/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.13490770]

Can anyone explain to a brainlet why Chainlink is so revolutionary? Why would companies pay to use oracles? Isn't it cheaper to have a Pajeet behind a desk confirming the authenticity of information?

[Anonymous No.13490946]

>>13490770
>comparing the trust of decentralized nodes with collateral on the line to the trust of a pajeet who doesn't speak english properly
You just answered your own question

[Anonymous No.13491053]

linkpill yourself

http://bizpill.online/LinkPill.html

your question is basically asking, why should I pay to eat at a restaurant I can afford when eating out of the dumpster is cheaper. Can't I just pay a hobo to tell me which morsels are safe to eat?

[Anonymous No.13491181]

>>13490770
>Can anyone explain to a brainlet why Chainlink is so revolutionary?
Sure.

Chainlink was the first time in recorded history that it was proven that 32 million dollars could be raised from gullibles to fund the development of something to which they would have absolutely zero entitlement.

They said it couldn't be done, and Sirgay proved them wrong.

[Anonymous No.13491188]

>>13491053
OP here
Yes... eating out of a dumpster is cheaper.

[Anonymous No.13491202]

>>13491181
>to which they would have absolutely zero entitlement.

Apart from owning tokens or running nodes? What are you even talking about?

[Anonymous No.13491226]

>>13491188
This.

[Anonymous No.13491241]

>>13491188
Checked.. hobos have experience with what is safe and unsafe to eat out of dumpster

[Anonymous No.13491244]

>>13491202
You honestly believe JP Morgan is going to knock on your door, cap in hand, and ask you nicely to sell them your Links? Or that HSBC will write you a nice letter ask for a few? Maybe you think Goldman Sachs will send a director down with instructions to kiss your ass?

You are TOTALLY adorable

[Anonymous No.13491296]

>>13491188
if it's
>>13491053
>eat at a restaurant you can afford

this means that the price is not substantial to cause you any loss or dent in your wealth. When you get to a certain net worth, there are things that no longer cause an expense. That's a central point in the analogy I used because the institutions that will use LINK are not trying to save money on transactions, they want Quality of transactions so they can be the standard for transacting in whatever off chain data they are linking.

for example, if the S&P wanted to incorporate crypto trading, they could have an ongoing contract to chainlink the data appropriately. They can charge a premium to investors who use the S&P for that new purpose and have them absorb some of the extra cost and everyone is thrilled to have a trustable transaction between two completely different entities.

[Anonymous No.13491315]

>>13491181
>to which they would have absolutely zero entitlement.

u wot m8

[Anonymous No.13491337]

>>13491296
>the price is not substantial to cause you any loss or dent in your wealth
faggot, it's about getting RICH in the first place

[Anonymous No.13491339]

>>13491244
>tfw you can no longer tell who's fudding for fun and who's an actual brainlet who genuinely believes Link is worthless.

I hope for your sake you're the former anon.

[Anonymous No.13491344]

>>13490770
>Can anyone explain to a brainlet why Chainlink is so revolutionary?
No. Go away. Don't buy it.

[Anonymous No.13491372]

>>13491337
>RICH
>not Wealthy.
>thinking a stack of cash will last forever
>doesn't understand that making it means having productive assets that pay dividends

it's clear that our financial goals differ, perhaps this accounts for some of the discrepancy between our viewpoints.

[Anonymous No.13491393]

>>13491226
samefaggot got caught, go fuck yourself start searching on waruso

[Anonymous No.13491405]

>>13491372

[Anonymous No.13491406]

>>13491393
I'm the real OP. That other guy who said he was OP was lying, but I agreed with him.

[Anonymous No.13491425]

Link is useless. I feel bad for people that actually believe in this shit.

[OP No.13491446]

>>13491406
>t-the other guy was lying