Forbes is gay and bluepilled

[Anonymous No.14597105]

>money they can afford to lose
>being all in

[Anonymous No.14597107]

>>14597105
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ktorpey/2019/07/04/with-all-eyes-on-the-bitcoin-price-another-crypto-is-up-over-800-this-year/#24bf86327a69

[Anonymous No.14597328]

>>14597105
>think twice before buying after an 8x
This advice is redpilled af.

[Anonymous No.14597339]

>>14597105
Read as: Forbes are all in and don't want you to know it

[Anonymous No.14597353]

>>14597105
It's just some random bitcoin maximalist who does no research on, and refuses to acknowledge the utility of, the blockchain.

He's not posting from forbes, he's posting to forbes.

[Anonymous No.14597362]

>>14597105
If Forbes associates and staff were all in, this is probably what they'd write. It's sensible in general but given the project possibilities it's clearly FUD.

[Anonymous No.14597364]

>>14597105
>link shilled on forbes
cant believe this shit. you guys have gone too far with this meme.

[Anonymous No.14597389]

Being real for a moment, it's still the truth.

Even Link could suddenly hit a snag, a hack, an unfixable bug and be worth zero in a flash

All of crypto is a gamble

[Anonymous No.14597403]

>>14597389
>Just work for 65 years and leave your children a 70% paid off mortgage

[Anonymous No.14597448]

>>14597403
Imagine posting such a tired response to just am honest comment?

We've seen shitloads of projects go bellyup at random

I'm in 15k Link, but that doesn't mean I have to be blindly believe it's s sure thing because nothing is in crypto

[Anonymous No.14597463]

kek, in the context of this guy's background it's extremely bullish. he's a classical bitcoin maximalist, read his little bio below... the fact that chainlink raises an interest even in btc maximalists is heavy shit

[Anonymous No.14597479]

>Forbes caught holdin

[Anonymous No.14597487]

>>14597105
All money is money you can afford to lose.

[Anonymous No.14597527]

>>14597448
>while I agree with you
Imagine using using plebbit spacing straight off the boat.

[Anonymous No.14597568]

>>14597448
It's all so tiresome.

I would have said the same thing before it became evident that they are being actively supported and rolled out by the biggest names in the data industry.

The fact that the google cloud integration and the oracle rollout was engineered behind closed doors indicates that a large group (Larger than google and oracle) have planned to establish a monopoly before other crypto projects even have time to understand what has happened.

I doubt wholeheartedly that Oracle will simply roll over and cancel their rollout, not when they are on the verge of cementing their position as a data leader for the next two decades. The blockchain and Smart Contracts are the pinnacle of disruptive tech, the next stage after the internet. The first company to solve the oracle problem in a usable fashion WILL be the gatekeeper of the fourth industrial revolution. Oracle and Google will defend this project until their last breath, because letting it fail will mean that someone else that 'does it better' will usurp their position and their fall from grace and panicked scrambling to stay relevant be the end of them.

[Anonymous No.14597901]

>>14597389
>eing real for a moment, it's still the truth.
>Even Link could suddenly hit a snag, a hack, an unfixable bug and be worth zero in a flash
>All of crypto is a gambl

I would say now it is the same probability that the piano will fall on you from the skyscraper.
Life is a gamble

[Anonymous No.14597921]

>>14597105
>buying this coin today may not be too dissimilar from playing the slot machines

Wheres the lie?

[Anonymous No.14597942]

>>14597389
Could

you

even

space

more

like

a

Nig

Nogger

[Anonymous No.14598273]

>>14597364
FUDsters BTFO

[Anonymous No.14598285]

>>14597105
Am I the only one who doesn't feel that link is a gamble?

[Anonymous No.14598336]

>>14597463
jesus fuck what a retard

[Anonymous No.14598401]

>>14598285
Everything is a gamble anon, but this seems like the best option out of the lot

[Anonymous No.14598462]

>Forbes

[Anonymous No.14598506]

quote:

While LINK has been the darling of the crypto asset market in 2019, it’s important to remember that these sorts of coins can fall just as fast as they rise, especially when they rise as fast as LINK has this year.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ktorpey/2019/07/04/with-all-eyes-on-the-bitcoin-price-another-crypto-is-up-over-800-this-year/#121cb6c27a69

[Anonymous No.14598608]

>>14597389
You're unironically retarded. Even bitconnect is not worth zero.

[Anonymous No.14598739]

Such a limp, boomer article

[Anonymous No.14598789]

Qnt (quant) is where it's at, just compare marketcaps.

[Anonymous No.14598985]

my only question is why is link so big? From what ive seen its a small team with a small product they've made. Why would google need to integrate it or any other big company for that matter? Especially when Google's own system of nodes on their own token would prob go huge much faster

[Anonymous No.14599055]

>>14597568
>Oracle and Google will defend this project until their last breath, because letting it fail will mean that someone else that 'does it better' will usurp their position and their fall from grace and panicked scrambling to stay relevant be the end of them.
kek what?

Oracle and Google will create a competitive service as soon as there's a market for it. The only reason they don't right now is:

#1. No one needs oracles. Chainlink been out for months on test net, no one using it.
#2. The tech for actual decentralized oracles isn't even out yet. Chainlink hasn't even started making their shit decentralized.

Did Facebook use Maker? Did facebook use Tether? Did Facebook use Hashgraph? Did Facebook use Ethereum? Did Facebook use EOS?

Nope, they're making their own. You can be sure that by the time oracles gather some users, Google/Oracle/Whoever is gonna make their own, and CRUSH Chainlink.

Even if Chainlink has 5 years mover advantage and meme patented TEE, Google will DESTROY them.

Google could literally release a service and get more users (and more decentralization) in 1 month than Chainlink could in 5 years. And they will, as soon as there is demand. There is no demand for Chainlink's product now. It's been out on testnet for months. No one using it.

I hope that makes you very salty, sub 80 IQ LINK poster.

[Anonymous No.14599073]

>>14597105
Forbes is a lefty magazine, just like nearly other mainstream outlet. We had a large poll in germany among journalists here and it turned out they are OVERWHELMINGLY left-green. like added up 70-80% lefties. only very small fraction conservative or right wing. Journalism itself as a field attracts all these losers and weaklings that can only talk but not produce. It's a pattern that you have likely as well in the US. Written stories are the worst, they are full with lies and made up bullshit. TV is 'slightly' better but anything aside from a livestream gets still spinned and manipulated towards leftism. We need to gas these assholes.

[Anonymous No.14599078]

Guys why did Forbes say ChainLink doesn’t actually need to use the link tokens? G-guys??

[Anonymous No.14599105]

>>14599055
Google ackschully has a history of acquiring projects similar to Chainlink, rather than starting development on their own.
They obviously wouldn't buy out Smart Contract if they didn't get any control of the tokens with it, but maybe the large amount of LINK held by the team will make this option viable?

[Anonymous No.14599116]

>>14597568
>Oracle and Google will defend this project until their last breath
A retard's hands wrote this.

[Anonymous No.14599145]

Yeah and you could buy your local currency and for it to inflate to it being worth nothing aswell.
Investing in anything is a gamble, some with less risk and less reward and some with more risk and more reward.

[Anonymous No.14599173]

>>14599105
Google isn't gonna buy Chainlink for many reasons:

1. It's extremely overpriced. $4bil marketcap for something 2 guys been working on for 2 years and with 0 adoption. If the price corrects downwards 99%, maybe. Or if it gets 100000x more adoption and stays the same price. Both impossible scenarios.
2. The tech is easy to recreate, everything is open source and there's nothing innovative about Chainlink except TEEs. Google ain't gonna spend $4bil for TEEs.
3. Legal uncertainties. Link tokens were certainly a pure unregistered security being traded by retail american investors for a full 2 years.
4. There's no money to be made by buying Chainlink. The creators already made it by raising 30 mil and creating $4bil worth of tokens out of thin air. The money to be made is by creating a new token out of thin, keeping 65% of it, and that's your profit.

[Anonymous No.14599229]

>>14597389
$1000 EOY FAGGOT. WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?

[Anonymous No.14599293]

>>14599173
1. Market caps in crypto are to be taken with a grain of salt. I think this would be considered in a potential deal.
2. I disagree
3. This is a legitimate worry. One can make assumptions based off of Coinbase, but they're not in the leagues of Google.
4. There's plenty of money to be made. Maybe there would be more money in building an in-house solution, but that's not Google.

[Anonymous No.14599345]

>>14599293
>1. Market caps in crypto are to be taken with a grain of salt. I think this would be considered in a potential deal.
Absolutely false
>2. I disagree
You're wrong. You have no argument brainlet.
>3. This is a legitimate worry. One can make assumptions based off of Coinbase, but they're not in the leagues of Google.
>4. There's plenty of money to be made. Maybe there would be more money in building an in-house solution, but that's not Google.
You're wrong. You have no argument to back up your claim. Chainlink created $4bil worth of value out of thin air in 2 years. They will NEVER make that type of revenue from anything else other than printing tokens.

I have bad news for you, your IQ is low, and most likely you will not succeed in life.

[Anonymous No.14599371]

>>14599345
why are linkies all EXTREMELY and OBVIOUSLY stupid? Don't any of you guys have an IQ over 100 or some kind rudimentary understanding of logic or technology?

[Anonymous No.14599629]

>>14599371
RIGHT BACK AT YA, BUDDY

[42 No.14599673]

>>14597105
They must say that
Normies are really that bad and would blame you for giving them the idea without taking any ownership of their decisions.

[42 No.14599695]

>>14599073
Journalists are intellectual prostitutes who will write and/or say anything you want for the right price.

[Anonymous No.14599718]

>>14597105
>>14597107

Well shit, LINK is being recognized even by the Boomers and their media.


$100 EOM

[Anonymous No.14599937]

>>14599073
>Forbes is a lefty magazine
how mentally ill do you have to be to believe this?
fucking back to /pol/ with you

[Anonymous No.14600336]

>>14599345
>>14599371
nice arguments

[Anonymous No.14600347]

>>14599937
jew