[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2022-05-12: Ghost posting is now globally disabled. 2022: Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
View page     

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 216 KB, 1080x1080, Link.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10603464 No.10603464 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Let's be honest, it's worthless.
The project itself is nice but the toke has absolutely no value, you don't need LINK to run a node as confirmed by the team, their whole business model is that nodes will be paid with LINK.
Now let's suppose noone fork the thing to just use it with ETH once it's done, why would I hold any LINK as someone running a node? In fact what prevents a smart contract to auomatically do ETH -> LINK -> ETH (or whatever other blockchain using chainlink is running on or simply atomic swap)? With such a high token velocity that would make the marketcap basically worthless, see:

>Many token economies are currently being proposed where the token is purely a medium of exchange token. A hypothetical example would be a decentralised car-hailing economy where all participants require the hypothetical token, TripCoin, to transact in the system. Well, nobody actually wants to hold the coin so the paying passenger would convert from fiat (or BTC) into TripCoin, send it to the driver for the trip, who would convert it straight back into fiat (or BTC). No member of the network wants to hold the coin because all other expenses are in fiat. If the network had to grow to the size of Uber, then the transactional volume would be exceptionally high, but so would the velocity of the system. So overall, the network might have $20 billion in value, but each individual coin wouldn’t accrue this value.


At the end of the day only protocol coins and security tokens seem to have value, all the utility tokens have bullshit economics, their only purpose was raising funds for the developpers, they basically exchanged you few kg of colored sands against oil barrels and told you that only this sand will be used to pay for the stuff they are building.

>> No.10603477

I unironically have terminal cancer and bought LINK because I want my wife and daughter to be set when I die. Not even mad about your comment.

>> No.10603541

>not reading the whitepaper

>> No.10603560
File: 26 KB, 255x255, Magic Pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>dodging the question
Also I've read the WP, it's exactly as I said, eat a dick fag:
>The ChainLink network utilizes the LINK token** to pay ChainLink Node operators
for the retrieval of data from off-chain data feeds, formatting of data into blockchain
readable formats, off-chain computation, and uptime guarantees they provide as operators.
In order for a smart contract on networks like Ethereum to use a ChainLink
node, they will need to pay their chosen ChainLink Node Operator using LINK tokens,
with prices being set by the node operator based on demand for the off-chain resource
their ChainLink provides, and the supply of other similar resources. The LINK token
is an ERC20 token, with the additional ERC223 “transfer and call” functionality
of transfer(address,uint256,bytes), allowing tokens to be received and processed by
contracts within a single transaction

>> No.10603567

But the data will go via the token??? So its needed?

>> No.10603572

You are clearly intelligent OP. Shill me your bags as I need some winners.

>> No.10603616

Any protocol coin with a decent team, funding and use-case I would say.
I talked about LINK but it's really the case of the vast majority of tokens, they don't have any reason to exist in the first place beyond fund raising, only tokens making sense imo are the ones being securities but right now there are very few.

Your sentence doesn't make sense anon.

>> No.10603618
File: 49 KB, 1066x800, 3D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

this is all you need

>> No.10603624

>You don't need lINK to run a node

Correct. As a requestor though, would you rather choose nodes that have collateral in case they fuck up? Absolutely. Definitely not for all contracts, but most business related contracts that fail will cause someone to lose money and someone has to compensate that, which is what the collateral is for.

>Toke(n) has absolutely no value

Besides collateral, requester still has to pay in LINK to the nodes as all the query parameters are in the LINK token itself.


Honestly I struggle to see what's your point here. Elaborate.

>> No.10603700
File: 685 KB, 680x1073, chainlinconspiracy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

You provide collateral to the contract so if you give wrong data, the counterparty gets compensated for it.

Serious node operators won't probably sell(unless they really have to) LINK at an early stage, because with more LINK you can accept more contracts since you have more LINKs to stake. This is also the reason why node operators will benefit from a high LINK price.

>> No.10603791


You completely missed the part where nodes will want to stake LINK as insurance for their data pulls.

Retard moron.

>> No.10603810

To be honest, I'm not really that interested in the price right now, the tech is what appeals to me (I already deleted my blockfolio). I believe in the project, so the day to day price is of little concern to me. Besides, the entire market has suffered so this was to be expected... imagine you sold etherium at $10, and how you would be kicking yourself for that. I would argue this is a much needed correction and is bullish for the longer term. That said, I wish my pay check would come in sooner so I could make use of these panic sellers. Hopefully the price will stay down and I'll have some time to accumulate. For now the whales are keeping it low and there's a lot of baseless fud going around, most of it started by buyers who want to get in cheaper. The fundamentals are still great, the partnerships are legit, and there are some big updates coming soon, so just keep accumulating and check back this time next year!

>> No.10603850

>Honestly I struggle to see what's your point here. Elaborate.
It's really simple, there are legions of Dapps with their own tokens around, if they ever become mainstream people won't go buying manually dozens of different tokens with all the hassle it is and the volatility risk, chances are there will be a second layer letting you pay with the currency of your choice and converting it through a decentralized exchange in the token used by the
Dapp. Same thing for people providing services through these Dapps, chances are they will immediately convert the tokens in the currency of their choice because they have no incentive to hold it compared to a more widely accepted currency.

Check the article I've linked, if a token has no mechanism to impede its velocity (ie incentive people to hold it) then there is no reason why they would hold it.

There are no mentions of a collateral system in the whitepaper, if I understand correctly they want to do something like iexec with a proof of validity or something? Also why wouldn't they use ETH or BTC or even a stable-coin as collateral? Again, it's artificial.

>This is also the reason why node operators will benefit from a high LINK price.
Node operators don't really care of the LINK price if they convert their gains in ETH instantly.
I would go as far as saying that in fact it's not really something desirable to hold these tokens as a business because they will always have a smaller volume and marketcap than Ethereum by design which will make them more volatile and risky if you aren't a speculator.

>> No.10603882

fuck u are retarded nigger. did you just now discover that article? You realize it's at least a year old and this exact same conversation has happened on this board 600 times. fuck off back to the streets pajeet, you aren't smart or clever.

>> No.10603927
File: 5 KB, 261x193, NotAnArgument.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Pic related
>You realize it's at least a year old and this exact same conversation has happened on this board 600 times. fuck off back to the streets pajeet, you aren't smart or clever.
LINKies posted thousands of times the same thread too, I don't see you bitch about it faggot.

>> No.10604060


>> No.10604080

Imagine typing this

Now imagine reading this

Both are stupid as fuck

>> No.10604137

Imagine being those bagholders, LINK token is worthless.

>> No.10604212
File: 107 KB, 1024x752, IMG_0831.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]


>> No.10604385

>There are no mentions of a collateral system in the whitepaper
Yes there are. Look for words like "penalty", and read on.

>> No.10604520


Shit just sold 100K

>> No.10604603
File: 1.98 MB, 1184x1196, 1531399555175.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>The project itself is nice but the toke has absolutely no value, you don't need LINK to run a node

>> No.10605465

Brainlet here. Are we fucked ?

>> No.10605594


>> No.10606248

I just scanned the white paper for what I assumed includes an outline for staking link as a collateral criteria used for node selection, and for penalty payments. But OP is right, it doesn’t specify that the penalty is staked in link. It sounds like it could be any currency the contract wants, probably Eth. And no mention of staking link as part of a node selection process. I know Thomas has said this would be the case, but it ain’t in the wp

>> No.10606551

Node operators aren't going to convert their gains instantly. They will hold most of them as more tokens means they can run more jobs and earn more money.

This shoots down your entire argument. Even with high liquidity, all the operators are going to hold most coming in anyway.

>> No.10606937

why the fuck wouldn't the team want to use link and make themselves unimaginably wealthy in the process. hey obviously hold a shitload of tokens so would it make ANY sense for them to undermine their own holdings by enabling the network to pay for data with something other than link. use your heads people, they're on our side.

>> No.10606969

>OP is right, it doesn’t specify that the penalty is staked in link
OP didn't say anything about penalty being staked in Link or not, so he can't be "right" you doofus.

The WP isn't going to contain all of the minutia concerning the token economy, just like it's not going to contain all the minutia on many aspects.
It's a general technical overview.
The team has clearly addressed this, so get over yourself.

>no mention of staking link as part of a node selection process
This is the same thing as staking Link for penalty/collateral.

>> No.10606976

Now this is a based and redpilled shitlink thread.
And you are right, Kyber will make most "utility" tokens useless.
Most usefull nodes will stake shitlink that they got from sergay.

Remember. 1000 satoshi eoy

>> No.10607014

>nobody would want to do any trading or speculating with a pure transaction coin
>tokens that are being hoarded and hodled aren't actually taken out of circulation, thereby reducing the available supply
>the white paper does not specify any other use for the token other than purely transactions

All these assumptions, all of them so very wrong.

Delete posts
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.