/biz/ - Business & Finance

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.

Most of you, despite your great efforts to research Chainlink, don't understand what the real value of the network is, and more importantly, who will benefit most first from its use.If you took the time to think about the team and the problem, you'd notice that they both point in a single direction: towards high-value, low frequency transactions with easily externally verifiable data triggers which have parties with an extremely large incentive to act at least partially dishonestly.People are talking about automated payroll and IOT like these applications make sense at current. They don't, because the technology has decreased the cost of trust 100x, not 100,000,000x. The first people to use cellphones were the ones who could afford 20 bucks a minute because they made more money off that communication advantage than it cost them.


Everyone thinks the technology unrolling in front of them is somehow magical, but this is literally just another technology: it takes something expensive and makes it lots cheaper. Every other tech follows this path: the people already paying huge amounts for that thing buy up all the early uses and then things trickle down. Think again the adoption of the cell phone or personal computer. For the most part you don't need to have a trustless relationship with your employer, but if it cost you 5 bucks a year to make sure you couldn't get screwed by them, you'd pay it.

>>10641113
The rich first adopters we're talking about here are really stupid fucking rich. Think reinsurance, credit default swaps, basically anything that could transfer asset sizes big enough to wreck institutions. They literally give zero fucks whether their contract costs 100 or 1000 dollars in ETH, they'll just pick the most trustless solution, which will be a public, distributed ledger not run by any entity.Think about it from the perspective of someone buying a credit default swap: right now their options are to buy the swap knowing that the writer will do everything legal under the sun to delay payment in the event of a payout in order to secure a position first. From your perspective as the purchaser, you losing even a month or two on that payment could end your branch or even your business.Right now your only options are to buy the swap and take that chance or to go naked, because there are literally no entities that you can trust to act in a perfectly forthright manner, no matter how many lawyers you hire.

>>10641121
There are a million more points that could be made to this effect. You're looking at this project from the outside having no idea what the real needs of the target audience are. They don't use twitter, they call and get a warm greeting before the third ring.Which brings me to the best part of this post: you stupid fucks have no idea how good Sergey is. Look at his track record and what everyone who has ever worked with him says. The smartest people in the world, the ones who actually dictate your life and the rules by which you play are always three things: smart, quiet and determined. Look at the caliber of people who have lined up to work for him in a fucking startup. Think about what he's posted in his (albeit) very limited social media imprint: he's definitely a guy who believes in changing the world for the better and also for giving people willing to out in the effort a shot in life. If you actually dissect how the chainlink token works and how the network value incentives work, it's done with investor value in mind.

>>10641128
Here's an example: the staking portion of the network could have been in any asset or even in USD via SWIFT API. But it's not, it’s in a decentralized erc677 token that literally anyone with half a brain could buy. Why does staking matter? Because in order for the network to function, one of the paths of malfeasance has to be blocked by the staking of collateral. That staking value must be at least equal to the value of assets being transferred in these contracts. And the first users of the network will be people with large value transactions and low trust environments. It is harder to make a network like this, and he added this additional degree of difficulty not because he's a sadist, but because he is intentionally throwing a bone to anyone willing to look deeply into the tech.


I know less than 1% of this board will take me up on this but here's one of my best investment vetting secrets: for anything you're thinking of putting more than 1% of your portfolio into, make a handwritten timeline of how the project came about, who joined when and look into any discrepancies. These little inconsistencies generally reveal one of two things: non-public information that is bullish or non-public information that is devastating to the project. If you're investing with that knowledge while the entire rest of the base is reading reddit, you will destroy the market long term. If you do just that for chainlink you'll find a bunch of stuff that nobody has yet posted on 4chan. If you don't want to, don't bother. Just sit on your hands and get rich in three years. Sergey is one of the smartest guys alive right now. He could stick his dick in the mouths of most fortune 500 c suite players and triple their IQ. Money wise, he's about to.

>>10641113
>>10641121
>>10641128
>>10641137
Shit I know this is pasta but it’s the first time I’ve read it all the way through. Comfy read

>>10641226
Left over pasta is the best kind of pasta. This shit was super tasty.
2.5k eoy

>>10641088
>So what is the big deal?

JUST FUCK OFF

>>10641137
>make a handwritten timeline of how the project came about, who joined when and look into any discrepancies.
Yeah because I'm smart enough to figure out what any of that means.

nice chainlink fanfic

No linkies can't see the future.

>>10641088
yeah but cars will be obsolete soon so chainlink will go to $0

who wrote that originally? absolutely correct and based.

>>9999999

dis a gud thread