/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>9726117
>doesnt that mean its success is depends on ethereums success?
right now yes. I think they plan to launch their own network though, so there's that. I'm sure some LINK autist will have more info.

>and so far isnt everything dependent on bitcoin
From a marketprice perspective yes. Technically absolutely not.

>>9726117
It's not fully dependent on Ethereum, but it would definitely suffer if they were forced to switch. In my opinion a bet on Link is a bet on Ethereum. I just hold both.

>>9726131
> I think they plan to launch their own network though
Making shit up...not a bad idea for fud

>>9726140
Do you understand what the phrase "I think" means?

>>9726145
Yeah and I think you’re making shit up, good job

>>9726132
so all these link shills are really eth shills and should just buy eth. its alot safer, if link becomes useful it also validates eth.
seems like going all in on link is too much risk

>>9726153
you totally caught me admitting that I was not certain about that. Good job! Don't forget to tell your mom so she can put a sticker on the fridge for you

>>9726131
It's meant to work with all blockchains in the future.
Just takes time to develop.

>>9726167
Maybe you should think a little longer than 5 seconds instead of coming up with mom insults and realize how retarded it would be to spend time and capital on a new chain when ethereum suit their needs just fine

>>9726187
Do you realize ethereum is open source and can be forked today, for free
Do you realize there are several ready-to-use blockchain implementations?
Do you realize that a blockchain really isn't that hard to implement?

Now take your uncalled for butthurt and shove it up your cunt, retard.

>>9726198
Kek why not make it more obvious that you’ve never run a business before or ever had a discussion with someone without acting like a child.

>>9726243

>>9726161
Yes a 2 or 3x is way safer than a potential 2000x

Very smart Pajeet

Thanks for being you OP. I haven't been able to use this in what feels like year's.

hmm so they already tried chainlink on another blockchain called NXT. that was a few years ago, holy shit, im back to being bullish

soon it will be the other way around ;)

well, soon enough

>>9726270
Yes it would be
Just play the lottery

>>9726325
Of course it's safer, but there's a tradeoff between risk and potential gains. This is crypto, not the fucking stock market. Go big or go home. And it's not like eth didn't tank along with everything else in January. You'd be an idiot to be in crypto to only 2 or 3x your lunch money with the kind of risk that comes with it.

Also,
>implying buying link is as risky as playing the lotto

>>9726117
>>9726131
>>9726132
blockchain agnostic retards

>>9726117
>everything dependent on bitcoin?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Ponzi
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/ponzischeme.asp
The only Vitalik and foundation do - reinvest money to Bitcoin
https://poloniex.com/exchange#btc_eth
Vitalik cannot use fiat for keep this criminal money.
The only "investors" have - passwords of fake money and 150000 lines of opensource code.

There are no plans to build an independent Chainlink blockchain so it would remain an ERC20 token. Chainlink plans to be able to trigger contracts on BTC, ETH and Hyperledger. If there was a good reason in the future, it's possible the core developers would add a core adaptor for somewhere else.

>>9726281
No. You're mixing a lot of things in strange ways, it's a sentence but it's not coherent.

The Link token is just a way to purchase data feeds for smart contracts. Its a basic supply and demand principle where the equilibrium price is found based on the last price bought/sold on the market (binance, huboi, etc). The actual tech is the chainlink network which allows a company or individual to purchase the decentralized data feeds from the CL network to be used in a self-executing future smart contract. The network can make payouts in other cryptos through the use of adapters so a smartcontract could execute an agreement where the payout is done in bitcoin or ethereum, or any other blockchain they build an adapter for, but the data bought to execute the contract will have been purchased with LINK. The reason this is special is that because anyone can setup a node, the data input feeds become decentralized, and no one can tamper with any data feeds like they could for a centralized oracle service. This makes smart contracts usable for banks and other high money institutions because they wouldn't want to risk large value contracts (think millions and billions) on a centralized oracle smart contract that could get tampered with by a third party hack or 51% attack. By using the decentralized oracle service network of Chainlink, institutions can safely use smartcontracts with real world data (as opposed to stuff put on the blockchain which takes time and energy) and this will open up adoption of smartcontracts to the world because we already collect tons of data from billions of devices but there was no way to get it on the blockchain without a tamper proof guarantee but the chainlink decentralized oracle network can provide that. If I made a mistake another anon can please correct me.

>>9726804
Sergey is that you?

>>9726117
>doesnt that mean its success is depends on ethereums success?

This depends on what you mean by success. Price is irrelevant but hashrate I'd agree with. The platform aims to be blockchain agnostic. Pricewise though, If link succeeds then eth will succeed. I can't speak to vice versa, but my gut says that's less of a factor.

>>9726804
And this is why you will make $ and most people will not

>>9726804
>this
>is
>a
>thesis

with no product in sight

>>9727278
It’s working on the testnet now. I get the GitHub updates. A lot of progress is being made daily. The team is dudes just like us who want to see this shit happen. If it works and gets adopted, we’re probably rich. I hope you’re trying to FUD for lulz but it’s early morning so no one will read this anyways and know chainlink is the best kept secret in crypto.

>>9728012
I should also mention that the LINK token is required for the transfer of the data and shit, so someone who wants data needs to actually purchase LINK to get their data for smart contracts. Some bank who wants to buy future interest rate data or something similar could easily spend millions on purchasing data feeds for the self-executing smartcontracts especially if it allows them to significantly cut costs.

>>9726804
>TL;DR

The gist for OP is Chainlink is modular. As much of the resources as possible are handled offchain, and the on-chain contracts (including token) can be ported to other blockchains as the need arises.

Chainlink needs Ethereum initially, but once the network is functioning, it can shift or expand to support any blockchain.