omnomnomnomnom

>>6803287
Hey faggotron, anon here that you screen capped. Don't expect other people to do your research.

As I warned you in the other thread don't buy into LINK. It's a Pajeet scam coin and it already got shadow forked and is useless.

>>6803568
this

>>6803802
I bought 5k LINK at $0.33 months ago and held them during the prolonged dip below that.

But I still have no fucking idea what it does. People toss buzzwords around. "Dude smart contracts lmao." Fuck off. What is the actual use of it for corporations? It's a currency. How is it more "secure" than USD or credit? What exactly is it replacing? Lawyers? Literally what?

>>6803287
He's right you know.

>>6803428
literally kill yourself

>>6803287
Wait the major claim to fame for link is 'it connects to an api', holy fuck

>>6803938
You have no idea what you're talking about dumbfuck, go read a whitepaper for once before you make a fool of yourself. Nobody here has any obligation to spoon feed you, either figure it out yourself or fuck off; you don't contribute anything here.

OP do you know what the internet is?

Imagine carving up the entire value of the internet into only 1 billion pieces, and having the chance to buy those pieces for under $1.

That's what LINK is.

>>6804114
MY DICK IS SO HARD

holy fuck and they have the balls to call arkies deluded

>>6803287
i see why people hate link holders. Im tired of seeing these fucking threads. buy it or fuck off

>>6804108
I am sorry that explaining something to another human being is very hard and threatening for you. I take it you majored in computer science. We will find a cure for autism one day.

>>6804114
Something tells me that is not right. I don;'t even know if you're joking or not.

fags buy a coin and haven't even read the whitepaper

>>6803938
This is why people say DYOR, because you're asking too many disparate questions.
Go read the whitepaper, go read an informational guide, literally do the smallest amount of research and you'll answer all of your questions.

Here's a sample: it allows dApps to connect to off-chain APIs and data fees.

If you don't see why this applies to corporations, what this means for blockchain development, and can't conjecture what the LINK token will be used for I can only assume the following:
a) you literally have done no research
b) you probably don't have the slightest idea what smart contracts are, what dApps are trying to do, and what all of these mean for disrupting legacy business
c) you unironically deserve to be poor if you're FUDing a project that you invested in without doing the bare minimum amount of research

>>6804148
right there with you

>>6804224
he is right except its more like a utility of the internet, so it's like carving up http requests, or 'having a stake in electricity'. link's value is too abstract right now because its the very first of its kind so no one can wrap their head around it.

>>6804224

Nah it is right. I'm not even being all that metaphorical with it. Data is the new oil, and at this point its like LINK is the only oil rig manufacturer.

I'm a developer for a living, which helps weed out the genuinely interesting from the novelty science projects a bit. Blockchain tech and dApps are still such a new concept that its like we're being a chance to invest not just in apps, but in protocols that will go on to become standards. LINK is the only project aiming to solve the Oracle problem in a way that could feasibly go on to become the standard, and with the partnerships they have lined up (zeppelin_os, SWIFT, likely Docusign), it seems increasingly likely that they actually will go on to become the standard for getting data into and out of blockchains.

Think of Ethereum like a decentralized computer, but one without an internet connection. You can have your dumb CryptoKitty games on it, but most of its abilities are cut off without the ability to talk to other systems. LINK really does stand to become the internet for the dApp era.

>>6803938
>It's a currency.

What the fuck.

>>6803641
Then why does it have 18 decimals?

Good try though.

>>6804224
I actually did major in Computer Science because it has some real value unlike most other shit. Anyways, I can't be bothered to explain a thing to you because you haven't shown anyone that you're worth giving an explanation to, you clearly haven't bothered to do your own research about what Chainlink solves; you just want to be spoonfed like the chubby little baby you are. You don't deserve a slice of our pie, go buy ripple instead.

>>6804363
But you can store data on the blockchain already without link?? dapps are already working without link?

>>6804337
this realization hits me in wave; like when you're on shrooms and think for a few moments you've sobered up only to start seeing monkeys again and the ride continues. i'm not sure it's a possibility i can accept.

>>6804363
Okay. Thank you for the real explanation.

This shit is way over my head. Two summers ago I dated a girl who was doing her masters in data science at University of Chicago and I never understood a thing she said. I understand "data" and "big data" and all that are exploding right now, but it's very difficult to understand as a layman what you guys are even talking about when you use the term "data," and how or why this is some new thing. And especially how something like ChainLink puts a price on it.

>>6804484
I already said I own 5k link which i bought at $0.33.

Also I am not chubby.

>>6804533
Block size is limited, can only store so much data 'within' a 'coin', scarcity creates value

>>6803287
tfw there is already a crypto that deals with the derivatives market

>>6804571
Sell me some on the next dump, I'll gladly take them off your hands. Maybe you could try and download some more brain cells online so you might be able to understand how fucking important it is that you hold onto those links you have.

Bitcoin super conference when?

>>6803287
fuck off pol subhuman

>>6803536
>Also, there's no way LINK could ever hope to become $1k, because why the fuck would a company spend so much money to use LINK when they could just make their own LINK copy or use the myriad of other LINK clones that will surely pop up if LINK is successful?

LINKLARP is the highest form of PoMo art and entertainment on the whole of the internet.

>>6804896
but why?

>>6804668
I'm not selling.

My desire to understand LINK has nothing to do with what I'm doing with the investment.

Sometimes you computer science nerds have no idea what insufferable, self-important assholes you act like and then you wonder why you can't get laid. I majored in English and psychology and have never been such a condescending twat when someone asks me something about these things. You are truly a cruel and awful person. Have a nice night.

>>6804954

>why would companies use microsoft word when they can just make their word processor software?

I'm starting to do research on mobious. Getting a bit worried. Not gonna lie.

>>6804954
More trust behind LINK
Seriously you think anyone's going to use the Pajeetcoin Mobius

>>6803938
It solves the oracle problem

OP the name is pretty self explanatory.
Links blockchains together like how the internet links computers together.
Pretty fuckin easy to understand.

>>6805021
This is a good question
Libreoffice does the same thing as Microsoft Office but is free

>>6803287

can someone explain to a normie where I would find the cost savings in my contracts escrows and laws by using chainlink

LINK is the ultimat pajeet coin.

You completely miss the purpose of this coin if you believe that it could ever eventually go every close to those prices.
It couldn't be possible to use it at those price you damn retards.

There's 350million link tokens circulating with a total of 1billion, right? Can you guys name me one $5+ coin with 300 million+ circulating?

>>6805021
>making a token with one click is the same as writing 100k lines of code.

>>6805073
No, it does not do the same things. Have you ever properly used office?

>>6805133
No not really
Anytime I want to do anything advanced I just use LaTeX like someone with at least an eighth of a brain would

>>6805105

>>6805097

>>6805177
this guy fucks

>>6805007
>I picked the most reddit majors of them all
Don't blame me for your inability to do the most basic research before sharing your ignorant opinion on a chilean salsa dancing forum. I wouldn't have acted the way I did towards you if you didn't say some of the dumbest shit I've ever heard in your original post, do your own research before making yourself look like an idiot. Also, I have no issues getting laid, your wife tastes fantastic; goodnight sweetheart.

>>6805104
EOS and ICON.

This has been a good thread and I've learned nothing from it. Let's keep it going.

>>6805104
EOS, ICX.

Now what?

>>6805177
You underestimate office. Latex is good, I use it too. But word has many many things under the hood. I'm sure that there are YouTube videos on the advanced stuff. It is worth knowing.

i mean biz shilled omisego until link came along and its been nonstop shilling and it literally is the worst project even worse than pajeet scamcoins because they think it was going to be used by swift lol

>>6805073
It is silly because crypto relies on decentralized trust, if you run a centralized crypto you myswell deploy a traditional solution

>>6804896

kind of like how nobody uses mac/dell and everyone is using eMachines and compaq?

>>6805007
> I majored in English and psychology

>>>/lit/ is that way brainlet.

>>6805097
>LINK is not dividable. Forget about the 18 decimals
>Costs to pay node operators is set in stone at 10 LINK

I'll just assume you're fucking around.

>>6805224
Good night is two words, I am not married, and you have no idea how semicolons work. Also paying backpage hookers to condom blowjobs doesn't count as "getting laid."

>>6805104
the majority of the tokens are going to be held by large node operators (corporations) so just consider them nonexistent. The price is going to go way up when the actual available supply starts shrinking

>>6805021
>>6804896

Lol, spoken like a true fucking brainlet.

Microsoft Word is around the same price as its competitors. Difference is about 20% at most.

Now compare that with a $100 LINK vs $5 new competitor. It makes NO sense for a company to use LINK at that point. Also, the new guy will probably have more innovation as well.

>>6805352
The FUD in chainlink runs so deep man. Deeper than any coin I've ever seen.

>>6803287
love chainlink

>>6805364
Go back to pleddit if you want to correct grammer, no one gives a shit here.

>>6805386
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU EVEN TALKING ABOUT NOBODY IS GOING TO BE BUYING TOKENS WHEN THIS THING GOES LIVE

>>6805386
Are you fucking brainlet? Single token price doesn’t matter to companies unless they want set up the node

>>6805364
>Good night is two words
some might say it's, interlinked.

>>6805386

HAHAHHAHAH so fucking dumb.

>>6803287
Ah welcome. I see you have joined us. Have you set up your MEw yet to purchase your LINK? I would be happy to help you.
Praise kek and his prophet Sergey!
I think you will like it here anon.

>>6805386

>>6805390
There genuinely are a lot of brainlets who simply are incapable of understanding what LINK really does.

We had the same type of fucking brainlets last year who didn't understand what a smartcontract was, so for them it meant that Ethereum was shit.

>>6803287
Microsoft and IBM are building their own oracles. No one's going to use Chainlink, but since it's the only oracle with a token you can trade on exchanges, it gets shilled daily.

>>6805425
>Go back to pleddit if you want to correct grammer, no one gives a shit here.
Back to krautchan I go then.

>>6805447
Shut up, faggot.

>>6805500
>Microsoft and IBM are building their own oracles.

>>6805386
LibreOffice is completely free. Not a single company I've worked for uses it.

Also, you don't need LINK to host a node, its actually for micropaying reputable nodes.

jesus christ the brainlet memes are killing me

>>6805386
LINK is only used by the node operators. End users of the smart contract oracle solutions never have to buy link lmao. It is solely used to pay people to run nodes in exchange for their processing power to confirm the contracts. This is the part that makes us rich. Centralised oracle solutions won't. LINK needs us as much as we need LINK. LINK is love, LINK is life.

>>6805364
A;m I ;us;ing my s;emicol;ons pr;oper;ly n;ow;? Regardless, you should do your own research before coming here and asking questions that let everyone know you're a brainlet.

>>6805494
So true, they thought if we have normal contracts why the fuck would we need a smart-contract. Or we can simply add smart-contracts to all cryptos because we can't possibly justify Etheruems price.

Soon my friend.. They will all neck themselves.

>>6805549
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-gb/blog/scanatomy-2/

>>6804896
nice rebuttal, lol

>>6803287
The pajeet in your screencap is delusional. ChainLink will not replace the entire derivatives market. But that doesn't mean it's useless. It definitely has a lot of potential to be something big. Having a decentralized network of oracles will vastly increase the real-world utility of smart contracts and the whole thing is going to boom for a bit when a new DApp-focused software stack is developed and every webdev hops in on the smart contract meme. Right now DApps are limited by their lack of ability to access any data that's not stored on the blockchain.

ChainLink will probably be a part of any decentralized software stack that's used in the mid-term. Whether something eventually comes along to replace it is anyone's guess but ChainLink has an advantage of being the first mover here. Look at Bitcoin, a totally useless and broken shitcoin but everyone still uses it because it came along first.

>>6804363
Can you imagine the power of link + fct.

God fucking damnit it's so incredible that I almost don't care about the fact that I'm a sweaty, out-of-shape social outcast with nothing going for him (not larping).

>>6805386
im not even going to bother reading the replies to this one. i see 6 replies and i know youre getting fucked reemed by every single one of them. idiot.

>>6805021
this wojack is the one true wojack

>>6805326
Holy fuck. I forgot about eMachines. I sold and worked on those fuckers at Best Buy back in early 2000's

20,000? how retarded are you guys?

>>6803938
It's not a currency, retard. Neither it's a platform or a crypto.
It's a network to link all the blockchains to other blockchains and to banks. The only use LINK token has is to get the network nodes running. It's like a share in the internet if such thing would exist.

>>6805850
You clearly didn't read the whitepaper. Wire transfers take too long and are too expensive. The whole banking and stock industry will be moving to blockchains for fiat transfers.
That's the main point of LINK.

>>6806401
quadrillion market industry...anything is possible anon

>>6806408
So why is a ChainLink for sale?

Since when does the internet work like this?
It's like holding technology hostage.

>>6803287
You can't shut the fuck about LINK can you? You can't stop thinking about it. It's been months, and you're still talking about it. How can you not see how big this is going to be?

>>6806621
To get a node running you need LINK.
It works exactly like masternodes do with normal coins. And you get paid in LINK for transfers your node does.

It's basically a way for the banks to have a stable decentralized transfer network for pennies, because they don't have to build the infrastructure themselves.

>>6806702
>How can you not see how big this is going to be?
>You can't shut the fuck about LINK can you?
...?

>>6806737
Do you need some assistance?

>>6806721
But banks are doing fine.
Why do they need this new, mysterious tech?

>>6806752
Why would anyone shut up about something as big as LINK is supposed to be?

>>6806754
>But banks are doing fine.
7 day wire transfers are not fine. They are already starting to get fucked in the ass by digital currencies and paypal. They either jump on blockchain or they are fucked.

LINK a shit

>>6804495

dApps are working, but the scope of their data is limited to the smart contracts the data is being used from. That data can't travel say from EtherDelta to CryptoKitties because they have no way to communicate, and no agreed upon protocol to enable them to.

Its not that data can't currently exist on the blockchain, data is what the blockain is. Its that getting data into and out of the blockchain currently has no standard way of handling it, so dApps have no way to speak the same language.

Chainlinks network not only allows data to flow in both directions, which will allow blockchain tech to finally eat the world, but the model its aiming for is the first and only that could go onto become a standard, similar to HTTP being the standard way your browser talks to a server.

>>6806754
>But banks are doing fine.

Nigger, are you fucking serious? Banks have been drooling all over the possibility of utilizing smartcontracts ever since Ethereum became known to the public last year.

Now, what stops them from utilizing smartcontracts? The one thing that LINK provides, and will be the first to provide.

>>6807037
>The one thing that LINK provides, and will be the first to provide.

The lack of*

>>6806841
To me this just seems like an issue with how blockchain itself is utilized, but I can certainly see the inherent value of a decentralized oracle system if such a thing can exist.

>>6806841
>>6807037
>>6807069
you both drank the kool-aid. or at least too much.

Chainlink solves this problem right? (article at coindesk)

Why Many Smart Contract Use Cases Are Simply Impossible

1. Contacting external services

Often, the first use case proposed is a smart contract that changes its behavior in response to some external event. For example, an agricultural insurance policy which pays out conditionally based on the quantity of rainfall in a given month.

The imagined process goes something like this: The smart contract waits until the predetermined time, retrieves the weather report from an external service and behaves appropriately based on the data received.

This all sounds simple enough, but it’s also impossible. Why? Because a blockchain is a consensus-based system, meaning that it only works if every node reaches an identical state after processing every transaction and block.

Everything that takes place on a blockchain must be completely deterministic, with no possible way for differences to creep in. The moment that two honest nodes disagree about the chain's state, the entire system becomes worthless.

Now, recall that smart contracts are executed independently by every node on a chain. Therefore, if a smart contract retrieves some information from an external source, this retrieval is performed repeatedly and separately by each node. But because this source is outside of the blockchain, there is no guarantee that every node will receive the same answer.

Perhaps the source will change its response in the time between requests from different nodes, or perhaps it will become temporarily unavailable. Either way, consensus is broken and the entire blockchain dies.

So, what’s the workaround? Actually, it’s rather simple. Instead of a smart contract initiating the retrieval of external data, one or more trusted parties ("oracles") creates a transaction which embeds that data in the chain. Every node will have an identical copy of this data, so it can be safely used in a smart contract computation.

>>6807173
In other words, an oracle pushes the data onto the blockchain rather than a smart contract pulling it in.

When it comes to smart contracts causing events in the outside world, a similar problem appears. For example, many like the idea of a smart contract which calls a bank’s API in order to transfer money. But if every node is independently executing the code in the chain, who is responsible for calling this API?

If the answer is just one node, what happens if that particular node malfunctions, deliberately or not? And if the answer is every node, can we trust every node with that API's password? And do we really want the API called hundreds of times? Even worse, if the smart contract needs to know whether the API call was successful, we're right back to the problem of depending on external data.

As before, a simple workaround is available. Instead of the smart contract calling an external API, we use a trusted service which monitors the blockchain’s state and performs certain actions in response. For example, a bank could proactively watch a blockchain and perform money transfers which mirror the on-chain transactions. This presents no risk to the blockchain’s consensus because the chain plays an entirely passive role.

Looking at these two workarounds, we can make some observations.

First, they both require a trusted entity to manage the interactions between the blockchain and the outside world. While this is technically possible, it undermines the goal of a decentralized system.

Second, the mechanisms used in these workarounds are straightforward examples of reading and writing a database. An oracle which provides external information is simply writing that information into the chain. And a service which mirrors the blockchain’s state in the real world is doing nothing more than reading from that chain. In other words, any interaction between a blockchain and the outside world is restricted to regular database operations.

>>6807101

I'm a developer who's been into blockchains since before BTC reached dollar parity when it was first getting talked about on /g/.

I remember Ethereum when it was just a whitepaper.

I say with absolutely no irony, LINK is the first project since Ethereum that's made my jaw drop and made me say aloud "Holy fuck... this is the future"

Anyone who's been in this game long enough can see that LINK is the epoch of a new era in blockchain tech. Any newfags who bought into crypto in 2017 can't see the forest for the trees and for the most part don't understand anywhere near enough about the technology they throw their money at.

I can tell which you are...

>>6807173
Yes. That's why everyone is getting such a hard-on for LINK. The problem has been known ever since Ethereum came out.

Like I said earlier, banks and a bunch of other institutions have had their dick hard for smart contracts for about a year. LINK will be the first in line to make it possible for them to utilize smart contracts in the real world.

>>6807037
I trust money skeleton in saying it’s hard to justify oracles being expensive

>>6807288
Money skeleton thinks Ethereum is worth $7.

Will you short Ethereum now?

>>6807260
>Like I said earlier, banks and a bunch of other institutions have had their dick hard for smart contracts for about a year


Far longer than that friend. Banks were into Ethereum before it was even launched. I heard about Ethereum from a friend who works at a bank who was tasked with researching blockchain tech/smart contracts back when Ethereum was just a whitepaper.

They've been eying this tech for a long time now, and waiting for something exactly like LINK to let them start adopting DLT without having to start from scratch. This board has absolutely no fucking idea where this coin is heading.

>>6807325
>This board has absolutely no fucking idea where this coin is heading.
This board has a good idea, that's why we are hoarding LINK.
And it's not a coin.

>>6807255
yes and i bought amazon stock in the early 2000s and see that your a retard

>>6807325

Some of us know.

>>6807359

I knew someone would point out that I called it a coin kek. Still haven't broken that habit. Everything was a coin when I started, and I'm not changing. Get off my lawn goddamnit!

>>6803287
might want to get on LINK 2.0, the former isn't worth its weight anymore

>>6807375

> can't spell you're
> buys obvious stock pick
> thinks he's a genius

grats on being a lucky brainlet

Are there any competitors to link?

>>6806834
I don't want to be successful.

>>6807550
Not any serious ones that are even close to launching their mainnet. Mobius finished their ICO last week, and consists of a bunch of pajeets.

Unless Sergey or Steve goes into a psychosis and manages to destroy all the work they've done so far, LINK will be the first out the door.

>>6807550
None that are anywhere as reputable or even as far along in their progress as LINK is, or offering a platform that has all the security and scalability features LINK has

>>6807550

The closest thing is Oraclize, but they've opted for a centralized model for oracles which likely won't go onto become the standard because of that.

To put why in the plainest terms I can, LINK's solution is like HTTP, the protocol your browser uses to talk to websites. Oraclize's solution would be like if AOL had come out with their own internet protocol and expected everyone to adopt it as the standard.

Developers are what will push blockchain tech forward, and developers won't trust something like Oraclize as the standard. Chainlink's partnership with zeppelin_os also ensures that Chainlink will become the standard because it will become the default oracle for all future dApps.

So... there's kind of a competitor... but there's not really any competition.

>>6807710
Interesting.

From what I've read, a centralized model for oracles would defeat the purpose of smart contracts.

>>6805704
how do i buy this coin??

>>6808527
I like how all of the LINK stats are made pulled out of thin air.

>>6805604
>It is solely used to pay people to run nodes in exchange for their processing power to confirm the contracts.

It's almost like people don't want to pay thousands of dollars for LINK when you can do the same thing with a competitor for 1/10th of the price.

The absolute state of linkies

>>6808728
Of course you want when all traffic goes trough chainlink

>>6808728
There is no competitor. Mobius has a pajeet team, no partnerships and no proof of concept.
If your CEO is a pajeet, you know it's a scam.

>>6808887
Mobius team also said they have no interest in moving it to other exchanges. They are only focussing and caring about their dapp store now.

50k EOY

DYOR retard

>>6808728
THEY AREN'T PAYING FOR LINK TOKENS U FUCKIN DUMMY. USING THE ORACLES DOESNT COST SHIT. IF YOU WANT TO HOOK UP YOUR API TO A BLOCKCHAIN, THAT IS SOMETHING ELSE COMPLETELY THAN RUNNING A NODE.

LINK is used to pay the node operators. Large nodes will have lots of LINK they stake, will be highly trusted with sensitive contracts. There will be an incentive to hoard, not sell, for node operators, driving up the value

Nobody else explain it to him he is a fucking brainlet if he doesn't get it at this point

>>6809114
to add to this, think of it like owning land or something

2k linklet here. I'm going to run my node using trusted hardware (when they get that shit sorted) and get those sensitive contract big bucks.

>>6809114

i'm both confused and retarded
so who decides how much LINK a node receives
and who would the people who operate nodes sell their LINK to in order to cash out

>>6809220
ohhh pajeet, shit or get off the street.

>>6809241
everyone will want link. literally everyone.

>>6809220
do we have to run nodes off this r cn we just buy link coins and hodl?

>>6809256

but like what would people need LINK for if it's not to pay node operators
like who is spending LINK is my question

>>6803536
>Why buy avocado's and strawberries for import prices if you can grow them in your Backyard

>>6809345
The banks are spending links to keep the nodes running.

>>6805386
HAHAHA this fucking kid actually was insulting someone else being this fucking braindead, jokes on you kid cya in the obituaries when u inevitably kill yourself

>>6809345
Smart contracts that use the network have to send LINK tokens to node operators. Node operators set their own prices.

>>6808326

Basically yes. The real value of smart contracts/dApps is that they can be/are decentralized, so building on a centralized model for your data does basically defeat the purpose. The internet itself is decentralized, and the future of our technology is following that trend so when you're looking at something that could become a protocol, and you've given the choice between centralized and decentralized, always bet on decentralization winning.

>have link
>sell link to bank
>bank pays you link to use node
>repeat
It's fucking glorious.

>>6805247
>>6805285
Alright you win this round but I'll be back with a better argument you'll see

>>6806834
I've been and unsuccessful millionaire for years?

>>6809259
Of course you can hodl, but running a node is just putting a little bit of computer skills and making a basic server (or renting one through cloud services) where you get paid more LINK for hodling over time.

Link protocol is going to evolve into the future AI overlord's mechanism for reaching statistical certainty about non-machine events. Invest in link and you invest in the profitable obsolescence of humankind.

>>6808527
Is this some kind of 4d link hype?

IS LINK MOONING US AGAIN??

>>6810745
I least we know the Jews will die too.

>>6805386
Quality shitpost

>>6810847
Pnd cycle memecoin

>>6809114
>There will be an incentive to hoard, not sell
Why?
I mean really Why?

>>6811109
right, almost forgot

>>6811109
I'm attending the super bitcoin conference on feb 16 and Sergey will be there. What should I do there?

>>6811175
because link is the ticket to access automated smart contracts that interact with real life events. if it's adopted then literally ALL commerce connected to the blockchain will require link.

>>6811218
Please just listen to Sergey

>>6811279
...yea, but should I give him a 100% LINK Paul Allen card?

>>6805562
Same, this thread is gold

>>6805084
It's a lot of effort to manage contracts.
Creating them, agreeing on them, signing them, having them be confirmed officially, having the conditions controlled and most importantly having the funds distributed according to the contract's outcome.
With chainlink you create a contract, wait for someone to agree on it, and done. The rest is done trustlessly and automatically. People won't be able to accept contracts without intending to pay out anytime soon.

>>6811314
of course, and a happy meal

>>6811314
Tell him we will hunt him down if he doesn't deliver soon.
He shouldn't mess with cultists.

Shall I sell all my XRB and go all in on LINK?

>>6811578
might actually do this
>>6811825
I'll be in public, come up with something better

>>6811218

Livestream it for us?!?! PLEASE OP I will donate some Linkies if you stream it!

>>6812055
>I'll be in public, come up with something better
Just pass the message.
If testnet isn't rolling out my March, we know where he lives.

>>6803287

It's a complete sham OP. Decentralization doesn't magically solve the oracle problem. Sergey is just kicking the can down the road and passing the buck to the data providers. When I think of decentralized oracles I think of the problems of data accuracy and sibyl attacks. He acknowledges both of these in the whitepaper but laughably dismisses them in one or two sentences. These problems should be the main topic of the whitepaper. Regarding data accuracy:

>A simple way to deal with a faulty single source Src is to obtain data from multiple sources, i.e., distribute the data source. A trustworthy ORACLE can query a collection of sources Src1, Src2, . . . , Srck, obtain responses a1, a2, . . . , ak, and aggregate them into a single answer A = agg(a1, a2, . . . , ak). ORACLE might do this in any of a number of ways. One, for example, is majority voting. If a majority of sources return the identical value a, the function agg returns a; otherwise it returns an error.

So an oracle's accuracy depends entirely on its data-sources. Well what if they are all identically wrong? And all the oracles agree on the incorrect data? The oracles will be like lemmings jumping off a cliff.

Regarding Sibyl attacks:

>With sufficient demand for an oracle provider’s data, we expect there to be enough economic incentive to justify off-chain audits of oracle providers, confirming compliance with relevant security standards, such as relevant controls in the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix [26], as well as providing useful security information that they conduct proper audits of oracles’ source and bytecode for their smart contracts.

Jesus christ, this solves fucking nothing. Decentralize everything just to create too-big-to-fail oracles. This hasn't been thought through at all.

>>6812158
>>6812380
I'm not OP. I will not be able to livestream it because it is a private event. They might give me some sort of recording afterwords though, not sure yet. I'll be taking paper notes regardless, and will update 4chan

>>6812457
You didn't read the whitepaper, did you? The nodes are designed to take data from multiple sources and calculate the mean average. If there is a strongly deviating data, the majority of trusted sources counts as truth. So in 80% of sources report same data with minor deviations and 20% show major deviations, the 20% gets thrown out and the mean average is calculated based on the remaining 80%.

>>6803287
Its really crazy boys, I can almost shed tears. I remember 3+ years ago talking to people on how and when we will get a decentralized Oracle.

Back then, We thought it was possible to maybe code it into the Bitcoin network itself, and that each bitcoin wallet would also serve as a decentralized oracle provider. We quickly realized how stubborn the bitcoin network is and gave up on it.

Along came Ethereum, and now along comes chainlink. I love you guys. We will make this together. Life is truly beautiful at times.

>>6812457
>So an oracle's accuracy depends entirely on its data-sources. Well what if they are all identically wrong? And all the oracles agree on the incorrect data? The oracles will be like lemmings jumping off a cliff.

Its a possibility, sure, but each nodes receive a reputation scores. There's essentially a monetary incentive to achieve correct information.

But The perimeters are taken from a group average, so if a couple nodes give incorrect information, it wont matter because it will receive the correct perimeters from the remaining 95% nodes.

>>6812846
fuck. these threads make me want to increase my link position

>>6813096
Patience friend. Do not be slaughtered like a hog.

>>6813096
do it anon, you are in safe hands

>>6813096
Corporal reporting in for duty. What's your rank?

>>6813153
patience in what regard my interlinked brother

>>6813249
In that sense that there is still a lot of time before this market takes off.

We arent going to see $300 link anytime this month or the next.

>>6813209
Sergeant Major, at ease

>>6803287
He's right about literally everything, except the part where he thinks it isn't for normies.

Chainlink is shaping up to be the first and only true key to mainstream smart contracts.
Look up what smart contracts are and do.
Basically they are a peer-to-peer agreement/contract system. That means literally all of the services provided by banks, insurance companies, investment firms, ... can be supplanted by community-based initiatives that run on smart contracts.
Loans, insurances, investment funds, ... could all be set up, financed, managed, ... by crowdfunding, crowdmanagement, ... all based on the secure backbone provided by smart contracts, which cut out middlemen like bankers, insurance brokers, even attorneys and judges (to an extent, of course).

Yes, industry adoption will blast the price into the outer reaches of the galaxy.
HOWEVER, this is peanuts compared to what would happen in case of absolute mainstream adoption by the public at large.

>>6803604
mhm

>>6813009

Nobody knows what the "correct" answer is. That's the thing that we are trying to agree on here. If we knew the correct answer there would be no need for these oracles in the first place. The only way we can approximate it is by some majority consensus of the nodes. But realistically we could have 20 oracles that are all getting their data from 2 corrupt sources, in which case there will be a consensus but it's the WRONG consensus.

>>6813326
Then those Nodes would receive poor reputations and receive less and less work on the network. Those that receive good reputation will continually receive more work. A single wrong consensus is not the end of this project.

Almost like a natural selection so to speak.

>cultists it
lmao. if this isnt a sign not to buy idk what is. don't drink the koolaid anons

>>6805059
That's not what chain link does at all. You're describing ark.

>>6813646
Its quite funny because I can remember the sentiment of ETH of /biz/ back when it was sub $0.80.

Very cult like following. Only FUD came very much like yours. Nothing really to back it up. Chainlink really does have quite the familiar feel. Remember this boy.

>>6813646
stay poor plebbit

>>6807173
>>6807201
This article is basically one big advertisement for decentralized oracles, i.e. Chainlink.

>This all sounds simple enough, but it’s also impossible. Why? Because a blockchain is a consensus-based system, meaning that it only works if every node reaches an identical state after processing every transaction and block.
>Everything that takes place on a blockchain must be completely deterministic, with no possible way for differences to creep in.

Anyone who has half read the Chainlink white paper knows that Chainlink completely wrecks this logic.

1) with Chainlink, the metric that has to be identical across all nodes, is the metric from a single data source.
The point is to have several nodes querying and processing the very same weather report, for instance. In this case, the results of the different nodes should indeed all be identical.

2) obviously, significant weather-based smart contracts such as in this example would ideally not be based on a single weather report source, and would definitely be set to a certain range of temperatures, rainfall, ... within which the contract is triggered.
In practice, you'd have various weather report sources in various places providing data to the smart contract; whereby each and every source is queried by a number of nodes to provide the security of decentralization.

>recall that smart contracts are executed independently by every node on a chain.
Lmao.
This is so very obviously not about Chainlink.

>But if every node is independently executing the code in the chain, who is responsible for calling this API?
The client.

>If the answer is just one node, what happens if that particular node malfunctions, deliberately or not?
With Chainlink, the whole point is to have more than "just one node".

>if the smart contract needs to know whether the API call was successful, we're right back to the problem of depending on external data.
This is exactly the point of Chainlink.

>>6804495
>But you can store data on the blockchain already without link?? dapps are already working without link?
Link is for external data.
Dapps run on internal blockchain data.

>>6803536
This
Only retards are saying that an erc29 could hit that price
Both eth and neo skyrocketed because they allow people to buy ICOs
You can't do shit with link
It might be useful for banks sure. It could hit 5$ being extremely optimistic.

>>6803287
Seriously... why could this coin NOT reach $100?

I mean, look at ETH, NEO etc.
Sure they're built on creating ICO's, but LINK is built on Oracles. Oracles are rewarded with LINK. In 5 years time, when airports are using Oracles for weather data, when insurance companies are using Oracles for speed readings, when police are using Oracles for forensic application, when cyber security applications are using Oracles for public key encryption, when applications are using Oracles for authentication, when cloud hosting providers are using Oracles for traffic analysis, when retail firms are using Oracles for validating their till balances, when audit firms are using Oracles for invoice validation, when manufacturing firms are using Oracles for product quality control, when freight companies are using Oracles for logistics handling, when GPS providers / Google Earth are using Oracles for positioning data, when global advertising conglomerates are using Oracles for audience demographics, when companies are using Oracles for directorship votes, when banking conglomerates are using Oracles for transaction assurance, when oil titans are using Oracles for contract assurance, when nation states are using Oracles for census data, when governments are using Oracles for voting polls, when armies are using Oracles for command and control verification, when the UN is using Oracles for voting for permanent 5 members, and when Oracles are using Oracles for veracity; does LINK at $100 sound reasonable? If not, does it sound more reasonable than LINK at $2?

Such is the oracle possibility. And there's your answer.

>>6814012
Congrats you outed yourself as a brainlet along with that guy

>>6814012
>You can't do shit with link
>It might be useful for banks sure.
You said this back to back, lol.

Also, see >>6813314

>>6814012
see
>>6813824

stinky

>>6814168
Define Oracle.

>>6814168
There's a lot of variables.

Are ETH and others gonna be useful? I think they might. But right now they have hardly any applications. Maybe FI could use them eventually?

Then there's the competition. Corda is apparently trying to do the same things as LINK and it has the bank seal of approval.

Then there's the token economics. What can we really expect the token to be worth in the end? Is it replaceable? Will Sergey care about its price?

And lastly, how will the team eventually deliver. I think the repo being private is a huge red flag, though understandable.

Anyway, assuming it doesn't fall on these things, it will be massive. Even if all other tokens are obsoleted by banks' own distributed ledgers, LINK will hold strong. It can even obsolete every other utility token - all the utility tokens can just be replaced with fiat if LINK succeeds.

t. non-linkie

>>6805386
hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahhahahaha jesus fuck man off yourself before you get an accidental chance at breeding.

>>6814323
Not sure if dumb dumb or pretending be dumb dumb. You dumb dumb?

>>6814012
you don't understand. nodes are going to charge for their services in link. if link's adopted, there are going to be millions of API calls and contract executions through chainlink every day, and of course the high paying customers are going to get better service. companies are going to want to hoard the fuck out of link because it guarantees them access to smart contract execution. this isn't a bullshit incentive either. the factom blockchain has a similar (but much better designed) incentive system to hold and speculate on the future value of FCT to get cheaper pricing for use of the protocol

>>6814395
LINK is the only token I have positive expectations about right now. But if you had some problem with my facts, point them out instead of shitting things up with retarded ad hominems

>>6814323
>Are ETH and others gonna be useful? I think they might. But right now they have hardly any applications. Maybe FI could use them eventually?

I ask you, do you believer in a peer to peer network of sending data from one individual to another? If you cant see the worth in it then stop reading my reply any further

>Then there's the competition. Corda is apparently trying to do the same things as LINK and it has the bank seal of approval.

Cordano has no working product. Besides that, I haven't read anything Cardano can do that revolutionizes existing blockchain technology.
Built around hype and buzzwords.

>Then there's the token economics. What can we really expect the token to be worth in the end? Is it replaceable? Will Sergey care about its price?

Price speculation is inherently worthless at this point of time. I just know one thing, if LINK can deliver on its goal, its very undervalued as it currently stands.

>And lastly, how will the team eventually deliver. I think the repo being private is a huge red flag, though understandable.

Through time and work. This really boils down to faith in development team. Recognition from Swift, Gartner, Cornell, and WEF shows signs of the right direction.

>>6814292
A thing that verifies that an off-chain thing, is what is really claims to be; and can therefore be brought onto the blockchain.

For example, an Oracle could verify that the speed of a vehicle was what it purports to be; and bring it onto the blockchain.

Another example would be an Oracle verifying the quantity of dicks inhaled by the filth on this board; and then bring it onto the blockchain.

>>6814513
Flush yourself down the toilet you stupid piece of dog shit.

>>6814678
I think it's a fantastic ideal, but I'm also a realist and understand that people don't care about this. Most of these blockchain current blockchain projects are retarded, you don't need a decentralized AWS for example, when AWS does the same thing already cheaper and more efficiently. SKY and LINK are the only good ideas that can't be easily grabbed by banks.

Corda, not Cardano, man.

>Price speculation is inherently worthless at this point of time. I just know one thing, if LINK can deliver on its goal, its very undervalued as it currently stands.
Or not. It's a big unknown, and like all projects may be overvalued already.

>Through time and work. This really boils down to faith in development team. Recognition from Swift, Gartner, Cornell, and WEF shows signs of the right direction.
True

>>6814723
after you kys, pajeet

>>6814852
>Corda, not Cardano, man.
My bad. Skimming through threads here and I didn't read it out fully.

> but I'm also a realist and understand that people don't care about this.

I can see where you're coming from but look at how things are adopted:
No one cares what a fractal antenna is or how it receives better signal, they just care that their phone works.
No one cares how amoxicillin can treat your infection, they just care that it makes them feel better.
No on cares how your apple was processed, they just want to eat it.

>>6808972
Nice green ID

>>6814954
But the problem is that banks can just steal the good things about distributed ledgers. So everybody still gets the apples. This is a problem of Windows vs Linux - public blockchains are the good, Linux, but in the end the banks, Windows, are gonna swallow it

in reality, if ethereum can't get its scaling and fee issues fixed soon so it goes to shit and Link is forced to make a new token based off of another blockchain what will happen to the owners of chainlink? How will they be compensated?

Blockchain agnostic just means that chainlink can communicate with other blockchains due to its use of external adapters. All erc 20 tokens will forever be tied to Etherium including Chainlink unless they stop using erc 20 tokens to fund node operators. Eth runs on 7 transactions per second and has high transfer fees. The link token is not fit for business consumption in its current state. Whether or not Etherium scales is a significant worry. Chainlink would be forced to make a new token as a part of another blockchain if Etherium can't scale.

>>6815031
The free market has quite the peculiar way of dealing with these things.

One could argue Linux is objectively better, but the market favored Windows because ease of use and a myriad of other things.

I really get what you're saying and how you're attempting to play devils advocate, but these questions are unfortunately unanswerable at the current time. Only time will tell.

>>6815133
You're right and I hope things go well, but we're also playing against the banks and governments here. It's gonna be a rocky path.

>>6815105
sharting

>>6815031

Doesn't apply to LINK. A bank can't, by definition, set up a trustless but private oracle system. It's an oximoron.
For them to set up a truly trustless system they would just have to replicate the ChainLink network, and that's pointless.

>>6815210
Its been done before. BTC and ETH really took them by surprise.

Its an uphill battle for sure, but its not an impossible one. Do not be mistaken friend.

>>6815241
nope. Don't just assume everything pointing out a weakness is fud.

>>6815273
>Its an uphill battle for sure, but its not an impossible one. Do not be mistaken friend.
I'll be keeping up. Sad to say that I sold most of my crypto for the near future though, I'm afraid we'll see more dumping until this blows over

>>6815252
That's why I think LINK is one of the only projects with a long-term chance of survival. They might overtake currency cryptos since people are ok with trusting banks, but they can't ever overtake LINK

>>6815306

Anon was referring to sharding, which is one of the proposed scaling solutions on the EVM.
But it doesn't matter. It would not be a major issue to transition the coin from Ethereum to a faster, more appropriate platform. Among the technical challenges facing the ChainLink project, migrating a token from one chain to another would be trivial.

>>6815417
Thanks for the response. Do you know what the process is to make sure the current holder of link don't get left with a useless token assuming Chainlink moves to a better blockchain?

>>6815105
Scaling seems to be quite the issues for many in the cryptosphere. I tend to look at it as a small hiccup and not an end all. Ethereum was built in mind for later renovations, and Buterin created Ethereum after realizing how difficult bitcoin is to mend these hiccups.

Its quite peculiar because even with the massive scaling issues bitcoin had, many didn't seem to care and continued using it. But I do agree that when dealing with large companies, scaling problems will become a much larger issue at hand. We are starting to see small fixes with Ethereum scaling with sharding, and one most put a little faith in the developers.

I have a lot more faith in the Ethereum project then I do, say, NEO for example.

>>6815105
and even then its worth noting that Chainlink was built in mind to server other platforms aswell.

>>6815495
All erc 20 tokens will forever be tied to Etherium including Chainlink. Eth runs on 7 transactions per second and has high transfer fees. The link token is not fit for business consumption in its current state. Whether or not Etherium scales is a significant worry. Chainlink would be forced to make a new token as a part of another blockchain if Etherium can't scale.

>>6815495
I don't know exact plans of how that will happen, but an airdrop could be a quick easy solution. Show us you have X amount of LINK in your wallet on the Eth network and we will airdop you the same amount on your XLM wallet.

>>6815105
Wrong man. ChainLink network is not on Ethereum. Only the token is. The token is only a means to pay node providers. The actual network is not on any blockchain, that's how it's blockchain agnostic.
And you're wrong about their plans to support other blockchains. Basically ChainLink will have core adapters built by SmartContracts.com and external adapters built by the community. The external adapters has specs on it, for example which API it's communicating with and what kind of data it's receiving. The core adapters are the ones responsible for taking that data and plugging it into the smart contract into a particular blockchain. Initially, the core adapters will only be built to support Ethereum, BTC and HyperLedger. Support for other blockchains will come when they think it'll be necessary.

Basically there two kinds of adapters. Core and external. External grab data from off chain. Core adapters take that data and put it in whatever blockchain smart contract it supports.

For those who say 7 tx/sec is a bottleneck, it's not. Only the payment will be on the Ethereum network, the actual work will all be done off chain. You don't need to get paid every damn second, it's wasteful. You'll be paying for a lot of gas. It would be smart to get paid in batches where the LINKs are held in escrow until it reaches a certain amount and then it releases it all at once to your wallet.

The 7tx/s is a moot argument since none of the information processing is actually happening on Ethereum network.

>>6815865
>All erc 20 tokens will forever be tied to Etherium including Chainlink. Eth runs on 7 transactions per second and has high transfer fees. The link token is not fit for business consumption in its current state.
You have zero clue what the Link token does.

All the actual computations for the smart contracts will take place on whatever blockchain/DLT/platform the client wants. That functionality will not be tied to Ethereum at all.

The token itself is used only for three things: node staking, contract staking, and node payment.
Staking is a very static process, so not taxing at all for the underlying network (ETH).
Node payment is likewise not very dynamic, since many contracts will be long-term, and payment can be done in batches instead of continuously.
Even with hundreds of thousands of Chainlink nodes in a few years, the ETH network would cope just fine with the Link token usage. Plus there are tons of updates in the pipeline for ETH.
And even if ETH completely shits the bed at some point, all it would take is to mint tokens on another network and airdrop them using smart contracts.

>>6803287
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSrHCF06HXY&t

Chainlink is already obsolete technology because newer blockchains already have solved the oracle problem. LINK is just a stupid biz meme at this point

Link is mooning now, need to keep the price low so i get to accumulate.

FUD it now

>>6816858
nice one pajeet

>>6816907
You're kidding yourself if you believe LINK will be relevant in 12 months

My questions are:
1)if chainlink is such a groundbraking project, why isn't anybody outside of 4chan taking notice of it?
2)if the project is still alive, why has serjey not given an update or posted on his twitter for almost four months?.
3)what the fuck is this shit about the shadow fork?.
4)all the promising coins of 2018 are starting to get adopted by large corporations, so why isn't the same thing happening with chainlink?

>>6817483
>1), 2)
Read the AssBlaster saga, it will all make sense.

3) FUD from last week, but shhh don't tell the plebbitors

4) S W I F T, Axa, Zepplin_os.
Swift will be the main force of propulsion for corporate adoption, though.

>>6817078
You're retarded if you think whats happening now is LINK being relevant, you won't be able to handle the things thats about to come, you should buy in asap

>>6817078

Fuck, I literally just made my "retarded FUD" image today, now you're dropping this gold?

>>6817078
Not shilling for ByteBalls, but they actually already have decentralized on-chain oracles (pic related). You can literally use them RIGHT NOW, on mainnet, in the official wallet.
LINK bag holders are probably the most delusional people i've ever seen.

I feel you OP. Once i barely understood what blockchain is and what is bitcoin, i decided to go look up Ethereum and read what the fuck are smart contracts on the official wiki. Needless to say, i understood fuck all. It said you can put piece of code in block data and execute it at a certain circumstances, but that doesn't really make sense .Worst of all im a web developer myself, though not a really good one.

>>6817766
Oh wow cool. But hmm. Let's see... I'm pretty sure ByteBall won't be the Crypto that will rule them all, so it's marketcap is shared with a shit ton of other cryptos and platforms.

And congrats for ByteBall. But there are many other blockchains that still need an oracle service and ChainLink will be the only provider.

Besides that, oracle service of Chainlink is much more powerful than ByteBalls. There are going to be a shiiiiiiit ton of nodes which will give ChainLink the advantage of being the most decentralized and therefore the most secure and the cheapest as node operators will be competing.

>>6817766
centralized oracles picked by byteballl execs not community,

>>6803287
>Explain to me like I'm a lazy but pushy and skeptical boomer
KEK

>>6817483
people are taking notice of it. Notice how it's climbing up the ranks despite zero marketing by the team or anything new being publically released. It's not just /biz/ buying. Addresses are growing and social media volume is still low buy consistently growing.

I mean, I don't know what else you guys want. We're literally here telling you this is revolutionary. We're telling you why it's revolutionary. We're telling how there is no competition. We are telling you how it's such a critical piece in the adoption of blockchain tech. Yet, I see here people who are still so doubtful because "it's only in /biz/". Or you have people who say, oh transaction limit, completely misunderstanding how CL actually works. Or those who talk about shadowforking. Jesus fucking Christ, are you that retarded? And then you have the lies like "no working product" when the PoC was done successfully so many god damn times. Yet those same ppl are jumping on TRXs dick trying to chase a coin that has no serious fundamentals. I don't know wtf you guys are doing. I'm just completely lost how you can justify investing in shitcoins left and right, but when it comes to real tech you're brushing it off because of some stupid FUD that could be seen for what it is if you have any understanding of CL.

The only legitimate criticism against ChainLink Is Intel SGX exploit. Other than that I seriously see ZERO legitimate arguments against it. None. At. All.

I've never went all in on coin before until ChainLink. Never! And Ive been in this game for 3 years.

>>6818307
Yeah, that one is essentially unironically centralized. Byteball dev would have easier time if he just stored the numbers into one regular SQL table.

WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER

DO NOT UNDER ESTIMATE THE POWER OF POSITIVE THOUGHT! ESPECIALLY COLLECTIVE POSITIVE THOUGHT!!

THIS SHIT IS GOING TO REACH $1,000 EASILY!
HOLD THAT THOUGHT AND VISUALIZE IT IN YOUR MIND EVERYDAY AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE STARTING NOW AND IT WILL MANIFEST INTO REALITY. DO IT! I'M NOT JOKING!

VISUALIZE AS OFTEN AND AS DETAILED AS POSSIBLE!

>>6818393

The only mistake you're making is trying to help these fucking retards. You've acknowledged it yourself, people are too stupid and are throwing money into TRX and shit. Just let them do it while you buy more cheap LINK.

Link 2000 eoy. Dubs and pink id confirms.

Does it make sense to go all in at this coin if I only have $1500? Should I try to catch a shitcoin moon first?

thanks linkbros

>>6817766
Not decentralized, and not blockchain-agnostic.

>>6818480
While I don't disagree with you, as I really don't give a shit if more people buy into it or not, but I'm really just trying to help people here. I know for a fact that ChainLink will be huge in the future, so I don't care if they buy now or FOMO later, the end result is I'm going to be fucking rich making some serious passive income from those nodes.

>>6818393
Why didn't you go all in on etherium when it was under a dollar?

>>6818656
How many link tokens do you own?

>>6818707
A lot of people did then subsequently sold when they got a 10x not suspecting (for good reason at the time, and guilty myself at $12) it would approach stratospheric heights. LINK won't get to a $1000 but if it hits $5-$10 you can bet most of /biz/ is gonna sell and it could very well keep going.
If lightning strikes and this hits a ripple like frenzy because normies love banks and SWIFT is literally a big of deal as you can get this thing could go far further than anything any of us think is possible (though obviously it would retrace and find it's fundamental value eventually).

>>6818579
It depends on the kind of person you are. If you have an itch for trading then don't go all in on ChainLink. You never know when this coin will actually moon. So invest in other coins while you hold a solid long term position in CL and just let it do it's thing.
You might see gains tomorrow, or a month later or a year later. You might see a red candle tomorrow or a month later or a year later. But rest assured that in 2 years none of those dips and highs will matter. You'll have made a huge amounts of gains from CL.

IMO don't trade CL. Buy and hold and only buy more.

Trade other coins to make money for now.

Me personally I went all in on LINK as I feel super comfy now. I don't feel like I need to constantly chase green candle, I know for a fact in 2-5 years I'll be a fucking millionaire so I don't give a shit, I'll wait those 2-5 years and make it big than chase green candle and worry all day and maybe juuuuuust maybe I'll make it, but highly doubtful.

>>6818814
If you were wrong about ETH, what makes you so sure $1000 is impossible?

Can someone give me 14 linkies? I have 236 and the OCD of not having exactly 250 is killing me. 1 week until paycheck. God fucking damn it non-round numbers are a nightmare.

>>6818707
Cuz I'm a fucking dumbass is why. I also didn't invest in BTC in 2012 even though I was a hardcore believer in it since I was a Ron Paul supporter. I also didn't invest in Google when I knew for a fact that Android is going to hit it big, but I told family and friends to invest in it (I didn't have a job at the time). I also regretfully didn't invest in Amazon when I thought Bezos mindset of customer first as a religion sets him apart from the crowd. I also didn't invest in Tesla knowing oil and gas will eventually go away.

Point is, I missed lots of opportunities in life. I went all in on ChainLink because I finally learned to not give a shit what people tell me, I'm doing my own research and investing in what I truly believe in. Everything else is just noise.

>>6818918
despite what retarded people think market cap is not entirely a meme. It seems unlikely chainlink will hit trillion dollar market cap. Even if trillions of dollars are being transacted via smart contracts being fed data via the chainlink network they're only paying out a small fraction of that to get access to the network for each transaction. Plus the fact that chainlink was only ever intended as a stop gap until the time when blockchains are able to feed data themselves means links lifiespan is limited will probably sink in eventually. I'll keep 1k of my 35k just in case, but for now I think it's safe to say 1k is just a meme to get newfags to buy over 1$+

>>6819089
I'm not gonna argue against ChainLink getting to a $1000 as IMO those are just baseless speculations. However, it is also baseless to think that ChainLink can't ever reach that marketcap. Crypto market is universal for all nations with no regulations 24/7. When governments get swallowed by Crypto and every major transaction happens on the blockchain, you bet your ass 1T mcap for a coin won't be just a pipe dream. Who would've thought a $70billion market a year ago could be worth $800billion a year later.

You're not thinking big enough if you don't think we're still in a baby market.

>>6805007
Maybe you should have researched computer science then so you won't have to listen to a bunch of "condescending cunts", then again you'd probably just ask your professor to give you the answers instead of doing your own research and studying.

Fuck off dumbass.

>>6819089
Ah, I see. Thanks for the info. Especially about the lifespan.

You are using the 1,000,000,000 tokens to calculate the market cap, right? My understanding is that few tokens will be in circulation once they have been given to node operators. I figured this would drive the price higher.

When will this new generation of data-accepting blockchains be available? Trying to determine when I should be selling. I did my own research but didn't come across that yet

>>6819393
Blockchains having their own oracles wouldn't kill the use cases of Chainlink. ChainLinks power is by being blockchain agnostic and it will have the most amount of nodes for any foreseeable future.

Besides, why would blockchains wanna reinvent the wheel instead of just using ChainLink which will already do what they want to do AND in a much better fashion? It's like saying "why buy a Fork and a Spoon when I can just use a Spork all the time?"

>>6803428
This has to be bait

>>6819089
To be honest if chainlink solves that problem for all blockchains why would any widely used blockchains even need to make decentralized Oracles? Unless there is a better way than chainlink to get information in and out if the blockchain in a trustless manor. I don't know much but I think aeternity which has its own blockchain is making decentralized oracles. This makes them a competitor to chainlink which might fit your prediction.

>>6819720
idk as far as I understand it the reason you need an external layer like chainlink is because right now blockchain consensus methods don't work with external data so you need another layer to do that consensus making, which is what Chainlink and other oracle solutions do (this is presumably the help that Andrew Miller brought as an advisor). So if you want to leverage the power of the blockchain and not have a centralized point of failure, you need a another layer to come to that consensus for your blockchain. I don't know what the next generation will look like or how it works because I'm not an expert, but Sergey seems to imply that blockchains will be able to do this in the future, negating the need for an external layer. How far away that is, I have no idea, maybe someone else can share with us.

>>6819089
>Even if trillions of dollars are being transacted via smart contracts being fed data via the chainlink network they're only paying out a small fraction of that to get access to the network for each transaction.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
What determines the price of Link is the supply/demand for the token, not the volume of money flowing through the Chainlink network.

And there is virtually no limit. Link could be a billion dollars a pop, and you'd still be able to transact a single dollar cent worth of Link, since the token has 18 decimals.

>chainlink was only ever intended as a stop gap until the time when blockchains are able to feed data themselves
This is complete and utter bullshit.

1) nowhere was this ever stated
2) that very concept makes very little sense since you'd have to make oracle computations integral to the nodes for that blockchain somehow, on top of the mining/staking/consensus/... mechanism that actually shapes that particular blockchain/DLT/...
3) this would not be anywhere NEAR as secure as one big, giant overarching oracle network that is applied to ANY AND ALL blockchains/DLTS/... out there

>>6820258

The demand for link will be determined by the ROI that you can get running a node, which will always be a small fraction of the total value being transacted. Remember they're trying to save money.

>2) that very concept makes very little sense since you'd have to make oracle computations integral to the nodes for that blockchain somehow, on top of the mining/staking

This is exactly what everyone thinks this will happen in the future.

3) this would not be anywhere NEAR as secure as one big, giant overarching oracle network that is applied to ANY AND ALL blockchains/DLTS/... out there
This is a good point but still it's hard to see how technological progress just stops with chainlink because it has a big network.

>>6819067
>Point is, I missed lots of opportunities in life. I went all in on ChainLink because I finally learned to not give a shit what people tell me, I'm doing my own research and investing in what I truly believe in. Everything else is just noise.

this guy gets it

>>6820423
>The demand for link will be determined by the ROI that you can get running a node
The ROI in fiat, yes.
This has almost nothing to do with the fiat value of the token, however.

>This is exactly what everyone thinks this will happen in the future.
That would result in a proprietary blockchain with proprietary oracles. There are a bunch of those already, and they're shit because everyone and their dog is building their own blockchain.
Nobody's going to migrate to a certain blockchain just because of the oracles. Certainly not when you have a standalone network of oracles that can connect to any blockchain/DLT/... you want.

>it's hard to see how technological progress just stops with chainlink because it has a big network
Singular oracles already do exactly what they're supposed to: bring external data onto the blockchain.
The only thing that was missing was a robust, DEcentralized system of oracles to provide a common framework for complex matters with multiple parties, for the added security of redundancy, for the cost savings due to the competitive node marketplace, etc.

Everything else in terms of technological progress has to do with optimizing and increasing the data sources (databases, APIs, ...).
Which isn't even a big deal, since with Chainlink banks won't even have to change their APIs to connect their current workflow to the blockchain.

>>6820685

I feel what your saying, I hadn't really thought about the advantages of using a blockchain agnostic network that is much stronger than 100 different next generation blockchains that have each hypothetically solved the oracle problem natively and wouldn't necessarily need a third party solution like chainlink but would still want to use it.

>>6812457
This is why you get QSP.
ETH - Securing secure smart contracts
LINK - Securing a way to get data onto smart contracts
QSP - Securing and validity of data presented on smart contracts.
REQ - Using QSP as their auditing backend, they add financial diversity to the applicability of smart contracts.

There's a reason LINK, REQ and QSP are the holy trinity.

I just want to say, there's a lot of shit threads about LINK on here (both FUD and memes).

This has been an epic thread where people actually talked about the tech. It's been a refreshing thread to read.

>>6817483
>all the promising coins of 2018 are starting to get adopted by large corporations, so why isn't the same thing happening with chainlink?
Why pay someone else if you can do it yourself. That's really the issue with all open source faggots. No one stops a cooperation that is interested in using the technology to do it themselves. Does anyone really believes a cooperation that wants to use smart contracts will buy etherum. Or n the case of Link, if it needs an oracle, buy Link. Delusional coiners

>>6803938
In a nutshell, it's a network for open JSON APIs. If you are a financial institution or a news corporation or just about anything that could curate information as a serialized API, you could, theoretically at least, add it to the ChainLink ecosystem and people then could use it to write smart contracts based on the output of your API. Then you'd get rewarded with stinkies every time they use your API.

I don't blame you for not understanding it, "smart contracts", "oracle solvers" and all that shit are actually legit buzzwords that get thrown around mercilessly, and the chainlink testnet is so incredibly barebones and crappy as to turn off just about anyone.

>>6821675

Crappy in terms of unintuitive or non-functional or just ugly?

>>6805007
Is this your first time here, faggot?

>>6821726
Non-functional, the options you get for writing a smart contract are basically a simple conditional based on the output of an API.

>>6817483
>all the promising coins of 2018 are starting to get adopted by large corporations
Lol no.

>so why isn't the same thing happening with chainlink?
In other words, why isn't Chainlink a finished product yet?
Do you realize how dumb this question is?

>>6821578
Yes, corporations will create their own global decentralized oracle networks instead of one already made by someone else for much cheaper.
Makes perfect sense.

this thread stinks

>>6821750

Do you see that as simply being an early release issue, or are you skeptical about the feasibility of the project in general?

>>6821899
Absolutely skeptical, the project has the stench of abandonware and all the updates we've been given come from really dubious sources.

Still, I bought a bunch of LINK, just in case.

>>6821942

This is salient.

>>6821942

I'm not really worried about the development schedule or communication profile. My main concern is just that what they are proposing will in fact be too technically difficult to pull off. Only time will tell.

>>6803938
https://www.frostbrowntodd.com/newsroom-self-enforcing-smart-contracts-will-change-your-life.html

>>6822238
Anyone who tells you that smart contracts are replacing lawyers is a lying piece of shit.

>>6822268
Fucking brainlet nowhere does that article say they're replacing Lawyers but they'll be working very differently.

>>6822337
Most of the shit you can purportedly do with smart contracts, you can do with a run-of-the-mill scripting language, except worse because smart contracts are not turing complete.

Financial lawyer-wise, they change nothing EXCEPT, and this is a huge exception, you don't need to celebrate a contract with a payment processor/card issuer in order to, say, build an automated lease system.

>>6821794
That's what I said. Maybe someone more competent comes along and offers a product that isn't traded by retrads on grey market exchanges and actually works, not like Sergays fever dream scam

>>6803536

It's so fucking funny, this reminds me of the fact that most people calling me a deluded linkie can't even afford 1k LINK while I have 65k and it's not even 4% of my portfolio. Thanks for reminding me I'm pretty comfy compared to most of you even though I'm far from being a whale.

>>6822421
>Maybe someone more competent comes along and offers a product that isn't traded by retrads on grey market exchanges and actually works, not like Sergays fever dream scam
Ya, or maybe someone will try to offer a better product and it won't work and then that person will fall into a ditch and his clothes will be all dirty and then a seagull will shit on his head and then his hair is all dirty too.
Ever think of that possibility?

>>6822548
Congrats on being a millionaire-and-a-half.

All from crypto?

>>6803287
>>6803287

LINK broken down
https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/7nwis4/why_i_believe_chainlink_link_is_the_most/

>>6820165
No, you aren't quite understanding what he is explaining to you.

if a company Wanted X problem solved, would they
A. attempt to spend a lot of time, money, and resources into developing their own fix
OR
B.Pay to use this service that already exists and gives them exactly what they want.

Think of, for example:
An airline company needs oil in order to run its business. Do you think the airline company is going use its profits to fund an oil rig and get the oil for themselves? No, of course not. They are just going to continue purchase the oil to keep its company running.

>>6803604
ugh, I can't believe I'm invested in the same token with retards like you. I really hope you're joking around.

>>6822763

both of you are a few steps behind in terms of your sophistication of understanding of what problem chainlink solves. Study up and maybe you can contribute to the conversation next time ;)

>>6822614

20k in June bby. Made shitloads of mistakes. It's all from picking good ICOs early. Advice for token hitting the market soon: JNT.

Under the radar ICO: Tomocoin. 20x guaranteed. Keep eyes open for whitelist. You'll make it brah.

>>6822725
Reddit is going to run out of undervalued coins soon.

>>6803641
>no point in having link cost more than a cup of coffee

Source?

>>6822877
/biz/

>>6822877
It's from BAT's white paper memed into the ChainLink lore

>>6805037
You're worried that a product who's team consists of three pajeet boys is going to solve the oracle problem before a product that's been in development since 2013-14?

My money is on the Russian.

>>6822831
Nice.
I started with 5k in summer of 2017, and I'm at 20k now.
Would've probably had double that if I hadn't gotten robbed along the way.

>>6823009
>if I hadn't gotten robbed along the way.
Figuratively or literally?

>>6823038
Well crypto-robbed.
Etherdelta is hell.

>>6811175
Aside from the things you probably already know, LINK tokens will be used as leverage by the nodes as an insurance against providing bad information to the smartcontract.

Imagine you're BankPajeet™, and you want issue a $100M loan to a company through a smartcontract. Now, you'd be dumb to risk it all on nodes that operate with little or no LINK tokens, since they wouldn't be able to pay compensation in the rare event of false information being provided.

So what do you do? You choose to utilize ONLY the nodes that have 10k or more LINK.

And this will be the norm. The higher the contract value, the higher the insurance through LINK tokens the contract owner will want.

>>6813209

MAJOR

>>6805007
I was all of your English and Psychology professors anon, and I failed you for every class. Stop larping as a graduate.

can we even post

>>6823050
>im too retarded to use a decentralised exchange

>>6825579
I could use it perfectly. ED simply doesn't have even the most basic protections against the most common threats, like CSRF.

>>6805364
>Also paying backpage hookers to condom blowjobs doesn't count as "getting laid."
it still does tho

>>6803473
know what the real sad part is? thinking that any of your shills or fuds on fucking 4chan matter in the grand picture of things. this place is 0.001% of the market.

And you also don't know what accumulating means.

>>6826714
>And you also don't know what accumulating means.
That's only an assumption. Nothing more.

>>6805386
I don't think crypto is for you

thanks People, you made me feel very comfy