/biz/ - Business & Finance

check alts vs sats. its not just chainlink

>>52295947
Show me an alt that was kept below a specific price like this for 6 months, with BTC dumping every time it went over said specific price.

>>52295924
What just happened?
FTX had a 2-3 billion dollar hole after lending user assets against their ToS.
What asset did their user own and Alameda did not invest in?
Chainlink...
Who else used FTX to dump Chainlink and suppress the price?
Celsius, Nexo...

What do you think happened to the user liquidity from Nexo?
They were all in it shorting Chainlink and the price going up will cause massive bankruptcies.

Binance is not safe either seeing their timing...

>>52296002
Does this explain how Bitcoin keeps dumping every time Link pops its head up?

merely a cohencidence

pure coincidence

9 is the most powerful of numbers, regal

>>52295995
icy pee

this is chainlink's new Proof of BlackSwan service, when the price hits $9 a blackswan event will occur

CZ is selling all is FTT only to suppress the price of LINK

>>52297610
this. CZ is extremelly smart and knows very well that oracles will capture more value than blockchains in a few years. he's ready to do everything to fuck competition over

>>52295924
Laughable yet clever ERC20 token scam tacked onto some decent tech that isn’t proprietary and will be improved by someone else down the road. Imagine holding this absolute cult grift scam garbage.

>>52295924
we're about to break the year long resistance
bulgarian faggots don't want that to happen

>>52298373
Literally looks like a blow-off top, this shit dumping so hard lmao.

>>52295924
>why isn't Chainlink allowed to break above $9?
because it's allowed to gain against bitcoin, which is exactly what that stupid fucking graphic denominated in USD is telling you.

>>52298373
For fuck's sake a few hours ago this chart would have looked great. Now it looks like fucking dog shit. Just send it all to zero so I can kill myself and end this misery.

>>52298438
that's a weekly candle and it's currently Tuesday

>>52297591
kek'd

>>52297591
Fucking lol

>>52295924
jannies ban for supportin link

>>52298373
This is a shit attempt at charting. The blow off top of the previous run never constitutes a point in the ensuing channel, it's not part of the same pattern.

You would have to draw your channel to start from the next peak after the crash, like this.

>>52296871
Yeah but that's different because ICP is a shitcoin

>>52296002
Yeah but nexo for example while they were shorting link on aave were actually accumulating in BULK. When the liquidation point came, they had to buy a couple of 100k link. It was said at point it was at lower slippage as if they did it OTC. I used to have a few screenshots about it with better explanation, but thats what happend.. I'm sure they are still floating around.

>>52295924
i already told you, anon.
about the price of a cup of coffee.

while you were stacking on kapiluwak memes i was stacking link. (LN)
i dumped that shit at $300 though.
https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/link/
and am selling chinese bath houses right now in northeast us and sanfrancisco.

Is Chainlink going to walk the talk and do a Proof of Reserve on its own Treasury?

>>52299172
Nope they'll use binance oracles to do it

>>52297766
Oh so this IS the new FUD lol

>>52299206
Oof, not a good look if Chainlink won't even use its own technology to prove its solvency. Maybe Chainlink is close to being insolvent too?

>>52299172
>>52299577
I guess it would make sense if they were operating a lending platform where they leverage user funds in risky plays on the market. I don't think they are though, so why would they need to prove solvency?

>>52298894
If it's shit why has price responded to the current area violently multiple times in the last several weeks

>>52299657
Well it's a risk if the company responsible for providing the Proof of Reserve technology can't even manage their own solvency.

>>52299784
But they are not in the business of borrowing/lending, so what do they need to prove in that regard? That's the whole idea behind Proof of Reserve; to prove that there is enough liquidity to make every user on the platform whole if they decided to cash out. Or to prove that the stablecoin you're minting is actually backed by btc/eth/dollars etc. Chainlink is not minting stablecoins nor are they lending or borrowing. There is no reason for them to divulge treasury information to the public and by extension potential competition.

It's a cute little jab but doesn't hold up to a second of logical thinking.

>>52299921
Holy newfag read about impermanent loss protection. follow 42 and ChainLinkGod on Twitter. DYOR. Bancor is 100% safe free money just hand over your tokens and put your worries to bed!

>>52295924
Elites aren't ready to use it yet

>>52300075
Your script is malfunctioning, nigger

>>52296763
>>52296809
this and you're anti-semitic if you think otherwise.

>>52300126
DYOR Bancor V3 has been independently verified by both 42 and ChainLinkGod certified blockchain experts. They have said Bancor V3 is 100% safe free money. You would be stupid not to give your tokens away for that juicy yield

>>52299721
You can see price action even fits better on mine, constant bodies settled under. That said diagonals are pretty insubstantial, im just pointing out that you're including an area that by definition isn't part of the channel.

>>52300075
Has bancor still not resumed withdrawals lmao?

>>52300228
lmao yourself Bancor V3 has impermanent loss protection you are completely safe and ready to claim your free money now. Simply hand over your tokens and get a good nights rest, you earned it!

>>52295924
HELLO THERE IS A GIANT SCAM HAPPENING RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR EYES. WE'RE BEING ROBBED. THEY TAKE ALL THE LIFECHANGING OPPORTUNITIES AWAY FROM US. YOU COULD'VE BOUGHT HEX AND ENJOYED THE 10,000X BUT YOU TOLD ME CHAINLINK IS THE BEST TOKEN EVA. YOU LIAR VISHNU WILL PUNISH YOU FOR THAT DEVASTATING LANGUAGE THAT ROLLED OVER YOUR TONGUE. YOU WILL NEVER REDEEM NOR OWN A HEX LAMBO

>>52300075
>>52300202
Are you that anon that got a mighty fine haircut @ Bancor's Barbershop? Sucks to suck, my friend. Should've listened to us oldfags telling you to keep your Linkies away from that obvious kikery

>>52300075
IP has nothing to do with link or their finances

>>52296002
Yeah CZ probably has the biggest shorts on Link right now

>>52295924
Because me and others are still cooming.

>>52300307
>>52300321
Newfags. Resd about Inpermanent Loss Protection. You are covered! Read about the latest advances in Financial Technology or FinTech for short powered by Bancor V3

>>52300450
Not all of us were meant to make it, friend. Hope you don't let it consume you.
>Believe in the me that believes in you

>>52299577
checked
>smartcontract.com
>doesn't use smartcontract for ICO

>>52300513
NGMI

>>52295924
We really need a /csg/.

>>52300599
Haircut looking fine though anon!

>>52299784
Solvency doesn’t work the same as with a lending platform. Solvency with CL Labs is literally just $ + LINK token held by CL / uncirculating supply. All of which is published on the blockchain and doesn’t require an Oracle because it’s an equation of the protocol itself you absolute newfag brainlet

Guys

Will binance's own Oracle makes chain link redundant in the future?

>>52299172
>Proof of Reserve on its own Treasury?
team wallets are onchain, dummy

>>52300348
Why should he if link is actually a great product which price actively wants to move forward?

>>52301849
Ofc not.
As their bridge got hacked previously and as a simple ethereum fork, I doubt their programming skills will be top notch

>>52302797
So he can make his link clone and eat Sergey’s lunch, making link’s dominance much lower than it would be otherwise

>>52302872
How old are you? Seriously. I guess 15

>>52295924
made for the BBC (Big Bitcoin Cock)

>>52295947
This is the new fud. Surprised it took this long for the bulgarians to concoct it

I said it earlier, LINK hit $9 three times in the past 48 hours, BTC immediately shit the bed each time. These are no longer coincidences, just like it shat the bed at $52, $38, $25. Someone has target LINK this entire time. I don't blame who ever is doing it, fat boy is complicit by sitting idly while his project gets creamed day after day

>>52295995
>>52296538
>>52302968
Holy meds.

>>52302140
Sergey doesn't dump from team wallets, he uses stealth wallets to dump.

>>52300450
Every active anon must have suffered impermanent loss at some point just as privacy meant nothing to a lot of anons in the past.

>>52300211
not really. all you did was draw a line in the middle of the trend. you’re taking out of your ass. go to sleep, kid.

>>52295924
Bogdanoff....
Link's at 9$ again...

>>52296871
Nope.
ICP constantly trended down during that same period.

>>52299172
>>52299577
See >>52302140

>>52302901
Are you behind the news? Binance have literally "launched" an oracle which is one faggot copy pasting Chainlink repos.

>>52300196
Betraymoto literally endorsed every single jewish scam. He shilled/paired with Celsius, Bancor, Voyager, FTX,...
Every black swan. Then of course never to be mentioned after they collapsed.

I suppose you watched the Smartcon. Did you notice something odd among the participants? 90% of them were fucking kikes. Some were even wearing a fucking kippah on stage.
I'm pretty sure SirGay himself is jewish. And if he's not, he's a mossad asset.

>>52302968
>just like it shat the bed at $52, $38, $25
Yes.
And a bunch more levels, like $20, see pic.

>fat boy is complicit by sitting idly
What the absolute FUCK would he be able to do about whales dumping Bitcoin?

>>52305732
>What the absolute FUCK would he be able to do about whales dumping Bitcoin
finger blasting SN in morse

>>52305260
Chainlink is partnered with nearly all of crypto. Whenever a crypto shits the bed, it's a given that they're partnered with Chainlink in some way.

>>52297591
They also started covid to kill chainlinks momentum

That one shaked normies out

>>52305775
>They also started covid to kill chainlinks momentum

>>52305821
m...meds....

>>52305821
Its funny how many coincides there are, its so tiresome but never selling

>>52305862
>coincidences
They must be coincidences, right?
It's not like they're gonna tank the ENTIRE global financial market just to stop Link from pumping, right?

I mean just think.
The two absolute biggest global macroeconomic disasters since the cold war, and both just "happened" to coincide with two absolute key Chainlink pump events, with pinpoint precision:

>Covid
Chainlink about to break its absolute ATH at $5

>Ukraine war
Chainlink pumping hugely against BTC after the staking announcement

And that's without even considering the hundreds of blatant Bitcoin dump suppression events.
Even if all of this is 100% coincidental, it changes nothing about the fact that without all of these coincidences, Chainlink would've gone from double digits to mid-triple digits just like BNB, QNT, ... did.

>>52305882
They must be real mad biz found out about it pre ico, really makes you wonder who assblaster was

>>52305821
Thank you for posting this pic. If you look a the actual chart these days they fucking erased that wick lmfao. I'll never forget that day. Sitting at my PC watching my NW evaporate and knowing I could do nothing about it. All I can do now is laugh.

>>52299921
That's not the point, imagine Binance implementing Chainlink Labs Proof of Reserve and then Chainlink goes under. How many people do you think are going to trust the tech if the company behind it imploded?

>>52301810
The $ (if they even hold many $, could be BTC & ETH or any other crypto assets) are not visible to the public, so no one has any idea how much they hold. Hence why we need a Proof of Reserves on their Treasury. Truth not Trust right!

>>52302140
So all the $ that Sergey dumped $Link for are on-chain? I don't think so, you dummy

>>52306108
I was watching the crash to $0.0001 as it happened live before my eyes, I belly laughed the entire time.

>>52306215
>dumped tokens
Those aren't considered 'treasury'. They are used to pay people. The dev wallets are treasury. Have a look at those.

>>52306215
>So all the $ that Sergey dumped $Link for are on-chain?
Literally yes.
You can see every single token he "dumped" and at what time/price.

>>52295924
Link cannot moon because I hold it. The universe decided that nothing good can happen to me. Sorry guys.

>>52307599
Don't you have a thread to prun janjan

>>52307400
Look up the definition of Treasury, you might learn something

>>52307426
You cannot see how many $ Sergey has lol You can only see what he used to have, but Proof of Reserves is attestation for what they currently have. You guys don't even understand your own products lol

>>52308088
>You can only see what he used to have
You asked whether all the $ that Sergey dumped are on-chain.
And they are.

How many he has left is irrelevant to anyone outside of Chainlink itself.

>>52296538
Fractional banking Cex with no fees for unlimited wash trading.
The price is only what you accept to sell it for until the liquidity is removed and every CeFi collapses.

>>52302872
The LINK clone has a meaning for binance.
Binance is aiming to siphon all the value from the crypto space like a cancer quickly destroying the body.
It's certain they played a hand in the Chainlink price suppression as it is their biggest foe.

They don't want Chainlink to succeed for 3 reasons:
- It would siphon out all the value from BNB and the Binance ecosystem with its L0 value proposition and swap its ranking with BNB.
- Chainlink is allied with TradFi and would remove Binance's power to make the rules in this place.
- In doing so it would bankrupt Binance and BNB, either through simple value proposition dynamics once BNB is useless or if Binance shorted Chainlink by causing the same result as for FTX.

>>52308250
Not really, since if Chainlink doesn't have any $ yet they're practically insolvent unless they turn to dumping more tokens. Basic liquidity and cashflow. Who supports PoR, CCIP, Staking, DECO if Chainlink is insolvent and goes under?

>>52308340
>if Chainlink doesn't have any $ yet they're practically insolvent
Except you can see on-chain how much reserve they have.

>>52295924
Sir Gay has sell orders for 9usd.

>>52308088
>but Proof of Reserves is attestation for what they currently have
no it isn't you dumbass, proof of reserve seeks to ensure that a custodian holds the assets it claims to on behalf of its clients.

Chainlink doesn't claim to hold billions in dollars as some emergency reserve, they said that the money they cash out will be spent on growing the network and pay devs etc, that money is essentially considered gone after they have cashed out

chainlink would only be considered insolvent if they had massive loans that used LINK token as collateral like FTX did which isn't what they do, we see them consistently cashing out LINK for actual money. Just stfu you retarded fudding brainlet

>>52308378
But it's BTC that's getting sold every time Link hits $9.

>>52308354
Show me how much $USD has on hand right now

>>52308480
That's completely irrelevant to anyone.
Consider all of it gone the second it's moved out of the dev wallets.

The reserves are on-chain, verifiable to all.

>>52308451
Holy fuck you dumb fucking retard. You don't need to have loans to go insolvent. Jesus fucking christ the absolutely fucking retardation on this board. Insolvency relates to cashflow dumbass, no cash to pay bills = insolvent. Proof of Reserve can be used as an attestation that they have a substantial reserve of $ on-hand to cover upcoming costs. If Chainlink doesn't have enough $ then they need to have the ability to access liquidity via options like selling more Link. As Link price continues to decrease, Chainlink's ability to access that liquidity also decreases, hence putting stress on cashflows. Google what a going concern is and how it relates to insolvency.

>>52308528
It's completely relevant, Chainlink can't pay its bills in Link. It needs $ or £ or Euros to do so, depending on the jurisdiction. Lol you literally can't even comprehend the basics of how a Treasury works, it's astounding.

>>52308573
This. There's been rumours they lost half their funds in celsius and lost even more now with ftx collapse. They're running on fumes and need to fire the 400$k HR roasts if they want to continue development.

>>52308573
>Chainlink can't pay its bills in Link
They can pay bills by selling Link they still have, which we can all easily verify.

In order to keep the lights on, exchanges etc. need more than just the staked/escrowed/reserve/... assets to which they should attach proof of reserve; they need operating capital, and nobody has ever demanded proof of reserve for operating capital.

>>52308600
>They're running on fumes
They still have over 500 million Link tokens, they're golden.

>>52308614
Its a bulgarian or paid jeet

Stop responding

>>52308627
the 18pbtid is paid chainlink labs shill.

>>52308555
It has ample runway after selling all the way through the run up. They were smart enough to sell to acquire operational cost for years, they were no doubt smart enough to keep that money in dollars as the market is imploding and they’ll hoover up cheap LINK to pay all the top Web2 talent that’s being offloaded right now as FAANG crumbles. Sirgay has cornered trust minimisation services for all industry verticals and sured up finances and doesn’t need to show anyone a goddamn thing. He played the cycle beautifully, and if you can’t see that and we’re unable to stop the Jews from taking your cubes you were never meant to make it.

>>52308601
>Don't worry lads, they can just dump more tokens to survive.
Congrats, amazing strategy. Don't worry about where the previous money has gone, Sergey can just dump millions of tokens into a market that is already down by 85%. Stunning.
>nobody has ever demanded proof of reserve for operating capital
They literally demand it every day in traditional finance, with things like liquid ratios and CA vs CL reporting. Liquidity is king, and the number 1 reason why companies fail is because they cannot meet their short-term cashflow requirements.

>>52308691
>Congrats, amazing strategy
Worked for Solana, Matic, Fantom, Uni, ADA, QNT, ETH, ...

>They literally demand it every day in traditional finance
Shareholders do. Shares are securities.

>>52308680
If he has so many $ on hand and Chainlink Labs is heavily solvent then I'm sure he won't have any issues demonstrating his tech by providing a Proof of Reserves on Chainlink's Treasury. I will even accept an audit proof from each of the banks where Chainlink stores their funds, they should already have those for their last financial year. Easy peasy to provide.

>>52308728
Chainlink's treasury has been on-chain for all to see since 2017.

>>52308719
>Shareholders do. Shares are securities.
The demands for it are primarily from suppliers and lenders actually, rather than shareholders. Shareholders generally just get information provided in quarterly and annual reports.

>>52308743
Even in this capacity, the on-chain treasury is exactly what they'd want to see.

>>52308555
yes if Link went to 0 chainlink would likely struggle you fucken genius

>>52308751
Please don't tell me you work in any serious position in Finance, because you'd be one hell of a risk. The fact that you don't consider $ on-hand as part of Treasury, and that you believe tokens in a extremely volatile market are somehow secure assets, just shows how little you understand. You probably believe FTX isn't in any trouble, they had lots of tokens!

>>52308831
>The fact that you don't consider $ on-hand as part of Treasury
Consider all of it gone the second it's transferred to an exchange.
What is Chainlink left with? Over 500 million tokens.
Nobody's asking about their pocket change when they can objectively prove they still have that.

>>52308766
Congrats, you do know that Link doesn't need to go to zero for Chainlink to be insolvent right. The more you talk the more you show you don't understand liquidity.
Let's say Chainlink needed a large amount of $ today, what's the maximum amount they could raise from selling Link tokens in a 24hr period?

>>52308854
>Nobody's asking about their pocket change when they can objectively prove they still have that.
hahaha $3b is pocket change? That's almost more than their current market cap. You must be a Chainlink Labs employee, "no don't ask us about where the money went, just consider it gone bro, look we have more tokens to dump"

>>52308901
>hahaha $3b is pocket change?
Going off the worst-case scenario whereby nearly all of what they dumped is gone, then their $ holdings will be pocket change.

>>52308859
>you do know that Link doesn't need to go to zero for Chainlink to be insolvent right
Chainlink could lay off all but two people and still be a functional project.

>>52308955
>Going off the worst-case scenario whereby nearly all of what they dumped is gone, then their $ holdings will be pocket change.
The fact that you're totally okay with the possibility of Sergey just stealing $3b shows your cuck nature. There's absolutely nothing that Sergey could have blown that much money on in the normal course of business, yet you have zero interest in holding him to account.
>Chainlink could lay off all but two people and still be a functional project.
They couldn't even release mainnet in 2019 with just two people, why lie? If they only need 2 people why did they hire over 400+?

>>52309105
>Sergey just stealing $3b
He put it to extremely good use, I'd say.
He owns crypto, has more legacy adoption than ETH, and has both feet AND his cock in the door at Swift.

>They couldn't even release mainnet in 2019 with just two people
Mainnet was pretty huge lol.
Things would be slower, but it would absolutely still be viable. They got a spot on Sibos with only two people.

>If they only need 2 people why did they hire over 400+?
Because companies tend to grow.

>>52309146
why don’t you shut the fuck up and realize Chainlink is dead in the water? Developments? Absolutely not you fucking cultist and no there is no correlation between recent price events and staking coming with any type of “FUD” you dumb retard faggots

>>52309186
>Chainlink is dead in the water

>>52309146
>He put it to extremely good use, I'd say.
Yeah, he might buy his dad another Lambo, or maybe he will need a 4th property to go with what he owns in SF, NY and Puerto Rico. You do know he skipped off to Puerto Rico at the end of last year right, in order to take advantage of the tax benefits.
>and has both feet AND his cock in the door at Swift.
He did one PoC 6 years ago that has currently seen no adoption in production, and they've only just started a 2nd PoC for a totally different piece of tech. 2 PoC's in 6 years and zero adoption. Amazing! Maybe in 2027 they'll start a 3rd PoC! Hold Marines! HOLD!
>Things would be slower, but it would absolutely still be viable. They got a spot on Sibos with only two people.
Lol, if they go any slower they're never getting anything out before the end of the century. DECO release 2030 lads! No wait, 2040!

>>52309248
>he might buy his dad another Lambo
His dad had a Lambo before Chainlink was even created lol

>He did one PoC 6 years ago
>and they've only just started a 2nd PoC
kek I love seeing bots update their scripts like this.

>f they go any slower they're never getting anything out before the end of the century
Mainnet was launched 1.5 years after the ICO, and it now dominates the industry.

>>52306518
That time I had long on link in Binance - but on BTC pair so I was saved. After that I closed the long and sent all my link to wallet. Never moved it since

>>52309322
You're exactly whom they're targeting with these dumps and wicks.

>>52309300
>His dad had a Lambo before Chainlink was even created lol
Hence the use of the word "another", reading comprehension please.
>kek I love seeing bots update their scripts like this.
PoC 1: 2016, PoC 2: 2022, 6 years apart. No adoption. Facts are facts anon, you can believe I'm a bot but that just means you're getting BTFO by an AI.
>Mainnet was launched 1.5 years after the ICO, and it now dominates the industry.
Ah yes, that sheer domination. Just like MySpace! What's the marketcap of MySpace again? No no, no need to rush Sergey, you just take your time

>>52309437
>Hence the use of the word "another"
You were implying that lambo was paid for with Link tokens lmao

>PoC 1: 2016, PoC 2: 2022, 6 years apart. No adoption.
This is pure, unadulterated cope.
The fud used to be "they had a PoC but only because they won a contest, Swift hasn't worked with Chainlink since".

>Ah yes, that sheer domination. Just like MySpace!
MySpace was Oraclize.

>>52309332
Read again. Was.
>>52308955
>Chainlink could lay off all but two people and still be a functional project
This. Also you are not really investing in Chainlink when you buy LINK.

>>52309538
>Read again. Was.
That's what I meant yeah

>>52309465
>You were implying that lambo was paid for with Link tokens lmao
You're projecting anon, read my words carefully and not just make stuff up in your head.
>This is pure, unadulterated cope. The fud used to be "they had a PoC but only because they won a contest, Swift hasn't worked with Chainlink since".
So what have Chainlink been working on with SWIFT in the 6 years between 2016 and 2022 then. What were they doing together in the time between those 2 PoC's? Surely you can provide some evidence right.
>MySpace was Oraclize.
Sure it wasn't Band, or API3, or Winklink? None of those seemed to blow up too big, no no, Chainlink definitely fits in more with being MySpace, the first big platform of its kind. Watch out anon, maybe Binance Oracles are the Facebook equivalent

>>52309679
>So what have Chainlink been working on with SWIFT in the 6 years between 2016 and 2022 then.
The integration of distributed ledgers.

>Sure it wasn't Band, or API3, or Winklink?
All of those came after Chainlink.

>>52305732
Notice how the suppressors got btfo when he released that jan 1 vid? Sitting idly means nothing is happening, which is... exactly what's fucking happening. He spent the entire year holding his dick while his token got btfo and it's squarely on his shoulders. How does nothing happen in 11+ months? That's sheer incompetence on his part

>>52309719
>Notice how the suppressors got btfo when he released that jan 1 vid?
Yeah, Bitcoin instantly started tumbling but Link just kept on pumping.
Eventually they dumped the fucking stock market, that finally got Link dumping as well.

>>52309744
That is the pattern. SmartCon announcement got dumped within 12 hours. Galaxy Digital announcement, Two Sigma announcement, on and on

>>52309699
>The integration of distributed ledgers.
Hahaha wtf, bro can you go Ethereum right now and send a transaction and show me the SWIFT MT103 message that comes off the back of it. No wait, do it on Bitcoin. No no wait, try it on any layer 1. Hahaha you can't, you literally can't. "Integration of distributed ledgers" hahaha what a load of shit, can't believe you're trying to suggest they spent the last 6 years supposedly working closely with SWIFT and only now they can do a second PoC. Just lies, Linkie lies, Linkie larps.

>>52309918
>PoC with Swift bad
They're not sending their best.

>>52310047
>A PoC basically means it's live bro, no I can't prove it, just trust me bro.
I mean, you could just point me to a single bond on-chain that Chainlink provides interest rate resets for. That was the premise of the first PoC 6 years ago so surely it must have gone live in production and be visible today right.

>>52310287
A PoC is an advanced step towards it going live, yes.

>>52300307
Bancor stole so much LINk from me. Fuck those kikes.

>>52295924

>>52310321
So it's not live then, and PoC 1 hasn't been live in the last 6 years. So how much value has PoC 1 added? Still waiting for evidence of that bond on-chain that Chainlink does interest rate resets for.....

>>52305882
I just checked this, they announced staking Sept. 28th at SmartCon. https://decrypt.co/110725/chainlink-aims-to-be-aws-of-web3-as-staking-plans-announced

>>52310973
Sergey released a video on January 1 announcing the release of staking "this year": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YShbzR7mlog

Link immediately started pumping, and BTC immediately started dumping.
Link kept pumping though, until a few days later the global financial markets dumped because of the looming Ukraine invasion.

>>52310973
And in June Chainlink announced the actual details of staking.

Once again, Bitcoin and the global financial markets instantly took a nosedive.

>>52310973
>>52311046
>>52311072
pic of both times the financial markets dumped in response to the two major staking announcements.

>>52311046
>>52311072
>>52311152
Okay thanks, I wanted to check for myself and don't keep up with these things. I appreciate the clarification

>>52295924
because the tech matters
anything it can do, coinbase and binance do it faster, better, cheaper AND their APIs are easier to use
chainlink not needed

>>52311284
>anything Chainlink can do, coinbase and binance do it faster, better
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH (part 1)

>>52311284
>>52311411
>anything Chainlink can do, coinbase and binance do it faster, better
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH (part 2)