/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>16819785
no, this can't be. surely not. surely i won't make it with my 209 link stack? right?

>>16819823
if dubs u make it

>>16819823
You won't make it, you will be able to buy a house though.

>>16819859
making it for me is likely drastically different to most people. for me it would be being able to live in a tiny apartment and never be bothered.

What qualifies as a blockchain based contract though? If I set up my own private blockchain on my computers and use an oracle that I set up on my own server, will a "smartcontract" created on this blockchain qualify as a smartcontract? If so, I'll start scamming people with these contracts and just change the outcome of the contracts to my liking.

>>16820033
Newfag

>>16819890
Ultimate neetlife is lived in an RV or a campervan

>>16820065
good point!

>>16820055
I'm literally pointing out how these laws about smartcontracts are bullish for Chainlink since they need to exactly define what a smartcontract is.

>>16819890
If you hold long enough then you will make it.

>>16820065
How much money do I need for that?

>>16819785
This is extremely bearish for Segshit.

>>16819785
What part of cup of coffee priced stablecoin don’t you newfags understand?

>>16820109
i believe this too. many nulinkers will make it with puny stacks if they keep holding. if they follow the memes, they will. anyone with a tiny stack will be less tempted to sell any of their link before any retardedly high prices. i think this will be especially true with people entering in when we reach the double digits and beyond. mostly because for them to 10x their money, they will need far higher prices than someone buying now. many will still sell after a 2x or something like that, because they think link is just another shitcoin. most normies will likely understand or begin to understand link's true power after mass adoption and triple, quadruple, if not quintuple digit prices.

>>16820214
There are just 3 legit big investments in crypto BTC, ETH and LINK. People who don’t get that are fucked

>>16819785
the absolute state of illinois

Cup of coffee at best. Link will be within the $2-6 range forever. Screencap this and you’ll never forget this

>>16819859
>namefagging as the devil
>Id says joo

welp thats enough 4chan for 1 day

>>16819785
Funny; Sam Hyde and Nick Rochefort were trying to FUD Link on this exact basis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ckZ_RhrfMI
>THIS COMPUTAH CONTRACT SHIT DON'T MEAN NOTHIN, KID, GET OUTTA HEAR WITH THAT MESS AND BRING AN INVOICE

Fucking boomer faggots, $1000 EOY

>>16819785
>>16819823
>>16819853

you pests just keep coming back huh

>>16820295
>BTC, ETH and LINK
Why would anyone in their right mind still invest in BTC and ETH over LINK? BTC and ETH already went through exponential growth (went from under a dollar to over 3 digits) while LINK is still single digits.

>>16820429
What kind or faggot do you have to be to watch sam hyde?

>>16820471
>>16820509

reminder that LINK is NOTHING like ETH.

1. ETH had a testnet with thousands of users and finished mainnet 1 year after ICO, and only raised 16mil. Chainlink had a testnet and mainnet with ZERO users after 2 years and 32mil. It has gained ZERO adoption (the partnerships aren't using it). The level of developer adoption and excitement for ETH vs LINK is absolutely incomparable, LINK has none.

2. The Ethereum tech was actually innovative. It was the first successful attempt at a smart contract platform. It was decentralized and working one year after ICO. Chainlink only has centralized oracles (Sergey is lying about decentralization) which are not new or innovative. Their "innovative" solution to sybil resistant consensus is KYC.

3. The Ethereum foundation only had 1% of the Ethereum supply after ICO. The Chainlink team has 65%. Also when Ethereum was $1, it had a market cap of less than $100,000,000. It was actually a low market cap gem. Chainlink's real marketcap (if you count the 650,000,000 tokens in Sergey's wallet, ready to sell) is currently $2,000,000,000, which makes it an incredibly overpriced top 10 coin, not a low market cap gem like Ethereum was at the time.

4. Chainlink has already had mainstream exposure. It's made the front page of crypto subreddits countless times, was covered in forbes and every news outlet imaginable. Yet, even after all this attention, it has failed to get any developer adoption. It is fair to say that every single dev in the space knows about Chainlink, and decides not to use it. There are many projects running oracles in production, none of them choose to use Chainlink.

on a personal note, sorry guys but you chose the wrong horse. you even probably fudded a project that should have taken link's place. this is nobody's fault but your own and that fat walrus sirgay. it'll never happen, fr, fr this time.

>>16820540
Stale pasta is stale. Try harder.

>>16820295
heh, not interested in your chainlink scam, 4chan. i just found a [insert btc/eth/link killer #434758349592] with the help of my fellow redditors.

why is it that btc and eth maxis believe that chainlink is not needed and that it will just be implemented natively into btc/eth?
why is it that reddit mostly seems to go for the "next btc" like nano or some shit. or that they invest in xrp or anything other than link. was (and still kind of is?) the /biz/ fud really this effective? :D

i'm really late to buy link. late to buy link on /biz/ standards, otherwise i'm still early. i really wish i had put in just SOME research when i first read about link, 2018 i think. oh well, at least i got on the train, maybe not the most comfy seat but a seat nonetheless. i think that you should not waste your time and energy worrying about what could've been, instead you should focus on the future. better late than never, no? :D

4chan's /biz/, although what you find here is mostly shit. like probably 95% of it, if not even 99.XX% of it is shit. you know you have lurked for long enough when you can instantly discern gems from the shit.
sorry for the nulinker rant :D

>>16820471
BTC & ETH are THE big players in blockchain right now. Save bets. link for most nobrainers is still risky invest

Reasons why Link will fail

1. Zero customers, zero need. No one is going to pay for information to be inserted into a smart contract. That's what an oracle is supposed to do. The problem is a x100 calls costs a x100 times whatever Link charges. If you have to make thousands of calls, that's hundreds of dollars in Link tokens. If I were a dev, it would be much simpler to just make my own call to whatever data I needed.

2. Zero development, all marketing. Link has hired shills, link started on biz and Sergey himself got the inspiration to post, network with and contact people on biz. That's why begging is not allowed on biz, because after link a lot of other tokens tried to copy them. There's a lot of disingenuous shills saying that Link was only made for business cases and biz was never supposed to discover it. Quite the opposite, it was made first as a marketing token.

3. Deceitful. The Link team lies continuously; they'll attend a conference (SIBOS) and say they're partnered with Swift which is a banking protocol that handles these bank conferences, implying that they're going to handle data for big banks. They contacted the Google dev to make an offical blogpost and thus said that they're "partnered" when in fact, it's just a mention. They stretch the truth.

4. Zero transparency. Link raised 32 million in it's ICO. Since then, we have no accounting of their funds. They market dumped twenty to thirty million worth of chainlink (we still don't know the full amount) and never said a word about it. They're still dumping here and there, even larger amounts and believe they are free to do so at any time.

5. Cult-like behavior. 90% of the memes made by Chainlink pose Sergey as this kind of messiah. They encourage zero compromise grounds that anyone should sell their token. They encourage people to buy their tokens despite; mortgages, spousal issues and even when their "investors" are homeless they'll encourage people to buy more.

>>16820429
It's called a joke you autist.

>>16820197
Weird how that's missing from the whitepaper, almost like it's an MS Paint edit.

>>16820471
>Why would anyone in their right mind still invest in BTC
Derivatives have killed BTC.

>>16820197
Do people actually fall for this bs fud?