/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>10999125

i am not interested in taking bait. i am here to simply warn some bizralies who are in a blind leading the blind situation.

Remember, when you ask if you should all in on link or buy lots of Link or HOT, you are being advised to and told it is a good idea by someone with a 400$ portfolio who is all in. If that isnt enough to sober you i dont know what is.

>>10969276
No wonder Vitalik dislikes Sergey, his comparatively a Chad in every sense. This skeleton looks like an autistic fruitcake.

>>10781865
And I just rolled trips here
>>10781777

Praise kek

>All these neets on /biz/ will end up being actual multimillionaires

Can it really hit $100? Even after everything that happened?

>>10694864
It’s true, all of it

>>10684413

>>10683947
Foolishness no linker. foolishness

>what is SWIFT
my son. we all know you were req'd by the devil. But now, it is time, to give into the singularity. Dont resist it. We tried warning you with the Mozza scam

>>10669007

WHY WONT SOMEONE DUMP DAMN IT, CRASH!!! CRASH! CRASH!!!!!!!!!!!

>>10618088
Tfw started in nov of 17 with 900 bucks. Tfw flipped and flipped it thru biz shills all the way up to current 32k value. All in link. Tfw immune to faggot OPs faggot nigger post.

Never fucking doubt me again.

I'm actually more qualified to talk about this than most anons.I'm employed with a cyber-techno machinations company, I do a lot of security analyst programming type work. Open source, decentralized, APIs, partnerships, you name it. We'd be one of the first companies in line for something like Chainlink, if the decentralized smart contract space had more value over traditional data exchanges. There's a catch though, an underlying flaw more deeply embedded in the bedrock of LINK than the very code itself. The flaw is with the concept, and it's this: Companies won't actually go through the hassle of trusting their data API's through crypto. Now I can already hear your keyboards going frantic, but hear me out. /biz/ hates banks, and traditional data providers. But actual companies, businesses, and investors do not. There's an old saying you might have heard of: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!". The idea that any of our bosses would give us the go ahead if we approached them to put our companies valuable data in a smart contract on a cryptocurrency called Chainlink, that they've never heard of, we'd be laughed out at best and fired on the spot at worst. We already have API data buyers and providers we trust. 'But Chainlink is trustless!' I hear you cry, but is that really a good thing? Just listen to the sound of it. Businesses don't want to spend millions of dollars on something that is trustLESS, they want something trustFUL. 'But the reputation system!', doesn't that defeat the whole point of your coin? If companies only trust nodes with high reputation, what's the difference between trusting banks and data providers that already have reputation, but in real life not on a computer screen. The fact is, LINK is going to share the same fate as ETH will. A lot of 'real world application' hype, with a lot of 'crypto world application' reality. Only, this billion supply coin isn't going to come close to the $1k that Etherum hit. Happy gambling though anons.

>>10591944
Dios mio

We are invincible. The entire market is being slaughtered, everything is approaching ICO and we're actually going up not down. This is the ultimate Chad coin of all time.

One word.
Rinkeby.
Strap in boys.

What do you think will happen for chainlink? We will finally see if the July 30th poster was a larp or had any sort of credible information. If you don't have a link stack yet, you are fucking up.

>>10408761
Spooky indeed

>>10245464
Link 1K eoy bitch, your fud has no power here

>>10233493
and here is smug sergey without the sunglasses