Cunts Cant interpret protocols like LINK

[Anonymous No.53642724]

Even if they were given 5 days from now to try.

Stay poor

[Anonymous No.53642731]

>>53642724
CC? I Pee.

[Anonymous No.53642739]

its dumping lmaoooo get fucked retard

[Anonymous No.53642808]

>>53642724
Have you checked BAND protocol?
im invested in both

[Anonymous No.53642827]

>>53642724
Real world data gets to the blockchain but in a decentralized fashion. Oracle problem solved n shiet

[Anonymous No.53642848]

>>53642827
Okay why bother having real world data on a blockchain, and even if it was necessary why would it need to be decentralised?

[Anonymous No.53642859]

>>53642848
>why bother having real world data on a blockchain
lol

>why would it need to be decentralised
Because otherwise pic related happens.

[Anonymous No.53642875]

>>53642848
Consider increasing your room temperature

[Anonymous No.53642921]

>>53642724
More likely date is 2/16

I just have a feeling

[Anonymous No.53642932]

>>53642859
That proves nothing? It just means a high quality centralised oracle that is more efficient than LINK has yet to be made.

[Anonymous No.53642964]

>>53642932
fucking wow

[Anonymous No.53642967]

>>53642932
Are you being retarded on purpose?

[Anonymous No.53643011]

>>53642724
he's defecating fresh new chainlanks in the woods as we speak

[Anonymous No.53643015]

>>53642964
>>53642967
not an argument.

[Anonymous No.53643050]

>>53643015
Unless you can create centralized oracles that are 100% failproof, decentralized oracles will always be more secure because if one does fail, the others just keep working.

[Anonymous No.53643056]

Chainlink doesn’t make logical sense. The issue in the financial system has never been people trying to manipulate the data, the issue has always been people capturing the data. It literally will not matter if you have a trillion oracles verifying a banks balance sheet or verifying algorithms if they are captured and the bank gets to decide how its balance sheet is structured or if the algorithm agreed upon was produced by them.

[Anonymous No.53643081]

>>53643015
>refute my retarded ‘arguments’ that have already been refuted hundreds of times
Nah

[Anonymous No.53643113]

Meh. I would rather not make any money than make it on the back of an actual scam like this.

[Anonymous No.53643146]

>>53643113
Cope. If you could go back in time and buy SHIBA before it went x10000 you would do it, even though that ACTUALLY is a scam.

[Anonymous No.53643172]

>>53643146
Mind telling me what made it a scam? Makers ran with money or something?

[Anonymous No.53643237]

>>53643172
The whole LEASH debacle where they tried to lure in more money by promising to build SHIB into an actual useful product by adding an exchange and all sorts of other bullshit which retards on the internet gobbled up. Also I believe it was SHIB who "burned" a big part of their supply by giving it to Vitalik Buterin, who later market sold it all to donate to some disaster relief fund in India lmfao.

It's insane how much flak LINK gets while actual scams get away scot free because enough people fall for the scam, causing it to have decent price action until the inevitable rug. Bad price action = scam, good price action = not a scam, according to /biz/lets

[Anonymous No.53643366]

>>53643237
I see. Thanks for taking the time out to explain.

[Anonymous No.53643537]

>>53643015
You know most of us hashed all this out like 5 years ago.
Just because you’re a retard, doesn’t mean we’re going to walk you through the shit we had to spend years sifting through bread crumbs for.

[Anonymous No.53643968]

>>53643056
it's to provide tamper proof data to self executing smart contracts.

[Anonymous No.53644040]

>>53642724
We're about to dump btc on you stupid goys, hope you enjoyed your little pump

[Anonymous No.53644312]

>>53642739
>>53643113
>it’s dumping!!!
>ackshually I don’t want to make money!