/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.16003079]

Is it possible for LINK to be worth more than Ethereum? Someone explain the tokenomics

[Anonymous No.16003105]

>>16003079
>is it possible for an ERC20 token that hasn’t done shit for 2 years to be worth more than the platform it got printed on and pretends to want to serve one day

How dumb are you exactly?

[Anonymous No.16003112]

>>16003079
No because Sergey has yet to dump his millions of tokens on stinkies.

[Anonymous No.16003116]

>>16003079

[Anonymous No.16003133]

>>16003079
>2.46
It only gets BETTER AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHHSAHAHAHGAGAH

[Anonymous No.16003154]

>>16003079
No we're full get out.

[Anonymous No.16003173]

>>16003079
>Someone explain the tokenomics
Big Sergey owns 65% of all the supply and HE WILL DUMP ON YOU whenever you pump his coin

[Anonymous No.16003175]

Nodes want to compete to serve data to smart contracts. High value contracts require higher collateral. The more collateral a node is holding, the more jobs it can take, and higher value jobs, so the more profit it can make.
Competition among node operators to hold the most collateral (which must be denominated in the LINK token) could drive individual token price to astronomical heights as supply dwindles and demand for collateral increases.
Ethereum, while likely to be the world's first decentralised computer and the grandaddy of smart contract platforms, only needs the token to fuel transactions on the network.
The economic case for the Chainlink token has a much stronger potential for both growing in value and maintaining that value. There is no reason at all why Chainlink's market cap would not exceed Ethereum's, in fact I fully expect it to do so in the next 10 years.

[Anonymous No.16003194]

>>16003175
>10 years
my dick wont be working then

[Anonymous No.16003231]

>>16003175
damn nice

[Anonymous No.16003244]

>>16003079
>>16003105
>Be ETH, entire purpose is to be used for dapps as gas. You only need tiny tiny amounts for most dapp transactions, so little that the effective supply is actually far greater than LINKs 1B. Coins never stop printing. No way to passively make income.
>Be LINK. Smaller effective supply, need much more because you’ll need collateral to match billions and trillions of dollars in contracts. Essentially require each LINK to be worth a large amount so that it’s fractions can be worth enough for the transactions. On top of this, no supply because people will want it for staking collateral for passive income. Only LINK on the market will be very expensive, and zero more will ever be minted.

Not a chance for ETH to outpace LINK in the long run.

[Anonymous No.16003250]

>>16003079

Not a chance.

There is no demand for smart contracts on Blockchain.

[Anonymous No.16003267]

>>16003244
Everybody should get their 32 LINK for staking asap

[Anonymous No.16003268]

>>16003194
Dude you'll be able to get nanobots injected into your dick that not only give you an erection on command, but who go through all the palaver of wooing roasties on the internet so you can focus on playing video games instead.

[Anonymous No.16003398]

>>16003244
>$542 trillion of derivative contracts that need to be collateralized
>current market cap of link is $1 billion
>542 trillion / 1 billion = 542k

542k * 5000 = 2.71 Billion.
heh looks like my $5k stack might be worth a lot some day

[Anonymous No.16003579]

>>16003079
This is some Freud tier denial. Link is literally the greatest scam in crypto history.

[Anonymous No.16004044]

>>16003079

[Anonymous No.16004071]

>>16003267
what's more valuable? 32 eth or 2100 link? return on 32 eth won't exceed the value of that many link

[Anonymous No.16004126]

>>16003194
You'll be able to order a new one.

[Anonymous No.16004195]

>>16003079
reminder that LINK is NOTHING like ETH.

1. ETH had a testnet with thousands of users and finished mainnet 1 year after ICO, and only raised 16mil. Chainlink had a testnet and mainnet with ZERO users after 2 years and 32mil. It has gained ZERO adoption (the partnerships aren't using it). The level of developer adoption and excitement for ETH vs LINK is absolutely incomparable, LINK has none.

2. The Ethereum tech was actually innovative. It was the first successful attempt at a smart contract platform. It was decentralized and working one year after ICO. Chainlink only has centralized oracles (Sergey is lying about decentralization) which are not new or innovative. Their "innovative" solution to sybil resistant consensus is KYC.

3. The Ethereum foundation only had 1% of the Ethereum supply after ICO. The Chainlink team has 65%. Also when Ethereum was $1, it had a market cap of less than $100,000,000. It was actually a low market cap gem. Chainlink's real marketcap (if you count the 650,000,000 tokens in Sergey's wallet, ready to sell) is currently $2,000,000,000, which makes it an incredibly overpriced top 10 coin, not a low market cap gem like Ethereum was at the time.

4. Chainlink has already had mainstream exposure. It's made the front page of crypto subreddits countless times, was covered in forbes and every news outlet imaginable. Yet, even after all this attention, it has failed to get any developer adoption. It is fair to say that every single dev in the space knows about Chainlink, and decides not to use it. There are many projects running oracles in production, none of them choose to use Chainlink.

[Anonymous No.16004259]

>>16003175
>>16003244
>>16003398
You're assuming LINK will capture a big % of the entire world, when it has failed to get ONE SINGLE DAPP to use it, even though their test net has been available for 1 year.

Chainlink has failed. It won't capture anything. Name a single dapp with users using Chainlink.

The only thing keeping it afloat in terms of price are the fake partnerships who are not actually using it.

[Anonymous No.16004299]

>>16003398
Yep, more money than the entire available monetary supply will be invested into a erc20 token and companies will put their entire net worth into link because they have simply no other choice than to use exactly this json parser and not any other of the readily available ones.

[Anonymous No.16004360]

>>16003079
Bunch of 4channers tried to force it as /ourcoin/. Basically, the ceo of Chainlink (Sergey), a known Russian scammer paid Nigerians and Indians to shill it as the next big thing © . The erc-scam pumped from 0,11$ to 4$ this summer (actually the best performing crypto of the year) until Sergey and his associates were ready to dump. They've dumped millions of coins to the top and it shows no sign of stopping anytime soon. Meanwhile Sergey posts pictures of himself on his instagram in Bali, Dubai, Panama, etc and 4channers meme themselves into ''hodling'' whilest Sergey dumps to enjoy a luxurious lifestyle.

This is the most sophisticated scam of all times in crypto. Sergey raised 32 millions during the ICO and used this money to pay legit businessmen and academics to shill it. John Wolpert, Ari Juels, Klaus Schwab, Tom Gonser, Evan Cheng. He corrupted all of them.

Oh and if you visit Chainlink's website you will see logos of Swift, Google and others saying they work with Chainlink. This is because Chainlink slightly photoshoped the logos to be able to tell victims that they are working with them without getting sued.

[Anonymous No.16004414]

>>16003112
>>16003173
wow you posting the same thing over and over sure convinces me that you are posting out of the kindness of your heart
truly thank you praveen at last i truly see

[Anonymous No.16004453]

>>16004414
>t. desperate linker pretending people are getting paid to FUD when it's obvious people are getting paid to shill.

[Anonymous No.16004472]

>>16003079
The tokenomics are the exact reason that it will eventually be worth more than ethereum.

[Anonymous No.16004490]

>>16004472
no

[Anonymous No.16004937]

>>16004195
>Chainlink only has centralized oracles (Sergey is lying about decentralization) which are not new or innovative. Their "innovative" solution to sybil resistant consensus is KYC.
explain more about this. Is that seriously true?

So let's say there is a random number generator that the Chainlink node is plugged into. And the server says the random number is 5, but the chainlink node sends the number 7 instead to the smart contract. What happens then? How is the node punished?

[Anonymous No.16004970]

>>16004414
Get punched, Nazi

All your fucking hopes in life are held by one Russian. But you hate in Jewish folk and believe insane conspiracy theories instead of blaming yourself

[Anonymous No.16005048]

>>16004937
>What happens then? How is the node punished?
with their current code that they spent 3 years and $50mil to make, nothing happens. It's not punished and whoever uses the contract gets cheated. That's why Chainlink is a scam and no one uses it.

None of the decentralized features they've been larping about for 3 years they have even started to implement.

[Anonymous No.16005063]

>>16004970
Get gassed kike

[Anonymous No.16005100]

>>16003398
>>$542 trillion of derivative contracts that need to be collateralized

Chainlink will not see a dollar of that.

Stay retarded.

[Anonymous No.16005117]

>>16005048
>None of the decentralized features they've been larping about for 3 years they have even started to implement.
oh... but i thought mainnet has already launched

[Anonymous No.16005172]

>>16005048
wrong, incorrect nodes that lead to a failed contract resolution will lose a fraction of the collateral proportionate to the number of nodes involved in the incorrect transaction, that’s the entire point of the collateral system goofus

[Anonymous No.16005192]

>>16005117
It has launched, their mainnet is centralized vaporware with no consensus algorithm or sybil resistance (other than their centralized KYC kek).

It has launched since July I believe and literally not a single dapp with user is using it, because it's shit tech. Imagine having launched months ago and not having a single user kek.

>>16005172
FALSE. This has not even started getting implemented. 3 YEARS. $50 MIL FUNDED. Fucking pathetic lying linker.

[Anonymous No.16005266]

>>16005048
While staking isn't up yet, if the node doesn't respond you can withdraw the link that you made the request with.

[Anonymous No.16005277]

>>16005266
>he thinks this adds any level of security or decentralization
KEK LEARN TO CODE BRAINLET

[Anonymous No.16005371]

>>16005192
how can there be no users when making a request/interfacing with chainlink is this simple (pic related)?

Can you not send a request like in the documentation? I havent tried it so...

[Anonymous No.16005383]

>>16003079
No, of course it can’t.

[Anonymous No.16005435]

>>16005371
because making a request without chainlink is just as easy, cheaper and more secure. That's why literally no developers have chosen to use it for their oracles.

secure, centralized oracles are absolutely trivial to make. Chainlink is not decentralized, so it's way cheaper and more secure to make your own oracles for your dapp.

Now decentralized oracles are difficult to make, but Chainlink has not even started working on decentralization. They are years away, if ever, and have already wasted $50mil and 3 years.

[Anonymous No.16005452]

>>16004360
Here we go again. Can't beat the classics, eh?

[Anonymous No.16005563]

>>16005192
>This has not even started getting implemented.
wrong again sweetie, staking is on the way and with it the collateral system
>>16005435
of course it’s easier to make a centralized oracle, it’s also much easier for them to fail or be manipulated. the chainlink network will protect against attacks that would cripple centralized oracles

[Anonymous No.16005623]

>>16005563
>wrong again sweetie, staking is on the way and with it the collateral system
lie. they've had 3 years and they haven't even started on it. You have no proof other than Sergey's larp blog posts.
>>16005563
>of course it’s easier to make a centralized oracle, it’s also much easier for them to fail or be manipulated. the chainlink network will protect against attacks that would cripple centralized oracles
Chainlink IS centralized oracles. There's literally nothing decentralized or secure about Chainlink. Which explains why literally ZERO dapps are using it KEK.

[Anonymous No.16005628]

>>16003079
>tokenomics

[Anonymous No.16005664]

>>16004259
>You're assuming LINK will capture a big % of the entire world, when it has failed to get ONE SINGLE DAPP to use it, even though their test net has been available for 1 year.
>Chainlink has failed. It won't capture anything. Name a single dapp with users using Chainlink.
>The only thing keeping it afloat in terms of price are the fake partnerships who are not actually using it.

5th most used ethereum contract.

https://ethgasstation.info/

[Anonymous No.16005685]

>>16005664
name a single dapp using it. Pro tip, none are.

Those are just wash transactions made by the team themselves to make it look active.

But you knew that didn't you? You're just trying to perpetuate the lie so your shitcoin can pump.

[Anonymous No.16005689]

can you tell that who use chainlink?

i havent hear of any company etc, that use chainlink

so chainlink has zero use case, or tell who company use this erc-20 token chainlink and for what

[Anonymous No.16005720]

>>16003105
>is it possible for a jewel to be worth more than the vault that contains it?
how dumb are you exactly?

[Anonymous No.16005737]

>>16005435

> Chainlink is not decentralized

Chainlink team owns about 65 % of total chainlink token supply

i think it was 70 % when chainlink started, but now they have dumped 700 k so many times in binance alone one of their eth address

god only knows how much they are already dumped their link tokens other addreses to other exhanges, etc

[Anonymous No.16005742]

>>16005720
>t. desperate linker pretending a shitcoin with 0 users after 3 years will one day hold 1% of the world value

[Anonymous No.16005755]

>>16005737
actually the blockchain tells you, and it confirms they still own at least 600mil+ tokens ready to dump whenever they want.

[Anonymous No.16005773]

>>16003079
Technically it's possible, but I personally don't see it happening soon.
Take UOS for example, it has a marketcap of 2mil and can easily go 10x but it will still only sit at 20mil marketcap which is pretty undervalued for a project like this.

[Anonymous No.16005793]

>>16005755

and there are people who buy this shit
chainlink team owns over half of total token supply

chainlink token is erc-20 token with zero use case, no one use it anything, its value is zero because it has zero use case

only constant shilling at this site fools people to buy chainlink
every day about tens of even over hundred of chainlink shilling posts alone this board

chainlink is classic ponzi scheme

[Anonymous No.16005815]

>>16005755

chainlink team owns over half of total token supply

chainlink token is erc-20 token with zero use case, no one use it anything, its value is zero because it has zero use case

only constant shilling at this site fools people to buy chainlink
every day about tens of even over hundred of chainlink shilling posts alone this board

chainlink is classic ponzi scheme

[Anonymous No.16005816]

>>16004259
Cope

If this is true then all of crypto is a ponzi. Btc and ETH have no meaningful adoption either.

[Anonymous No.16005842]

>>16005816
you are onto something

[Anonymous No.16005865]

>>16005793
the team literally never advertises, shills, or makes claims about vast wealth, it doesn’t do pointless token giveaways or engage in sales tactics of any kind, it engages with the community non-aggressively and provides currency price heartbeats for free so that people can see and test the network functionality for themselves

[Anonymous No.16005979]

>>16003175
What happens to the security of the ETH blockchain if an ERC20 token has a higher value ?

[Anonymous No.16006113]

>>16005172


Whatever your doing. keep it going. Your making Chainlink pump.

[Anonymous No.16006122]

yes

LINK IS WORTH $1000 per token, there's your tokenomics

eth is just about worthless

[Anonymous No.16006149]

>>16003079
no global adoption for eth without chainlink, what do you think?
>a car (ETH) cannot move without wheels (link)

[Anonymous No.16006177]

>>16006149
are you saying wheels are worth more than a car?

[Anonymous No.16006293]

>>16006177
yes, and soon everybody will realize this.

[Anonymous No.16006479]

>>16003079
YES

[Anonymous No.16006540]

>>16003079
yes

[Anonymous No.16006547]

when BTC was ~7000 $
ETH was 1200 $

think about that...

[Anonymous No.16006823]

>>16004970
Russians have historically hated jews, too.

[Anonymous No.16006837]

>>16005685
fat fuck
here
https://github.com/Synthetixio/synthetix/issues/293

[Anonymous No.16006915]

I'm a new dApp developer and desu I have a real hard time seeing how middleware-as-tokens will take off within the space. For instance, I'm currently calling on oracles to activate contracts. I utilize my own oracle as well as a few independent ones. I'd like decentralized oracles but the idea that I need to get eth and link for a minor part of my project makes no sense. It was easier for me to make my own oracle service and reach consensus with people offering third party non-decentralized services. I get that people with greater needs will be more incentivized, but my project aims at hundreds of contract executions a week and I just can't justify the use case to incorporate some middleware.

On top of this, I see no use in tokens for a decentralized oracle service anyway. In a future iteration of my oracles (if my project takes off) I have a design that simply pays out eth for independent oracle messages. Why the fuck is a token needed when a smart contract can handle the who process with ETH? It seems like at best a novel way at crowdsouricng but at worst a scam to extract money from the hands of people that can't ask this simple question: why not just incentivize the network with ETH itself?

[Anonymous No.16006994]

>>16006915
a) link is blockchain agnostic. so your eth no issue, would be an issue on other networks
b) pic related

[Anonymous No.16007061]

>>16006994
This is an absolute garbage response. The market falls in step with the big players. BTC dropped like 10% today and so did ETH and LINk. So if ETH's market volatility doesn't work in their favor (whatever the FUCK that means) then as of right now it's been shown that neither will LINK itself work in their favor. Not to mention that volatility of any coin without a central authority or peg will likely be volatile.

I can't believe this is an official response. This is precisely why tokenomics doesn't work at a deeper level. The lack of basic economic theory isn't there for people to see the flaws in logic.

[Anonymous No.16007097]

>>16003267
Where'd the 32 LINK come from? Is that all you need for staking?

[Anonymous No.16007106]

>>16006994
Also, LINK may very well work for other blockchains but that doesn't discount the fact that LINK itself is internal to ethereum. If you get paid out or utilize LINK that's no different than getting paid out or utilizing ETH in fiat terms. Except LINK is like a shitty gift card that can only applied within an ecosystem whereas ETH has more liquidity and applications. Face it, they wanted to print money. And they did. This whole project could've been 1. blockchain agnostic in the sense you're describing 2. ethereum based (or even ANY currency)

[Anonymous No.16007120]

>>16006915
>It was easier for me to make my own oracle service and reach consensus
Yeah anon that's great. Loads of other projects have had problems from their shitty oracle implementations, but I'm sure yours is airtight.

[Anonymous No.16007142]

>>16007061
meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow decentralised oracles meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow meow

[Anonymous No.16007160]

>>16007120
I'm not denying this. I'm still new. Could you send me some sources so I can read into this?

[Anonymous No.16007247]

>>16007061
Dude just look what happened with eth vs link in the last 18 months.
>>16007106
again, now you shifted to "a liquidity issue". just see what happened with eth vs link in the last 18 months. the token also allows to help bootstrap the network and incentivize their adoption like you are seeing rn with them being gifted/used by data providers.

[Anonymous No.16007332]

>>16007247
Please provide sources I'm not sure what you're referring to. Also I didn't shift. I said 'also'.

As for bootstrapping/gifting, I can see the incentive as a developer. In this sense I can see that it is an enterprise solution, but my issue intensifies as such. Enterprises with enough resources would not need to use this service as a solution. If I can cook up a shitty oracle myself there's no reason why specialized oracles can't be created and guaranteed by an entity that's big enough. Such enterprise solutions are antithetical to the thesis of decentralization. I don't think that's a good thing, but it's just how it is. For instance, Facebook or Google in no way want to remove the control they have on data. These companies strive for monopolies. Why would they mitigate trust to an alternative party when they can do it internally and claim guarantees backed by their multibillion dollar valuations?

[Anonymous No.16007366]

>>16007332
Or consider a more viable case: stock exchanges. In theory they would be a great place to decentralize oracle services. The issue with this is two-fold. First, companies like the NYSE make their money licensing their data. Second, time is literally money for them. A decentralized service is by nature slow. Third, such data, while it would be more accurately related by decentralization, as of right now has no major issues as a centralized entity because their whole business is built upon them accurately relaying information. As such a LINk or any other middleware like it offers a solution where there is no problem.

I have a problem and I need decentralized oracles. But as of right now that task is too cumbersome and complicated and costly at my stage in production. Also LINK doesn't even have a decentralized service out yet, so I can't even use one if I wanted to.

[Anonymous No.16007529]

>>16007332
Usage of the chainlink network doesn’t require relinquishing control over data. Inevitably all commerce involves a transaction between at least two parties, and though corporations will certainly benefit from internal, centralized oracles for internal business, engaging with distributors and consumers requires trust in external parties. Smart contracts automate these transactions, and the chainlink network guarantees a trustless environment through its distribution. It’s a verification method with no single point of failure for all of its participants, regardless of their size or need. The network isn’t a conscious actor, it does not wield power or influence, but it offers extreme utility and speed to its users. That node operators benefit financially from this arrangement is just further incentive to participate in the network.

>>16007366
As you said, the big money is what moves the market. Traders don’t care if exchanges make a buck off their data. Traders want to make more money faster, which they can do with chainlink. Which is why exchanges will certainly become huge node operators in the future and derive income from staking.

The LINK network is still growing, yes. But it’s growing at a faster and faster rate, and the bigger it gets the more decentralized and effective it becomes.

[Anonymous No.16007813]

>>16007366
do your contracts settle thousands to millions of dollars? if not then you probably don’t need chainlink, it’s not for you so don’t worry about it.