I've been here since 2015

[Tampanon No.21487228]

I dont understand link's utility. Monero is the project that makes sense in my head and I literally bought eth at 5 dollars. Please help me out

[Anonymous No.21487557]

>>21487228
what doesnt make sense about links utility? i think youre investing in an older idea of blockchain. bitcoin was "private money", now youre investing in "ultra private money". its a sound idea but growth potential is a bit slow. I'm investing in a vision of a "decentralized stock market". i buy whatever coins helps that vision become reality. Link is a key piece of a "decentralized stock market".

[Anonymous No.21487690]

>>21487557
Strong sell signal

[Anonymous No.21487702]

>Monero

Are you from 2017?

[Anonymous No.21487832]

>>21487228
Because you've been here since 2015, all you can understand is bitcoin and monero and at best ethereum. Chainlink is much more complex, while ethereum introduces smart contracts (which is already a much more complicated concept to understand when compared to bitcoin's value transactions), chainlink introduces a decentralized oracles protocol to get data from different points and inject it into a smart contract.
My problem is that I'm scared I'll becomz a link maximalist since I've been here since 2017 and that I'll miss the next big thing in 2023 when link is 1000$ because desu I'm more emotionaly gay for chainlink than for natalie mars, and I would fuck the shit out of natalie mars.

[Anonymous No.21487905]

>>21487702
more like 2014 when crypto wasn't much more than a means of payment for drugs and fake gucci bags

[Anonymous No.21487968]

>>21487228
It works like this.

[Anonymous No.21488505]

>>21487228
Crypto is made up of two groups, high IQ curious people that have some understanding of how the financial system works and low IQ risk takers who are not mentally capable of understanding finance or blockchains at all. The major divider is probably 2016. There are both types who entered either side of that year but mostly it's a good rule of thumb.

If someone is a true believer in chainlink, that's a good indication they are on the side that is incapable of understanding. You can cynically speculate on the price but the fundamentals of the purported use case are simply retarded.

Monero on the other hand is absolutely the most important project in the space and if a bitcoiner doesn't acknowledge value of Monero then it's likely that they too are of the low IQ type, only instead of the link cult they joined the btc maximalist cult.

[Anonymous No.21489015]

>>21488505
I agree. Issues with privacy are only getting worse, as the governments of the world make more and more serious interventions in people's private lives. BTC is too traceable, Monero is the answer.
Monero will have its time in the sun again soon when buying it undetectably becomes easier with atomic swaps.

[Anonymous No.21489067]

>>21487968
that meme fucking smells onions jfc

[Anonymous No.21489319]

>>21487228
Monero's got a use case, but everyone's banning it. No government will ever accept a global adoption of drug currency. If you want to make money you should diversify yourself between what is a game changer, and memes. It would be best if it would be both.

[Anonymous No.21490011]

>>21489319
>everyone's banning it
Besides the fact that's not really true, Monero (and bitcoin before it) was created to be immune to bans. An exchange delisting is nowhere near the end of the currency.

I don't know what level of bluepilled you are on governments. Of course banking powers are never going to give up their position willingly and in fact they probably want to hold on to their piece of the drug trade. If you think speculating on ponzi schemes is a good idea because they are nonthreatening to the power elite then that's a different topic really.

[Anonymous No.21490102]

>>21487228
are you the south korea faggot who logged into my instagram last night? go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.21490206]

If you like Monero, you would be interested in OffShift, the first ethereum based coin that is cryptographically private.

[Anonymous No.21490412]

>>21487228
Anon if you like XMR you should check out XHV and XSN. They might be more up your alley.

[Anonymous No.21490902]

>>21488505
I respect your idealistic view of the crypto space. Unfortunately, with the way things are going I think it's unlikely that the intended purpose of crypto currency will be the end result.

I say this as someone who took the time to understand a fair amount about it back in 2017/2018 and then lost interest until now when some of my investments are starting to moon. A lot has changed, admittedly, but the more things change the more they stay the same so-to-speak. People still by and large don't give a shit about the way this tech could change our lives for the better, they just want to get rich in the current paradigm.

Anyhow, my largest holding is LINK. Back in the day it seemed promising, but also like it could be a scam. I really just put throw away money on it and I'm just enjoying the ride at this point.

[Anonymous No.21491082]

Hey dude, LINK OG here bought in October 2017. The general fundamental value of LINK at the time was that it was the first project to start working on decentralised oracles in any meaningful way.

The value pretty much derives from first mover advantage and network effects. They have positioned themselves quite well in the industry now with a web of literal who after literal who. This is why I bought at $0.20. Would I buy at $20? To be honest no. The valuation now seems to have swayed from being primarily fundamental to being mostly speculative. 99% of people will not be able to run a Chainlink node due to the technical credentials and KYC required. There is the option of staking on other people's nodes though - whether nulinkers will eventually do this or not who knows? To me right now it looks like the deluded speculative blow off top that if you've been in since 2015 you've likely seen time after time after time again.

TL;DR - fundamentally bullish on LINK, currently would not buy at $20 due to speculative value outpacing fundamental value