1000

[Boat Anon No.10610228]

What is this? Is this good for link?

[Anonymous No.10610259]

>>10610228
>Ctrl+f "Chainlink"
>its actually there
2500 eoy may be fud

[Anonymous No.10610276]

>>10610228
Link to url plox

[Anonymous No.10610300]

>>10610228
send a link to this

[Boat Anon No.10610305]

>>10610276
https://ethfiddle.com/recent_fiddles

[Anonymous No.10610328]

Loom Network? Go look at Loom network... leave my stinky out of loom network

[Anonymous No.10610334]

>>10610305
>https://ethfiddle.com/recent_fiddles
you're actually useless
here's the link directly to OP's pic related.
https://ethfiddle.com/nCSacYWku7

[Anonymous No.10610341]

1000=fud

[Anonymous No.10610358]

>>10610228
>Random anon writes a fiddle which is basically just a block of code for testing
>LOOK WHAT I DID A WEEK AGO
>Even though the actual content is fucking nothing

[Anonymous No.10610360]

>>10610334
Here's the links to all 4 of them for anyone interested
https://ethfiddle.com/tXUceT2BrZ
https://ethfiddle.com/8suh6yapqX
https://ethfiddle.com/IvqiPy2IC4
https://ethfiddle.com/nCSacYWku7

[Anonymous No.10610363]

It's a salary contract that requires accurate price data in order to automatically payout a salary periodically.

[Boat Anon No.10610373]

>>10610334
Fuck you, I’ve figured it out anyways.

Open law are testing salary contracts on ropsten

It is them that have being doing alll the testing

You are all welcome

[Anonymous No.10610375]

This is actually bearish for Chainlink.

[Anonymous No.10610381]

>>10610373
lol why you mad fren i thought we bust each others balls here.

anyways im going to look at the ropsten transactions and try to find anything for july 31

[Anonymous No.10610404]

>>10610373

[Anonymous No.10610412]

>>10610381
>>10610373
guys, they've been rapid fire testing on ropsten
https://ropsten.etherscan.io/txs?ea=0x20fe562d797a42dcb3399062ae9546cd06f63280&topic0=0xddf252ad1be2c89b69c2b068fc378daa952ba7f163c4a11628f55a4df523b3ef&p=1

i can't understand what the payloads are

[Anonymous No.10610418]

>>10610404

[Boat Anon No.10610420]

>>10610381
>>10610381

I’ll bust your balls and call you a stupid monkey then because

The contract is identical to everything that has been on there for the past few months and has been industrially tested.

This is now an Open Law thread. Remind me of the connections and their partners whilst I soak in my bubble bath which mummy ran for my 31 year old ass

[Anonymous No.10610458]

>>10610420
i've never seen anything other than the opcodes, which i can't read since my assembly is weak. where has it existed other than ethfiddle?

[Anonymous No.10610479]

>>10610420
Don't forget to buy your mum a new house after you've made it.

[Anonymous No.10610480]

>>10610228

What do you think they meant by all this, unironically?

I love you guys by the way.

[Anonymous No.10610487]

>>10610480
It is actually nothing.

[Anonymous No.10610500]

>>10610487

But who is using it, someone is?

[Boat Anon No.10610509]

>>10610458
I’m going to be honest I am a coding brainlet but a fully autismatic breadcrumb trailer for link.

What I see when I click in to the contracts on the website is identical to what is seen for the past few months every 8 minutes on ropsten.

I’m willing to be proven wrong, it could be just an anon winding us up. We would need to find the source of what I’ve found.

[Anonymous No.10610515]

>>10610487
It's not 'nothing'. Chainlink is being tested with behind the scenes with some of the biggest lawfirms around. Indisputable at this point.

>>10610480
Unironically it means we're all likely to make a lot of fucking money. I love you too. See you on the otherside.

[Anonymous No.10610521]

>>10610500
Someone certainly is. But it could literally be anyone and even an Anon in this very thread. Its useless as far as information goes.

[Anonymous No.10610528]

>>10610509
yeah the thing is, when i view the payload in plaintext form, it's all gibberish.usually you'd see a call to cryptocompare's price API. I'm working on figuring this out...

[Anonymous No.10610536]

>>10610515
>>10610521

[Anonymous No.10610564]

this is so fucking huge that people are such dumbfucks and fail to understand. openlaw testing entire salary structures being paid automatically in a trustless network.

[Anonymous No.10610574]

>>10610521

>even an Anon in this very thread

[Anonymous No.10610591]

>>10610564

Ya this is going to be fucking great.

Bonds market = trillions

Payroll = trillions

Mortgage contracts/real estate contracts = trillions

Insurance = trillions

Logistics = trillions


getrekt nolinkers

[Anonymous No.10610605]

with the confirmation of openlaw they are collaborating with the two biggest legal repositories working on smartcontracts (this and project accord).

[Anonymous No.10610611]

>>10610591
>>10610564

What do you speculate the minimum length of time a company would request an API is, and what do you think is the minimum cost?

Would transactions on Hyperledger need the LINK token? They would right, since the oracles connect to the API's regardless...?

[Boat Anon No.10610625]

>>10610564
I guess they are trying that but let’s not get carried away.

This is a draft contract created by the SC team.

The contract doesn’t need to have a meaning for Open Law

They just have to see that the contracts work, before they make a relevant contract.

[Anonymous No.10610634]

[Anonymous No.10610654]

>>10610625
>>10610634

If one starts using it and saves $ they all will - it will cost a lot of wagies their jobs, unironically if you work in any of these fields you should be hedging your low-level job with Chainlink

[Anonymous No.10610661]

>>10610634

[Anonymous No.10610675]

[Anonymous No.10610681]

>>10610564
This is most likely some dipshit pretending to be openlaw.
Anyone can enter these fiddles.

[Anonymous No.10610690]

[Anonymous No.10610701]

>>10610681
Which is what I have been saying. Its worthless information.

[Anonymous No.10610722]

why is it so hard for you faggots to just sit still and accumulate and let the actual insiders (SherlockLink, AssBlaster) do the dot connecting?

[Anonymous No.10610724]

>>10610509
Um guys....

I think they're testing IOT stuff right now.


https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/2066818-ue22-error-master-thread-pioneer-you-listening.html

Hear me out. Click on the below ropsten link:

https://ropsten.etherscan.io/tx/0xb6fe91c76ed343faf59f8efee81139a5a7d6db0e50f1b9ec4ccb8f63d3048626

then scroll to "Input Data", and click view as UTF8. Ok, you see the box with the UE? That's the type of data requested.

Proof:
https://ropsten.etherscan.io/tx/0x8972dbdab99e8356e34800a2944c0b1377de06d4e5404a30cb56a8a942cfa665
if you look at this transaction (this is the same transaction Thomas used in his tutorial for viewing ropsten transactions), the input data when views in UTF8 is USD (price data).

Now pic related is WHAT I BELIEVE to be the actual value passed, which is 22.

UE22 is a Pioneer audio receiver error code

I don't know if I'm jumping to conclusions. I dont know if I interpreted the contract correctly.

[Boat Anon No.10610732]

>>10610681
I have no way to refute this point. I just searched for a term in google and came across this shit.

My strong inkling is that this wasn’t meant to be found though.

Anyone know where fiddle pulls these contracts from?

Is it on github maybe?

[Anonymous No.10610740]

>>10610360
AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH ALL MY LINKIES ARE GONE

[Anonymous No.10610745]

>>10610228
> post a code snippet of a vaporware
> linkies say 2500 EOY

[Boat Anon No.10610751]

>>10610724
>>10610724
Ffs now I’m going to have to get out of mummy’s bubble bath to go and see what you have found on my laptop

[Boat Anon No.10610786]

>>10610722
Tbh I am willing to join a smaller group of researchers that would like my help. Researching link is my hobbie and I’m okay at it.

I joined a telegram once but it was full of absolute morons being rude to Rory

[Anonymous No.10610835]

>>10610724

>UE22 is a Pioneer audio receiver error code

[Boat Anon No.10610911]

Holy shit look at the tabs in open laws most recent gif on twitter

[Anonymous No.10610957]

>>10610911
Rinkeby Transaction something. 2500 is FUD

[Anonymous No.10610969]

>>10610911
RINKEBY NETWORK TESTING - EMPLOYEE OFFER LETTER - SALARIES......OH SHIT

[Boat Anon No.10610972]

>>10610911
When I posted this I thought it was Ropsten, it wasn’t........

It was much better

[Anonymous No.10610989]

$2500 EOY

[Anonymous No.10611001]

>>10610681

Why the fuck would someone pretend to be openlaw? Why not pretend to be Berkshire Hathaway or Goldman fucking Sachs?

[Anonymous No.10611004]

[Anonymous No.10611015]

>>10611001
Openlaw has a noted connection to Link. Also I can't source how old those Fiddles are because comments can't be trusted. The article is four hours old so it is entirely possible someone saw the article and started to larp by creating those fiddles. Probably the OP.

[Anonymous No.10611030]

>>10610911

https://media.consensys.net/controlling-autonomy-a-new-tool-to-stop-smart-contracts-once-executed-bc9de699bca0

$1000 eoy is fud
$2500 eoy is fud

[Anonymous No.10611032]

>>10610911
>>10610957
>>10610969
>>10610972

Gentlemen, some of us don't have Twitter and can't get it for...reasons. Please post pic.

[Anonymous No.10611039]

>>10611032
https://twitter.com/i/status/1027265661330972673

[Anonymous No.10611058]

>>10611039

Can't see it because I have to create an account brother.

[Boat Anon No.10611060]

>>10611015
Caught me. I made it all up.

Sorry for trolling everyone

[Anonymous No.10611067]

>>10610786
Do you know about the chainlink discord? The person who runs chainlinkfan twitter is very active in it connecting muh dots. Anyone can join I think. Don’t think it’s hidden.

[Anonymous No.10611072]

>>10610786
I would like to join a group as well, how can we organize? Is Discord the best solution?

[Anonymous No.10611075]

>>10611060
It is okay Sean we still love you.

[Anonymous No.10611085]

>>10611058

[Anonymous No.10611090]

>>10611072
See above. One sec I’ll grab the invite link

[Anonymous No.10611095]

>>10611085
Can't see shit it's too blurry.

[Anonymous No.10611099]

>>10611015
the fiddle is from July 31 tho...

[Anonymous No.10611102]

Thanks man......fuck that's huge.......who else would be doing this? Like unironically who? No one right?

Is there a way we can see who's behind the transactions?

[Anonymous No.10611115]

>>10611039
Holy fucking shit so it really is OpenLaw testing Chainlink on Ropsten. They literally tweeted that they're doing it 4 hours ago.

[Anonymous No.10611124]

>>10610724
Wait wtf is this.
>>10610911
Pic related I don’t see what you’re talking about post gif.

[Anonymous No.10611128]

>>10611099
OP already admitted he made it up. But if you can show me a date that isn't in the comments which mean fucking nothing as I could say it is the year 1902 then it was just a larp.

[Anonymous No.10611131]

>>10611095
that's as good as you're gonna get. But you can see the word rinkeyby and the etherescan logo. Just open this link:

https://rinkeby.etherscan.io/txs

compare... and see

[Anonymous No.10611133]

>>10611115

Dude there's been so much news lately. They can hardly contain this anymore. It's happening, they are probably freaking the fuck out trying to rush mainnet so the autists stop hunting. Good thing we're in our own bubble here.

[Anonymous No.10611148]

Openlaw was suppose to have a facebook live stream last week... I'd tried to watch it, then feed died off, and they said they'llreschedule. It was to announce something big, in conjuction with consensys

[Anonymous No.10611155]

>>10611128
am i missing something here lol

[Anonymous No.10611170]

>>10611131
Fucking hell bros. So close to selling my remaining 5 ETH for more link.

[Anonymous No.10611178]

What is happening in brainlet terms?

[Anonymous No.10611179]

>>10611170
i had 12 more left sold before the dump and im comfy right now

[Anonymous No.10611182]

>>10611095
Enhance

[Anonymous No.10611183]

>>10611170
sell your 5ETH for LINK.

[Anonymous No.10611198]

>>10611170
Why? Some help me understand is this a larp about openlaw testing or not? And can someone post the gif of openlaw on Twitter with the tab open?

[Anonymous No.10611199]

>>10611182
Is Chainlink even on Rinkeby?

[Anonymous No.10611208]

>>10611199
they started testing on rinkeby a few weeks ago. so yes.

[Anonymous No.10611209]

>>10611095

[Anonymous No.10611210]

>>10611198
ok i got it downloaded

[Anonymous No.10611214]

>>10611198
Click on the article in the tweet. There's a 1080p screen recording.
>>10611039 tweet here

[Anonymous No.10611216]

>>10611199
they just supported it last week, catch up nigga

[Anonymous No.10611219]

>>10611060
want to join CRG?

give me your telegram @ and I add you, we are a small group of chainlink researchers
or send me a mail:
[e-mail]

[Anonymous No.10611224]

>>10611060

for real?

[Anonymous No.10611226]

lol this reminds me of when thomas said they need all eyes on the contracts when they start testing them a few months ago. but im pretty sure he didnt mean mainnet but meaning once on rinkeby (right now)

[Anonymous No.10611227]

this is a pretty obvious one, open law looks like it only supports ethereum and chainlink is according to vitalik the toyota of ethereum oracle projects. It would be more surprising if they weren't using chainlink.

[Anonymous No.10611232]

Waste of time sage this

[Anonymous No.10611235]

>>10611232
fuck off.

[Anonymous No.10611236]

Blockchain Based lending:

https://media.consensys.net/blockchain-based-lending-1eee5edabe8a

holy fucking shit

[Anonymous No.10611237]

>>10611210
Why would they leave the rinkeby tab open like that when chainlink just announced two weeks ago they’re testing on rinkeby? Is there anything else they could be testing or did you guys confirm with transaction times or something?

[Anonymous No.10611243]

Let this thread die guys. Don't waste a nuclear pump by letting the cat out of the bag early.

[Anonymous No.10611248]

>>10611236
open law is quite fucking based lads. its beginning to turn into what we fully expected little by little.

[Anonymous No.10611250]

>>10610228
This highlights a point that the whole crypto community is missing about smart contracts:

The promise of smart contracts isn't to have deterministic code that transfers ETH, it is to take the promise of blockchain (immutability, unkillability, trustless execution) and apply it to the real world.

In order to do that smart contracts have to work with existing business practices and must be able to show value without a huge hurdle to adoption.

The contract must:

• Execute in the local currency using existing bank accounts

• Have language that is understandable to a legal department, not just coders

• Use existing methods of endorsement to legally trigger the contract

Guess who had the foresight to know ALL of that before ever launching their project?

Chainlink

• Swift partnership which grants exclusive access to banking APIs which can freeze funds, check balances and transfer funds using existing bank accounts in local fiat currencies

• Zeppelin_OS, Reportix and all the other human-language smartcontract front ends partnerships to make Chainlink nodes the default nodes for data and API access for the actual people writing high value contracts in the corporate world.

• Docusign partnership which takes ESTABLISHED digital signature platform which already has legal precedent and is understood to be valid in the business world to use cryptographically secure triggers, linked to each entity, to start contracts.

The only people who could have seen all of these things years in advance would have insider/VC experience and have experience in the smart contract world back when blockchain was a novel concept.

If Chainlink doesn't succeed, smart contracts won't succeed in the foreseeable future. Docusign knows that, Swift knows that, Intel knows that and they all want a piece of the cash cow.

Sergey is a genius.

[Anonymous No.10611254]

>>10611216
OK let's summarise this shit.
Chainlink is now on Rinkeby testnet. OP anon finds a test contract mentioning OpenLaw from a week ago.
>https://ethfiddle.com/nCSacYWku7
Today OpenLaw tweeted that they're testing smart contracts and in their tweet there is a link to this article:
>https://media.consensys.net/controlling-autonomy-a-new-tool-to-stop-smart-contracts-once-executed-bc9de699bca0
In the article is a HD video of a screen recording where you can see they are testing on Rinkeby.

[Boat Anon No.10611258]

Guys if you are feeling grateful to me for posting all this stuff could you please do me a favour and downvote the thread on reddit.

I don’t like them being involved on linktrader

Thanks in advance

[Anonymous No.10611267]

>>10611258
got u man.

[Anonymous No.10611279]

>>10611254
basically this in a nutshell.

[Anonymous No.10611288]

>>10611258
Done

[Anonymous No.10611302]

>>10611219

@LUHawk#1097

I was the guy yesterday who found the Fremantle capital connection

[Anonymous No.10611315]

>>10611254
Shit even I understand

t. when brainlet

[Anonymous No.10611319]

>>10611254
Good summary.
>>10611258
I unironically love you guys.

[Anonymous No.10611329]

>>10611258
>>10611319
we're really going to make it. love you all. when yacht party?

[Anonymous No.10611330]

just bought some more LINK because of this. dont give a fuck

[Anonymous No.10611346]

There better be a movie about us.

[Anonymous No.10611350]

>>10610724
This is a linkpools' transaction. There are a lot of them from the last 2 months. It's literally nothing. But whatever...

[Anonymous No.10611353]

I can't believe this is happening. I fucking accidentally bought LINK on etherdelta right after the ICO because I was a newbie and didn't know how to use a dex. I was trying to buy KNC (kyber) and fucked it up. I decided to keep it and now a year later this shit looks like its actually going to happen...

[Boat Anon No.10611365]

>>10611219
My name is Mike Python on Telegram, I’ve got an avatar of a chinaman but I can’t find my @ name

[Anonymous No.10611366]

>>10611350
Read >>10611254

[Anonymous No.10611373]

>>10611346
Why did you delete this?

[Anonymous No.10611385]

>>10610681
check their twitter and where they are testing....

[Anonymous No.10611398]

>>10611373

Please delete Anon.

[Anonymous No.10611418]

[Anonymous No.10611431]

>>10611258
Sure, no problem dude

[Anonymous No.10611444]

OP is about a Ropsten transaction but everything else in this thread is about Rinkeby.

[Anonymous No.10611461]

full vid in HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhSyaPE29W0

[Anonymous No.10611471]

>>10611444

[Anonymous No.10611496]

>>10611444
the significance is that they are now testing on Rinkeby brainlet. times up perfectly since they recently started to

[Anonymous No.10611512]

This thread makes me feel like the crypto community is deluded and linkies are sane. I mean ffs this openlaw test with LINK is closer to real world normie adoption than any of plebbit's favorite shitcoins, but nobody gives a shit, it's like it's invisible to everybody but us, and the price doesn't change

[Anonymous No.10611516]

I don't know about you goys, but i'm getting sleepy.

[Anonymous No.10611525]

HODL

[Anonymous No.10611539]

>>10611258
done - thx a lot m8

[Anonymous No.10611561]

>>10611512
Unironically the oldest story in investing.

[Anonymous No.10611582]

>>10611561
100% true.

>“It takes remarkable patience to hold on to a stock in a company that excites you, but which everybody else seems to ignore. You begin to think everybody else is right and you are wrong. But where the fundamentals are promising, patience is often rewarded—Lukens stock went up sixfold in the fifteenth year, American Greetings was a sixbagger in six years, Angelica a sevenbagger in four, Brunswick a sixbagger in five, and SmithKline a threebagger in two.”

Peter Lynch

[Anonymous No.10611583]

In yesterday's research thread I posted about how Accord recently updated the whole list, added SmartContract, some law firms, a few others. They however removed Digital Asset during this update, which is very strange. I urged anons who have a twitter account to ask Accord directly about this removal, since they openly answer questions about partnerships/collaborations. One anon said he was on it, do we have any news about this?

[Anonymous No.10611590]

>>10611583
make a new thread about it please. i remember it and also know there was another anon who went to email them

[Anonymous No.10611593]

>>10611512
no. Its the fact that every "real world use for x shitcoin" has not seen any normie adoption. Bitcoin has been out for almost 10 years and there is no mainstream use for it.
There is reason why /g/ shits all over blockchain tech, its pointless and actually a negative since it consumes so much power

[Anonymous No.10611621]

>>10611590
>>10611607

[Anonymous No.10611630]

>>10611512

>it's like it's invisible to everybody but us

ya because linkmarines fud link to oblivion any time it leaves biz. normies don't know about chainlink, almost no one does. even if they do know about it, it takes a lot of reading to understand the big picture. there's an element of big brain-ness to owning link but an even bigger element is exposure.

[Anonymous No.10611649]

So if you actually look at the transactions and contracts they're demonstrating, there is no use of chainlink.
https://rinkeby.etherscan.io/address/0x550af6dccc444a07696d74abc8fef171e13311ea
It's just a series of test MakePayment() transactions. No chainlink, even the payment stopping behaviour they're so oddly proud of seems to be offchain. Why are linkies always so desperate to connect invisible dots?

[Anonymous No.10611663]

>>10611254
I'm not sure I'm convinced anymore. OP's post shows an EthFiddle for Ropsten. Inside the contract there are a number of ethereum addresses/contracts mentioned all for which are Ropsten based except the first bit regarding OpenLaw. For the OpenLaw segment, the address is a Rinkeby contract which makes sense as they are testing on Rinkeby. So we have this bizarre contract consisting of addresses for two different testnets?

It looks to me like someone has simply copy and pasted the two and put them into the same EthFiddle.

This isn't the first speculation about Consensys for Chainlink so they may well be testing, but OPs image does not show it.

[Anonymous No.10611719]

>>10611236
Hot!!

[Anonymous No.10611776]

>>10611199
When exactly did Chainlink start testing on Rinkeby?
Because here's another demo video from Openlaw's youtube showing tabs with Rinkeby action from July 11 (test time stamped July 9).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoWE26TKXqk

[Anonymous No.10611782]

>>10611649
>>10611663

>0x550af6dccc444a07696d74abc8fef171e13311ea

this is the contract, not the address. they excluded the addresses they used in the medium post on purpose so that we couldn't snoop.

[Anonymous No.10611785]

>>10611254
>ACTUALLY taking this seriously
omg lmao lol you guys so stupid omg

[Anonymous No.10611831]

>>10611776
According to Chainlink's pivotal tracker they only started using Rinkeby on July 31
Meaning Openlaw's been testing on Rinkeby before Chainlink
So there's no reason to believe the two are related and the assumptions in this thread turned out to be false?

[Anonymous No.10611845]

>>10610722
DDYOR?

[Anonymous No.10611865]

>>10611782
The address of what? This is the contract they used, and the transactions they made to it. Here is one of the transactions they made in the video: https://rinkeby.etherscan.io/tx/0xa63288e5e77b33468b61d209b3ea9ab6935c24fcee0e936d13ea47e0f09f9073
It's just an indirect payment to 0xcf6165e56c3383978f6eaaf58b314af41569c0f0
Here's the call stack, in case you thought a chainlink call might be hidden in there somewhere:
https://rinkeby.etherscan.io/vmtrace?txhash=0xa63288e5e77b33468b61d209b3ea9ab6935c24fcee0e936d13ea47e0f09f9073&type=gethtrace2
Absolutely nothing but an internal transaction of 0.001 ETH to their test payee.
It's like you guys lack any blockchain investigative skills at all.
>>10611831
Entirely correct, there is nothing here to suggest openlaw is using chainlink in any way.

[Anonymous No.10612108]

>>10611776

[Anonymous No.10612151]

>>10611865
this.

openlaw has been testing on rinkeby for a while now, way before 7/31

[Anonymous No.10612173]

>>10611865
>there is nothing to suggest openlaw is using chainlnk in any way.
are you a nolinker?

[Anonymous No.10612225]

>>10612173
I sold at $1.20
This is irrelevant.

[reluctant kneepad girl No.10612260]

>>10612225
>You sold at $1.20
This is irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.10612457]

>>10612225
okay so are you a nolinker?

[Anonymous No.10612461]

>>10612108
Date?

I encourage linkbros to annotate their random screenshots etc with the dates when they only show stuff like '3 hours ago'. Establishing a timeline is essential to seeing the big picture.

[Anonymous No.10612570]

>>10611199

It’s almost like you’re not on here 24/7 anon, get it together

[Anonymous No.10612572]

>>10611254
All the Rinkeby still look like crypto compare, but that doesn't mean anything bad

https://rinkeby.etherscan.io/address/0x01be23585060835e02b77ef475b0cc51aa1e0709#events

[Anonymous No.10612793]

>>10612260
arent u a trap?

[Anonymous No.10612868]

>>10610412

It's just hex, probably an encoded parameter for some system to read. Could literally just be a string like "Test" as part of an automated test suite.

>>10610328

What's wrong with Loom?

[Anonymous No.10612893]

>>10612461

[Anonymous No.10612976]

This thread worth reading or another larp?

[Anonymous No.10613133]

>>10612976

[Anonymous No.10613137]

>>10612976
stay poor nolinkie

[Anonymous No.10613205]

>>10610341
Dr Nazarov, I'm CIA

[Anonymous No.10613236]

>>10613133
>it's real
Holy shit, they won't give an official statement but they're basically saying yes

[Anonymous No.10613263]

>>10613236

[SAGE No.10613307]

>>10613236

what does "a @Consensys spoke" mean? I don't know how Twitter works - are they dropping hints?

[Anonymous No.10613351]

>>10613
They work with or are owned by ConsenSys

[Anonymous No.10613376]

>>10613236
that reply is extremely generic. no hashtags related to chainlink

[SAGE No.10613392]

>>10613376

I tried to ctrl+f and couldn't see Chainlink there either

[Anonymous No.10613422]

>>10613376

openlaw didn't reply, they liked the question that was asked.

[Anonymous No.10613427]

>>10613376
>>10613392
there's no reply you fucking retarded boomers. learn to use the fucking internet for once

[Anonymous No.10613441]

>>10613422
That's pretty much a yes then.

[SAGE No.10613445]

>>10613376
>>10613422
>>10613427

KEK I can't believe I'm that big of a boomer wow.

t. 27 year-old boomer

[Anonymous No.10613468]

>>10613236
Dig through @LINKNewsOracles followers and watch the rabbit hole get sorry deeper

>>10613236

[Anonymous No.10613553]

>>10613468
Love how actual real corporate Twitter accounts follow a shill account kek

[Anonymous No.10613558]

>>10613468
I know about Howard Carl. But I mostly see anonymous followers. Who else are you thinking of.

[Anonymous No.10613604]

>>10613558
@annetgriffin @cryptohm

[Anonymous No.10613675]

>>10613558
The Salesforce girl wasn't a VIP if I'm not mistaken.
Gonser follows one of the other shill accounts iirc.

[Anonymous No.10613720]

Her biggest follower is American express. Annetgriffin from open law. Also follows a link account

[Anonymous No.10614299]

>>10610611
Hyperledger will own link tokens and a node, and will call the APIs on behalf of their clients. They’ll handle all token-fiat conversion and just invoice ther clients every month.

[Anonymous No.10614540]

Why does this only have 46 views?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhSyaPE29W0

[Anonymous No.10614706]

>>10613205
lmfao I saw that guy around campus before
he barely got his degree last year

[Anonymous No.10614747]

>>10614540
Makes me wonder if we’re closer to adoption than we realise.

[Anonymous No.10614881]

>>10610487
Sweet fun bro. Well crafted.

[Anonymous No.10614895]

>>10614299
Thank you Steve! Any more inside
info for us?

[Anonymous No.10614899]

>>10614747
I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH LINK

[Anonymous No.10615648]

Does not clearly shows they are going to use LINK. This is FUD.

[Anonymous No.10615679]

I'm actually more qualified to talk about this than most anons.I'm employed with a cyber-techno machinations company, I do a lot of security analyst programming type work. Open source, decentralized, APIs, partnerships, you name it. We'd be one of the first companies in line for something like Chainlink, if the decentralized smart contract space had more value over traditional data exchanges. There's a catch though, an underlying flaw more deeply embedded in the bedrock of LINK than the very code itself. The flaw is with the concept, and it's this: Companies won't actually go through the hassle of trusting their data API's through crypto.

Now I can already hear your keyboards going frantic, but hear me out. /biz/ hates banks, and traditional data providers. But actual companies, businesses, and investors do not. There's an old saying you might have heard of: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!". The idea that any of our bosses would give us the go ahead if we approached them to put our companies valuable data in a smart contract on a cryptocurrency called Chainlink, that they've never heard of, we'd be laughed out at best and fired on the spot at worst. We already have API data buyers and providers we trust.

'But Chainlink is trustless!' I hear you cry, but is that really a good thing? Just listen to the sound of it. Businesses don't want to spend millions of dollars on something that is trustLESS, they want something trustFUL. 'But the reputation system!', doesn't that defeat the whole point of your coin? If companies only trust nodes with high reputation, what's the difference between trusting banks and data providers that already have reputation, but in real life not on a computer screen.

The fact is, LINK is going to share the same fate as ETH will. A lot of 'real world application' hype, with a lot of 'crypto world application' reality. Only, this billion supply coin isn't going to come close to the $1k that Etherum hit. Happy gambling though anons.

[Anonymous No.10615742]

>>10615679
is this literally copypasta now?

[Anonymous No.10615752]

>>10615742
how fuckin new are you man

[Anonymous No.10615809]

>>10615752
i try not to come on here because i just lose my money believing in crypto every time instead of taking profits

[Anonymous No.10616290]

>>10615679
I'm actually mo' qualified ta rap 'bout dis than most anons.I'm employed wit' a cyber-techno machinations company, i do a lot o' security analyst programmin' type work. Open source, decentralized, apis, partnerships, yo' name dat shit. We'd be one o' da first companies in line fo' somethang like chainlink, if da decentralized smart contract space had mo' value ova traditional data exchanges. Therez a catch though, an underlyin' flaw mo' deeply embedded in da bedrock o' link than da very code itself. Tha flaw be wit' tha concept, n' dat shitz dis: companies won't actually git through tha hassle o' trustin' their muthafuckin' data apiz through crypto.

naw i can already hea yo' goddamn keyboards goin' frantic, N' therez Ain't nuthin' but hea me out. /biz/ hates banks, n' traditional data providers. N' therez Ain't nuthin' but actual companies, businesses, n' investors do not. Therez an old sayin' yo' might have heard o': "if dat shit ain't broke, don't fix dat shit!". Tha idea dat any o' our bosses would give us tha git ahead if we approached 'em ta put our companies valuable data in a smart contract on a cryptocurrency called chainlink, dat they've neva heard o', we'd be laughed out at best n' fired on tha spot at worst. We already have api data buyers n' providers we trust.

[Anonymous No.10616308]

>>10616290
'but chainlink be trustless!' i hea yo' cry, N' therez Ain't nuthin' but be dat really a wack thang? just listen ta da sound o' dat shit. Businesses don't want ta spend millions o' dollars on somethang dat be trustless, they want somethang trustful. 'but tha reputation system!', doesn't dat defeat tha whole point o' yo' goddamn coin? if companies only trust nodes wit' high reputation, What the fuckz tha difference between trustin' banks n' data providers dat already have reputation, N' therez Ain't nuthin' but in real life not on a computa screen.

da fact be, link be goin' ta share da same fate as eth gotta. A lot o' 'real ghetto application' hype, wit' a lot o' 'crypto ghetto application' realitizzle. Only, dis billion supply coin isn't goin' ta come close ta da $1k dat etherum hit. Happy gamblin' though anons.

[Anonymous No.10616642]

>>10613133
So it’s real ? What the hell does chainlink actually have a working product? Every other project would have made a big announcement about this.

[Anonymous No.10616709]

>>10616290
Real spit unk. Preciate you lookin out like dat n spittin game to us yunginz tryna come up out cheer. 100.

[Anonymous No.10616747]

>>10616642
You in da shkreet now ainnuh.

We ain wit da yappin
We ain wit da cappin
We just wit the fappin
At the big booty brappin

A nigga gon talk, I can see it in he eye
Imma steal all his link, imma make he mama cry
I sell it fo da low, but I get it for da high
Dat fomo be a bitch, lil nigga, I ain lie.

100

[Anonymous No.10616794]

>>10615742
Its allways been pasta

[Anonymous No.10616803]

>>10616642
Link doesnt do hype.

[Anonymous No.10617483]

This thread is still up? We must be in despair, /biz/ is slow again.
>>10612260
Glad you agree
>>10612457
Depends on exactly what you mean by that. I own no link at present but I'm not opposed to it. Waiting for a good reentry.

[Anonymous No.10617518]

bump

[Anonymous No.10618082]

>>10613133
HOLY FUCK

[Anonymous No.10618106]

You fucking faggots can't see past your own stench, chainlink is a Slav scam. Steve Ellis isn't a real person and Sergey is too busy looking at the latest additions to the McDonald's menu. Node operators don't even require link and the two other hires, community managers, were found after they did a YouTube review on beanie bears, which coincidently mirrors the value of the internet bean's your talking about. Muh assblaster, you fucktards can't even tell that he used the Dennis system for his larp, he literally used a sitcom technique to pick up women on you idiots.

[reluctant kneepad girl No.10618113]

>>10617483
>Waiting for a good reentry
how's that waiting coming along this morning, faggot

[Anonymous No.10618130]

>>10618113
How's that faggot coming along, morning?

[Anonymous No.10618132]

>>10617483
>Waiting for a good reentry.
you better be quick. it's happening.

[Anonymous No.10618216]

>>10618106
>not holding beanie bears
>nolinker

Anon, I’m not sure you’re gonna make it

[Anonymous No.10618269]

I just realized my 12k wont be enough..

[Anonymous No.10618282]

>>10618269
It’s plenty.

[reluctant kneepad girl No.10618304]

>>10618269
It's not enough.

[Anonymous No.10618350]

[Anonymous No.10618360]

>>10612225
No you didn’t you fucking LARPing faggot