/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.13923669]

There were no coordinator contract developments in Pivotal. You could see the penalty/staking contract was not developed yet. They explicitly said SGX integration and reputation wouldn't be part of the first version. If you can't logically deduce that this is the mainnet they would launch, you are a brainlet. They are basically testing aggregation now, and will get proof of concepts up and running. Why would they drop stuff like SWIFT when it literally cannot be used without SGX. And no big boys are going to use the network without staking, SGX and reputation. The aggregation contract working is the bullish signal. Don't fall for the fud marines

[Anonymous No.13923712]

Node KYC is absolutely necessary for this stage, and it is obviously not a long-term feature. Think for youself anons

[Anonymous No.13923762]

Don't forget: The main part, the aggregation contract, actually works. It's launched with 40+ partners that are gonna test this for the big boys. SGX developments have been ongoing so they are not starting from scratch with that. It won't be years

[Anonymous No.13923828]

>>13923712
>think for yourself
>4chan
Heh

[Anonymous No.13923843]

>GUYS STOP SELLING, THIS IS BULLISH TRUST ME!!! ASSBLASTER WAS REAL!!!!!

[Anonymous No.13923855]

>>13923669
>>13923712
>>13923762
>will be years before we see $1.50 again

[Anonymous No.13923865]

oh boy, second page of cmc here we go

[Anonymous No.13923903]

>>13923843
Lol okay boy who cried wolf.. there are ppl who just won’t make it on this journey

[Anonymous No.13923913]

>>13923855
Unironically this. I can't believe people on this board thought we would see any type of major adoption in 2019. This is going to bleed straight back down to 60-80c over the next year, where it could very well remain for a couple years after that.
I have said countless times that we are far earlier than anyone here seems to realize

[Anonymous No.13923935]

>>13923669
back to the top 200 in a few days cap this

[Anonymous No.13923943]

Node KYC isn't even FUD. You don't need anonymous node participation to have decentralised data transfer. Decentralised just means multiple nodes doing the processing.
If you have a network with 10k nodes where every node is a registered individual then you have a decentralised solution.

[Anonymous No.13923959]

[Anonymous No.13923993]

>>13923959
Why didn't I listen and sell.

[Anonymous No.13924075]

>>13923669
logical but at what stage can we expect the big announcements?
Would SWIFT or Microsoft or whatever want to use neet nodes with SGX?
do we need reputation system + SGX + ..? before SWIFT would come in?

[Anonymous No.13924186]

>>13924075
I don't think neet nodes will run SGX nodes for SWIFT payments. Remember: SWIFT payment nodes will not require decentralization. They will not use the aggregator address. So for example, PayPal will probably run their own SGX node. And SWIFT will be similar. These just require SGX. Not reputation or staking. HOWEVER, for SWIFT and other payment outputs to be relevant and useful for the network, we need high quality data inputs, which will only be available with staking and/or reputation. I suspect staking contract will come next, then reputation, then SGX, then coordinator contract. This is just my guess though

[Anonymous No.13924227]

>>13923943
Yes and no. Node kyc makes the network more vulnerable to legal coercion.

[Anonymous No.13924330]

No wonder Vitalik hates chainlink when they can solve Eth problems while working on their own.

[Anonymous No.13924349]

Neet nodes should wait until the network is stabilized and reputation makes KYC obsolete

[Anonymous No.13924383]

>>13923993
you still have time, each day will drop about 20c more

[Anonymous No.13924411]

Isn’t intel going to shit though?

[Anonymous No.13924418]

>>13923712
>Node KYC is absolutely necessary for this stage, and it is obviously not a long-term feature. Think for youself anons
YUP! Malicious node operator sybling the network when its in its infancy would completley destroy it before it even got off the ground.

Anyone else submit their info to the team a year ago when they had the option on their website "Im interested in running a link node"? Hope this gives me a leg up.

[Anonymous No.13924485]

>>13923903
I turned $5k into $60k with this shitcoin. How’s hodling working out?

[Anonymous No.13924524]

>>13923712
Rory said kyc would stay longterm but as an optional feature, so people can chosse what kind of nodes/providers they want to use.

[Anonymous No.13924643]

>>13923913
But on Silicon Valley they create new companies and make huge breakthroughs in a matter of days. Why can't sergey just take a bunch of adderall and make it go faster?

[Anonymous No.13924645]

>>13924524
Sure, listing services can choose to have any kind of KYC they want, but reputation and staking are much better measures of reliability that will make KYC unnecessary and inconvenient. You want the network to be censorship resistant

[Anonymous No.13924653]

I agree with pretty much everything in this thread, just curious how long you fags think it will take before this is actually a useable product (SGX, reputation, etc)? Based on the pace they've been going I'd say 2021 no earlier. Which leads to my next question... what other shitcoins pumps are you guys riding in the meantime while LINK bleeds back to $.50? I have my eye on HOT and ZIL.

[Anonymous No.13924698]

>>13924485
You didn't turn it into anything, someone just bought your shit coin. You crypto kids are NOT businessmen.

[Anonymous No.13924725]

>>13924186
you seem smart, so what is your take on when we'll get price action in relation to announcements?
SGX is released and then.. some big announcement from SWIFT/PayPal etc?
for some reason I can't imagine this happening one day. we never get big announcements.
just trying to get some hopium

[Anonymous No.13924727]

>>13924643
Because a large part of LINK's success is dependent on rigid financial institutions that are currently run (mostly) by boomers. Adoption won't come instantly.

[Anonymous No.13924765]

>>13924698
> T. Boomer

[Anonymous No.13924773]

>>13924727
I know. I was just messing around. Even under ideal conditions, software development takes years.

[Anonymous No.13924855]

All linkies had to do was look at Ropsten traffic

[Anonymous No.13924868]

>>13924773
I should have sold.

[Anonymous No.13924889]

>>13924868
There's no telling what it'll do in the interim. They have a real product that's working as promised. They didn't overextend themselves and it seems like they have good heads working on this.

[Anonymous No.13924917]

>>13924725
Well, you don't necessarily need SWIFT for the price action you want. If proof of concepts start getting off the ground, and staking and/or reputation later allows for a shitton of dapp activity, that's basically the story of Ethereum. Derivatives, bonds, trade finance and insurance won't be until SGX integration is ready for off-chain payments. This is when we really moon but people outside /biz/ may connect the dots before then and cause price action. I think all this could happen within a year

[Anonymous No.13924937]

>>13923935
I don't think you understand how a ranking system works. It's already in the top 200.

[Anonymous No.13924960]

>>13924643
>>13924773
Don't forget this is blockchain development. And completely new territory. It's a lot slower than other software development

[Anonymous No.13924993]

>>13924725
Also, don't forget what a catalyst staking will be when the supply is locked up. That's next I suspect

[Anonymous No.13925026]

>>13924917
>could happen within a year
Yeah you have to factor in btc halving in here and next year's bull run. LINK will probably "moon" within the next year as everything else does, just a question of how much and then of course when to sell/buy back in.

[Anonymous No.13925036]

>>13925026
Fuck. I don’t want to wait a year.

[Anonymous No.13925073]

>>13925036
You're going to be waiting longer (to make it) unless you're invested in other coins or have a seriously large stack of LINK.

[Anonymous No.13925094]

>>13924960
That's why I said
>Even under ideal conditions

[Anonymous No.13925119]

>>13923669
based and redpilled