/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>15818377
You unironically have another year of crabbing to accumulate more.

>>15818381
what's a good amount to accumulate do you reckon? I can probably put another 1000$ in.. but I don't wanna risk too much.

>>15818391
I don't think there's much risk, it will never be under $1 again presuming it keeps going and that would be if we had a year of no news.

I think 3k is a good amount. Some anons LARP about needing 10k+ but they've fooled themselves into thinking it's more of a sure thing that it really is. That mentality is, however, also why it just can't drop that much.

>>15818399

appreciate the advice, I'm currently holding about $500 in UOS and about $1500 in rsr also, tempted to convert the UOS to Linkies, otherwise I'll just start buying more link when/if it drops and hope for the best.

obligatory
https://vocaroo.com/i/s18AjfUgNu2S

>>15818399
>more of a sure thing that it really is
It's the most sure thing in crypto history and probably the most sure thing 100x investment on the planet today. Research more.

>>15818399
>Some anons LARP about needing 10k+ but they've fooled themselves into thinking it's more of a sure thing that it really is.
Wait what do you mean by this?

I have 2K link and won’t be able to buy for a while. Used to be 2.8K but I had to sell the 800 over time because I was broke atm.

I should be greatful I have that desu but it sucks not being able afford more.

>>15818414
>I'm currently holding about $500 in UOS and about $1500 in rsr also
Please sell these shitcoin bags and either stay in BTC/ETH/LINK or invest it in something else.

>>15818399
Lol most of us got our 10k stack cheaper than your 2k stack

>>15818414
I'm not that convinced by RSR, mostly due to the team and that countries don't just bring in hyper inflation for fun, so they'll do all they can to prevent access to a stable coin alternative. Then otherwise there are a million normal ways to store money in a stable form then revert back to the local currency for use, RSR can only offer ease but that goes with prohibition.

Im lazy though i just variously hold BTC, LINK, and XMR. Currently only link and some small amount of monero with the rest tethered.

>>15818391
I only have 100k Link which is nowhere near enough to actually make it.

All these Linklets with 10k stacks singing about 1k eoy are starting to piss me off with their propaganda. It was a joke and they are actually believing it and causing FOMO in newfags preventing the dump. Link is only going to $10 max. Right now I might make 1MM before tax on that, but tax will take a big chunk out of that then inflation will fucking ruin me over the next decade.

Even if I chuck the 1MM into a dividend stock that pays out well and I get 70k a year of it, it's not enough to beat inflation unless I basically live in poverty as a neet and keep my wagecuck job in the meantime so I don't have to sell any retirement Link. In 10 years that 70k a year will feel like 20k a year. You need a minimum of 2MM, but more likely 3MM to make it. The upper predictions for Link where about $60 but that was made during the bullrun of last year, and it assumed that the overall crypto market cap would still be expanding and BTC would go on to 1MM a Bitcoin and that we would be in a full blown crypto FOMO hype bubble when mainnet came out and we got our price singularity. All of that isn't going to happen anymore.

The singularity is cancelled. Now we will have a slow growth to $10. And the sad but ironic thing is most people on this board will hold from 20 cents, to $10 and then hold all the way back to sub $1 again because you all believe the 1k eoy memes, and just like the retards who held BTC and didn't sell at 19k, you will do the same with Link at $10. Looking at the current charts depresses the fuck out of me when I know I only have 100k Link, nowhere near enough to make it.

At best I will have 1-2 sweet years, and then return to wagecucking after that. But it will be worse because I will have tasted freedom and know what I am missing out on.

I have, unironically, 140k link. Nulinkers, kek...
Still we're all brothers in arms at the end of the day, go for as many as possible

>>15818435
How about QNT?

>>15818377
get a wagie job, and put in 20-100 a week.
you have some time left.

>>15818416
Based
Never selling

>>15818443
I have 3.5k from 80¢ so no.

>>15818425
At least for the near future i don't see any large use of the network. We can see jobs run and it's just heartbeat for the disappointing eth node selection. People are dreaming thinking banks or defi are going to move their billions of dollars to a small, real world untested network like chainlink. With PSD2 they'll all use in house centralised and trusted APIs for the time being, as sibos showed.

The problem then comes that holders often tout the importance of being the first mover and the network effect. Well the cat is out of the bag but it hasn't captured any market and the node marketplace is woefully short of the initial scope. There's zero reason a bigger, connected group couldn't develop a clone at this point. It saddens me that mainnet was released in the staking free, eth node form it was. I fear upcoming derivatives will be crypto ones and it will go the way of BAT.

Now i am still bullish, it's my main hold but anons here think it's a ticket, a fool proof win. Anyone who has been caught up in a big financial failure has thought this, it's prudent to be aware of potential points of failure.

>>15818377
>>15818399
>>15818414
>>15818443
>>15818446
>>15818478
More and more Chainlink whales are buying RLC.
What's the reason for that?
Is RLC really more developed compared to Chainlink?
Why are Linkies triggered when you mention RLC?

>>15818416
>https://vocaroo.com/i/s18AjfUgNu2S
based. rare.

>>15818478
I have been thinking about a LINK/BAT/REN altcoin portfolio, is it based?

>>15818554
Don't know about REN but definitely not BAT. The whole "why does it have to be it's own token" has never been answered, it was a funding token. Not just that but its not even currently working on a blockchain on the browser ads and tipping. It's centralized in order to give it the speed it needs to have. As soon as it gives people easy access to their tokens it will see an almighty dump as people market sell whatever they have accrued. Plus the deplatforming of kiwifarms means they're hardly reliable in terms of overcoming the demonetization problem.

The general idea is good but BAT has a long, long way to getting there if ever.

>>15818489
> 0 proof bait post trying to compare his laughable shitcoin to the industry standard for oracles
Yawn

>>15818614
>industry standard
>no industry using it
Not buying your bags, tranny.

>>15818478
Agree that mainnet without staking is incomplete. What do you think will happen to network use when staking launches?

>tfw knew about eth at ~$2
>didn’t take it seriously because it felt scammy
>tfw had a decent stack of link
>sold some because I didn’t think it was going anywhere
I really need to learn to listen to biz

>>15818377
Whoa you're a boss dude

>>15818659
Really hard to know. If we were seeing low level groups using the network with the trusted nodes then i would say we'd see it open up with bigger jobs and maybe the node formation process being expedited leading to a much wider range of data. However we don't have that so it really depends if the team has some big users purposefully waiting for staked collateral functionality. If we don't have that staking will disappoint greatly. Not much will be locked up and the price will drop after the initial pump when staking is blogged about.

As said i think something like chainlink will be huge, but it's really about time we saw some use of the network or else I'll be worried some other group will just make their own.

>>15818716
Id ask why they put other tasks in front of the staking contracts for dev
Some would say the pivotal is a ruse

>>15818478
Congrats you got me, motherfucker niggerfaggot

>>15818478
A hype mania created usage for ETH within the crypto sphere. The same is already happening with chainlink as every few days another crypto projects comes out that it intends to use it.
Legacy finance had nothing to do with ETH’s massive bull run and had no intention of using it because without oracles ETH had no ability to add value outside of crypto. Chainlink however makes its use feasible so not only does link have all the potential of ETH within crypto it has a higher probability of being used by legacy finance in the years to come.

>>15818716
I wouldn't be surprised if at least some clients are waiting for staked collateral.
Then there are the Oracle startups, they will be users.

id: keks will

>>15818740
Yeah i agree, that's why i think something like LINK will be huge and why im currently mostly in link, however it is still not guaranteed that it will be link that makes it. The case of the shitcoins is part of that. Every day we get some coin announcing 'us x chainlink' and some vague lazy talk about oracles, but then nothing else comes of it. Seemingly it's just scammy shitcoins trying to claw at the popularity and attention given to chainlink.

We had suggestions of some trustworthy big players like swift, google, ms azure. However these haven't come to pass. Sibos had innumerable speeches on swift gpi and none mentioned use of link. With google there was a post saying "we appreciated our time with google and hope to do more in the future" and with MS we have cryplets and some staff links, no bad news there but no confirmation yet either.

>>15818751
Yeah though start-ups aren't big clients and then we had the presentation cancelled, announcements of announcements since and the first revealed one basically being linkpool making a startup trying to get people to use linkpool. Im not hyped about fernando's bag pumping mess.

With those i at least hope it shows bigger players that the network can be trusted.

>>15818716
>or else I'll be worried some other group will just make their own
However I don't buy in the fork FUD because: 1 if it will be implemented by a who it would have to go all along the way link went, so link has the first mover advantage, 2 if a big name develops it ok the first mover advantage can go fuck itself BUT it isn't feasible for definition, we're talking about a decentralized trustless oracle network and you can't have trustlessness if a big name is involved (think about facebook's libra), so it would only be another old centralized oracle. The only way I can see link losing the battle is if a groundbreaking new tech come up in this oracle niche, which again is highly unlikely and as we all saw WE have aboard the right guys that are likely to deliver such game changing techs (example: Ari Juels with Deco, formerly Chainlink's Mixicles)

>>15818806
Yes but say swift wants to: they can straight up copy link for most of the work but have the manpower to get done in weeks what took link years. They have so many enormous customers ready to go day one. Then apart from the nodes they and their partners can establish, node operators will absolutely align with the system with promised huge jobs.

They'll have a hundred nodes in a month and from big legacy companies giving iot data, banking data, insurance etc etc. Im amazed none has so far and that's why im not as faithful in link as others, they really don't seem to have secured first mover advantage or the network effect.

>>15818716
Newfag. Shadowfork fud is old as fuck. Fuck off

While I love shitposting with my fellow pajeets I need to gtfo of here and visit other boards and stop checking the prices all the time and do other things irl.

>>15818830
>shadowfork
>fud
YOU WILL MEET WITH JUSTICE ONE OF THESE DAYS JASON, STOP TRICKING GULLIBLE NEWFAGS INTO THINKING THE SHADOWFORK IS FUD OR THE CONSEQUENCES WILL NEVER BE THE SAME!

>>15818824
>Yes but say swift wants to
It can't! You didn't get the point: if (insert big name) copies link it will consequently lose security by trustlessness/decentralization, which is the whole point why link exists and is valuable! If they copy link they'll still end up with a worthless centralized oracle, nothing new. That's the beauty of decentralization, you can't own it without making it worthless. That's why there's one and only bitcoin for example, and no company, state, whatever, can steal it

>>15818444
Nice trips. Some countries are already in hyper inflation.

>>15818806
This anon fucks

>>15818873
But they can, there are what 15 nodes or thereabouts now? All for eth with future crypto prices coming. That would not be a hard number for a big corp to produce in a day. That doesn't mean the nodes are owned by say, swift, just that they helped set them up just as chainlink has and currently uses kyc and interviews and testnet for node operators. Then all kinds of totally independent node operators will be clamouring to get started.

>>15818847
GPI LINK is the shadow fork. It was FUD after Sibos 2019 it is certain

>>15818950
>there are what 15 nodes or thereabouts now?
That's not about the nodes but the lack of a big authority behind the scenes, it's something more psychological than technical (again see libra, they're also "decentralized" but still untrusted by the most)
>That would not be a hard number for a big corp to produce in a day. That doesn't mean the nodes are owned by say, swift, just that they helped set them up
And that's exactly where the problem resides, decentralized oracles BY SWIFT can't be compared to chainlink in any way, they are 2 different things, because fucking swift. What do you think would happen to btc price if it suddenly was confirmed as a CIA experiment? Now you've your answer.
tl;dr no big corp can steal link's intrinsic value and marketcap, case closed

>>15818377
you'll have about $1.3 million EOY, is that enough for you?

>>15818950
Would you trust the outcomes of a decentralized oracle network implemented under the supervision/tied to a group of jews? I wouldn't, sooner or later the shit will get backdoored and rigged by my thinking

>>15819015
It's not the same to say what if btc was a cia experiment, swift isn't an untrusted company and would still be releasing it as a product with open intentions. We can all see the code. I would wager that for most swift comforts them much more than smartcontract.

Regardless it's still irrelevant who made it. We can all see the code and find any hidden backdoors at the level of simplicity it is. It comes down to the network in play and someone else could make a massive one.

>>15819048
Well eventually, as with link the nodes wouldn't need to be signed off by swift. It would be it's own self perpetuating system. But as i said above i imagine for most businesses and normies they would a company like that over sergey & co, my opinions and yours will be the tiny minority.

Now I've been using swift but i doubt they'd do it, they've certainly been working with chainlink in some capacity and i really don't see sergey actually setting up a shadowfork. It would be some other company (id hope).

>>15819104
>swift isn't an untrusted company and would still be releasing it as a product with open intentions. We can all see the code. I would wager that for most swift comforts them much more than smartcontract
Okay let's play this game once again, Google isn't an untrusted company and we can all see the source code of android but guess what? BAM, Google Apps, closed source and shady as fuck but still a main component of the OS (you can't even receive notifications without them, at all), not to talk about jewtube but that's another story
>We can all see the code
Also, do you think that open source = safe? Think twice, it takes only 1 new release with shady code to caught all with the pants down when it will instantly auto-update on all the machines in the world. It happened recently with an old library (don't remember which) that was used by almost every big website, the mantainer purposely injected a malware and game over, you couldn't have the time to check the code that you were already screwed
>i imagine for most businesses and normies they would a company like that over sergey & co, my opinions and yours will be the tiny minority.
So normies and companies trust swift, surprise surprise, it doesn't matter since they aren't link's target. Link (like swift) operates to the backbone, it's something seamless for the most, so who is the target here? Who moves everything, who pilots google and the likes from the shadows, and I'm pretty sure that they don't want a "trusted" name but a trustless system. Think bigger, like the picture is

>>15819196
I guess but then what's to say link doesn't do the same? Beyond that at no point do i want a competitor to link like that, but the relevant question is if such a circumstance manifests will it take off and destroy link? Normal people don't care about those things and neither do corporations.

Kek I take that out of my wallet with no second thought to buy clothes. Just work hard and put more money in.

>>15819212
>what's to say link doesn't do the same?
Are you talking about the "malicious update"? At this stage it won't make sense at all for the team to even consider that, that's something that will come when we will have a huge network activity, when there will be something big to be rigged. But at that point I'll be already banging thai hookers on a daily basis so I don't care that much to find a definitive answer, get it?

>>15818950
Stopped reading

>>15819315
No pls

>>15819281
Yes but the malicious update was a criticism of a big player copying it. But its still pertinent to link, it won't stop either taking off.

It still generally stands that there's no reason i can think of that someone couldn't steal the game and that will hurt our chances of making it. Again, I hope not but we need to see some network use soon.

>>15818399
You sir are a huge Faggot
>14 Posts by this ID

I have been all in Link since 2017 and only put in more. There are many anons that did the same. This huge presence of smug 2019 Linkers that act like pussy bitches really grinds my gears.
T. 140k Linkmarine

>>15818489
I like RLC, decent complementary product to chainlink, the doracle debacle is overblown imo. I only get "triggered" when retards like you try to force fud narratives.

>>15819385
Yes 14 posts. This is a dicussion board. Maybe your tranny friends are more used to just being 1 post ids.

>>15818399

In some ways I hope you’re right (you’re not) I’d really like to make it to 15K, 20K in a pipe dream.

Shit is going to get wild soon, fast and hard.

>>15818416
Based

>>15819340
So don't use any software at all at this point, dude it's beginning to look like your straight up try hard fudding. Get real. Last sponfeed:
>Yes but the malicious update was a criticism of a big player copying it
Yes, because a big player starts with a big network usage, which instantly gives him the incentive to rig the thing (on top of the other above-mentioned shit). That's not the case for link

Trust, you will be able to afford a 100k stack soon enough.

>>15818416
Based fuck off hluu

>>15818381
This
People seem to think we're in this huge rush or that it's too late to grab more LINK, but this is a long haul. It isn't going to moon overnight, there's going to be another year at the very least before it really takes off, and when it does it will do so slowly over time.

>>15818399
1000 eoy confirmed

high double digits are coming sooner than you believe. after halving everything will start to go up.

I only have 3.7K link
I will never sell, i'll become homeless and suck cock before i sell
Nothing could make me sell my linkies

>>15820064
You absolute faggot fucking kill yourself, how many years you linkfags been saying that?

It'll crash soon faggot.

>>15818414
you do know that RSR was an organized shill on /biz/ by the pump group satsgang, right?

>>15820302
Patience is a virtue, fren.

Got 16k at ICO
Got 30k at 28c avg

Sold 15k at 4.3

I put $10k into 10k LINK, 1.4 LP, and 32 ETH over the course of the last 2 years and I still don't know if I will.

>>15820948
yea you will, just fight through the FUD, lift, eat clean, train hard, read books, find new hobbys. build stuff, help people. produce, create.

>>15818416
Based fuck jannies

i just cant belive people are paying more than .45 cents for link.

i REFUSED to buy anymore once link hit .60 cents.

sadly i only got 35k link. and have already been selling on the way down, from 3.70 to 2.70

cant beilve how many stupid people are injecting fiat into link lmao.

link is slow bleed to .80 cents over teh next months/years.

i have been saying this since july

pic related, made this on july 11th

sold on july 11th

>>15820323
Oh shut the fuck up with your pathetic Satsgang obsession! already!! whats wrong did you loose your pocket money in 1 of there p&d's or pay 4 a bullshit private group!!?

>>15818716
>>15818806
>taking the fork FUD seriously

>>15820280
just remember to use protection with that BBC in yr mouth!!

I lost 150,000$ to procapital last year, i almost gave up on life not until i saw a post in a local paper about stanley who helped me recover my money and I’ve made 340,000$ in 6months this year
agentstanley @ protonmail .com