/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.10623234]

Where did all the FUD go? Come here sweetie ;)

[Anonymous No.10623245]

>>10623234

Fresh batch of rat poison, with more sugar water this time

[Anonymous No.10623263]

>>10623234
Why did they change their logo? I liked the other one better

[Anonymous No.10623290]

>>10623245

your forced memes are so shitty

[reluctant kneepad girl No.10623297]

What's up, shitlinkers?

[Anonymous No.10623312]

people who fud chainlink were found and had their throats slit, maintaining them alive so that they can whistle the US anthem through their exposed windpipes.

[Anonymous No.10623409]

>>10623297

all day every day me and all of my boys in the discord are shilling chainlink and there's nothing you can do about it. it's moon time baybee. you had a year- an entire fucking year to accumulate a comfy quantity of chainlink and you just couldn't make it happen. you couldn't stop paying student debts or rent or buying shitty microbrews or jacking off into a sock and me and my crew are here to remind you of it. you passed up on a year of prime time link accumulation and now it's time to eat shit. fuck every single one of you fud slinging faggots. my homies and i are better than all of you and i'm not even foolin. faggots. you're all weak fucking faggots and i hope you don't make it. there's no room for you at the top. eat shit.

[Anonymous No.10624456]

>>10623263
The simple Link cube logo is on the surface of the inner cube of the hypercube logo.

[Anonymous No.10624789]

>>10623234
Zoom out faggot

[Anonymous No.10624898]

>>10623409
>the discord group got their 2x. now it's time for some creative reverse FUD so they rebuy on the lowr
so, is this pasta an 'outburst' fabricated by the neo-nazis to divert attention of themselves or is it just a crippled covert op to scare off joe 'fomo' sixpack?

linkshills are a shitshow, but also entertaining in their complete lack of competence.

[Anonymous No.10625035]

>>10623409
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 APIs 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.