/biz/ - Business & Finance

even if it was NOT, we would still be multibillionaires, let that stink in

WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER

DO NOT UNDER ESTIMATE THE POWER OF POSITIVE THOUGHT! ESPECIALLY COLLECTIVE POSITIVE THOUGHT!!

THIS SHIT IS GOING TO REACH $1,000 EASILY! HOLD THAT THOUGHT AND VISUALIZE IT IN YOUR MIND EVERYDAY AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE STARTING NOW AND IT WILL MANIFEST INTO REALITY. DO IT! I'M NOT JOKING!

VISUALIZE AS OFTEN AND AS DETAILED AS POSSIBLE!

>>14273471
Who?

INTEGRATED AND PARTNERED. CHAIN LINK IS BASICALLY GOOGLE NOW.

>>14273540
No fren, it IS google

>>14273522
you are a MANIAC!

Pic related for all of you dumb retarded fucks

>>14273471
Holy fuck..

>>14273471
Sergey will buy google. Screencap this.

But but but

>>14273540
Chainlinkn is gonna be bigger

I need to make around $26bi of my tokens so i can wipe ou the jews

>>14273703
I'm financially discombobulated

man it feels comfy having only just bought in at the dip in april. Entered at .44 without the months of HODLing to make me impatient.

usually every small rumor makes it pump. where is the pump now? there is something fishy going on

cmc

>>14273903
spoonfeed or eli5 pls fren

>>14273903
why are you even sampling the bottom of the literal who exchanges?

Uhhh just because google says they're partnered with chainlink doesn't mean they are actually partnered with chainlink. Saying and doing are two very different things.

>>14273471
What timeline are we in bois? $1000 by EOY possible?

>>14273942
you sound like my fucking wife. piss off.

>>14273952
Memes aside, not by EOY but eventually in a few years.

>>14273942
please dilate your fake vagina, thank you.

>>14273471
1k sats

>>14273916

look at the volume and prices
not included

>>14274125
any idea why?

>>14274233
imo
the singularity involves alot of important people going to prison and they are trying to delay it as long as possible...

>>14273974
Nahh $100 is the highest it will go IF smart contacts are actually adopted which is still far away and mostly hype at this point. Supply is too large for the type of valuation necessitated by $1000. It's economics 101. Don't fall for the memes nulinkers this is a 10 year hold at minimum.

>>14274366
FUD.

This image is mostly a meme but it gets the point across. The "supply is too high" is only an argument if you plan on selling within the next year or so.

The circulating supply will be much smaller than it is now if you understand the tokenomics. Most of the circulating supply will be tied up in nodes/staking so the number of links available for purchase on exchanges will be *significantly* lower than it is now. This is assuming a fully mature network which will take some time.

That as well as the fact that if link succeeds, the banks+tech corps will pump our bags for us. It's dumb to think of link as purely crypto in the long term, it's more in the middle of crypto, finance, and tech. Thus traditional crypto mcap barriers aren't really a thing long term.

Even in the most pessimistic view it could reach a few hundred dollars in a future bull run by taking the #3 spot in a multi trillion crypto mcap (just think of all the shitcoins in the top 10 currently).

$1000 link was never a meme, it's just a matter of when. You're the nulinker here fren.

>>14274456
$1000 is fud

>>14273974
But anon, oracles don't exist.

>>14274567
Unironically it is, but link would have to capture a large % of the derivatives market for it to go that high. Would take some time.

>>14274603
Are you selling a small portion at certain targets?

>>14274603
it will probably facilitate the creation of a shitloads of new derivatives of digital assets and capture some of that value as well as that of traditional derivatives

>>14273868
Because binance is dead now

>>14274603
Look anon I hold a small stack of link too but the derivatives market is grossly exaggerated. Pic very related.

>>14273555
>>14273522
stop samefagging

>>14274628
Assblaster sucks at predicting price tho.

I will sell a little at $50 to be sure

>>14274657
that guy doesn't even consider staking which will lock up most of the supply.

>>14274657
Whoa it's on a blog it must be true

>>14274628
Given the objective history of how LINK consolidates it would not drop that much, if it go to 60-70 I wouldn't bet on it dropping below 45. Also with PSD2, I'm pretty sure staking will be done by September 14th.

>>14273991
>Hello? 2016 department? I’d like to report a dead meme trying to resurrect.

>>14274657
>I hold a small stack
So you're a nolinker with a suicide stack because you're still too fucking dumb and don't understand LINK. Thanks for the chuckle.

>>14274688
They’ll have to seriously up the payouts if they’re relying that much on staking. MCO pays out 8% p.a. for a 3 month stake.

>>14274711
Please dilate your fake vagina you mentally ill faggot.

>>14274628
I'm still thinking about it. I'm a bit of a linklet with a 15k stack since i'm a poorfag uni student and it's all I could accumulate (still trying to accumulate more).

The only situation I could see myself selling a portion is if we pump too early and purely based on hype within the next year, without much to show for it. I think we would see a hard crash afterwards, sort of like ETH. But I'm not much a fan of swinging and I would do this only if it were really obvious. Otherwise I'm HODLing long term.

>>14274630
This is a good point, link could definitely create new markets and ecosystems.

>>14274657
That is literal retardation/FUD. If FUCKING ripple reached a mcap of like 100 something billion in the last bull run, there's no reason to believe link won't, even in the most pessimistic view.

>>14273942
Absolutely mentally ill

>>14274742
Of course the payout will be good. Scarcity due to nodes/staking and the fact that these links need to be equal with the value of the contracts will drive the price up massively.
It's why we keep saying SWIFT and derivatives will pump our bags more than anyone else.

>>14273942
COPE HARDER FAGGOT

>>14274750
>if we pump too early and purely based on hype within the next year
We've appreciated 1300% from ATL based solely on hype. I mean the LINK network in its current state is 5 nodes repeating the price of ETH. That's it. All the partnerships and 'potential use cases' are just speculation on future features and usage. That includes the Google shit, as much as I wish it didn't.

I'm not selling but if you were intent on selling peak hype and buying back when expectations have lowered to meet reality, this would probably be the time. Probably another pump in the next week for the Oracle conference which would be the best time to exit. Again, that's IF you're intent on selling, which I'm not. Because you never know when another left-field article like the Google thing is going to drop, kindling another hype cycle.

>>14274967
lmao no, we are undervalued if anything. sure the network is still in infancy but even just speculation on decentralized oracles should be worth A LOT more. this is the only project tackling this problem and anyone with half a brain can see it holds a lot of promise.
it's quite stupid to think we are crashing in the near future, the general crypto bull run will continue to pump us, even with a lack of major developments or hype.

What I was thinking was that when we are post btc halving and the bull run begins to die down, maybe around 2021, that link has pumped far into 2 digits and possibly even 3, it only has minor uses and then we would see a crash downwards.
Trying to swing now is insane with this kind of volatility, we could just take off one day like ETH did.

>>14273471
>coindesk
trustworthy source kek

>>14273703
partnered with SmartContract, not Chainlink. You can only USE chainlink not partner with it. Its like saying I have a partner ship with the internet.

>>14274967
>"we've appreciated 1300% from atl solely on hype"
COPE HARDER FAGGOT COPE HARDER google doesnt get things done based on speculation fuckign moron, they fuck with things that makes them WIN

>>14273767
>imagine being this psychologically unbalanced

>>14274657
Hes comparing a NETWORK (link) to Companies.

>>14274671
Spotted the retard

>>14274657

Thank you for being the only sane person.

>Muhhh market derivative
>muhh neet nodes

>>14273513
Holy fucking shit

>>14275258
this. ill be forever for $10. These deluded moon boys can keep yelling $1000 is fud.

Why are link threads always blessed by numbers?
>>14273522
>>14273555
>>14274233
>>14274366
>>14274688
>>14274711
>>14274747

>>14273830

Don’t be too smug. Your hands are paper. Ours are iron now.

>>14275413
$10 literally makes no sense.

There are more or less 2 scenarios long term.

1) Chainlink fails and is a scam (goes to $0)
2) Chainlink succeeds and becomes the industry standard (or at least one of the top choices) for decentralized oracles (goes to 3 digits and beyond)

There is quite literally no scenario where it only reaches $10. Even purely off speculation it can go much higher in this btc halving bull run.

You are so low iq it hurts.

>>14275479
ive been fucking with you the entire time anon. I hold a 10k stack and feel like a linklet. Just needed some hopium.

>>14275551

>>14275441
because KEK is watching over us

>>14275119
Saved!!!!! The best FUD is the truth which is easily misinterpreted.

>>14275551
will a 4k stack make it?

>>14275601

God bless

>>14275479
$10 is an expensive cup of coffee

>>14275073
>lmao no, we are undervalued if anything
the delusion is incomprehensible.
Oracles have no network effects. Do you understand what that means? Chainlink may be the first, but if it's successful other oracles are going to pop up, charging less and probably using eth directly, or even a stablecoin.
It's already valued at $1.68B when the fair valuation that assumes success is $1M at best.

Ethereum is a platform, platforms have network effects. Network effects mean many separate things have to move at once to relocate to a competitor, eg. a lending dapp that uses erc20 tokens would have to move along with all these erc20 tokens + all users, which is almost impossible.
Oracles work as a commodity. I can start my smart contract with chainlink and switch to chadlink tomorrow. Users won't even notice. There's only one moving part - the oracle choice itself.

I'm literally trembling. What am I gonna do when I become a millionaire? I'm scared.

>>14275704
AHAHAHAHAHA
Oracle's have no network effects take a load of this guy AHAHAHAHA

>>14273962
Lmao, nominated for post of the day.

>>14275646
If smart contract adoption really takes off providing data in a tamper proof way is absolutely critical. If Sergey and company can get a decent share of the derivatives and insurance market $1000 long term is fud. Only question is your willingness to hold on the way there,

>>14275704
>no network effects
One, the larger the network grows the higher the quality of your oracle options. This is the main reason you are retarded. But second, there are companies being created for the sole purpose of servicing chainlink node operators. What the fuck do you think network effects are?

>>14275766
>One, the larger the network grows the higher the quality of your oracle options
that doesn't make sense. Do you know how an oracle works? There's either the provider you want or not.
>What the fuck do you think network effects are?
I already explained, they arise from interactions between entities, when the sum of the whole is larger than the sum of its parts. There are no interactions here. The amount of companies created or whatever is completely irrelevant.

>>14273471
fuck fuck is is still time for me to buy now?

>>14275119

>>14275479
You are genuinely fucking retarded to believe there are only two outcomes for $LINK.

>>14275758
thanks for the reply, I will hold fren

>>14275809
One, yes I do understand how an oracle works. An API provider, or a potential node operator with access to said API data, has a financial incentive to run a node on the most established oracle network. Presumably, established means more likely to be secure etc but that is not what we are arguing. So the provider you need is more likely to be available as the network grows. Simple.

So potential node operators and potential smart contract providers are certainly attracted to a more established oracle network. Having multiple companies that specialize in running nodes in addition to NEET nodes and companies providing directly will thus be attractive to them. This will increase network size, like a positive feedback loop. Unless you believe that "network effects" are something other than this in which case I have no idea what you mean m8

>>14274688
You people are the worst. Market cap is a meme. Staking does not 'lock up' the supply. It's always going to be 1 billion, and coins can move in and out of being staked with relative ease.

Think about it this way. If sergey has a 100 million tokens on a paper wallet, and he burns it but doesn't tell anyone, will that cause the price of Chainlink to rise?

>>14275758
>$1000 is fud
so $1500 is possible?

>>14275704
you do realize building a secure network with good reputation takes time? it doesn't matter how much money you have. everyone will go with chainlink because it's already so far ahead of any possible competitors.

this is some dumb FUD. oracles won't be able to just "pop up" like that.

>>14273942
obvious bait lmao well done

>>14275758
how much fcking longer? It's been almost 2 years for me.

>>14274366

Brainlet doesn't know about derivatives and insurance kek.

>>14275979
i think at least more 4 years to reach, if reach, $100

>>14275646

Think of your 4k LINK stack like its 4k stack of btc.

Now ask me that question again pajeet.

>>14275704
wow the fudders get more and more desperate

>>14275910
>An API provider, or a potential node operator with access to said API data, has a financial incentive to run a node on the most established oracle network.
Yes, but he has no disincentive to also provide access elsewhere, which is likely to be cheaper.
The value of link tokens is value that's redirected from payments made by users to token holders. So either link is worth exactly zero, or a network with no forced token use is going to be cheaper for both sides.
>Unless you believe that "network effects" are something other than this in which case I have no idea what you mean m8
eh, how about how easy it is to switch then?
>Network effects mean many separate things have to move at once to relocate to a competitor, eg. a lending dapp that uses erc20 tokens would have to move along with all these erc20 tokens + all users, which is almost impossible.
>Oracles work as a commodity. I can start my smart contract with chainlink and switch to chadlink tomorrow. Users won't even notice. There's only one moving part - the oracle choice itself.
>>14275973
>you do realize building a secure network with good reputation takes time?
there's no reputation, why do you think they launched with kyc only? Because they realized their initial idea makes no fucking sense.
There are two types of data:
- free data, like eth prices. It's impossible to make any profit on it. It's too easy to circumvent and users will correctly see any price larger than zero as a racket. No dapps are going to pay hundreds of dollars to get an eth price (or similar) that's provided for free today.
- paid data sold by the data providers. They don't need any reputation, they are the ultimate source. There's going to be only one node that provides the data.

Their initial idea was for decentralized nodes to leech of api of other data sources, but that's either free (first case) or breaks copyright. Data providers prohibit reselling, because if they didn't, they would make only one sale.

>>14273471
wow really valid source ;)

/biz/cucks in so much denial and depression after facebook didn't partner with chainlink they are desperate

>>14275809
>>14275937
>>14276053
Desperation and trainwreck logic
The absolute state of fags who missed the google pump

>>14275937

Dont expect the stinkers to even comprehend that.

They’re too busy sucking Sirgay’s dick to apply any ounce of logic.

>>14276053
Your entire reply is retarded but the only part I wanna roast is that your users wont even notice until your smart contract is fed bullshit insecure data and they lose all their money kek

>>14276053
So you're taking what the network looks like 3 weeks after launch and saying that's what the network will look like in a year? 2 years from now? 5 years from now? You're absolutely delusional.

Reputation is coming you fucking retard, they launched with KYC because you have to in order to get a network running, later on it will be optional.

Nice to see that you don't have a clue about anything. This is sad FUD. Buy back in for a small loss while you can swinglinker.

>>14275937
>with relative ease.
Nope, once the network matures people will have a good incentive, ie the reward/payout, to keep staking and keep their links off exchanges.
And depending on the type of contract and length, it definitely can't be removed with ease.

>>14276115
>who missed the google pump
it's you who missed the google pump by not selling.
>>14276159
>>14276164
literally not a single counterargument, which means I won

>>14276220
How can I have a counterargument if you don't even have an argument.

Your whole """argument""" is that no development will occur. I doubt you've even read the whitepaper if you're assuming that all features were coming out with mainnet release.

>>14274456
>#3 spot in a multi trillion crypto mcap
seriously kys
>muh derivatives
The market and contracts on which they operate work fine without crypto or blockchain

>>14276257
Cope

>>14276257
horses operated just fine also but for some reason people switched to cars instead

>>14276220
> n-no you missed it
You're going to have to spend many, many more paragraphs spewing your retarded drivel before you get my bags. Maybe if you beg for some outright and post your eth address I"ll give you 10 linkies. Would you like that Sanjay? Free Western pity money?

>>14276257
Yeah because fucking ripple is so deserving of that #3 spot. The top 10 is full of shitcoins waiting to replaced.

Also the financial markets worked fine before the internet. Doesn't mean it can't improve.

>>14276290
Are you retarded? I have asked this multiple times on /biz, yet no one has a reply: Why is there no blockchain general discussion the merits of the technology on /g/ ? I have seen a couple in the past year or so on /g/, and they get thoroughly btfo. Because the tech is unneeded.
>>14276328
You really think crypto will be a multi trillion industry. You are delusional

>>14273962
Fucking underrated.

>>14276373
It reached nearly 1 trillion in 2017. That bullrun will be nothing compared to next year's btc halving.
Don't take it from me, DYOR. Many financial think tanks and even banks predict that a significant percentage of the world economy will be run on blockchains and crypto in the future.

You're the delusional boomer. Crypto is still in early adoption phase.

>>14276373
Using /g/ as an indicator for worthy futuristic technology discussions is like using this board as a business and finance board. Of course if you weren't such a newfag you would have known that trying to make that appeal to authority was retarded to begin with.

Fuck off, newfag.

>>14274628
>$150 at full potential

stinktard desperation is palpable

Sold 6000link at 2.01usd. Still have 31500 left. 12k should last me a half year in Pattaya. Leaving next week see you guys.

>>14274870
>SWIFT

the wording on the smartcontract website suggests link are helping swift build their own oracle derived from link and not using chainlink itself.

>>14276953
Oracle = node

>>14276999
Oh look, someone who's not a retard. What are you doing here fella?

>>14276999
>>14277057
It will use a shadow fork, bullish for smartcontract, not for link.

>>14276253
>Your whole """argument""" is that no development will occur

>>14274956
I have no fucking idea what this means and I'm still stoked for CL.

>>14276373
>a board full of literal autists who lack the social experience to understand the cost of trust can't figure out the value of a technology that reduces the cost of maintaining trust
kek

>>14277090

>>14277152
my argument is completely independent of what they develop, can you read English on a basic level?
why am I even arguing with a sub 90 iq pajeet

>>14273513

>>14277089
it the white paper is says the shadowfork won't happen to holders in the US

>>14273471
when you know, you know

>>14274657
>market is grossly exaggerated
$11 EOY is right on track

>>14277177
i didn't even bother replying to that other part because its laughable

imagine thinking you don't need oracles for smart contracts because data is """free"""

keep coping

>>14275682
have you ever been to starbucks

>>14277291
>imagine thinking you don't need oracles for smart contracts because data is """free"""
sub 90 iq pajeet confirmed
check in an english dictionary the meaning of the word "circumvent"

>>14277374
you haven't given a single reason as to why oracles aren't necessary.

keep coping. you will NEVER buy back in for a profit, sorry tranny.

>>14277399
Nowhere did I state that oracles aren't necessary.

>>14274456
>thinks trillion dollar Mcap is outrageous

Well genius, we almost hit a trillion in 2017

>derivitives work fine

Yeah bro, that's why they literally are ruining the world and caused multiple recessions with their jewnanigans. PIC RELATED

Nice fud

I only have 4k links and I could've had 400k links if I didn't just leave the rest in Buttcoins.

How should I off myself?

>>14276953
Based solely on what is written there, you are most likely correct. But here are some things to consider:
- Chainlink devs are working around the clock on chainlink itself
- Sergey mentioned a "SWIFT Chainlnk"
- Banks are being forced to compete fintech startups

The first point makes me wonder how much time could Chainlink employees dedicate to some other oracle, instead of developing a specific chainlink for SWIFT. The second point stands on it's own, I think. Where I'm going with the third point is most fintechs are doing blockchain/smartcontract stuff, so to compete it would make sense for SWIFT to enter the same market in some way... just something to think about.

>>14274657
Oh crap, I didn't know there was a blog post about it. Ok cool I marketsold 100k

>>14277414
Then your entire argument is negated lol. The paramaters of data don't matter at all. Chainlink will deliver that data one way or another. You cannot just write off chain data on to the chain like that.

>>14277516
You can create a competing oracle. I literally wrote about this in my first post.
>Chainlink may be the first, but if it's successful other oracles are going to pop up, charging less and probably using eth directly, or even a stablecoin.

>>14276432
>>14277428

>nearly/almost=it did
>10yrs=early, especially on a totally speculative tech
>>14276548
>>14277147

its not an appeal to authority, its a fact. Go open a thread about blockchain on /g/, see what happens.

>>14275839
Sorry anon if you buy now you'll only x600 your investment, you're too late. I wouldn't bother.

The main issue i have with 1000$ meme is how a lot of anons use ETH as a benchmarks as to how LINK will grow.
Now eth went from 1$ to 1400$, but btc went from a few hundred bucks to 20k in that time. In Sats, eth only just 100x at peak (0.15), but was 300$ at the time. Its sat value was closer to 0.08 when it was $1400.

My point? Btc did a 100x in usd while eth did a 100x in sats for it to reach such a price.

Will btc need to do another 100x in usd again to 1 million while link goes 100x in sats from here? Because that is retarded. Btc will not hit 1million. A 10x from btc here is about all i can see at best.

Link has to achieve a lot more than ethereum ever did in relative performance to reach 1000$. I hope it manages to...

>>14277586
> check back in this thread later
> this faggot is still begging for cheap bags
Kek
Amazing

>>14277661
> p-please refer to the low IQ consumer electronics board which is lucky to have one decent thread on programming in a week
> also completely disregarded btc when it was first released
I'll repeat it again in bite sized pieces just for you since you're a bit slow.
Fuck
Off
Newfag

>>14273522
thanks anon

>>14278126
That's your only issue with it? Not that $1k would mean the total mc would be 1 trillion, which means it would have to flip BTC 5 times over? Even going on the circulating supply of 350m, that's a mc of 350b, so itd have to do almost twice of where BTC is now.

I could believe $100. Maybe even $200. But $1k is too much.

>>14278610

Thats nothing. Mc doesnt mean shit.
If link delivers there is no reason why flipping btc isnt possible.

>>14278610
>he does not know

>>14275551
Based.

>>14274657
$11 LINK would put me on cloud 9 and I only have a 10k stack

>>14273703
But partnership doesn't mean its going to be integrated

inb4 google virtue signals and ends the partnership bc of the racist neets that are invested in LINK

>>14274657
won't work man, you aint getting any of my stack

>>14275551
The FUD over the last few days should give you all the hope you need. Look at the desperation. The FUD is bullish.

>>14275937

It's called token velocity and staking decreases the velocity (aka the current trading supply) which in turn increases the price. You're retarded if you think there is no difference between staking and not.