[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance


View post   

File: 226 KB, 1000x1000, ChainLink.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21330960 No.21330960 [Reply] [Original]

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: Companies won't actually go through the hassle of trusting their data API's 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? 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 high 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 ETH hit. Happy gambling though anons

>> No.21331307

>mainnet launched a year ago and it's STILL just 5 nodes pinging the price of ETH
Waiting for the top of this pump then I'm getting out for good

>> No.21331743
File: 20 KB, 509x423, 1592390964499.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21331743

Nice try you deceitful greedy Hebrew but none of my REAL fellow linkCHADS are going to sell.
I don't know how many threads you have to FUD up but guess what Shekkelstein?
>NOT
>SELLING
NOT
SELLING
>NOT
>SELLING
NOT
SELLING
Maybe if you buy now you can shine my custom made leather Oxfords but you had your chance noLinker. And now you get to reap what you didn't sow you filthy KIKE.
Fuck jannies, fuck trannies and especially FUCK noLinker redditors!

>> No.21331928

>>21330960

You say you work on machinations, ie evil plans and were supposed to believe you. Go fuck yourself

>> No.21332079

>>21330960
>If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
but the system is broke and crypto fixes it

>> No.21332088

>>21330960
NOT FUCKING SELLING.

>> No.21332143

>>21330960
Your bosses would prefer XRP instead.

>> No.21332161
File: 136 KB, 828x794, BDE1D2C8-F756-4372-B098-5B0EBC5408F2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21332161

*AHEM*
DIDN'T
READ
NOT
SELLING

>> No.21332226

>>21330960

thank for the effort.
but the average link investor sound like this.

> complex system + buzzwords = new paradigm
> money go up brrrrr
> never selling

you are only losing your time.

>> No.21332957

>>21330960
>start reading
>this reminds me of the trustLESS pasta
>keep reading
>mfw
Thanks anon, it's been a while