/biz/ - Business & Finance

still undervalued

+ link need ETH 2.0 and ETH 2.0 when 2022??

>>17696926
link no need eth2.0

>>17696893
>number go up because I want
>number go up because I want
>number go up because I want

>>17696935
haha yeah right. Pay link fee + high eth fee good luck with it.

Op is partially correct. Smart contracts are a meme and won’t be a thing for corporate America. No one wants to be decentralized or trustless

>>17697069
this.
sergey and his team are working on a great project for the ideal world. in the real world, this won't be implemented. corporations and governments don't want anything to be decentralized and trustless for one huge reason, greed.
that being said, link's ROI was great for early adopters and made a lot of people quite a bit of money and still has a lot of people willing to hold so i'm sure the price will go up, but it'll have nothing to do with the project itself and everything to do with it being a great token for trading since the community's belief is so strong, so everyone knows even at the end, there will be a lot of people to buy your bags.

everything is astroturfed to stop the adoption of bsv

but they're retards because they believe their own lie that bitcoin is digital gold.
it is easy to make people forget gold is money because it is annoying to use.
it is hard to make people to forget bitcoin is cash because that's the only way it's secure

Gee dude, I'm gonna buy a ecr-20 token for $4 that some fat dude wearing the same shirt for 4 years now holds 650,000,000.

>>17697162
>. in the real world, this won't be implemented. corporations and governments don't want anything to be decentralized and trustless for one huge reason, greed.
Which is exactly why it WILL be implemented. Do you know how much fucking money a truly trustless decentralized oracle will save corporations?

>>17696893
Yes, link is just a
>2nd layer solution
better sell, goy.

>>17696893
My god this is fucking gay. I would have supported this FUD as I enjoy fudding link so new fags can’t get in but this is not even remotely funny and looks like it was written by a retarded 4th grade pole. May god have mercy on your soul.

>>17696893
>8.scam
gee for a second i had my doubts but then i read this and now i can't wait to sell my stack thank you kind sir

>>17696893
i concur, fellow oldfag. i was here long before the link ico, and honestly it's the most sophisticated shitcoin pnd orchestrated thus far; it really puts ark to shame.

>>17696893

>>17697195
it will not be implemented. defi = lost money for corporations. they need things to be centralized and expensive, not have your average joe swinging his $1000 stack

>>17697011
threshold signatures, faggot

>>17697195
1. smart contracts are a meme. cryptokitties is the only current usecase.
2. you don't need tokens for blockchain solutions.
3. they will not develop it fast enough
4. Ethereum is competitor
5. Companies will develop blockchain solutions faster

Companies won't save anything. There will a be free blockchain solutions. Google or IBM will just mine your data and sell it to some other company.

>>17697376
>lost money for corporations
Yes, lost money for companies that don't fucking matter and don't need to exist. It's like automation. Automation gets rid of some jobs, the ones that are replaceable. The big corporations take advantage of this and fuck the smaller guys out of money. It's the same deal. Just because a few small time insurance brokerages might get fucked over doesn't mean that all investment banks in the United States wouldn't take advantage of the fucking savings. You're grouping all companies and corporations into one single group, and that''s the wrong way to look at it.

>>17697376
and with the sums they are interested in, they want lawyers, fees, officials, authorities and everyone involved. because those are a guarantee of legitimacy. no corporation is going to want multi billion stacks to be exposed to something as ridiculous as an oracle. they need liabilty, if something goes wrong, you can sue 3-4 different agencies/people/law-firms, they do not want some automatized, decentralized thing. if you do not understand this, i don't know what to tell you other than you are extremely naive as to how business works. to make it a little bit closer to your understanding, assuming you're purchasing a $500k house, do you want to print a form from your website and use it as a valid contract, or do you want the lawyer to draw the contract be liable for that, have it checked by the notary and sign it in front of the notary with all parties present? cmon

BSV BTFO

>>17697440
>no corporation is going to want multi billion stacks to be exposed to something as ridiculous as an oracle.
>no corporation is going to want multi billion stacks to be exposed to something as ridiculous as the internet.

>>17697463
vast difference, internet is a vehicle, you still have a dozen officials, law-firms, notaries etc. involved.

the hope of chainlink is to make those redundant as everyone claims, but no major corporation would actually want that

>>17697463
comparing smart contracts to the internet? sometimes i wonder if you guys are fucking with me on here

>>17697492
Dude you're never going to print off a fuckin contract at home and use it to buy a house. The average American will never even know this shit is going on in the background. Look, I don't even know why I'm sitting here trying to convince you otherwise. If you had any technical knowledge in that noggin of yours, you would understand just how much money a decentralized oracle could save, not to mention how much more reliable it is compared to a retarded ass notary society or whatever the fuck they call themselves.

>>17697503
Imagine it's the year 1970. Your firm conducts all trades on paper, and always has for all of economic history. The internet comes along. Someone tells you "Dude, you can save SOOOOOO much money if you just do all of this shit on the internet. Bro just trust me."

Do you believe him? Fuck no. Does it end up becoming the standard anyways? Yes.

>>17697527
yes there might be smart contracts in the future. The Chainlink tokens will not play any role. The EU is already developing an E-Euro and companies like Facebook will establish Libra. So why use any centralized shitcoin by a fat philosopher?

>>17697574
>developing an E-Euro
Has nothing to do with decentralized oracles.
>Facebook will establish Libra
Has nothing to do with decentralized oracles.

>So why use any centralized shitcoin by a fat philosopher?
Because it WILL be decentralized. It's not yet, which is why it's smart to buy LINK now before it is, because when that happens it will explode. Also, building a decentralized oracle is not something that a company can just do out of the blue. I mean sure, they can "build" it, but the decentralization comes from usage and nodes. Google + Microsoft + Amazon could all come together right now and build a decentralized oracle, and if they can't get anyone to run nodes for data feeds, then it would be fucking worthless. Chainlink is the FIRST company to start getting these data feeds. Let me repeat that. It is the FIRST one. The thing about decentralized oracles is that the first one to come along, no matter how small the company, will be the successful one. It takes time to build a decentralized oracle, and so far, they have 3 or more years on all (non-existent) competition. So sure, you're right in that if these decentralized oracles are never used, link is fucking dogshit worthless. However, if they are used, it will become one of the most groundbreaking technological advancements in finance.

>>17697680
Lition has ties to Ernst and Young and they are Rank 700

>>17697656
>The whole world is going to use a preminted shitcoin over institutional money
>it WILL be decentralized
>people will abandon centralized systems, because they are bad
>just like people abandon Facebook, because Facebook monitors your behaviour

You are dealing with normies. Normies hate Edward Snowden and don't care about decentralization or anything.

>>17697656
>Google + Microsoft + Amazon could all come together right now and build a decentralized oracle, and if they can't get anyone to run nodes for data feeds, then it would be fucking worthless.
buddy, if google, microsoft, and amazon got together and built a decentralized oracle, they'd have everyone who ever heard of smart contracts willing to run nodes. and this is exactly why link won't ever succeed. if there's true demand for this in the future, a large corp like any of those 3 will build it and market it without having never known who sergey nazarov was.

thanks bro, just sold all my link

fucking idiot lol

>>17697784
start using your brain. think of chainlink as

a) a data security solution
b) highly customisable decentralisation - the contract architects pick who is relaying the data

this is not some quixotic dream, it's built for industry. which is exactly why vitalik is sour on it

>>17697802
>buddy, if google, microsoft, and amazon got together and built a decentralized oracle, they'd have everyone who ever heard of smart contracts willing to run nodes. and this is exactly why link won't ever succeed
maersk

>>17697169
Kek

>>17696893
is coinmarketcap broken. do they use a chainlink oracle? gainers and losers shows the same shit everything has pumped

>>17697802
>if google, microsoft, and amazon got together and built a decentralized oracle, they'd have everyone who ever heard of smart contracts willing to run nodes.
It as hypothetical. Why would they build their own when they can just use one that already exists with a fuck load of data feeds?

Even if LINK could save a company from hiring a few extra attorneys, accountants, middlemen; it would save them a lot of money.

>>17697393
Where are the LINK tokens being stored?

>>17696893
>>17697345
Hello oldfags. I require you extensive knowledge and experience. Have any of these shitcoins ever worked out? Obviously Ethereum doesn't count, it was a top-tier project way before it launched.