/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.9102914]

I just can't see how any well developed smart contract token can't go up exponentially in value once launched.
Chainlink of course being the most likely to pump the most, due to its Swift contract.
I only hold a little bit of Link, my portfolio mostly consists of Monero and EOS, but I'm thinking of investing 20% of each into Link.

[Anonymous No.9103015]

>>9102914
Worst thing that happens is it only goes 10x in a year

[Anonymous No.9103022]

>Swift contract
proof?

[Anonymous No.9103484]

>>9103022
Did they not win that competition in 2016?

[Anonymous No.9103779]

>>9102914
Take a look at the top 10 again... lmfao

[Anonymous No.9104140]

It depends on the returns. Remember the point was to cut out the middleman like clearinghouses. Oraclize only charges 1c per call. Chainlink will obviously be more expensive because it's more secure but it's hard to imagine it'd be that much more expensive. 100 nodes at 1c a piece would be $1. Each node would need a lot of calls to make a substantial amount of money, which is possible but will probably take some time.

[Anonymous No.9104244]

>>9102914
EOS wants to push smart contracts in C++, ADA is written in haskell and most devs can't think recursively, XRP is a fucking meme nothing neeeds to be said, XLM is up there because IBM backs it but IBM is literally a shitcompany with years of continuous revenue decline, IOTA isn't proven to be secure and writes their own cryptography libraries (cardinal sin), Bitcoin Cash is a fucking meme and is useless when we have LTC

Basically BTC, LTC, NEO, ETH are the only things that fucking matter

let me remind you guys that BitConnect was a top 10 crypto for months on end

This industry has it all folks. Geniuses and clowns

[Anonymous No.9104259]

>>9104140
the prices are set by node operators competing against each other for jobs, not by a centralized entity like oraclize

[Anonymous No.9104287]

>>9104244
>smart contracts in C++
what the fuck is wrong with them

[Anonymous No.9104296]

>>9104244

yup, and you're a clown for putting LTC in that list lol

[Anonymous No.9104303]

>>9104259
It's virtually free to run a node because the system requirements are so low, which means node operators can take very little money to remain profitable. You can set your price, but you can also be undercut by other node operators just as easily. It's hard to imagine chainlink will be able to charge ridiculously higher prices than other oracle services.

[Anonymous No.9104324]

Chainlink is a meme and wont pass $5 in years
this shit is dead

[Anonymous No.9104346]

>>9104140
>Chainlink will obviously be more expensive
>What is economy of scale
>What is competitive price market

[Anonymous No.9104364]

>>9104303
yeah definitely. I am saying that the competition will drive the prices down. LINK is just better over all

[Anonymous No.9104368]

>>9104346
Sure, it might be less expensive. That doesn't bode well for the returns, and in turn, the token price.

[Anonymous No.9104392]

>>9104296
tell me why you think that

LTC literally implements the newest developments in crypto (SegWit before BTC, Atomic swaps, etc.). Also has a large block size while not being the big dog that bitcoin is. So basically you can use LTC when BTC is under fire. Thats quite useful my man

[Anonymous No.9104417]

>>9104368
Continuously paid dividends drive the cost of owning LINK up. Look at Berkshire Hathaway

[Anonymous No.9104436]

>>9104417
And there is a point where you can have ridiculously low prices and still have mega profits because of how much the network is used

Look at H&M, Zara, Walmart, Target, etc.

[Anonymous No.9105045]

>>9104244
>>9104287

They actually intend to use webassembly, which happens to ve compiled fron c++, one of the most widely used and secure enterprise languages in the planet. Solidity is a dangerous experiment, try to convince any serious company to use and audit it.

[Anonymous No.9105099]

>>9105045
Um, yeah... It's still written in C++ bud. If you've spent even a day writing C/C++ you'd know it's not forgiving in the slightest

[Anonymous No.9105224]

>>9104244
Sound advice from based bids.

[Anonymous No.9105314]

>>9102914
>smartcontracts.com literally mentioned by the World Economic Forum as the technology that brings 10% of GDP on the blockchain
>Szabo described something like chainlink many years ago calling it "God Protocol", Szabo endorses chainlink
>SWIFT endorses chainlink after successfull POC which delivered proof that chainlink can indeed speed up the bond market (trillions of dollars nigga)
>every bank describes in their internal pdfs something like chainlink and how its needed
>he isn't all in
>mfw

[Anonymous No.9105984]

>>9105314
based

[Anonymous No.9106472]

>>9103015
>If you have the ability to predict what will happen or be needed in the future trust that ability

Thanks Plato, that's some ground breaking insight there.

[Anonymous No.9106548]

>>9106472
>If you are delusional, Link will go to 1000 EOY
what it really means

[Anonymous No.9106678]

>>9104244
>LTC and NEO matter
>clown detected

[Anonymous No.9106725]

Y'all better hol'up niggas !
I understand Link is the future but it is fucking stagnating for half of year.
I made X3 since 14 Feb and keeping my eye on CL.
I will fomo in when it outperformes the fucking market.
But untill mainnet do you really think hodl is the best thing to do ?
Tl;dr Flip fucking safe coins for smallish gains then buy CL when mainnet is live.
Y'all niqqers !

[Anonymous No.9106734]

>>9102914
You deluded Linkies ACTUALLY believe ERC20 will still be relevant in two years

[Anonymous No.9106815]

>>9104244
remove LTC and NEO.
BTC,ETH,LINK and Monero will have the entire crypto ecosystem covered

[Anonymous No.9106823]

>>9106734

[Anonymous No.9106828]

LINK is intrinsically worthless. Node operators can be paid in existing cryptocurrencies. Just look at the testnet right now, it only accepts ETH instead of LINK lmao. It means that ETH can easily be substituted for it, that is, if someone wants to fork the token to accept ETH (an established cryptocurrency instead of some fucking ERC20 token made with a two-man team), LINK is basically useless. That is besides the fact that everything LINK aims to do can be easily done by cryptographically signing the data from the API source.
>muh next ETH


Uh oh, pissed stinker incoming HAHA.

[Anonymous No.9107839]

>>9104244
>IOTA isn't proven to be secure and writes their own cryptography libraries (cardinal sin)
What's wrong with that?

[Anonymous No.9107986]

>>9103015
Year is halfway over buddy. Take a fucking breath.

[Anonymous No.9108014]

>>9106734
Link isn't an erc20 token fuck if that matters ya bum.

[Anonymous No.9108043]

>>9105314
NONE of this shit fucking happened lmao nice assumptions stated as facts buddy.

[Anonymous No.9108087]

>>9104244
What is this genius trying to say, that EOS pushing smart contracts in C++ is good or bad? And Litecoin is a joke buddy paint a picture with a broader brush

[Anonymous No.9108386]

>>9106828
the github just made a commit that said everything MUST go through the link token. don't be a lazy pathetic faggot and look it up yourself. alternatively, don't post fud from two months ago.

[Anonymous No.9108671]

>>9105099
Just let him post his retarded fud. It will shake weak hands who don't know what a mess c++ can be to run with sometimes.

[Anonymous No.9108739]

>>9108043
>smartcontracts.com literally mentioned by the World Economic Forum as the technology that brings 10% of GDP on the blockchain
on page 24
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC15_Technological_Tipping_Points_report_2015.pdf

>Szabo described something like chainlink many years ago calling it "God Protocol", Szabo endorses chainlink
http://nakamotoinstitute.org/the-god-protocols/

>SWIFT endorses chainlink after successfull POC which delivered proof that chainlink can indeed speed up the bond market (trillions of dollars nigga)
https://imgur.com/a/mkod3
https://www.swift.com/news-events/press-releases/swift-tests-show-blockchain-has-potential-for-global-liquidity-optimisation

[Anonymous No.9108771]

Hello, I was looking at the Github and seen there were a lot of new Chinese observers. I looked at this guy specifically https://github.com/wikixuan/chainlink-docs and found it strange that chainlink-docs had been forked around 13,000 times. Is this normal to have that many forks?

[Anonymous No.9108862]

>>9108771
>13,000 times. Is this normal to have that many forks?
No, far from normal

[Anonymous No.9108908]

>>9104244
You are retarded if you think that Bitcoin cash is a meme.

[Anonymous No.9108933]

>>9108739

>https://imgur.com/a/mkod3

I seriously don't get how people call ChainLink a meme coin after presenting at SIBOS.

Are they retarded or do they just not know what SIBOS is?

[Anonymous No.9108971]

>>9108862
Probably some sort of attack? Or am I just being a bit racist about Chinese people?

It is interesting the amount of chinese randoms in the GitHub of late.

Also who is this Chad Welch 'The Reality King' who recently attempted a commit?

[Anonymous No.9108994]

>>9108933
they are fudders trying to accumulate. if anyone thinks LINK is unironically a meme coin they are not much smarter than a literal retard.

[Anonymous No.9109002]

>>9108933
see >>9108994

[Anonymous No.9109022]

>>9108971
Actually scrap that, it must just be the total amount of people who have forked the chainlink-docs section.

Which is surprising in itself that 13,000 github people have heard of chainlink

[Anonymous No.9109118]

>>9106725
You may be right but singularity could happen fast. I've got a couple other shitcoins and could sell my stack of Link to get more gains to put back more into link.

But to be honest I can't go to bed without at least 10k Link.

My gut feeling is Link will just shoot up . astronomically. Not semi fast but steady 1$-2$ per day climbs. Like 10$ in a couple hours type climbs.

[Anonymous No.9109132]

>>9108908
Bitcoin cash is just another LTC, Bitcoin gold, Bitcoin diamond, etc. No it's not "the real bitcoin". It may do Bitcoin's intended purpose better for now, but so do MANY coins.

[Anonymous No.9109139]

>>9108739
>Thinks Nick Szabo endorses ChainLink because he looks at their Twitter

>Thinks smartcontracts.com in 2015 had anything to do with ChainLink

[Anonymous No.9109155]

>>9108739
>doesn’t realize Swift is putting out swiftref

[Anonymous No.9109170]

>>9109139

[Anonymous No.9109193]

>>9109170
That is pretty cool

[Anonymous No.9109201]

>>9109170
Has nothing to do with Szabo endorsing them, dolt. People call increments of BTC satoshis. Does everyone who calls an increment of BTC a satoshi have Nakamoto’s endorsement? Does Elon Musk have Nikola Trsla’s Endorsement?

[Anonymous No.9109214]

>>9109201
If it was meaningless they wouldn’t have changed it.

[Anonymous No.9109216]

>>9109139
>Thinks Nick Szabo endorses ChainLink because he looks at their Twitter
he literally does, he was also at Synchronize 2018 and talked with Ari Juel (who wrote parts of the chainlink WP) on stage.
also >>9109170

>>9109155
>doesn't realize its gonna be all connected to chainlink anyway

[Anonymous No.9109242]

[Anonymous No.9109288]

>>9109242

[Anonymous No.9109293]

>>9109201
Let them have the bread crumbs that LITERALLY amount to nothing.
>>9109214
Your reasoning is because you "think" they "think" it's important. LMAO.

[Anonymous No.9109312]

>>9109201
>thinks everything is just a coincidence.
keep saving face in your life. i could care less about what you think about the project.

[Anonymous No.9109340]

>>9109242
LITERALLY no where does it mention ChainLink. Again you're putting together pieces you believe fit your confirmation bias.

[Anonymous No.9109354]

>>9109340
Its literally describing chainlink.

[Anonymous No.9109382]

>>9104244

Based anon strikes again

[Anonymous No.9109389]

>>9109139
>can't perform a simple whois to see that Sergey registered the domain in the first place

[Anonymous No.9109400]

>>9109340
Confirmation bias kek. That doesn't even fit in the context of this sentence.
> I hear words that sound smart
> I use them in sentence
Cba attaching brainlet but that's what you are

[Anonymous No.9109405]

>>9106734
>He's so new he doesn't know what blockchain agnostic means

[Anonymous No.9109408]

>>9109340
>not being intelligent enough to pick up on context clues, actual evidence, and the importance of the next generation of contracts.
>not realizing smartcontract.com will be a household name soon.
>never going to make it in life.

[Anonymous No.9109410]

>>9109354
No it's not actually. It's describing oracles. ChainLink happens to be the most prominent decentralized project in the space but by no means are they talking about ChainLink ON PURPOSE indirectly. LOL

[Anonymous No.9109428]

>>9106815
what about jnt for tokenization of financial instruments?

[Anonymous No.9109437]

>>9109410
see >>9109408
>never going to make it in life.
he is right you know.

[Anonymous No.9109448]

>>9106828

[Anonymous No.9109489]

>>9109408
this HAIL MARY fucking works out I'll be the first one laughing. All this dot connecting is just conveniently pointing at one project that is looking to solve the problem right now but they aren't even mentioning it by name probably because they'll use a centralized oracle to begin with because most of the time you don't need a 100MM contract to be verified by 100 nodes with over 100k link as collateral.

[Anonymous No.9109510]

>>9109489

[Anonymous No.9109533]

>>9109489
>aren't even mentioning it by name.
Can you read nigger?>>9109510

[Anonymous No.9109548]

>>9109389
Just because he owns it, doesn’t mean he was using it for ChainLink.

[Anonymous No.9109552]

>>9109437
You think all these "dots" just forgot to mention the one project that is working on to solve it? Non-disclosure up my ass. Someone would have slipped up one time and said ChainLink is a possibility. but nope. Nothing.

[Anonymous No.9109567]

>>9109552
can you read nigger?

[Anonymous No.9109575]

>>9109552
if you had the ability to make billions of dollars for your company, you would sew your mouth shut if you were smart. obviously we know your're not. your posts are living proof of that.

[Anonymous No.9109583]

>>9109533
Yeah I can read it means they're going to use a centralized oracle.

[Anonymous No.9109597]

>>9109583
no

[Anonymous No.9109611]

>>9109567
You guys with your .jpg copy pastas I swear.

[Anonymous No.9109629]

>>9109611
so you don't own any chainlink and don't plan to have some?

[Anonymous No.9109638]

>>9109312
>could care less
Then why don't you?

[Anonymous No.9109726]

>>9109629
I own some but you guys are out of control acting like this is a sure bet and not a Hail Mary you need to come back to earth and realize this is a super long shot.

[Anonymous No.9109738]

>>9106815
Legit

[Anonymous No.9109753]

>>9109170
Did anyone tweet this to Szabo?

[Anonymous No.9109772]

>>9109132

[Anonymous No.9109782]

>>9104140
look up what a network effect is. Something Oraclize will never have

[Anonymous No.9109819]

>>9107839
do you have any idea how difficult it is to prove an algorithm is cryptographically secure? IOTA is worthless because of this

[Anonymous No.9109829]

>>9109782
look up what the dunning kruger effect is. At no point did I say chainlink was the inferior product or would lose out to oraclize.

[Anonymous No.9109883]

>>9109726
The only reason to be in this market is for longshots that could potentially change the world. Even if you 10x a $10k investment, your life will not change very much. You'll still have to work to pay for housing and food. Practically, daily experience wise, you aren't much better off than if you found some shitty job and worked until you died.

[Anonymous No.9109929]

>>9108933

[Anonymous No.9110067]

>>9108994
Lol

[Anonymous No.9110072]

>>9109201
Szabo handed the keys to Sergey with Smartcontract.com domain, if you don't believe he supports Chainlink u are clueless. He likely has ownership in the project.

[Anonymous No.9110266]

>>9109772
Great argument.

[Anonymous No.9110286]

>>9103484
proof of contract?

[Anonymous No.9110721]

>>9109883
This i can agree with.

[Anonymous No.9110774]