[ 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: 61 KB, 877x607, worry.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53154670 No.53154670 [Reply] [Original]

>Amazon to cut 18K jobs
>Meta to cut 11K jobs
>Google to cut 10K jobs
>Tesla to cut 10K jobs
>Twitter to cut 3.7K jobs
>Stripe to cut 1.1K jobs
>Coinbase to cut 1.1K jobs
>Microsoft to cut 1K jobs
>Shopify to cut 1K jobs
>Snap to cut 1K jobs
>Robinhood to cut 480 jobs
>Netflix to cut 450 jobs
>Apple to pause all hiring
>Chainlink is hiring!!!
OK, I gotta say this as a LINK OG holder: I'm worried. How in the world is Chainlink Labs able to hire more people when big tech giants are struggling???

>> No.53154700

>>53154670
>Worrisome
I fear that you're right, I'm uncertain about the future of link and have my doubts if I should keep holding.

>> No.53154723

>>53154670
Because Sergeys slush fund (the unlisted 500mn link tokens) has a worth of $2.5bn as delusional bagholders are still willing to pay more than $5 for his funny Internet tokens.

Without delusional bagholders price would be < $0.1 and he would a bit more careful splurging money on $500k devs.

>> No.53154734

Because they don’t employ tens of thousands like Amazon or google.
I work for a tech company with about 1000 staff and we’re also hiring

>> No.53154758

>Useless bullshit cutting jobs
>Revolutionary new shit creating jobs
Yea it’s called progress.

>> No.53154797

>>53154670
>>53150929
>>53150234
>>53149897
>>53145671
>>53146678
>>53146983
>>53147586
>>53149271
>>53143968
>PLEASE SELL PLEASE PLEASE JUST SELL YOUR STAKED TOKENS SIRS PLS

>> No.53154939

>>53154670
1pbtid
i know you're bored anon due to the fact of the obviousness that is the token of link and this is purely bait what a time to be a-... on this basket weaving forum

>> No.53155816

>>53154734
How many employees work at Chainlink Labs?

>>53154758
Compare revenues, my dear friend.

>>53154939
Not bored, was too busy, actually.

>> No.53155870

>>53155816
>compare revenues
You don’t have access to their revenue numbers

>> No.53155874

>>53155870
Its zero minus gas fees. That's why Jonneh and Eric had to rug their longterm holders

>> No.53155877

>>53154670
sergey has 500million more link to dump. he can hire and provide for the rest of his life with this stack. while you losers hold the bag and he dumps it on you to hire stacies and nerds.

>> No.53155906

Lmao dude even Andre can write about oracles and not mention Chainlink once.
https://andrecronje.medium.com/oracle-evolution-ab7ce23da15b
And here's a rebuttal to a Vitalik post that does not mention Chainlink once.
https://blog.chain.link/decentralized-proof-of-solvency-systems/
https://vitalik.ca/general/2022/11/19/proof_of_solvency.html
By the way it took them months to respond to Vitalik and Vitalik does not mention Chainlink by name because Chainlink is not part of the conversation its hiding from the discussion. Chainlink is a piece of shit trying to get noticed so people will include it in the conversation. Meanwhile everyone in crypto is happy to pretend Chainlink does not exist lol

>> No.53155910

>>53154670
Tech companies are only cutting jobs because they're trying to play the markets.

Remember when Elon cut jobs because he had a "super bad feeling about the economy"? (literal quote)
He might as well have tweeted "I'm secretly shorting and want the price to go down".

>> No.53155924

>>53155910
why dont you blow elon musk if you love him so much you raging faggot

>> No.53155935

>>53155924
Read my post again, Mohinder.

>> No.53155939

>>53155935
get a room you two

>> No.53155964

>>53155906
>Andre can write about oracles and not mention Chainlink once.
He actually mentioned it twice.

>> No.53156005

>>53155906
>Chainlink is not part of the conversation its hiding from the discussion
Chainlink is hiding by being the most adopted oracle by a colossal margin?

>> No.53156055

>>53155964
lol source?
>>53156005
>90% dominance of a space everyone in crypto is pivoting away from
"Crypto" is the new category separate from Web3 that influencers are shilling to reimagine the space

>> No.53156064
File: 11 KB, 224x224, 1655135606382.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53156064

>>53156055
>Chainlink bad because crypto bad

There we go.

>> No.53156096

idk i always got amazon vibes like everyone knows the scale of this and they are just going to funnel resources into it to rule the world

>> No.53156098

>>53154670
They got rid off a lot of sales staff earlier

>> No.53156110

>>53155910
I highly doubt the owner would risk ever being found shorting his own company, he would get utterly fucked if found.

>> No.53156119

>>53156064
Crypto is the new pivot away from Web3 scams like how Jack is working on Web 5 a marketing hack composite job of Web2&Web3. Crypto is all about whatever does not include Chainlink and Chainlink is not about moving tokens and numbers going up. Chainlink is about academic research topics that potential clients can just ignore like proof of X. I think I will side with the people that care about making numbers go up and not ivory tower academic headcanon with no real world application

>> No.53156121

>>53154670
Hiring 1 people.

>> No.53156126

>>53156119
>Chainlink is not about moving tokens
lol

>> No.53156161
File: 1.60 MB, 245x180, lol.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53156161

>>53156126
chainlink is not about moving tokens it is about making services cheap enough to capture marketshare. 90% market dominance is not enough for the fat fuck and his big mac sauce covered fingers snd now people are avoiding Chainlink services like having unprotected anal sex with thai ladyboys it makes crypto fun and interesting and grassroots with no academic headcanon people can ignore. how are the poX sales going?
can academics sell real products?

>> No.53156193
File: 374 KB, 1506x1402, 1664900845778.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53156193

>>53156161
>people are avoiding Chainlink services
... by massively adopting them?

>> No.53156211

>>53156161
Something about the fact you’re in here seething post after post tells me you own Link.

>> No.53156217

>>53156193
did binance or any cex adopt chainlink?

>> No.53156224

>>53156211
of course i own link im retarded

>> No.53156228

>>53156217
>did binance or any cex adopt chainlink?
Binance, Kraken, Compound, ... adopted Chainlink, yes.

>> No.53156296

>>53156228
lol source??

>> No.53156300
File: 328 KB, 611x659, 1643035422569.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53156300

>>53156296
kraken

>> No.53156305
File: 148 KB, 614x690, 1648196954798.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53156305

Binance

>> No.53156311

>>53156228
binance got betrayed by the betrayer, and SBF was invited instead. As if they will adopt chainlink

>> No.53156317

>>53156300
>>53156305
this is not chainlink proof of reserve or proof of x you lying fuddie

>> No.53156323

>>53156300
>>53156305
Cll employee alert. Advise caution when responding to paid shills

>> No.53156328
File: 132 KB, 835x806, 1645829920793.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53156328

Coinbase

>> No.53156334

>>53156317
>did Binance or any cex adopt Chainlink??
>NOOO I meant did they adopt proof of reserves???

There go the goalposts lol

>> No.53156352
File: 119 KB, 623x799, 1671436171125.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53156352

>>53156311
>As if they will adopt chainlink
Well they literally did

>> No.53156357

>(Worrisome)
hahahah, gave me a good laugh that, thanks OP.
As if we might not be aware that it's a fud thread or that we're meant to be concerned. Same vibe as
>(and that's a good thing).
You fuddies crack me up.

>> No.53156359
File: 163 KB, 1023x1067, lmaoingatyou.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53156359

>>53156334
read my posts. did they adopt chainlink por?
you: no but they did adopt price feeds
lol

>> No.53156370

>>53156359
>did they adopt chainlink por?
That's not what you asked me: >>53156217 >did binance or any cex adopt chainlink?

>> No.53156380

>>53154670
He was dumping LINK during the bullrun. He should have plenty of cash in reserve for that.

>> No.53156407

>>53156370
see my post here
>>53156119
>Chainlink is about academic research topics that potential clients can just ignore like proof of X.
and here
>>53156161
>how are the poX sales going?
>can academics sell real products?

>> No.53156427

>chainlink can only sell price feeds as products
>cex scams destroying the entire space does nothing to motivate the survivors towards chainlink pox
what do you think will motivate them to implement poX?

>> No.53156541

>>53154670
Higher unemployment = lower inflation

>> No.53156552

>>53156407
Stop posting, you got got.

>> No.53156568

>>53156552
lol source?
>>53156407
>>>53156370 #
>see my post here
>>>53156119 (You) #
>>Chainlink is about academic research topics that potential clients can just ignore like proof of X.
>and here
>>>53156161 (You) #
>>how are the poX sales going?
>>can academics sell real products?

>> No.53156588

>>53156055
>source
https://andrecronje.medium.com/oracle-evolution-ab7ce23da15b
Ctrl + f chainlink = 2 results
>he didn’t even read his own source

>> No.53156604

>>53156588
>quickly changes the subject away from adoption of chainlink brand por poX services
the question was
>how are the poX sales going?
so how are the poX sales going?

>> No.53156612

>(worrisome)
>worry.jpg
Lmao

>> No.53156627

>>53155906
>>53155964
>lmao dude Andre can write about oracles and not even mention chainlink once
>he actually mentioned them twice
>lol source
>>53156604
Are you okay anon

>> No.53156636

>>53156627
Andre could write about the PoR PoX sales... if they existed that is.
big if
how are the poX sales going by the way?

>> No.53156659

>>53156161
It appears their main capture is price feeds as you said, hopefully CCIP changes this for the benefit of holders. I agree with you on chainlink being a largely academic pursuit, kind of a throw shit at the wall and see what sticks approach. Except it's being done with see what can be done "off-chain" then see if there's a market for it.
Since certain price feeds are now cash flow positive, I'm hoping there is a shift towards the team monetizing all the products.
I believe VRF and Keepers are also generating quite a few fees, just not at enough scale to be meaningful.

My main hope with Eric Scmidt coming on board is due to the google moment where google announced they were insanely cash flow positive and completely blew the markets mind when the initial figures came out, something everyone thought was impossible for a search engine. I would be expecting Eric to be searching for commercial value.

>> No.53156676
File: 18 KB, 637x631, 1572820102777.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53156676

>>53156119
>Crypto is the new pivot away from Web3

>> No.53156771

>>53156676
I literally read this on twiiter where all the good posters went. some popular vc i forget which one posted it in some thread
>>53156659
>hope
>let's see
>maybe
this this the problem along with
>agree with you on chainlink being a largely academic pursuit, kind of a throw shit at the wall and see what sticks approach
wasteful and problematic. they need to lead the space and not be fighting with whoever within to adopt. the only thing that would change things would be ccip swift banks etc. but sergey already put that to rest with his portions tweet. and now he's back in hiding.

>> No.53156822

>>53156771
It is a problem, but it is also a problem alongside bitcoin and ethereum or any other crypto where there is a lot of hope and maybe's in the general growth of all the space.

To be honest they have been a leader in the space, the number of other products and teams they enabled as well as sponsored through events such as their hackathons is impressive.

In my opinion the main thing that's missing are all those other teams and platforms singing songs of praise about chainlink. If SWIFT directly referenced chainlink in a broad market update the price would soar.

>> No.53156906

>>53154670
The only thing not bullish about this is the
>People: 1
listing.
Unless they've fired everyone in "People" and are rebuilding it properly this time.
If you have trouble attracting technical talent while offering $500k and extremely interesting things to work on, look inward.
I'd give them a pass because maybe Sergey naively thought that in order to fit in with the WEF shit you actually had to hire a bunch of useless people and signal various types of bullshit.
The secret is that you only need to signal the bullshit. You don't actually have to do it.
Making smaller, resource constrained competitors feel like they needed to actually drop efficiency and productivity rather than just go through to motions and pay lip service to them was a laughably effective move by some powerful people the last ten years.

>> No.53157002

>>53156636
You lost the fudding. Give up and make a new thread so you can fud more

>> No.53157019

>>53156906
why do u hate the green hair with unicorn emoji?

>> No.53157756

>>53156906
They recently laid off the sales staff. I reckon HR will follow soon.

>> No.53157833
File: 204 KB, 1652x1355, waste.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53157833

>>53156906
>>53157756
HR isn't going anywhere, I'm afraid.

>> No.53158242

>>53157833
>minimal work
Meanwhile
>20+ unfilled technical roles
>CCIP no where to be seen so far and its 2023
As much as the HR thing is a meme on here, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it's the sole thing holding link back the past 18 months or so.
People who work in crypto don't want to deal with trad barriers and bullshit.
If you're not prepared to hire degenerate anon autists with anime avatars who have a deep enough understanding of the EVM and exactly how the oracles update the price that they run MEV bots for fun and make more off of that then you'd offer in the salary anyway, then you're missing out.
It's almost like link tries to detach itself from its roots a little too quickly without realizing it still needs to grow more first.

>> No.53158305

>>53154670
because CLs cash flow doesn't come from a working product or service
they dump minted tokens on the market to pay the bills.
the holders pay
the rest of these tech companies rely on a good or service they provide which sales of will fall.
it's just common sense anon
I know this is a hopium thread disguised as fud

>> No.53158318
File: 3.47 MB, 3420x4950, 1630069125979.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53158318

>>53154670
>>53155816
I don't feel so good marines

>> No.53158340

>>53154797
Or maybe people are rightfully holding link to the fire? Get fucked poorfag, we are never going to stop twisting the knife

>> No.53158486

>claims article doesn't mention link
>article does mention link
>source?
>the article
>immediately changes topic

>> No.53158520

>>53158486
>claims neither Binance nor any other CEX adopted Chainlink
>Binance, Kraken, Coinbase all adopted Chainlink
>"b-b-but they didn't adopt proof of reserves!"

>> No.53158878
File: 92 KB, 704x900, 1671382190836277.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53158878

>>53158486
>>53158520
lol, bashers are having to resort to lies. Might as well be jewbots.

>> No.53160415

>>53157833
Source? Can this be faked?

>> No.53161273

>>53160415
yes, anyone can go on glassdoor and write whatever the fuck they want. go try it

>> No.53161324

>>53154758
>Yea it’s called progress.
Why would fucking Chainlink needs more engineering, it's retarded. They don't produce anything anymore, it's an oracle network, sources are integrated, pricefeeds, etc. It's done.

Meaningless Staking was the last retarded idea they found.

>> No.53161592

>>53158340
Isn't it funny how people figured out you were a chink from just your writing style? Lol

>> No.53161645

Are they paying these new hires with tokens or bagholders' money? Interesting business model in a contracting economy.

>> No.53161723

didn't realize hiring engineers was bearish
this after they just culled a lot of the sales team:
https://blockworks.co/news/chainlink-adds-staking-after-cutting-sales-staffers

>> No.53161945

>>53161723
My company did the same, then they had two rounds of layoffs and laid off the engineers and former employees they hired back after the first layoff.

>> No.53162027

>>53154670
I already applied for the "people" position, so don't even think about it.

>> No.53162029

>>53161945
what's the name of your company's token? must be pretty great to just be able to dump a token on hapless retail at anytime to fund operations

>> No.53162055

>>53162029
let me tell you about these things called "stocks"

>> No.53162196

I'll never sell stack

>> No.53163560

>>53158318
tfw i have never made more than 50k a year, but have quite the stack of chainlink tokens...
when will i feel good anons? when?

>> No.53163955

>>53154670
Yes very worrying thanks for your concern about my financial wellbeing.

>> No.53165607

They are afraid, Swift will broadcast to the entire world the Link partnership by march.

>> No.53165753

>>53154670
>thinks satoshi only has one stash
NGMI

>> No.53165814
File: 126 KB, 345x337, 6345634.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53165814

>>53161324
>Why would fucking Chainlink needs more engineering, it's retarded. They don't produce anything anymore, it's an oracle network, sources are integrated, pricefeeds, etc. It's done.
>Meaningless Staking was the last retarded idea they found.

Imagine writing that.

>> No.53166713

>>53165607
i have heard this is true

>> No.53166797

Chainlink is run by a liberal arts graduate, not an accountant. He'll keep going full retard on hiring HR roasties and flying too close to the sun until he's hit with cashflow problems(the number one killer of businesses) and his company dies.

>> No.53166804

>>53165607
>Swift will broadcast to the entire world the Link partnership by march.
They already announced this shit years ago, which is why it mooned years ago. Swift is priced in.

>> No.53168046
File: 61 KB, 876x425, lmaoingatfudders.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53168046

>>53158340
>t. probably posted pic related
sorry faggot, you shouldnt have trusted celsius and bancor
now you're stuck in biz hell writing link fud 24/7 like a cuck while stake chads just farm free linkies + build tokens thanks to their patience

>> No.53168899

>>53168046
Ha ha this 100%. Imagine being so dumbfuck retarded you lost all your Linkies on a ponzi scheme offering stupid-high rates. Greedyittle puppies are so easily separated from their stacks kek.
One more time for the road... HA HA HA HA

>> No.53169034

>>53166804
>Swift is priced in
HHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAAAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAAHAHHA
whew, lad

>> No.53169900

>>53156119
crypto is its own thing. any 'web3 metaverse' or CCIP incorporation of the old world is not true crypto and will not do well in the long run. Fuck that old world we are trying to build a new one not make that old one better. chainlink is a dead end in terms of innovation is looking increasing likely at least in the short term
>>53156659
>My main hope with Eric Scmidt coming on board is due to the google moment where google announced they were insanely cash flow positive and completely blew the markets mind when the initial figures came out, something everyone thought was impossible for a search engine. I would be expecting Eric to be searching for commercial value.
never gonna happen lol

>> No.53169982

>>53169900
>never gonna happen lol
Your 'lol' rang kinda hollow there, anon. Not too confident about that one, are you?

>> No.53169994

>>53169982
you mean you can't get understand how utterly ridiculous that speculation sounds? you need someone to elaborate for your tiny brain?

>> No.53170320

>>53169034
Everything is priced in
Staking is priced in
Swift is priced in
CCIP is priced in

Why do you think the price nearly halved from $9 to $5 after the actual staking release was announced? Because the release was less than what everyone expected. Another 24 month minimum for a less alpha version of staking? Nope thank you.

Same with Sergey saying CCIP-alpha sliver will be released in the next 2 years. Markets noped the shit out of that too, as indicates that this team is simply not able to deliver within an acceptable time frame.

>> No.53170601

>>53169994
>need someone to elaborate
Yes please could you elaborate on Swift going live on 20th March 2023 and the looming announcement that Chainlink will be very much needed going forward? Or would you prefer to dwell on the current price of the Link utility token and spend all day trying to persuade everyone not to buy it as it's clearly a bad investment?
Your choice, skip.

>> No.53170642

>>53155906
You dont know Andre's history with chainlink? tldr He's monumentally butthurt about it

>> No.53170682

>>53170601
>on Swift going live on 20th March 2023 and the looming announcement that Chainlink will be very much needed going forward
this is rampant unfounded conjecture
swift isn't "going live" on March, ISO 20022, a banking messaging standard is "going live" and will gradually be imposed to every bank, but nothing drastic is happening on that particular date, you are beyond delusional if you think banks will immediately switch to cross-border payments on the same fucking day
regarding cross-border, CCIP is by no means the only solution that's being developed, not to even mention that CBDCs are covered by a project completely unrelated to chainlink
https://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/nyic/project-cedar
get fucked hopium dealer

>> No.53170693

>>53170682
holy triggered

>> No.53170705

>>53170682
based truthpill

>> No.53170706

>>53170693
>could you elaborate
>"elaborates"
>"huuuurrrrrr triggered lol"
why are bagholders like this?

>> No.53170722

>>53170706
All the guy said was that he's confident Swift is going to integrate CCIP.

>> No.53170729

>>53170722
no, he made it look like CCIP integration on March is a certainty
all I did was express doubt based on the actual evidence, plus he actually asked me to elaborate
why are you so triggered?

>> No.53170734

>>53170729
>he made it look like CCIP integration on March is a certainty
That's what I said: he's confident it will happen.

>> No.53170736

>>53170734
ok and I highly doubt this, what the fuck is your problem moron?

>> No.53170747

>>53170736
Look at all this shit you verbally diarrhea'd: >>53170682

>> No.53170755

>>53170747
factual, reasonable and sound arguments, what's wrong with my post faggot?
holy triggered

>> No.53170773

>>53170682
The Swift thing really mindbroke the fuddies didn’t it lol

>> No.53170782

>>53170773
yes, my dear 1pbtid organic phoneposter
could you elaborate on how exactly my post is wrong?

>> No.53170806

>>53170782
>pls debate me
Go outside and calm down.
It’s not even unreasonable to think Swift will integrate ccip, no need to sperg out like that.

>> No.53170814

>>53156161
they provide price data for free and random numbers for nft scams, no need to oversell it

>> No.53170818

>>53170806
can you understand the difference between
>swift is 100% integrating ccip on March 20 2023
and
>it's not unreasonable to think they might integrate ccip
or are you all being retarded on purpose? did any of you retards even see the post I replied to?
fuck off

>> No.53170821
File: 46 KB, 811x548, 1663126892414.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53170821

>>53170814
>they provide price data for free
nope

>> No.53170835

>>53170821
>please pay us, nobody else does
lol

>> No.53170845

>>53170818
>100%

loom
2 of 3
verb
loomed; looming; looms
intransitive verb
b
: to take shape as an impending occurrence
the problems that loomed ahead

So he didn’t actually say “100%”.
I’d say the integration is taking shape.

>> No.53170853

>>53170835
>Chainlink is asking Compound to pay, and nobody else!
Look up the "sponsors".

>> No.53170859

is swift fault for taking their time, or the fatty with his team of academic?

>> No.53170861

>>53170818
Thinking the integration is a near-certainty isn't unreasonable at all, look at what happened to the cryptos that integrated any oracle other than Chainlink.

>> No.53170885

>>53170845
kek buttslammed

>> No.53170921
File: 548 KB, 960x539, q42020.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53170921

>>53170845
>asks me to elaborate
>I elaborate
>hurrrr why did you elaborate fag go outside touch grass durr
>muh pedantic analysis
ok bro calm down
>>53170861
well, considering the fact that CCIP was supposed to be released on 2022 according to Sergey, and remembering what happened last time Chainlink was allegedly scheduled for an integration with a legacy enterprise, I would think that believing anything regarding Chainlink is a "near-certainty" is borderline delusional at best
>look at what happened to the cryptos
this is a nonsensical false equivalence, LINK has not integrated with any entity even remotely similar to SWIFT, and the implication that SWIFT is akin to a L1 shitcoin protocol or a DeFi grift is disingenuous at best

>> No.53170924

>>53170853
>see, here are some other suckers to pay us for what we give away for free
haha

>> No.53170939

>>53170924
lol fucking cope

>>53170921
>b-but they delayed CCIP!
Did anyone see the goalposts? I'm sure I saw them here somewhere.

>> No.53170948

>>53170939
>23 pbtid full of cope, deflection and avoidance
thank you for your service marine, and thanks for conceding you have zero arguments to offer

>> No.53170956

>>53170921
>I elaborate
You replied as if he said it’s a 100% certainty that the integration will happen, you literally said this.
Fact is that’s not what he said.

Go mald in the corner.

>> No.53170957

>>53170948
>b-but your post count!
There go the goalposts AGAIN.
Just take the L.

>> No.53170970

>>53170956
and you have offered zero arguments, you keep engaging in ad homs like a 12 year old
keep crying over my posts
>>53170957
>t-t-take the L!
any arguments nigger kike?

>> No.53170988

>>53170682
kek look how desperately the shills are attempting to do damage control over this post

>> No.53170989

>>53170970
>you have offered zero arguments
What? The guy said the integration is ‘looming’ (taking shape) and it is.

>> No.53171003
File: 681 KB, 822x1237, 1672079010856.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53171003

>>53170988
>damage control
There's literally nothing to damage control.

>>53170970
>any arguments
Yes, the poster you replied to was correct and you were wrong.

>> No.53171010

>>53170989
it's not, and nothing regarding Chainlink is happening on March 20 2023, like he alleged
seethe harder
>>53171003
how was I wrong?
>inb4 t-t-t-take the L!!

>> No.53171019

>>53171003
>25 posts of damage control

>> No.53171028

>>53171010
>how was I wrong?
You said it's "rampant unfounded conjecture" that a Swift integration of CCIP is taking shape.

>> No.53171035

>>53171010
>it's not
It’s quite literally your word against Swift’s.

>> No.53171043

>>53171028
no, I said this is rampant unfounded conjecture
>on Swift going live on 20th March 2023 and the looming announcement that Chainlink will be very much needed going forward
nice goalpost moving
>>53171035
where did SWIFT state that they're integrating CCIP on March 20?

>> No.53171088

>>53171043
"To loom" means "to take shape" you retard, see >>53170845

>> No.53171092

>>53171088
which literally is speculation

>> No.53171091

>>53171043
>where did SWIFT state that they're integrating CCIP on March 20?
That guy didn’t say Swift was integrating on the 20th, he said Swift is “going live” on the 20th.
He said the integration is looming.

>> No.53171098

>>53171092
It's 100% confirmed that an integration is taking shape, see >>53171003

>> No.53171120

>>53171098
was the oracle integration 100% confirmed here?>>53170921
remember, an actual integration was scheduled on the roadmap

>> No.53171126

>>53171092
It's not speculation it's literally 100% confirmed

>> No.53171128

>>53171120
No, Chainlink themselves never said a word about it.

>> No.53171154

>>53171091
he very clearly implied exactly that you faggot
keep beating around the bush though it's amusing
>>53171126
unless they flat out announce any kind of integration regarding chainlink's products nothing is certain
>>53171128
so now that neither SWIFT nor Chainlink have said a word about CCIP integration, why are we all pretending it's happening for real this time? on what basis? CCIP was supposed to be released on 2022 and that didn't happen, now we don't even have an official confirmation about 2023 so what the fuck changed?

>> No.53171164

>>53171154
>he very clearly implied exactly that
Except he literally did not.

>> No.53171167

>>53171154
>neither SWIFT nor Chainlink have said a word about CCIP integration
Holy shit you're literally going senile.

>> No.53171185

>>53171164
except he literally did, that's why he brought up the date in the first place
>>53171167
holy fuck you're literally out of arguments

>> No.53171191

>>53171154
>so now that neither SWIFT nor Chainlink have said a word about CCIP integration
Is this your first day following chainlink and SWIFT news. Their close partnership goes back 5 years. If you're looking for spoonfeeding just say it and save yourself the embarrassment

>> No.53171196

>>53171191
this is day #1340 for me, and I don't see the SWIFT announcement about the looming CCIP integration anywhere

>> No.53171204

>>53171092
The other models you refer to are plain no use and only model 3 of 3 (model 2 is Capgemini's solution) solves a mCBDC (multi CBDC) scenario. You can screech and swear (a really unconvincing look, btw) all you like but it's very reasonable at this stage to suggest that Chainlink's will be employed by Swift. Indeed, I would venture to reasonably also say that the reason CCIP was not released as per last year's Jan 1st announcement is because the Swift release was pushed back to March 2023. Lo and behold, CCIP was pushed back. Funny that!
Of course, on top of all this, there's Jonathan Ehrenfeld Solé's 2 year running appearance at Smartcon, where he positively gushed on Chainlink's solution, and I think, Sir, that you are clearly either a bonafide dribbling retard or you're plain old fudding. I'll let other anons decide.
Good luck with the swearing. Your parents must be so proud of you.

>> No.53171232

>>53171204
He's either a disingenuous fudder or a lazy moron who hasn't done his due dilligence. I think the discussion would be better off if we didn't reply to posters like these who deny basic facts that have been obvious for so long.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uxF4Q6_glY

>> No.53171234

swift is rolling out its own digital currency interoperability protocol, and guess what, tnn
who could have guessed

>> No.53171235

>>53171185
>holy fuck you're literally out of arguments
Imagine saying "neither SWIFT nor Chainlink have said a word about CCIP integration" just a few months after Swift and Chainlink announced the CCIP partnership.

>> No.53171236

It's so funny that simply talking about the Swift partnership makes the fudders seeth.
Yes, Swift will use CCIP.
Yes, every country will have their own CBDC in 5 years.
Yes, you will get enslaved by the new world order and eat the bugs.
Yes, I will live like a king because I literally hold the keys to the heaven (chainlink).

>> No.53171248

>>53171204
I'm terribly sorry anon but all this is speculation ergo hopium
remember this?
https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/10/16/swift-startup-winner-demos-smart-contract-trade-with-5-financial-firms/
it is very reasonable to suggest that absolutely nothing substantial is happening, just like the last time
>that the reason CCIP was not released as per last year's Jan 1st announcement is because the Swift release was pushed back to March 2023
no it's not, what exactly has an experimental beta technology that's not even fully developed at this stage and is primarily focused on facilitating crypto2crypto txs has to do with the initial implementation of a messaging standard for banks? it's completely asinine to even suggest that swift is waiting on fucking chainlink for that, it has NOTHING TO DO WITH CCIP or CRYPTO
>>53171232
>smart contracts
what has ISO 20022 got to do with smart contracts? they're talking about things happening in a 10 year timeframe from now, how the fuck do you manage to mix up all this shit in your head? you're literally insane
>>53171235
>partnership means integration
>>53171236
schizo ramblings
oh god

>> No.53171253

>>53171185
>that's why he brought up the date in the first place
The date refers to “Swift going live”, i.e. ISO 20022, not ccip.
He said ccip is looming.

>> No.53171261

>>53171253
>I'm dense af
I can tell

>> No.53171266

>>53171248
>>partnership means integration
It means an integration is taking shape, yes. That's the whole point of partnering.
"Taking shape" does not mean it's 100% certainly going to happen.

>> No.53171278

>>53171236
>It's so funny that simply talking about the Swift partnership makes the fudders seeth.
It's such a massive thing that their shitcoin-attuned brains can barely comprehend it.

>> No.53171284

>>53171248
>https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/10/16/swift-startup-winner-demos-smart-contract-trade-with-5-financial-firms/
Good find! Don't you think that 'nothing hapened' because Swift never announced they wer going live with it in 2017?
Guess what? They're going live 2 months from now kek
This guy is nuts lol

>> No.53171543

>>53155910
If a company says its firing people, the stock will go down for maybe a day, but recover fast because that means they're cutting costs.
Fuck off with your brainlett takes

>> No.53171556

>>53171543
>companies downsizing is a good thing long-term
lol

>> No.53171787

>>53171556
Didn't you get the memo, anon? Up is down. Keep up! (or should that be keep down?)

>> No.53171798

>>53154670
Where are you getting these numbers? All of these layoffs already happened months ago at this point.

>> No.53171802

>>53154797
how do I filter every phrase related to chainlink?

>> No.53172363

>>53170747
Youre projecting pretty hard on him man. Reduces the quality of discussion here. He presented a reasonable doubt. Grow up already, not everyone is out to get you.

>> No.53172381

>>53172363
People are paid to FUD link on here, didn't you know? You are probably one of them, a NEXO operative.

>> No.53172392

>>53171278
No one is seething though. You guys are getting very defensive.

>> No.53172407

>>53172381
Lol. This place is not healthy. Headed outside for the day. I guess we’ll all see what happens in March eh

>> No.53172439

>>53172363
He completely sperged out when someone said a Swift integration is taking shape.
It's hilarious.

>> No.53172504

>>53154670
I qualify as "people", where can I apply?

>> No.53172542
File: 314 KB, 640x862, leomatiz5.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53172542

>>53154670
Reading this thread amazed me yet again that, after these last few years especially, there is still a fresh crop of retards who actually think anything happens. They really believe all these things will habben when literally none of this kind of shit ever transpired in the past. I suppose it's the organic baggie lifecycle. What a pathetic display.

>> No.53172590

>>53156193
based FUD dispeller

>> No.53172607

>>53154670
>amazon
ships actual goods to people and major contractor to logistics machine builders
>google
provides actual software with actual need
>tesla
builds physical automobiles and researches energy storage hardware
>microsoft and apple
builds software and hardware businesses need to operate
>netflix
video streaming service

>chainlink
uh uh um... imaginary "oracles" from the matrix? That launched as unregistered security selling "tokens" for uh ...

>> No.53172704

>>53172607
>That launched as unregistered security selling "tokens" for uh ...
Don't forget that their main defense against being a security is that the token is useless and does literally nothing and has no connection to the business

>> No.53172718
File: 2.94 MB, 3135x2327, 1669105807755078.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53172718

>>53171248
>'speculation'
Swift and Chainlink have been working with each other for five years. Jonathon Ehrenfeld Sole has appeared at two smartcons not to mention people from DTCC and BNY Mellon. Sergey has been regularly appearing at SIBOS. If you can't put two and two together then you're either dumb or being purposefully ignorant (i.e. fudding). Nobody here who has done their due diligence is falling for this shit.

>> No.53172736

> Not a single marketing/branding position

How can a team be this incompetent?

>> No.53172738

>>53172718
>Swift and Chainlink have been working with each other for five years.
As has been repeated many times, chainlink doesn't do "partnerships", they have "clients" or "users". So, how much has this "client" paid to chainlink during their 5 years of "usage"?

>> No.53172762
File: 285 KB, 876x1706, 1673003353208635.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53172762

>>53171236
Based.

>> No.53172768

>>53172738
Holy supermassive turbo overcope

>> No.53172788

>>53172738
$400 billion which we will receive as bonus rewards in q4.
Happy now?

>> No.53172796

>>53172738
Swift isn't a client in that sense. Swift and link are working together to create the infrastructure needed to link legacy finance with DLT. It will be banks and businesses paying node operators. In any case, Chainlink isn't a traditional business with stock, which seems to be the lens you're viewing it from.

>> No.53172819

>>53172762
>>53172768
>everything in the company is going the right way
Chainlink network revenue is ballpark $50m per year. The network valuation is ~5 billion. That's a clean 100x multiple on GROSS revenue (btw not even close to actual profitability) even at the current token valuation which I'm sure most holders would agree is deeply disappointing.
To summarize: yikes

>> No.53172821

>>53172607
>uh uh um... imaginary "oracles" from the matrix? That launched as unregistered security selling "tokens" for uh ...

Lol at least learn what it is that you are fudding.

>> No.53172846

>>53172819
>network revenue
Chainlink has no network revenue, the network is decentralized.

>> No.53172864

>>53172796
>Chainlink isn't a traditional business with stock, which seems to be the lens you're viewing it from.
Ok it's a nothing token which carries no rights and has no value. Happy now?
>>53172846
>Chainlink has no network revenue
Fine by me. Enjoy your 0-revenue imaginary tokens.

>> No.53172866
File: 673 KB, 1357x757, my ass.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53172866

>>53172819
>$50m per year
>source: my ass

>> No.53172894
File: 129 KB, 1218x648, 1667477485845617.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53172894

>>53172864
>nothing token
>No, it's a utility token that's required on the protocol level in order to use oracle services.

>> No.53172908
File: 135 KB, 780x180, youhavebraindamage.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53172908

>>53172866
Kek. Ok anon you're right they actually made $171 billion last year my mistake

>> No.53172956

>>53172607
kek, stinkies BTFO

>> No.53173038

>>53172908
Not to mention their TVE which will introduce exponentially more value into LINK once staking v1.0 is realised. Fudders are aware of this though, on some level every poster here know chainlink is the most important asset in human history

>> No.53173097

Good thing is more people are waking up to the mess which is called Chainlink. I remember last summer it was still 80% shills 20% fudders, now its probably 30% shills. Chainlink has basically delivered absolutely nothing to the token holder, hence link/eth and link/btc being below mainnet release 2019. Things won't end well next smartcon I think. More and more people are absolutely fed up with Sergey's antics.

>> No.53173102

>>53172894
Did you miss the bit where chainlink doesn't implement any of that? The token has nothing to do with the orice feeds.
>>53173038
My friend, I was making a joke. The 25th coin on CMC is not actually earning 171 billion per year.

>> No.53173104

>>53172819
>Chainlink network revenue
What's Satoshi's "network revenue" from Bitcoin?

>> No.53173116

>>53173102
>The token has nothing to do with the orice feeds.
Except literally every single little thing the price feeds (and all the other Chainlink services) do absolutely requires the token.

>> No.53173123

>>53172866
>to be

See link shills don't even know the difference between the present and the possible future.

>> No.53173132

>>53173123
Imagine not knowing how investing works.
If "to be" were already the case right now, it would be too late to make big investment gains.

>> No.53173136

>>53173116
Topkek 37 posts and being completely btfo every single time. It's probably chainlinkgod posting

>>53173104
BTC revenue is the revenue that goes to miners for securing the network. The miners made billions in 2021. Is it that hard to understand?

>> No.53173142

>>53173097
>Chainlink has basically delivered absolutely nothing to the token holder
The team owes you nothing, it has no obligation to deliver anything to you.
>My friend, I was making a joke. The 25th coin on CMC is not actually earning 171 billion per year.
Whether it makes 171 billion or 0 right now doesn't matter, it is still the God protocol, the most important cryptocurrency ever made that will secure trillions in value in the near future.

>> No.53173149

>>53173132
The difference you claim link makes billions a year TODAY which is not the case as shown on market.link

>> No.53173155

>>53154670
>How in the world is Chainlink Labs able to hire more people when big tech giants are struggling???
chainlink is in a much better position financially than any of those companies. they have billions of dollars in cash and liquid assets and they run at a profit

>> No.53173159

>>53173142
>The team owes you nothing, it has no obligation to deliver anything to you.

You are right and that's why they don't deliver anything. Is it finally sinking in?

>> No.53173161

>>53173136
>BTC revenue is the revenue that goes to miners
That anon was talking about what clients are paying to Chainlink for usage.

>>53173149
>you claim link makes billions a year TODAY
No I don't.
Also, Link absolutely secures billions a year today.

>> No.53173169

>>53173159
And I never expected them to, at least until 2030. I am happily staking my 21k stack across three separate wallets and am waiting until the time is right.

>> No.53173173

>>53173159
>they don't deliver anything
Except the absolute number 1 oracle?

>> No.53173180

>>53173169
So what will you do when they still haven't done anything in 2030? Because every anon claimed 2020 would be the magic year back in 2017

>> No.53173192

>>53173180
>every anon claimed 2020 would be the magic year back in 2017
whoa, anons claimed THAT???

>> No.53173195

>>53173180
Sergey claimed it would take two decades for the network to be fully operational so I'll wait another 10 years. I can hold, stake and enrage fudders like you who most likely lost their stacks on bancor and celsius.

>> No.53173209

>>53173195
>immediately resort to calling people fudders who lost their stacks when their fragile worldview gets triggered

>> No.53173222

>>53173104
Bitcoin has a revenue problem that is arguably even worse, but I can't be bothered getting into that now. For a better comparison look at ETH or even strong dapps like ENS.
>>53173116
No. They have completely artificially inserted the token in the purchase process. It has a really negligible effect on token demand as the velocity is so high.

>> No.53173237

>>53172819
>>53173136
Also funny how you compare "annual revenue" to total valuation like it means anything.
In 2022 BTC miners earned roughly $1 billion in mining rewards, but BTC's valuation is more than 300 times that.

>> No.53173250

>>53173222
>Bitcoin has a revenue problem that is arguably even worse
Checked and yes.

>They have completely artificially inserted the token in the purchase process.
Look up implicit staking and transfer and call.

>> No.53173307
File: 480 KB, 720x1187, Screenshot_20230107-112856.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53173307

>>53173180
2017 and 2021 we're magic years. Whether you optimized your position with risk on and securing a bag in the wake is irrelevant. It must be at least 80-90% do not make that golden trade.

Pain is the best teacher.

>> No.53173328

>>53173192
>whoa, anons claimed THAT???
Pretty much. If you told link anons in 2017 that staking still wouldn't be released in 2022 they would have laughed. 100%.
>>53173237
>Bitcoin economics also suck
Ok?
>>53173250
>Look up implicit staking and transfer and call
I don't need to look them up, I know more about them than you do. What's your point? That's an open standard any token can add it.

>> No.53173362

>>53173328
so you were in LINK threads in 2017? Are you a fallen OG, who lost his stack on bancor or celsius by any chance?

>> No.53173397
File: 200 KB, 750x1115, token needed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53173397

>>53173328
You know nothing about link. You need to stake link in order to provide an economic incentive for oracles to be truthful.

>That's an open standard any token can add it
Okay nice moving of the goalposts.

>> No.53173407

>>53154670
I applied and got rejected.

>> No.53173422

>>53154734
What positions are you hiring for? I got a software engineering degree in 2022 and am trying to enter the work force Anon.

>> No.53173458

>>53173407
has any /biz/ anon actually been hired by chainlink labs? I feel like there's so much autism and talent on /biz/ that it's inevitable that we have a man on the inside. Or were they all filtered by roasties?

>> No.53173462

>>53173362
>Are you a fallen OG, who lost his stack
I know this might be a difficult concept to understand, but I didn't this thing where I bought link tokens when they were cheap, and sold them when they got expensive! Crazy right?
>>53173397
lol I was shitposting with the Hodge when you didn't even know what crypto was. You're posting a screenshot of a thread that I'm probably in.

>> No.53173464

>>53156359
For anyone actually interested, the CL PoR system would require the CEX in question to work with some accounting firm like Armamino to develop some kind of API adaptor that can query their escrow accounts and do a bunch of other stuff. It's not as simple as just like querying a function to get a price feed for a trading pair.

Chainlink PoR isn't really that great of a tool for offchain assets right now and the cooler use cases are for things like TUSD.

>> No.53173525

>>53173462
prove it, show your sell orders right now and I'll stop posting on this board forever.

>> No.53173551

>>53173525
Why would I want you to stop posting?

>> No.53173565

>>53173551
It'll give you a symbolic victory over me and show you were correct in doubting chainlink if you did manage to sell close to the top (which you didn't, since you hold chainlink, much more than I do)

>> No.53173611
File: 472 KB, 1938x784, FollowupEmail.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53173611

>>53157833
I applied for an engineering job at Chainlink and it went like this, unironically:

>Get an email day before interview that the interviewer is flying from EST to PST so instead of 10AM, the interview would be at 7AM for her, which is too early.
>I say "ok, that is fine, we can reschedule it for 3 hours later, so it is at 10AM PST"
>Reschedule
>I wake up early to be prepared for interview and check my email. I received an email at midnight the night before asking if we could push the interview back a day
>Agree because I really want to work for Chainlink
>Finally get ready for interview. I set up my $2k HD camera and $1k microphone and run several tests to make sure it is working properly. I set up my background to look very professional and make sure the lighting is ideal
>Interview time comes and passes. I wait.
>12 minutes after scheduled time. BLING "Hi Anon! Sorry I'm late! I have a bad internet connection!" Interviewer proceeds to have difficulty connecting multiple times.
>We have to have the call solely as an audio call because the interviewer couldn't be bothered to have a proper setup.
>I can't demonstrate any of the projects I've built using Chainlink or anything or even discuss the project at all which I have been passionate about since 2017.
>Interview ends
>I get a rejection email on Christmas Eve.

I wish this were a made up story, but it's not.

>> No.53173639

>>53173458
I know a 2017 Anon who was hired and is still working for CL Labs. I know a couple that, despite being very talented, have been rejected.

>> No.53173641

>>53173565
ok but I don't care about any of that stuff. Believe me if you want, or not. As far as I'm concerned my posts stand on their own merit.

>> No.53173695

>>53173611
Was it a roastie who interviewed you or someone on the technical team? I guess you didn't display one of the "core values" or whatever globohomo shit they're looking for. Unironically one of the most bearish things about chainlink today. What did you actually end up discussing with her during the interview?

>> No.53173703

>>53173611
Checked kekked n rekt

>> No.53173715

>>53173695
Do you really even need to ask that question?

>> No.53174015

>>53170320
>this team is simply not able to deliver within an acceptable time frame
dumbest statement ever. chainlink can deliver when they know they are ready. without link DeFi doesn't work. thats how retarded the market is. "priced in" lol. lmfao even

>> No.53174064

>>53173611
What’s your background? I’m thinking of applying to CLL as a grunt developer but I’d need to switch careers and train for a year or so.

>> No.53174281

>>53173328
>>Bitcoin economics also suck
>Ok?
It means you're applying a massive double standard against Link.
Making you a retard.

>implicit staking is an open standard any token can add
lol

>> No.53175003

>>53171236
dont blaspheme.

>> No.53175952

HOLY FUCK THIS THREAD ABOUT A FAT RUSSIAN SCAM THAT CANNOT SELL PRODUCTS TO BUSINESSES AND TOKENS TO FUCKING RETARDS IS STILL UP YOU CANNOT MAKE THIS UP LMMMAAAAOOOOO CRYPTO IS DEAD FOR REAL THIS TIME

>> No.53176127

AI ART PROMPT
>OBESE SERGEY NAZAROV SHITTING ON A TOILET MADE OF NEET HOPES AND DREAMS
YOU LET DOWN THE BUMS, THE INSTITUTIONALIZED AND THE DESTITUTE MR NASTYSLOB!!!

>> No.53176182

LMAO CHAINSHIT NIGGERS ARE POSTING ITT ON A DEAD BOARD WITHIN A DEAD INTERWEBS

>> No.53176431

>>53172718
>Swift
Priced in
>DTCC
Priced in
>BNY Mellon
Priced in
>Eric Schmidt
Priced in

>but muh quadrillions!
Chainlink is a backend service, the quadrillion won't be converted into Chainlink tokens, rather they will pay a tiny service fee for using that service and that fee and that fee alone will be converted to value for Chainlink tokens. It's still a lot but we're talking at most a 100x over a timeframe spanning decades, which when discounted for inflation, opportunity cost and other factors gets you the Chainlink marketcap you have today.

>> No.53176477

>>53154670
>18000 fired
>11000 fired
>10000 fired
>3700 fired
>1100 fired
>1000 fired
>450 fired
>OMG THEY HECKIN HIREINOED TWENTY SEVEN FRICKIN PEOPLE

>> No.53176508
File: 593 KB, 1080x3975, Screenshot_20230107-185645.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53176508

>>53154670
Why are chainlink bagholders, when compared to the average person
>43x as likely to be from North Carolina
>37x as likely to be a crackpot
>26x as likely to be chinese
>22x as likely to be a new parent
>20x as likely to do cocaine
>19x as likely to be a Bernie bro

>> No.53176620

>>53176508
Bullish

>> No.53176716

Haven't been here in a while so just checking in. Still the same discord fud fags having a pre scripted conversation with each other. You niggas really need to get a life.

>> No.53176789

>>53176431
lol I love how hard you're trying to get me to sell. Look, I'm sorry, but I won't... hahahaha

>> No.53176804

>>53176431
Also, doesn't understand how staking or inelastic supply affects the tokenomics.

>> No.53176830

>>53161592
Now that you mention it he definitely is

>> No.53177242

>>53154670
How does this worry you?
Are you a genuine retard?

>> No.53177535

why did I read this shit thread
what the fuck is wrong with me

>> No.53177639
File: 73 KB, 2556x308, fuddersarenowbeggingforforgivenesslmao.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53177639

>>53176508
>>53175952
>>53176127
>>53176182
but chainlink fudders, when compared to the average person
...are completely buck broken by stake chads
this was a post made by the chainlink fud quorum not long ago
its...over fudsister
we lost the battle AND the war by gambling away our stacks on lending platforms

>> No.53179063

>>53177639
>we

>> No.53180397

>>53154670
So, now that the HR roastie fud is officially debunked this is is the angle you are going for?
Discord trannies on full damage control

>> No.53180401

>>53180397
how is it debunked?

>> No.53180773

>>53180397
They've recently cut off a lot of sales jobs, but HR remains unchanged, unfortunately.

>> No.53181471

>>53177242
>big tech companies, with revenues 100× Chainlink's whole market cap, are cutting jobs
>Chainlink isn't
Are you retarded?

>> No.53181489

>>53181471
Can you explain the difference in business practice between a growth industry and a declining business?

>> No.53181610

>>53154670
>Yes hello, I would like to be a People at Chain link

>> No.53181899

This whole thread has been irrelevant to making money, the goal of biz.

>> No.53181978

>>53170859
It was the Bank of England that was responsible for the isso delay. They have a lot of say in how this all happens because they process 25% of all digital banking trx’s

>> No.53182031
File: 71 KB, 734x441, 1649887621790.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53182031

>>53156121
Kek

>> No.53182120
File: 470 KB, 1440x2282, Screenshot_20230108_082501.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
53182120

>>53173422
Not the guy you replied to but Brave is hiring.

>> No.53182295

>>53180401

Do you think it is appropriate that a company which is scaling upwards at a fast pace should do without an HR department? It's a novel suggestion, but I'd like to hear how you think that could work? Or perhaps you think that all the engineers at Chainlink should take time out to vet new staff? Who would co-ordinate that, and what impact do you think this approach might have on overall productivity?

>> No.53183095

>>53182295
after your business brings in profits, it' natural to scale. are you saying that selling tokens to gullible people is their business? because that's the part that's doing well, everything else is losing money

>> No.53183099

>>53183095
>decentralized network
>profits
pick one

>> No.53183109

>>53183099
if profit is not the goal, what's up with the charade of charging compound?

>> No.53183127

>>53183109
Chainlink is playing "contract operator".

>> No.53183145

>>53183127
haha, do they have little hat as well?

>> No.53183177

Oracles are needed 24/7 the need for information flow doesn't care about recessions ;)

>> No.53183286

Linky frens, stop replying to fud threads and they will disappear.

>> No.53183379

>>53182120
Thanks anon, I appreciate it

>> No.53183394

>>53154670
Worrisome? This token exists solely to prop up HR roasties. They are the true devs even.

>> No.53183450

Daily reminder the ONLY WAY to win with Chainlink is to SHORT it.

>> No.53183618

>>53173611
sounds about right for a roastie "HR" interviewer

>> No.53183669

>>53154723
This is why you don't buy centralized supply coins