is CCIP really that big of a deal?

[Anonymous No.50401775]

what makes LINK so different from Quant's (QNT) Overledger system? is it that Overledger requires a paid subscription? is that the only thing QNT has over CCIP or am I misinformed, anything else?

[Anonymous No.50401868]

>>50401775
I don't know enough to compare, anon, all I know is that LINK has a way of releasing software that becomes the all-consuming industry standard, and I expect the same for CCIP.

[Anonymous No.50401916]

>>50401868

[Anonymous No.50401930]

>>50401775
overledger is bad news for ccip

[Anonymous No.50402033]

>>50401930
So overledger is niggers and Jews?

[Anonymous No.50402058]

>>50401930
This, Qnt makes link irrelevant

[Anonymous No.50402318]

professionals are making it

[Anonymous No.50402413]

>>50401775
Quant is literally unironically a scam with no real users and will implode like celsius once people figure out

[Anonymous No.50402433]

>>50401775
who the fuck even uses quant? i just looked it up and i can't find anything about people actually using it

[Anonymous No.50402458]

No it's not and staking isn't either, linktards are just grasping at any little hope that is left to not face the fact that they wasted a bullrun and are the actual bagholders. After it will be clear that neither will pump the price, they'll find another hopium straw to promote. It's absolutly pathetic, never marry your bags

[Anonymous No.50402465]

>>50401775
Quant kek, haven't seen that posted on biz in a while.

[Anonymous No.50402498]

>>50402433
This is the key difference. You can have all the connections in the world but chainlink has a ridiculously strong network effect and is very helpful on the development end. The go above and beyond for their customers unironically, the amount of devwork they dedicate to helping projects with their specific, nuanced issues is insane.

QNT and Gilbert may have ties to central banks and credit card companies, and that may be enough, but chainlink has hundreds of thousands, if not millions of direct users right now. They're the standard, quant is not


>t. Someone who has bought and sold and bought and sold both many times for profitable trades. idgaf about either on a personal level, id short link tomorrow if I thought that was a good idea. I do not think it's a good idea. I do think quant is a good short right now

[Anonymous No.50402552]

>>50402498
To be frank swift has consistently shown their extremely strong bullishness on utilizing link even within closed blockchain systems ie running an EVM distributed amongst key players.

Obviously, the level of interest visible is not as exciting to your everyday crypto hype maniac, as the way corporates show aggressive interest and the way a crypto faggot hoping to le make it is quite different.

I’m buying another 3,000 link in two months when shit hits the fan. As someone who understands Overledger and CCIP very well from extensive reading; I can say without a doubt the trust minimized option by far is CCIP, and the option with the greatest scaling + security is also CCIP.

What do I know though? I’m just a fag on a Mongolian basket weaving anime forum who held Link from 60 to 5 now anticipating it to hit 3 soon enough.

[Anonymous No.50402573]

>>50401930
this :^)
quant is coming up from behind and eating ccip's lunch
cope, stinkies
fucking cope
t. 5000 qnt chad

[Anonymous No.50402578]

>>50402498
QNT has more pumponomics for some reason, it keeps going up.

also do you think LINK will break its previous ATH in a face melting pump when CCIP/staking is about to release? since the news hasn't caused a pump yet of course, I'm assuming it's more of a buy the news sell the launch event now.

[Anonymous No.50402587]

>>50402578
It’s not going to rocket any time soon.

[Anonymous No.50402596]

>>50402552
why should I hit 3? I am also a fag here but I expect staking before smartcon so the window is closing.

[Anonymous No.50402606]

>>50402587
yes, we know link will not rocket any time soon
link is, what we call, unpumpable
you jelly of my 5000 QNT, bitch? :}^)

[Anonymous No.50402633]

>>50402413
If you arent smart enough to follow look at this shit
Literally an oil and gas guy as their CTO

Someone with zero technologic expertise
As their CTO
Its literally all a fucking scam

[Anonymous No.50402646]

>>50402633
someone is jelly :^)

[Anonymous No.50402654]

>>50402552
That's the other thing, quant isn't defi and never will be, however major CB's and IB's already trust each other well enough. This is why they can run a private quorum chain and not really have to worry or care about decentralization and maximize for throughput, they're only dealing with each other.

With that being said I've never seen a single demo or example of overledger in action, nor have heard of anyone currently using it do anything, and desu their whole concept just seems like a shittier version of synthetix that probably will have cross-chain atomic swaps/synth teleporters with v3 later this year (or they'll at least be technically possible). And unlike synthetix, quant doesn't give 100% of fees earned to stakers. Synthetix would have to deploy on those chains, but again, it will be technically feasible

[Anonymous No.50402656]

>>50402633
sir is not scam, data is oil sir

[Anonymous No.50402664]

>>50402633
he looks familiar

[Anonymous No.50402676]

>>50402654
project whitney
swift oracle
bis cbdc

start from here kiddo.
>inb4 they will use qwant

[Anonymous No.50402692]

>>50402633
>to help it bring its transformative blockchain solutions to market
cringe

[Anonymous No.50402757]

>>50402573
>coming up from behind and eating
Like it's old, processed lunch that comes out the backside?

[Anonymous No.50402768]

>>50402676
Lol I'm aware, I think chainlink is superior and could actually end up being the next google if they can scale and make their oracles profitable, I just also don't think that quant is a total larp/scam either. It doesn't have to be good, its not like governments don't sign massive deals with mediocre companies who have insider connections all the time.

But, the tokens are needed if they're actually being used, chainlink is being used right now (albeit isn't profitable)

[Anonymous No.50402870]

>>50402768
>chainlink
>isn't profitable

[Anonymous No.50402896]

>>50401775

Qnt is centralised and even early qnt faggots know that

[Anonymous No.50402957]

>>50402870
Aren't they still subsidizing their nodes? I know they've sized up a lot the last year, but I thought that was why selling 500k+ link every week was still necessary

[Anonymous No.50404139]

>>50401775
To be perfectly frank and honest with you (and I believe in openness and honesty to a fault in these matters); yes, CCIP really is that big of a deal.

[Anonymous No.50405078]

>>50402870
why he cute

[Anonymous No.50405564]

CCIP will likely be the crypto standard if defi stops being 99% scams. Central banks and any regulated institution will use overledger, or something without a token like SETL. CCIP doesn't adhere to standards, Quant is literally defining them with MIT

[Anonymous No.50405614]

>>50401775
Overledger is more like chainlink's "token bridge", as in they're both software that they'll make money from. Ccip is a standard for cross-chain communication, it's not software, anyone can implement ccip however they want without using any of chainlinks infrastructure. Quant doesn't seem to have anything like ccip from what I saw on their website

[Anonymous No.50405621]

>>50402896
This is part of the problem on /biz/ - all the high IQ linkies got out years ago so you're left with mostly idiots. Decentralization is a meme. Almost all projects are controlled by a 'foundation' who holds a controlling vote via the tokens. Maybe it will mean something in ten years.

In fairness, Linkies were due a big pump to probably ~$350 in the 21 bull run, but they got fucked by lenders shorting. I'm sorry. It's over.

[Anonymous No.50405760]

>>50401775
>is it that overledger requires a paid subscription?
>is that the only thing that qnt has over ccip?
you think that's a good thing?
the difference between permissioned and permissionless is the difference between a product that does impose friction on adopters and a product that doesn't

>>50402957
no
you've been lied to by bulgarians
as of recently, i am now 100% convinced that esl bulgarians really have been crawling and derailing regular link discussion for the past two years
they do it out of spite, with no recognition at all of the fact that linkies could have destroyed nexo two years ago, but chose not to sink to that level
it was the link marine's only mistake, opting to go the peaceful route for what are evidently bootleg mafiosos who can't conceive of peace

(staking will be at least partially subsidized, but assuming 50m or more link is staked at all times, it's still a net neutral to net decrease in circulating supply)

[Anonymous No.50405778]

>>50405760
>75 million link staking cap
>team will be releasing 50 million to circulation
>net neutral to net decrease in supply
are the bulgarians responsible for your poor reading comprehension and math skills?

[Anonymous No.50405799]

>>50405778
ironic that you should bring up poor reading comprehension
check my post for the phrase
>assuming 50m or more link is staked at all times

[Anonymous No.50405813]

>>50402896
so, equal to chainlink in that regard

[Anonymous No.50405827]

>>50405799
https://chain.link/circulating-supply
so far, the circulating supply has only been growing
blame whoever you want though

[Anonymous No.50405839]

>>50405827
there's no circulation history at that link you dishonest cunt of a man

[Anonymous No.50405860]

>>50405827

[Anonymous No.50405887]

>>50405839
are you fucking retarded?

[Anonymous No.50405898]

>>50405614
You need link tokens to use CCIP. I'd call that using link's infrastructure

[Anonymous No.50406000]

>>50401775

Network effects. Companies are waiting on Chainlink's solutions and don't trust other solutions in the market.

https://twitter.com/lemiscate/status/1531236043688640513?s=20&t=b1v8eUYDmFGB0b3os5KY0w

[Anonymous No.50406089]

>>50405887
this is how the bulgarian confuses everyone
there's clearly no history of circulating supply at that link; the bulgarian's assertion that the supply has "only been growing" is unverifiable with his supplied info
him saying "are you retarded" is intended to make it appear to onlookers as if the linkie doesn't know what he's talking about (when he clearly does), and if the bulgar is lucky and the linkie is demoralized, to even make the linkie question his own judgement
it's the most slimy strategy on earth

[Anonymous No.50406100]

>>50406089
you absolute moron, the supply has increased already +1million
I'm posting the official source by Chainlink themselves

[Anonymous No.50406144]

>>50406100
>the supply has increased already +1million
What's your native language? I know it's not really important, but I'm just interested in this sort of thing.

[Anonymous No.50406167]

>>50406144
assyrian

[Anonymous No.50406172]

>>50406167
Cool thanks man.

[Anonymous No.50406175]

>>50406172
no problem m8

[Anonymous No.50406755]

>>50401775
imagine not owning LINK and QNT in case you're wrong about either

[Anonymous No.50406853]

>>50406100
Link supply is capped at 1 Billion, anon. Amusing you can't grasp this. Still, at least your posts are anonymous so you'll never have to worry about being pointed out and sniggered at

[Anonymous No.50406869]

>>50406853
I obviously meant the circulating supply
it is hilarious watching you all perform mental gymnastics, refusing to accept the fact that the team themselves just told you they've increased the circulating supply by 1 fucking million stinks

[Anonymous No.50406870]

>>50406100
this is also his strategy
he clearly presented baffling evidence to support his case, and he's now trying to justify his position and write off observations against him and his position as foolish in the process

i will now say "if you are arguing history and you want anyone rational to take you seriously, post a link to the transaction/wallet on etherscan and not just the present figure with no additional history", and he will again deny accountability for his fuck-ups

[Anonymous No.50406878]

>>50406870
what is "baffling" to you? please elaborate

[Anonymous No.50406893]

>>50406100
this is also his strategy
he clearly presented baffling evidence to support his case, and he's now trying to justify himself and write off observations against him and his position as foolish in the process

i will now say "if you are arguing history and you want anyone rational to take you seriously, post a link to the transaction/wallet on etherscan and not just the present figure with no additional history", and he will again deny accountability for his fuck-ups

[Anonymous No.50406895]

>>50406878
KEK what's the matter retard? why did you delete your post about "baffling" evidence?

[Anonymous No.50406913]

>>50406893
oh there it is
so yes, please elaborate on this "baffling" evidence I have presented
just for reference, here it is
https://chain.link/circulating-supply
>468,099,970.45 LINK

[Anonymous No.50406961]

>>50402957
Bro. They talked about how they've reached a point where certain oracle networks have become purely profitable off of the user fees.

>>50402768
>>Lol I'm aware, I think chainlink is superior and could actually end up being the next google if they can scale and make their oracles profitable

And just what are you using to define as a scaling problem for Chainlink?

[Anonymous No.50406988]

>>50406895
because i am accountable for my typos retard

>>50406913
a link to the 1m supply increase at etherscan or some other source that tracks history of the dev wallet activity, dumbfuck
if you're arguing there was a supply increase, post the proof that shows when and where
your mere assertion is assumed bullshit by default

[Anonymous No.50407030]

>>50406988
>mere assertion
>https://etherscan.io/address/0xb9b012cad0A7C1b10CbE33a1B3F623b06fAD1c7C#tokentxns
here you go retard, the team THEMSELVES are OFFICIALLY accounting for tokens transferred by this address as "tokens that have entered circulation"
you can check out coinmarketcap, coingecko, messari etc whatever platform you want, the all have been stuck to exactly 461,099,970.45, from November 2021.
This is the team THEMSELVES informing YOU that they have already released these stinks to circulation
fuck you for even trying to deny it, you're obviously posting in bad faith

[Anonymous No.50407044]

>>50407030
>been stuck to exactly 461,099,970.45, from November 2021.
**467,099,970.45 for fucks sake, excuse my typo

[Anonymous No.50407274]

>>50407044
Why does this matter? Chainlink is a decentralized Oracle network that is being operated by Chainlink labs which is a modern blockchain company. Think of it like this. To own stock in Chainlink labs, you have to buy Chainlink tokens. The same tokens that are literally being used as a currency, as collateral and as a yield generator. There will NEVER be more than 1B total tokens, there won’t ever be “stock splits” etc. Then there is the economics of staking, as well as a currency at play here. The ETH/USD feed, which is a DON, is going to remove up to 75M Chainlink tokens from circulation. This doesn’t include other DONs, such as the other important price feeds, and other decentralized services, going live with the same staking functionality. Personally, I don’t care how much is in circulation, especially since there can be an infinite set of DONs being utilized across X number of chains. Maybe then you’ll realize that there isn’t even enough Chainlink tokens to go around.

[Anonymous No.50407318]

>>50406869
No one is refusing that fact, the circ. supply will be increasing 50 million over the next 9 months. This was laid out clearly in the recent blogpost. 75 million link will be locked in v0.1 staking which should be out in the next couple of months. So a net decrease in the circ. supply should occur

[Anonymous No.50407319]

>>50407274
>no, the circulating supply has NOT been increased, whoever claims that's true is a paid esl buglarian fudder employed by Nexo
>loool why does it even matter?
all I've been doing here is stating facts, the obnoxious shills spend every day here trying to force the narrative about the imminent "supply shock", the incoming "short squeeze" caused by CeFi going bankrupt, and how the circulating supply is "expected to be vastly reduced due to staking buying pressure".
so far, the circulating supply has been ONLY increasing, and that's that
cope all you want, I'm done coping

[Anonymous No.50407329]

>>50407318
>No one is refusing that fact
so far EVERYBODY ITT has been straight up denying it, reread the thread, stop justifying morons, stop moving the goalposts

[Anonymous No.50407428]

>>50407329
Then they are retarded
https://blog.chain.link/sustainably-growing-chainlink/
This was discussed ad nauseum when it came out

[Anonymous No.50407429]

>>50401775
>is CCIP that big of a deal?

Whether or not CCIP itself is going to be a big deal depends on whether or not Chainlink can pull off what it's meant to do.

Whoever figures out how to not only bring the real world onto the blockchain, but allow anyone to use any combination of different blockchains/L1s while doing so is going to be the most powerful entity of the 4th industrial revolution.
Rockefeller made his fortune through refining crude oil into kerosene and gasoline, just like Chainlink is attempting to unleash the power of data by refining it into useful trusted data.

It's such a revolutionary concept that most people not only have no clue what Chainlink is or is trying to do, they don't understand how much the world will change after Chainlink brings trust to the wild west of blockchain tech.
Facebook started the same way as some novel way of seeing if the girls in your class were single, but it took people pushing the boundaries of social media to get us to the point where global politics and economics are all voiced through Twitter or Facebook.

It's going to take a few years to actually see the world change after it's exposed to Chainlink's vision, but it's going to happen so quickly, those who don't look into it now will be caught with their pants down.

[Anonymous No.50407434]

>>50406869
I take it that when the 25M (later rising to 75M) Link tokens which will be staked on the Eth pricefeed are locked up, you'll be right here on biz shouting that the circulating (!!) supply has dropped 24M? (25M-1M=24M, to save you getting the calculator out). Can we expect to see you do this?

[Anonymous No.50407484]

>>50407428
>These releases to circulating supply will support the growth of the network, including the upcoming launch of staking later this year. It is expected that the upcoming launch of staking should have an indirect offsetting effect to these token releases, partly depending on whether the amount committed by stakers reaches the planned initial cap of 75 million tokens. The Foundation expects that these token releases into circulating supply will be small in the near term and will be focused on the already occurring oracle rewards, until additional deployments are required for additional key initiatives in the third quarter of 2022 and into the first quarter of 2023.
>partly depending on whether the amount committed by stakers reaches the planned initial cap of 75 million tokens.
we can safely deduct 2 things from this paragraph
1. they are not certain the cap of 75 million tokens will be reached
2. apart from the 50 million, they will be releasing additional tokens in Q3 2022
so I can safely assume that the "net decrease of the circ. supply" you're forecasting is unfounded at best.
>>50407434
absolutely

[Anonymous No.50407518]

>>50402870
Nodes are only fully profitable on polygon and bsc
Dumb newfag

[Anonymous No.50407524]

>>50407484

[Anonymous No.50407534]

>price feeds
Industry standard
>vrf
Industry standard
>keepers
Industry standard

Anything off chain related? Chainlink is the answer

[Anonymous No.50407545]

>>50402433

You won't. There are 0 usage stats on QNT. Some salty QNT bagholder will reply to this with some year old article connecting breadcrumbs that have resulted in nothing.

[Anonymous No.50407580]

>>50406961
I wasn't aware that some nodes are profitable now, if that's true, my bad and I retract that statement.

The scalability issue is that only a small group of dedicated autists use chainlink oracles regularly. defi isn't really *that* big yet, and all normie exposure was through shit like celsius (and other cefi scams) who would be actually interacting with defi on behalf of their hundreds of thousands of customers that they were scamming. Sure there's swift rumors, but we're not there yet. It's like when google was just a search engine in the late 90s, they were the best at indexing the web, but no one knew it yet, and even in the early 00s you could just close the google.com page and not use them. Now, not using google isn't an option if you use the internet.

I think all these scam funds/platforms blowing up is a watershed moment for chainlink oracles. The loans that were given out on-chain have ALL been paid back, and were paid back first. No legal team or judge or government can stop this, the smart contracts just liquidated the collateral based on chainlink oracle pricefeeds, and that's fucking that. People are missing just how fucking bullish for chainlink this is, even though everyone kind of has a sour taste in their mouth for defi rn (why? Idk, it was all centralized entities and ponzi scams going bankrupt that caused this shit)

[Anonymous No.50407603]

>>50407484
>1. they are not certain the cap of 75 million tokens will be reached
True, we have no way of knowing. I suspect it will be filled fairly quickly if it's a guaranteed 5% with no slashing risk
>2. apart from the 50 million, they will be releasing additional tokens in Q3 2022
The release in Q3 2022 is included in that 50 million

[Anonymous No.50407621]

>>50407319
Explain how a supply shock isn’t possible if the aforementioned services go live with staking? CL staking is completely different from your already known forms of staking, CCIP allows for nodes operating on different chains to communicate amongst themselves which creates a decentralized arbiter of truth as something goes from chain x to chain y not including the legacy capabilities that it enables once live. Remember all of these services require link to be paid and link to be staked. But all you can focus on is
>circulating supply
Like a little whiny bitch. Go ahead, sell your link, keep your link, no one fucking cares. But the truth is infinitely more valuable than trust and at the moment there’s only one entity working towards that, they haven’t failed, they have become a standard and no one else uses an dapp that doesn’t have them integrated, their data has created an entirely new economy based on truth. Unfortunately you can’t handle the truth, instead you can only focus on faggots from a Fijian frog fishing forum and their unrealistic delusions instead of looking at the fucking truth that the future is chainlinked.

[Anonymous No.50407720]

>>50407603
>only 50 million LINK are available to enter circulating supply over the next nine months (primarily coming from the 7 wallets of 7 million LINK each) to be used for various purposes
you're right, my bad
>>50407621
>how x isn't possible if y happens
>engage in my hypothetical ideal scenario and find me a flaw!
I'm not claiming it won't happen, all I'm doing is stating facts as of now.
If these facts are not bothering you, just ignore my posts instead of emotionally sperging out
>But all you can focus on is
the absolute facts?

[Anonymous No.50407802]

>>50407319
>the obnoxious shills spend every day here trying to force the narrative
t. 16 pbtid fudder

[Anonymous No.50407938]

>>50405778
0 + 50 - 75 = -25

You're welcome, literal retard.

[Anonymous No.50408009]

>>50405898
>You need link tokens to use CCIP. I'd call that using link's infrastructure
ccip is a standard. Like any other standard it's just a documented way to do something. The same way you don't pay someone to use the TCP standard on the internet. Here's another kind of financial standard similar to ccip
https://www.iso20022.org
Chainlinks token bridge is the implementation of that standard. It says it on their website that others can build their own token bridge according to the standard if they want
>the Programmable Token Bridge is just one reference implementation built by Chainlink Labs, but any third-party bridge application can be easily built by independent development teams wanting to take advantage of the security and functionality of CCIP
https://blog.chain.link/introducing-the-cross-chain-interoperability-protocol-ccip
the words they use like protocol, interface, standard, etc in the typical context mean a standardized way of doing something. If ccip was some software chainlink wrote and you had to pay to use it and only they can run it then it's not really "a standard" if only they are allowed to do it. If that is the case then it's blatant false advertising. To me it looks like ccip is a way of constructing a cross-chain token bridge and the "chainlink token bridge" is their implementation of that standard

[Anonymous No.50408031]

>>50401775
CROSS CHAIN INTEROPERABILITY PROTOCOL

HOLY SHIT BROS THAT SOUNDS AMAZING. BUYING 100K NOW MATCH ME

[Anonymous No.50408046]

>>50408009
The standard requires security to function
Link staked on ccip enabled is that security
Just like tcp/ip doesnt work without electricity

[Anonymous No.50408058]

>>50408009
>If ccip was some software chainlink wrote and you had to pay to use it and only they can run it then it's not really "a standard" if only they are allowed to do it.
Weird.
I could've sworn Chainlink was already the oracle standard.

[Anonymous No.50408059]

>>50408009
In order for CCIP to function, you require an oracle network. So you're correct, but your implication that anything else can replace CCIP rests on the notion that another oracle network will replace chainlink, or that they can produce the same results without third party oracles.

Also you have been harping on specific token releases, you do know the tokens being released into the circulating supply was outlined in the original whitepaper, yes? Next thing you'll tell me you're extremely upset that their is a dev wallet with 350 million tokens earmarked for node operators, GASP

[Anonymous No.50408877]

>>50408059
Good analysis, but unfortunately Chainlink Labs has bigger issues these days due to the collapse of Celsius. Chainlink stored their entire “warchest” as well as their 450m LINK for node operators on Celsius, which is now bankrupt. This is essentially pushing Chainlink very close to bankruptcy as well, as they have already started selling a portion of the 50m LINK that they announced would be sold starting Q1 ‘23. Unfortunately these new dumps won’t come close to funding chainlink’s 500+ employees and numerous security audits. I hate to say it, but chainlink’s progress is dead in the water at this point. Expect bankruptcy proceedings in the next few months.

t. former 50k OG who sold

[Anonymous No.50408969]

>>50408059
Things you're unlikely to hear at a tech meeting 2023
>Hey guys, lets use CCIP for our project, but instead of Link, we'll use BAND. I've done my research and it's by far the better option, whaddaya say?
I think the correct term here is KEK

[Anonymous No.50408998]

>>50408877
chainlink already confirmed they took their linkies from celsius a long time ago

[Anonymous No.50409032]

>>50407580
>only a small group of dedicated autists use chainlink oracles regularly.
huh? everyone uses them, unless you're referring to the lions share of web3 devs as "just a few autists", you're not wrong - but those few autists ARE everyone.

[Anonymous No.50409170]

>>50408877
>Chainlink stored their entire “warchest” as well as their 450m LINK for node operators on Celsius
Complete and utter headcanon

[Anonymous No.50409213]

>>50401775
It's just a buzzword. People here were hyping up Arbitrum like it would be the holy grail for link and it was a total nothingburger.

[Anonymous No.50409229]

>>50409213
Arbitrum isn't something Chainlink was developing lmao

[Anonymous No.50409248]

>>50409213
>>50409229
Arbitrum will be part of the inaugural full-featured link node network. Intelligent, even knowledgable discussion is completely devoid in this thread, some kind of long-form fud inception strategy being utilized to make demoralizers appear to be good faith anons.

[Anonymous No.50409266]

>>50407580
>The scalability issue is that only a small group of dedicated autists use chainlink oracles regularly. defi isn't really *that* big yet, and all normie exposure was through shit like celsius (and other cefi scams) who would be actually interacting with defi on behalf of their hundreds of thousands of customers that they were scamming.

Anon, this is not a scaling issue. You're complaining about an industry growth issue where you're only operating with info based on open and permissioned blockchains when there's a big industry of private blockchains outside the purview of Crypto twitter. Chainlink has zero problems scaling because it's 3rd parties spinning up their own node oracles using Chainlink's tools. As the industry grows, Chainlink is going to be used more because they're going to need data to connect to blockchains.

[Anonymous No.50409295]

>>50409248
Precisely. Note the anon obsessed with proving their are token releases to the circulating supply (true), but ignoring this is something we all knew was going to happen since the original whitepaper. Its fud disguised as good faith constructive criticism. The goal is to make newfags appear ignorant (they are, so not difficult) and scare away other potential newfags from buying at a macro low.

[Anonymous No.50409302]

>>50409266
can you believe people still don't know about hyper ledger custom tailored enterprise grade blockchains as a service, baseline protocol and chainlink? All of this speculative navel gazing bears complete ignorance on everything we have known is under the hood in progress, for YEARS.

[Anonymous No.50409335]

>>50409248
someone should put together a series of recent fud counter-posts, so as soon as a fud thread or post is made, we can just copypaste in the counterfud with minimal effort. Everyone should save it so it's ready to post at any moment. Insta-posting fudstopper posts will demoralise the demoralisers, always nice to do. The wackamole will be fun and we can keep score as to who has posted the most.

[Anonymous No.50409353]

>>50409302
For the majority of retail investors, nobody cares until number goes up, especially in a bull market where everything sees number go up. You'll see more interest over the months as we languish at the bottom (don't care about calling it exactly, this is around the range I expect to see us at for the next year or so), and then anywhere from smartcon if early, all the way to Q2 2023 if late, you'll probably see link begin to rise against the market. Slowly at first, just like last time,
>this rally will fail like all the rest

[Anonymous No.50409365]

>>50402606
Chadlinks are patient for the pump with SWIFT iso20022 and Whitney DTCC project. That pump is sustainable. What’s qtard’s pump called? Oh it’s pump and dump.

[Anonymous No.50409445]

>>50409353
>expect to see us at this range for next year or so
>expect to see price go up from smartcon (9 weeks time) to q2 2023
huh?

[Anonymous No.50409479]

>>50409302
The anons who were industrious enough to do this got bored. Nobody pays us, we do it for free - Sergey should have funded an enclave of disinformation specialists a long time ago, but that would technically be marketing and Sergey is playing it safe in order to maintain his position that Chainlink is fundamentally a utility.

[Anonymous No.50409494]

>>50409479
menat for
>>50409335

[Anonymous No.50409537]

>>50409445
unironically read it again and work on your reading comprehension

[Anonymous No.50409562]

>>50409537
Nope, it's Ranjeet tier word salad.

[Anonymous No.50409668]

>>50409445
>>50409562
BTC and link do not have symmetrical cycles. When I say the next year or so at the bottom, I'm referring to BTC and the broader crypto market, since the majority of projects (or scams) do nothing when BTC sits at the bottom of a bear market. Also accusing everyone and everything you don't understand immediately of being a jeet or bulgarian is kind of a newfag giveaway.

[Anonymous No.50409686]

>>50409537
Okay, i reread it again. I can't see it any other way than you contradict yourself in the same post.
> You'll see more interest over the months as we languish at the bottom (don't care about calling it exactly, this is around the range I expect to see us at for the next year or so)
so in this range for a year or so
>and then anywhere from smartcon if early, all the way to Q2 2023 if late, you'll probably see link begin to rise against the market. Slowly at first, just like last time
so breaking out of this range between smartcon and q2 2023
My reading comprehension is just fine. Your powers of communication would seem poor.
Please, lead me through your breakdown of the post. I'd love to hear it.

[Anonymous No.50409733]

>>50409668
>BTC and link
Holy fuck, you never mentioned BTC. You think we're psychic? Here's a tip: when you write a post, remember that your readers cannot read your mind
>reading comprehension
kek, you even doubled down on it. what a retard

[Anonymous No.50409758]

>>50409668
>When I say the next year or so at the bottom, I'm referring to BTC
kek
fuck off you ESL retard

[Anonymous No.50409774]

>>50409758
Lol you phrased it better than I could

[Anonymous No.50409776]

>>50409733
>>50409758
jesus christ I'm done, let the fudders have their way. Guarantee you're newfags from /pol/ who got shilled during the bullrun and bought link above 10 dollars.

[Anonymous No.50409795]

>>50409776
Its just salty reddit fags who got fudded out of $0.10 link in 2017-18. It always has been.

[Anonymous No.50409810]

>>50409776
Hahaha can one guy be so consistently wrong?
I bought 5000 Links at ICO in Sep 2017 and have around 60k of them now.
Listen to me, my friend. You are the weakest link. Off you pop now.

[Anonymous No.50409838]

>>50402870
the gif that saved LINK

[Anonymous No.50409947]

>>50409776
Hahaha Ranjeet confirmed! We have confirmation! Look at this street shitter squirm.

[Anonymous No.50410041]

>>50409810
>>50409947
This reminds me of 2017 /pol/ when /ptg/ started to turn into the q worship boomer fest. Also kek at you having 60k link, guarantee its more like 600 if that.

[Anonymous No.50410070]

>>50406000
>trust
all smart contracts are open source, they can just vet the solution themselves?

[Anonymous No.50410111]

>>50408046
>The standard requires security to function
it doesn't say that though, it could be optional. And it wouldn't be a standard if it required some proprietary paid service to function, it would just be a product. In all the diagrams it's off to the side as if it's not required for the network to function too. Sergey also talked about devs making their own bridges. And Why would current chain operators want to pay chainlink for something they've already built. It makes more sense for new chains without bridges to use their token bridge service if they don't want to develop their own. But for something like bridging BSC to Ethereum people are already paying a fee so it would just add another fee on top of that fee, or, ethereum would have to lower their fees to accommodate the additional chainlink fee, for something they already have working

>>50408058
>Chainlink was already the oracle standard
you have the wrong interpretation of what standard means. There's an important semantic difference between these two phrases
>ccip is the industry standard
>ccip is an industry standard
the first one is a marketing term. The 2nd one is implying it's a standard, like a proper IEEE standard that people conform with and then are said to be "standards compliant". You can see a huge list of various blockchain standards here
https://blockchain.ieee.org/standards
you can see here that chainlink has worked with IEEE in the past on "oracle standards", but notice that ccip and "cross-chain" isn't mentioned here
https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-ieee-bdl-develop-international-oracle-standards
From the chainlink website it says
>a universal messaging interface
this isn't the oracles, this is the interface (i.e the format and structure of data that is passed between blockchains over a bridge)
https://chain.link/cross-chain

[Anonymous No.50410147]

>>50406089
>>50406893
keep em coming, I needed to hear this as I was checking the links and didn't know what the frick was going on

[Anonymous No.50410153]

>>50410111
Look at all this shit you wrote just to argue semantics.

[Anonymous No.50410175]

>>50410153
I already btfo his original bad faith "they are adding to the circulating supply" posts by pointing out it was in the original whitepaper, something anyone who bought at ico should know, but a couple of /pol/ bullrun tourists decided I was esl and told me to go away because I didn't suggest link was going to moon immediately, so yeah, have fun arguing in circles over nonsense

[Anonymous No.50410246]

>>50410070
Auditing can only do so much to foresee errors. And we've seen hundreds of millions of dollars worth of hacks go on with bridges. Developers aren't going to put in the effort to vet a service they have to pay for.

[Anonymous No.50410367]

>>50410111
>he thinks enterprises won't use permissioned networks as a necessity
>he thinks he isn't transparent

[Anonymous No.50410573]

daily reminder that 90% of FUD posters are frustrated long term holders.

[Anonymous No.50410703]

>>50410573
>daily reminder that 90% of FUD posters are frustrated long term holders.
Sounds like a meme started by those who really ought no longer be named. Anyone holding a long term bag of link is in massive profit with no reason to believe more good things aren't in store.

[Anonymous No.50410718]

>>50410573
They should be weary of the power of negative thought, especially collective negative thought. Very weary.

[Anonymous No.50410862]

>>50410175
>because I didn't suggest link was going to moon immediately
no, it's because you;re a full blown retard who can't even get an idea across effectively without ballsing it up completely and then going into denial mode. I would not wish to be your employer, mate

[Anonymous No.50410883]

>>50410718
I AM A MANIAC

[Anonymous No.50410934]

>>50410883
DUDE SO AM I

[Anonymous No.50410949]

>>50410862
>because you;re a full blown retard
>I would not wish to be your employer, mate
E S L

[Anonymous No.50410994]

>>50410153
i can't understand how people don't know what a standard is. Maybe because i've worked with standards a lot in my work. A standard is a very specific thing, it's like a set of guidelines or a template, it's not a product, and i'm fairly certain from all the wording on the chainlink website (standard, protocol, interface etc) that a proper standard is what they're talking about with ccip. The "token bridge" is the product

[Anonymous No.50411012]

>>50410994
You sure like the sound of your own keyboard.

[El Arcón No.50411022]

Who pays to manufacture 100,000 bags of poisoned gummy worms on the chance might eat one?

[Anonymous No.50411110]

>>50410883
basin und manic pilled

[Anonymous No.50411120]

>>50410367
>enterprises won't use permissioned networks as a necessity
i never said they wouldn't. Blockchain is permissioned by default anyway, you sign things with your wallet in a trustless environment as a form of authentication that gives you the permission to perform various actions (as transactions). All i'm saying is chainlink has worded ccip as though it's a standard, not as a product. If people can only be ccip compliant by using the chainlink network then it's not really a standard, because chainlink would be the only entity with any reason to implement it

[Anonymous No.50411143]

>>50411012
>7 posts by this id

[Anonymous No.50411188]

>>50411120
what they mean is "standard practice"; i.e. use Chainlink for all their secure needs. Price oracles? Chainlink. Random number generation? Chainlink. Bridging? Soon to be Chainlink.

[Anonymous No.50411236]

>>50411120
Link is the standard, and everyone uses it. Would you like to try to condense your intentional word salad into something easier for us to digest? What exactly is it you are trying to tell us?

[Anonymous No.50411265]

>>50402552
>now anticipating it to hit 3 soon enough.
i've already got my over 10k stack but big tiered buys from 5 down
hitting 2 or 3 i'd likely bring it up to a 20k stack now

[Anonymous No.50411299]

>>50411265
Eta on these price levels?

[Anonymous No.50411391]

>>50411299
>3
It's fud, anon. It's supposed to persuade you not to buy. That asshole likely lost half his stack recently (Ha, bet that hurt) out of greed, and is salty af and trying to buy back. He knows there's a price hike coming in 9 or so weeks at smartcon and beyond. Buy now or regret it

[Anonymous No.50411432]

>>50411391
You'll regret doing anything except buying ETH at this point.

[Anonymous No.50411441]

>>50411143
you: 728 words

me: 119 words

[Anonymous No.50411460]

>>50411441
Please don't encourage it to post any more. I'm dying of boredom.

[Anonymous No.50411534]

>>50408998
>>50409170
Ignore it's pasta, seen it in a few threads now

[Anonymous No.50411709]

>>50409686
retard

[Anonymous No.50411749]

>>50411391
this
$5 is the bottom

[Anonymous No.50412036]

>>50411749
This. LINK will never see $5 again.

[Anonymous No.50412320]

>>50411299
zero clue, is why i already have them set in case
if not i've got plenty, but if it goes that low i'm getting more

[Anonymous No.50412521]

>>50408877
I’ve seen this copy pasta in like 4 different threads now if you are a shill you’re a retarded nigger, if you’re a link holder who thinks he’s being a le ebin old fag by fudding and keeping away teh normies! Congrats you’re a retarded nigger and you aren’t funny. Either way you slice it YOU ARE A NIGGER.

[Anonymous No.50413559]

>>50412521
It’s common knowledge that 90% of LINK OG’s came from /pol/, and are thus unironic Nazis and extremely racist. This is evident when you look at the chats whenever Chainlink presents at conferences such as consensus or smartcon. It’s always N word this, N word that.

I personally don’t want to put my money into a project like that and keep that sort of company. Moreover, I question the intelligence of people who shill LINK given their backwards and racist political views.

[Anonymous No.50413727]

>>50401868
> LINK has a way of releasing software that becomes the all-consuming industry standard
> LINK has a way of releasing software

[Anonymous No.50414040]

>>50413559
NIGGERS, JEWS! Bad news!

[Anonymous No.50414041]

>>50401775
CCIP is got to be essentially equivalent to a reserve currency for AGI

[Anonymous No.50414213]

>>50411188
>what they mean is "standard practice"
I don't think that's right. Like right here in the ethereum repo on github is ethereums spec for the ccip interface. Notice it doesn't mention chainlink at all
>EIP-3668: CCIP Read: Secure offchain data retrieval
https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-3668
Here's an optimism implementation
https://github.com/smartcontractkit/ccip-read/tree/optimism-experimental
And people in the chainlink org discussing the optimism implementation
https://github.com/smartcontractkit/external-adapters-js/pull/1100

[Anonymous No.50414227]

>>50414213
>>50411236
>intentional word salad
shutup fag, try reading a bit, you might learn something

[Anonymous No.50414541]

>>50412521
Ah yes the classic I don't agree so you are nigger comment.

Low IQ basic. Do better paid poster.

[Anonymous No.50414559]

>>50414040
Paid poster here, blah blah blah

[Anonymous No.50415231]

>>50413559
>LINK OG’s came from /pol/, and are thus unironic Nazis and extremely racist

[Anonymous No.50415967]

>>50414213
Heres a hint
When was the first time you heard the letters ccip

[Anonymous No.50416108]

>>50415967
I read your post

[Anonymous No.50416160]

>>50415967

[Anonymous No.50416171]

CCIP is big, but don’t believe the disingenuous shills hailing this as some sort of panacea for LINK price action near term
>>50414227 this anon gets it. Smart anons will read his poasts and easily comprehend that he’s correct
CCIP is a messaging standard. You don’t need DONs or LINK to use this messaging standard. The goal is much bigger than any DON or token bridge. The goal is for Chainlink to set the rules of the game. CCIP standardizes cross chain messaging, enabling programmable bridges which will unlock previously unimaginable territory for smart contracts and dapps
Yes this is just “word salad” if you’re a clueless newfag
The point is that the token is not needed for CCIP. Only, when CCIP becomes the universal standard, then Nazarov is a household name together with Bezos and Gates, and LINK will enjoy prestige for a thousand years

[Anonymous No.50416275]

>>50416171
Notice how "word salad" has triggered the pajeets. The phrase shines a light on their poor grasp of the English language. They can't stand it!

[Anonymous No.50416579]

>>50416171
but no one cares if it's the 'standard' if the token doesn't pump, anon... right?

[Anonymous No.50416687]

>>50407030
If you were serious, why didn't you just post the fucking Etherscan link, dickhead
I can't read your fucking mind; I didn't know you were comparing this figure to other, apparently static ones
I would've fucking assumed Coingecko and others use the official API, but I guess not
You're still wrong about the math on staking (under the conditions i outline), but this is real and I don't know what it's towards

[Anonymous No.50416729]

>>50401775
>Quant's (QNT) Overledger system
lol.

[Anonymous No.50416800]

Talk more about Quant. It's obviously the better choice here

[Anonymous No.50416909]

>>50416800
Quant is headed by Gary Jules and Zorgo Nazareth and has invented the worlds first decentralized Boracle system that uses Boracle nodes to move data left and right from blockchains rather than on than off them.

[Anonymous No.50417098]

>>50401775
It absolutely is that big a deal.

Everything else is hobbyist vaporware or lacking in security. Chainlink is the only team in the space that builds for actual at-scale adoption, and has both the thorough pedigreed R&D and the FANG-tier bizdev manpower to back it. You either understand it already based on their track record with their defi oracles, or you simply haven't been paying attention, and instead follow marketing promises more than adoption metrics.

Quant has no actual product and no customers, it's complete vaporware with a nice token action but unrelated from fundamentals in reality, meanwhile other bridges already live were rushed to market with poor security and get exploited for hundreds of millions every other week.

CCIP can launch at-scale via their already battle tested and widely adopted networks, they already have the reputation as the industry standard and pre-established industry customers monopoly, they have the biggest middleware market cap to back their staking incentives, they have the treasury to keep expanding, they've already deployed live services on all the leading chains with thorough audits, etc etc etc.

It's mind blowing how so very few in the space can fathom how Chainlink has already won the interoperability race due to all the groundwork they've already laid successfully while everything else struggle with building basic foundations.

Furthermore, CCIP combined with staking and the monopoly on price feeds, will open the floodgates for direct value capture for both the protocol and the token holders, which will create a positive feedback loop of demand, as Chainlink nodes will be uniquely positioned to earn juicy fees from being the central infrastructure of all cross-chain & off-chain smart contracts operations, offering the rare sustainable & safe yield, in a time where ponzi yields dry off and platform risks scare off big players. Supply will decrease as demand goes up + retail-facing service & marketing. $$$

[Anonymous No.50417566]

>>50417098
Thanks ChainLinkGod.

[Anonymous No.50417947]

>>50417566
Checked and based. Chainlinkgod is my favorite LINK fudder. He always argues everyone about everything even if he doesn't really know the answer and ignores everyone who proves him wrong. This is exactly the sort of person needed to shill a definitive truth solution that advertises Bancor and Celsius one day then deletes them like Stalin would the next. Thank you Chainlinkgod I believe in you!

[Anonymous No.50417983]

>>50416275
It's really THAT easy!

[Anonymous No.50418006]

>>50417947
Stalin would the next what?

[Anonymous No.50418067]

>>50418006
LoL, more word salad?

[Anonymous No.50418352]

>>50417947
>deletes them the next
I follow him on twitter and I don't recall seeing him delete any tweets. Perhaps I missed that. He hasn't denied that he believed in these defi platforms, but is right in saying we must learn lessons from all of this. Did you expect him to side with Bancor and Celsius after their actions? I don't. The guy isn't psychic. None of us are. You're using this as way to take a cheap shot at him. That's obvious. Unsurprising, too.

[Anonymous No.50418405]

>>50418352
a lot of people lost LINK due to his shilling of defi platforms and advice to seek out yield
look at him now: "oops sorry about bancor, i should have looked at it a bit closer and realized it can easily death spiral. oh yeah btw i pulled all my link out when v3 came out and didn't say anything. oops!"
also he is paid by the chainlink team

[Anonymous No.50418432]

>>50418405
I love the twitter link fags who blame Bancor and Chainlinkgod and literally everyone but themselves for the fact they chose to put their money in a risk platform.
Truly incapable of self reflection or admitting fault. A very useful quality in an "investor" kek.

[Anonymous No.50418457]

>>50401775
What I most value about LINK is their Oracle network but recent, I have been looking into other Oracle operators like subsquid.

[Anonymous No.50418573]

CCIP and Staking, two things that don't exist and will never be built, yet delusional Linktards keep talking about.

If Chainlink cant release staking in 5 years, what makes you think they can release a cross chain messaging protocol?

These are just concepts to create fomo waves of retards to buy the coin.

[Anonymous No.50418622]

>>50418432
Yet I'm not shilling any yield platform to nobody, friends and strangers, because I don't want to take the risk. I'm the idiot?

[Anonymous No.50418636]

>>50418006
>This is exactly the sort of person needed to shill a definitive truth solution that advertises Bancor and Celsius one day then deletes them like Stalin would the next
>shill a definitive truth solution one day then delete all mention of them the next
>shill one day then delete the next
>the next what
>exactly
r u a retard?

[Anonymous No.50418663]

>>50418405
>people lost due to his shilling
He was wrong in the end about certain platforms. Few if any saw it coming (though if you believe biz then everyone did. always after the fact, right?). He wasn't shilling these platforms, only discussing what they did in fact offer at the time. Your blaming him is childish. he's just a commentator who happens to be passionate about Chainlink. Please remember we're all human. Your salty (and fake) kneejerk hatred of him is clearly to lend weight to your no doubt many fud posts elsewhere about Link. You're fairly transparent. I never lost anything on Bancor or Celsius, because despite having a high opinion of CLG, I decided not to risk it. Where do I fit in your grand theory? It is never a good idea to go 100% with what any one person seems to suggest. Reading as many sources and opinions as possible is always the best path. Blaming clg for everything is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Now grow up.

[Anonymous No.50418690]

>>50418663
Hey CLG

[Anonymous No.50418736]

>>50418690
I'm flattered you'd think I was him, desu

[Anonymous No.50418745]

>>50418663
He shilled dmg which rugged you stupid faggot

[Anonymous No.50418773]

>>50418736
Ariel, listen to me. The human world, it's a mess.
Life under the sea is better than anything they got up there!

The seaweed is always greener
In somebody else's lake.
You dream about going up there,
But that is a big mistake.
Just look at the world around you,
Right here on the ocean floor.
Such wonderful things surround you.
What more is you looking for?

Under the sea,
Under the sea.
Darling, it's better down where it's wetter,
Take it from me!

Up on the shore they work all day,
Out in the sun they slave away.
While we devoting, full-time to floating,
Under the sea!

[Anonymous No.50418782]

>>50418745
based chainlinkgod the ruglord from mumbai

[Anonymous No.50418827]

>>50418745
I recommend you don't follow one person blindly and do everything they do. Putting all your trust in one source is never a good idea. Don't think any one person is some sort of Messiah. Learn to think for yourself . And keep reading! Simple, yet effective guidelines.

[Anonymous No.50419437]

>>50418663
you are so new
take a few months and just read, don't post

[Anonymous No.50419462]

>>50401775
Yeah it's a huge deal but the price will inexplicably tank when it's released

[Anonymous No.50420254]

lol 4chan is too stupid to understand the difference. They are not even competing with each other. Totally different market.

[Anonymous No.50420270]

>>50416687
I assumed you weren't a complete newfag and you would be aware that the circ. supply had been stuck for months

[Anonymous No.50420299]

>>50410175
yeah, truly a genius, uncovering the nefarious plot of the paid fudders
meanwhile, the person you quoted is not me, we both have green ids though so I get it lmao
>>50418663
>Few if any saw it coming
yeah, these APY seemed totally normal right from the start
fuck off

[Anonymous No.50420334]

>>50402413
>>50402633
it is a centralized scam and everyone who's followed it since QNT was 40c knows it, still makes me seethe that it pumped this high though

[Anonymous No.50420362]

>>50420334
>Husband, Wife, Brother family scam
>Gagik Alaverdian, President Americas at Quant Advance Computer Care Inc, Previous experience his own Computer Repair shop
>https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/glendale/profile/computer-repair/advance-computer-care-inc-1216-528119
>Peter Marirosans - Chief Technology Officer of Quant (previous experience a company with 1 employee)
>Chief Technology Officer Company - MAYFOURTH HOLDINGS LIMITED (past 3 years) 1 Linkedin employee KEK
>https://www.bbb.org/us/ca/glendale/profile/computer-repair/advance-computer-care-inc-1216-528119
>countless scams are associated with this quant address which is just a mail forwarding service address
>https://www.google.com/search?q=20-22+Wenlock+Road+address+scam&oq=20-22+Wenlock+Road+address+scam
>Quant Network achieved Technology Partner status with Amazon’s AWS Partner Network (APN). A move that will enable more than a million active customers to benefit from our Overledger blockchain operating system
>https://aws.amazon.com/partners/find/results/?keyword=Quant%20Network&size=10&start=0&sort=Relevance&view=Grid (no product, now removed from AWS)
>https://medium.com/@quant_network/quant-world-f13f3cd9f317

[Anonymous No.50420364]

>>50420334
Centralized is exactly what Fortune500 wants. stay poor crypto liberalist.

[Anonymous No.50420553]

I actually know nothing about QNT so I did a bit of research and I'm not sure how it's supposed to compete with CCIP, I mean from what I understand it doesn't support cross chain messaging? A smart contract on Ethereum can't securely send a transaction to a smart contract on Avalanche, or am I missing something? From what I understand it's just an API/abstraction layer that connects off-chain systems with blockchains, but that's it

[Anonymous No.50420604]

>>50420553
It is a tool for enterprises to use one or more DLTs in the most easy way possible in any language they like. To connect with other enterprises in other consortiums that could be using another DLT, they interoperate using IETF standardized APIs.

It's not about connecting crypto to crypto networks. That's DeFi. Quant connects TradFi without overhead.

[Anonymous No.50420621]

>>50420604
Got it, so I suppose the answer to OPs question is that Quant is not even competing with CCIP, completely different products. I suppose Chainlink's "enterprise abstraction layer" that's supposed to be released this year too will be more like Overledger

[Anonymous No.50420695]

>>50420621
Correct, not competing.

That abstraction layer is DeFi though, it's not like Overledger that runs on premise. It's like Windows for blockchains, it runs locally on your business infrastructure.

They're not competitors, they even partnered with Oracle back in 2019 in a program with Chainlink.

People see the world interoperability and immediately feel their investment threathened, just like XRP maxi's thinking Interledger is the end all solution for interoperability.

I hold both LINK and QNT.

[Anonymous No.50420776]

B E T R A Y
E
T
R
A
Y