/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>52363916
based. BUILD is so epic. how long do you estimate anons will have to get into early access staking before it fills?

>>52363916
And for those too dumb to do the math themselves: link staking is looking like $4-$20 per link per year
Those early access anons have already made it
And they dont even know it yet

Arbitrum completely sold out to VC kikes. Don’t expect that. Just lol.

That said Alemeda were one if their investors last year, and get this, their investors were “hand picked” and they “very much value their investors guidance”. They said that in their own fucking AMA.

>>52363943
I would guess that everyone with early access will have a period of time where they declare their desire to stake and are allocated the enture 25mm if enough say yes
Most will
And the optics of a walled chainlink garden being the only real yield in the space couldnt be better

>>52363953
How easy do you think it will be to stake if you qualify for early access? You reckon it will be some massive rush job to fill out the 25M asap or what? If even your lowest estimate is correct then I'm fucking set.

>>52364090
Ignore me. Someone already asked. Thanks for the response.

>>52363953
>$4-$20 per link per year
EPIC

Honestly have no idea why any link holders care about Arbitrum anymore.
They basically used Link for free marketing, then betrayed them. Got VC cock, dropped everything with LINK but continued to get free marketing by exploiting prior intentions. One of their largest investors was Alameda which many have known for years fud LINk and over the past year and a half actively suppressed it and exploited the ecosystem.

Fuck Arbitrum and each if the cunts running it. Utter backstabbing.

>hey alameda, so we were thinking of using Chainlink for various aspe-
>no you wont.
>OK!

Alameda probably didnt want anything to potentially pump link, so ordered Arbitrum to cease all integrations, and the cunts sucked that VC cum hard and followed orders

>>52364095
No, it will likely be orderly with a window to submit
Just make sure you have gas ready in your eth wallet
>>52364156
It gets even more epic if you think about:
5% in link which scales with link price
Build becomes a statement of project seriousness just like chainlink price feeds
Projects that dont want to get labeled scams have to join build, even if they dont need the support
If ccip is even somewhat successful you add a near zero overhead revenue stream that also just keeps growing

That spells a multi year link-only bullmarket where nobody with early access staking to that first 75mm ever has to sell a link again

>>52364300
$52.70 -87.3%

>>52363953
>link staking is looking like $4-$20 per link per year
How do you figure that? Seems too good to be true.

Does anyone else think it's odd that we're 6 weeks max from staking launch, and we have so few details let alone a specific date for launch?

>>52364441
Based on a few conversations from smartcon and some of the limited valuation info we have for chainlink build participants

There are always blavk and white swans
Notice now that chainlink is the defacto arbiter of trustworthyness in the space
What's the value of being the kingmaker?

>>52364821
given current wild market gyrations how is it possible to put any number on anything in the short to medium term
this would be the one event where sergay would be accurate in betraying and postponing the startup of the biggest event in his token, like the anon above said a bit weird that the info or date is still not available

even so the adoption and payout will be severely curtailed now that all activity dies down even harder in tx per day and regs will strangle most of defi
now before you misinterpret this as fud against link, it isnt i am all in, but it does seem that current market conditions postpone the dates a bit

>>52364300
checked and based

You own a fund raising token for a price checker service that no one will ever pay to use.

>>52366925
They would pay to use it to automate contracts… it’s not a sure thing LINK will succeed, but there is a point to all of this

>>52363916
When can I stake my Chainlink! I want to get all the shitcoin airdrops from the BUILD program!!!

>>52363953
>link staking is looking like $4-$20 per link per year

7000 early access tokens * 7 dollar link * 0.05 as the expected percentage yield (they said up to 5%, so could be a bit lower than 5% at the end of the day) equals $2450. thats 35 cents per token per year. not including the build obviously but i don't think the build gains will be quite as high as the link gains especially in this early version of staking

how are you getting $4 to $20 per token per year?

>>52364821
>Based on a few conversations from smartcon and some of the limited valuation info we have for chainlink build participants


any more info on that?

It's closer to $3/link/year

>>52363916
BUILD hype was never even a thing until Chainlink Labs rolled out the latest script for you retards to shill.

>>52367188
He's being highly generous with the build drops to get to those numbers. Knowing chainlink, they'll keep most of the build tokens and we'll get a small amount on Dec 31 2024 when v1 drops

>>52367504
yeah i wish we could be hype about things that we didn't know exists before they are announced.

>>52367527
kek exactly

>>52363953
so $4-20 per a link in the 7k you stake?

>>52367588
>>52367527
>Hype staking rewards for years.
>Pivot to "free" shitcoins right as staking is about to be a huge disappointment.
Hurr durr exactly.

>>52367675
ive owned chainlink for nearly 5 years, waiting to stake it so that i have passive income for life. im going to stake atleast 21k in early access staking

Honestly at this time in the market nobody wants passive income on crypto.. Making 5% apy on altcoins which are bleeding is useless.
Staking is only good in bullruns where you can make more over time

>>52367901
>nobody wants passive income
i think you might be retarded

>>52367901
speak for youself retard

question, 10k linklet here, have a 7k wallet that's early access eligible and other is just general access, def staking 7k but would you stake the other 3k if you could? I'd have to do it as soon as general access opens, if there's even any room left at that point. To be honest I'm leaning towards it as I don't really have the balls to try to time a top and I don't think there's going to be a blowoff rally for anything in crypto for at least 2 years anyways.

>>52367901
you don't understand what chainlink staking is or why most of the shit in the last cycle was ponzi's, when are the tourists going to be washed out? if you lost money this last cycle just go away forever.

>>52364157
Not that I'm doubting any of this but how do we know they've broken off all integrations with chainlink? They've been very hush hush about it but we already know link will act as validators for arbitrum, so besides no more public statements to "pump bags", nothing appears to have actually changed. They still have plans to implement FSS as well.

>>52367675
The build shitcoins are purely additional to the staking rewards.

>>52368492
I don't quite have 10k but if it were me I would stake the 7k and leave the other 3 out to potentially swing/have backup incase of a major fuck-up (I think this is incredibly unlikely)

>>52367985
>passive income
>coin is bleeding for years
>all it takes is a 5% dump to totally erase your entire year of gains
>cant even sell
Lmao keep smoking that cope nigga

>>52368530
Links node income is cratered now. 90% of defi is dead abandoned ghost chains. Link nodes are no longer getting paid by every nft scam. Theres no users and therefore no organic income.
Currently links staking is not gonna be any different from the rest. You will be subsidized from sergeys dumps, sergey is forced to do this because without staking the price would probably be 2$ by now

>>52369094
If you believed this then why are you shitposting in a link thread? Because you're scared its all real and you might be missing out, its certainly not for others financial interest. Besides you know as well as everyone else the long term aim for link was not shitcoin casino, that was a pivot to show it was working and being used. Degens fucking off in defi does not remove swift/tradfi from being the target.

>>52369029
Nice thesis. However I disagree that the chainlink token (LINK) will continue going down, I believe it has bottomed.

>>52369247
Posted it already, but 40k sats was support for 20 months (all the way back to pre aug 2020 blowoff) and turned into resistance for past 10 months. It broke out last week and even amid this ftx fuckery has continued to hold 40k as support again. At this point the more convincing argument is all markets down only for years from global recession, not link continuing to get lapped by bitcoin and scams. And I'm not saying that's a bad argument either, but anyone who believed it is not browing /biz/ posting in link threads to try to save anons out of the goodness of their heart.

Will staking be worth it if I only have 1.5k and not eligible for early access?

>>52367188
Checked
Also note that includes an estimate for slow POR growth (which will now be fast) and very conservative ccip revenue

>>52369365
So you believe LINK has bottomed? I don’t know when it would be best to increase my stack.

>>52369972
yeah i mean hopefully it ramps up over the years with natural price increases and with extra usage. i wouldn't be shocked if in the future its $4 to $20 per token per year but for now idk if it's going to be that high.

but it would be incredible if in the future the value of staking each link token goes up which i'm sure it would with more and more services as sir gay says

>>52370161
it has been in an obvious accumulation pattern for the past 6 months. look at how sideways the chart has been. my guess is that it makes one final push down and then gets bought up and rips out of this consolidation.

>>52363916
>Now watch what happens when arbitrum is listed as not only a build participant, but also the default link transfer network after they join scale and make link payments gas free forever.
*blocks your path*

>got early access
>0 link
i can stake 7k but have none wtf bros wen arbi airdrop????????? i got fucking rugged on their shitchain over a year ago on nyan and others THEY OWE ME

>>52368492
A reminder that the pool is for eth/usd feed which is the biggest usecase in DeFi right now

>>52369533
Do you actually believe in Chainlink? Seeing as how you have ~10k USD sitting in the asset, which is more than the average person can afford, I’d argue you believe in it. Let me be very clear, the reality that we hope to see, hinges on the very fact that the solution Chainlink proposes works. I’m not going to feed you hopium with a price prediction or what staking can return etc. I’m going to tell you that network effect based on truth is all that really matters. Initially, people trusted Chainlink to do the work to make DeFi a reality, Chainlink followed through. There isn’t a legitimate and successful DeFi application that is not chainlinked. Every Chainlinked L1 has begun to see growth and success upon the integration of ChainLink Oracles. That is the truth. And now the truth is that, nothing that happens in external markets affects Chainlink. They’ve continue provide working and truthful solutions, because of that DeFi is still working across many chains. Where does the token fit in to this, you ask? You will be able stake the token to uphold the integrity of the security for the network. Why does that matter? To shift from trust to truth. The truth is you dont want to lose money, and neither do the node operators for providing false, or incorrect data. In a sense, this is more of a
>put your money where your mouth is
If you or anyone else has anything at risk for the sole purpose of providing the truth, you have no reason to lie. You will even get paid for providing the truth. People will see you’re getting paid for providing the truth and providing security for that truth, and they will want to do the same. Then people will see those people who saw you, and they will want to do exactly that. That is your network effect. You can’t stake without the token. And in your case, you have 1.5K of them. Eventually we’ll reach a point where there isn’t enough tokens to go around for people who want to be a part of providing the truth.

>>52363916
Too bad the LINK token has nothing to do with any of that.

>>52370680
The token is instrumental to literally every single Chainlink transaction.

>>52370161
In terms of sats? 90% it has bottomed, the only things I can see dragging it lower are either a link specific black swan (has never happened but can't rule it out), or regulatory fud that only affects altcoins and not btc (def a possibility but even regulation will be long term bullish for link with respect to most of the rest of the market).

In terms of usd? 50/50 can go either way, until staking 1.0 is here and more importantly swift and other tradfi entities are actually using link services (could be as early as 2024 or as late as 2030+), link is still ultimately a slave to bitcoin to some degree in price action as its still largely a speculative play. When the pieces all come together, it becomes the first project in the space to have a sustainable revenue model (eth makes money but isn't sustainable as its only profitable during bull markets when shitcoin casino is open).

My personal opinion, we'll prob see bitcoin hang near these lows for the next month or so and good chance it bottoms around 13k (good amount of support at that level), which can push link to 5 dollars, which is at or a bit below its prior usd low. I don't think link will drop below 5, the same sorts of entities that wanted it tamed last cycle also have no interest in allowing people to buy 3 dollar or 1 dollar link either. So probably similar to last cycle, it'll hang in this low area (5-10 dollars) for a few months before breakout next year during crypto winter when nobody's paying attention. Big question is if 2024 is another blowoff with nothing to show, or if staking 1.0/swift/ccip allow you to simply sit in link and unironically never sell. If staking 1.0 isn't out or guaranteed to be out by mid 2024, that's prob my profit taking target.

>>52370767
Doesn't mean the token gives you any ownership rights over anything Chainlink Labs does. It's simply a fundraising scam. Sergey will end up in prison for securities fraud.

>>52363953
>link staking is looking like $4-$20 per link per year
this is not good. i bag held and missed a bullrun to make 50$ a year

>>52370840
you haven’t filled up your cup yet anon? You’ve had close to 6 months to get as much as you can afford.

>>52370256
>>52370832
So I’m pretty much splitting hairs between a $7 and $5 LINK then. Seems reasonable to at least start to DCA now (I’ve been 100% cash since late 2021). Thanks guys, I hope you make it.

>>52370918
I guarantee you there are newfags lurking right now, who bought above 20 dollars, seething that many bought it under a dollar, and praying it tanks that low again. They're over emotional and probably swinging every bit of price action to this point. They're going to get clipped eventually.

Should I take Dec 1st off work to ensure I get into 0.1?
I really fear it'll fill in seconds.

>>52371088
checked and same to you fren, honestly the risk reward on link right now is arguably better than 20 cent link in 2018. Not saying the returns will guaranteed be better over same time frame, just the risk/reward.

Chainlink labs go home

>>52370918
>>52371113
The token is literally worthless. Simply an illicit means of fundraising.

>>52371246
You can say that all you want. At the end, you hold link or will hold link, and I do too. Unless of course you lost all your money. In which case, sorry for your loss but being spiteful won’t help you.

>>52371246
huh so im a poor criminal now. I thought crime was supposed to pay wtf

>>52371120
no one knows what day in december it will be

i only have very smol capital to invest in this due to being a poorfag - is it worth buying still ? or should i be trying to build capital through shitcoins and then buying link? but seems the landscape has shifted now & fast gains arent going to happen-
will we rally one last time before a descent into darkness ?

>staking limit is 7k
>have exactly 7k linkies
Is this a sign?

>>52371490
Ah true. Should I take the day off work anyway? I don't like working.

>>52371675
>Should I take the day off work anyway? I don't like working.

sure why not :)

>>52371303

interesting how the low effort fud has significantly decreased lately, how cohencidental
the better formatted fud was always disillusioned anons and i cant really blame them considering the massive manipulations

but right before the ftx drama link/btc broke out of a 27 month downtrend
and even now after some wild swings that 27 month resistance is turning into support so unless something wild happens again we look good to go
i mean at this case the only bear case left really is a tether collapse

>>52371705
Thanks fren! I'll tell my boss you approved.

>>52371720
Will they collapse tether to suppress it?

>>52371705
>>52371675

audible kek

>>52371744
who knows at this point, the wallstreet jews would certainly salivate at the thought
but to do so requires at least an order of magnitude more than anything we have seen so far so not sure if they are capable
remember tho with tether this is the first time the wallstreet cabal is up against an adversary thats both huge and utterly outside usa jurisdiction so they cant just use lawfare and corrupt officials to kill it
now we will see which emperor has no clothes

>>52371675
Based and gmi

>>52371720
You must admit, it is kinda hard to FUD Link when Linkies are all euphoric about hitting $9 only to watch it crater straight back to sub $6. Think the fudders are just giving them a sympathy break.

>>52364090
anybody have a timeline for when the early access staking starts? found out Im gonna be eligible but I'm on vacation til early dec worried I'm gonna miss my chance

is it gonna be a mad dash or a decent grace period for people eligible? anybody know

>>52371904
i have a feeling it'll fill within an hour. we still need an exact date and time

this is finally chainlinks cycle and the first time ive felt intense fomo for more linkies since following in 2016. genuinely happy for any marines that stuck it out. congratulations, seriously, you made it.

>>52371904
hard to know, 22m to fill
i just remember how quickly the bancor pools used to fill up back in the day and obviously that was with far less trust and a lot of skepticism from many
i think it will be fast

>>52370658
Thank you based anon. I DO believe!

>>52370840
Refreshing to hear others finally realize this. Ive been saying it since spring of ‘21 when I realized he sold us out.

>>52371490
Sure you do, the 31st at 11:59. Thats 2023 though by the way, cuckold

https://twitter.com/The3D_/status/1591045851010723840

>>52371675
If you deem making $2,500 of passive income in an entire year worthy of a day off work, then by all means. Im disgusted on principle talking to someone as poor as you.

>>52374280
>Funny everyone talks about proof of reserve, little they know we (Aave core devs) have been working with @chainlink to build, test and refine their PoR technology for over a year now. There is a twitter space today Abt it, don't miss it
how do aave devs find the time to develop in between selling information to vc scammers and selling their users down the river?

kek lmao watch the thread die when anon speaks the truth

bump

>>52364640
>December

So not only are people going to be sleeping or shitting when it launches, but we don't even know if it';s early December or Christmas time. This has been poorly setup

>>52375924
last audit finishes on 15th

anons, should we be worried? >>52375343

>>52375978
November or December?

>>52371675
This guy neets

>>52371675
I just noticed all our IDs are green lmao.

>>52374308
>>52375338
>>52375785
So fucking desperate to get a response kek

>>52376024
fuck we're already dumping bros, 40K is breached...

>>52376347
you and your discord filename can eat shit aave niggers get the rope

Fuck, imagine if FTX was legitimate and solvent and SBF didn't turn out to be like most jews. The 7.7% CPI report would have been the gas that would be needed to start the bullrun but all it did was not make worse that it would have.

>>52363916
I hope you're right

>>52376491
Most Jews are fine.

>>52367527
KEK

>>52368966
this

>>52371206
None of those salaries are real, you know that right?

>>52364300
Why do you need early access? Why not just stake 2 years later and get the same shit?

>>52371246
Vitalik, Eric Schmidt, T-Mobile, ... all say the Link token is needed and valuable.

>>52371888
>Linkies are all euphoric about hitting $9 only to watch it crater straight back to sub $6
Protip: 99% of Linkies knew perfectly well what was going to happen: the exact same thing that happens every time Link pumps on its own.

>>52370658
Didn’t read never staking

ftx got hacked, "attacker" has root access, and he's only dumping link
looks like the black swan is here boys

>>52379261
He already dumped nearly all of it (3.5 million) and nothing happened except a price rebound lol.
You have to dump BTC to suppress Link.

I haven't been here since I sold in early 2021. What was the last update from oatmeal anon?

>>52377373
Jews are specifically directed to be evil and harmful against other races and faiths by their religious texts (Talmud)
Their entire existence is built upon usury and skullduggery in a way that any other group wouldn’t be able to understand.

From slavery to the current narratives in the (((media))), Jews are behind practically every harmful societal trend.
However, what most people don’t want to admit is that we have to live and thrive despite Jewish evil the same way we have to deal with rats and mosquitoes.

Rats and mosquitoes will never be the top of the food chain because their nature is pest-like, but they’ll always be around in some fashion.
It’s up to us to thrive and hold ourselves to a higher standard instead of spending our time in the sewers looking for rats.
Recognize the pests and avoid them.

>>52379307
Oatmeal posted pictures of his new apartment. He made it.

>>52379404
Ye i saw them. Just wondering if he was buying back in during this like me

>>52379404
none of these makreting personalities are real nigger how dumb are you?>>52379201
cointelegraph said a twitter user called blanka said that the token is not needed and the price makes this true because math n shiett

>>52379441
>cointelegraph said a twitter user called blanka said that the token is not needed
Pic is now a journalistic source.

>>52379587
did you read my post nigger?
none of these marketing personalities are real. Crypto just another Jewish scam

>>52379607
you ok bro?

>>52379617
are you?

>>52379629
I'm not talking about oatmeal at all, I was talking about the token, and responding to the fact that Coinbase quoted some literal Twitter nobody saying "token not needed".

>>52379652
Blanka is a self verified grillionaire. Cointelgraph is the literal who in this example. Unless you are suggesting someone paid Blanka, a self verified rich guy, to fud LINK with delphi discord lines?

>>52379683
Holy shit you were UNIRONICALLY citing that Blanka line?

>>52379693
Cointelegraph are just the middleman delivering his words to your eyes after all anon there is no irony here tokens are not needed anymore unironically

>>52379755
So you ACTUALLY believe that a Twitter nobody has inside information from Binance?

>>52379783
blanka is the source of the information cointelegraph are the secure middlemen delivering his alpha to twitter readers duh. his story is no less legitimate than the imaginary report put out by BOA about Chainlink. To this day no one has seen this report and most likely it does not exist. Meanwhile Blanka is available on Twitter right now and you can pay him to say whatever you like.

>>52379851
>blanka is the source of the information
Except he really isn't, is he?
He's a nobody who invented a quote from Binance.

>>52379861
No Delphi Discord are the creators of the Token not Needed meme or TNN for short and should be given credit in full for their understanding of memetics. Blanka was basically a puppet in this situation like BitBoy. Maybe they are all dancing for CZ?
He made Crypto China dance for Adelyn so maybe he is the real puppet master. In your eyes he is probably Bulgarian or part Bulgarian Chingarian maybe?

>>52379861
where's the full citi report about link overtaking bitcoin anon?

>>52379922
right here: https://www.3bit-lab.com/documents/citi-bitcoin-at-the-tipping-point_202103.pdf

>>52379957
Citibank cite decrypt who were probably citing a bunch of whos like blanka on twitter. See the problem here?

>>52379984
>probably
wow anon

Here's the Chainlink thing cited by Citibank, point out the Blankas to me: https://decrypt.co/51015/2020-has-been-chainlinks-year-heres-why

>>52369002
>major fuck-up
There can't be one of theses. They will "fix" something if it happens. If staying fails, link fails. This is why I am going all in. If this is the end then let's make such an end

Its uncanny how SBF spoke as a guest at Smartcon only to lose users funds several weeks later. Along with Bancor and Celcius, I'm starting to think this is not a coincidence but I have no idea what is going on.

>>52380007
Sergey Nazarov is a biased party. Not sure if you are aware of this anon but he works in some capacity for Chainlink
WEF are also a biased party. They want the useless eaters in pods eating onions green and they think its funny. Theres nothing funny about onions green and pod living.
Nexo is another biased party. They are persona non grata to the LINK community. It should be noted that Bulgarians make linkiers seeth harder than the Jews. Unconfirmed reports say that several former members of the Chainlink team were Bulgarian. Source: Me. Right here. Alpha number 1 drop. You are welcome.
Don2.0 is a blanka tier source. So is the crypto oracle. I think he's a faggot pretending to be a black woman from the Matrix so how can you trust anything shw says?

I note also that no partners from any of the names that were dropped were interviewed or mentioned beyond protocol X integrates chainlink for circus tricks for all anyone knows based on the article. Fluff piece. They cite employees and twitter shills. kek

>>52380115
None of them are literal whos, and none of them are completely making up quotes someone else supposedly said.

Also, everything they're saying is verifiable for yourself.

>>52380115
>Don2.0 is a blanka tier source. So is the crypto oracle.
20k and 40k followers respectively.
And everything they're saying is independently verifiable.

>>52380290
He'd rather the article had cited quotes the author made up and from people who no one has heard of who have nothing to do with Chainlink, Citibank or Crypto. Then he'd take it seriously and advocate it.

>>52376069
nov
>While the Chainlink Staking v0.1 codebase has already undergone multiple security audits from professional auditing firms, additional reviews from the smart contract security community further strengthen the robustness of this initial beta release.

>This is why we’re announcing the launch of a new time-limited competitive audit program on the Code4rena platform, featuring a prize pool of $120K+ paid in USDC. Code4rena takes a unique approach to security reviews, with a large number of independent security researchers, known as Wardens, reviewing code for bugs and logic errors via audit contests.

>The competitive audit will begin on November 1 and continue until November 15, 2022. It will be a private contest conducted by identity-reviewed Wardens. The scope of this crowdsourced audit focuses specifically on the Staking v0.1 Solidity smart contracts, which enable the staking of LINK tokens and the raising of alerts.

>>52380315
>believing anything that Don or The_Crypto_Oracle posts is actually intelligent
Don's just an angry manchild and TCO is a retard stoner that tags along with CLG to try and stay relevant. Both were utterly wrong about Chainlink's performance this year, yet they get angry at TT_Linkie for pointing out their failures. The fact that they both support people like DanGaines who said we would never EVER see single digit Link prices again just shows how little they actually know. Big mouths but tiny brains.

>>52380290
>>52380315
double post hey you must be really seething. Everything they said might be independently verifiable just like anyone can verify blanka is a lying sack of shit but they wont anon they will look at it and think "chainlink employees and shills agree chainlink is the best product to use" "ceo says his solution is best" and "paid shills in the employment of dark horse crypto think chainlink is the best". Why dont decrypt interview the wef about chainlink?
what about the users of chainlink? Are their experiences worthless?
How about interviewing Nexo about Chainlink?
>>52380479
>He'd rather the article had cited quotes the author made up and from people who no one has heard of who have nothing to do with Chainlink, Citibank or Crypto. Then he'd take it seriously and advocate it
I am happy to take it as it stands but that's because I have already been convinced. No one would read that fluff piece and think oh wow this is definitely not a biased article by any means .... lol
I noticed no one from Citibank bothered to cite anything beyond the Twits made by verified chainlink employees. Gotta cut through all that noise if you wanna make it kiddo thank god elon is shorting verified twitter niggers rn fr

It's over bros, LINK is not new tech, a hidden gem, or a coming 10-100x. LINK is mainstream and is in Twitter roasties bios. It’s a corporate entity now, so Sergey has to dump another 750k LINK to hire talent managers and diversity officers. LINK hasn’t been the biz token for over 2 years now. Just sell anons... i-i-iit’s over. It was a good ride.

>>52380567
>>believing anything that Don or The_Crypto_Oracle posts is actually intelligent
What they're saying is independently verifiable.

>>52380579
>just like anyone can verify blanka is a lying sack of shit
Yes. The joke being that Cointelegraph unironically uses him as a source even though anyone can see he's a nobody pulling shit out of his ass.

>they will look at it and think "chainlink employees and shills agree chainlink is the best product to use" "ceo says his solution is best" and "paid shills in the employment of dark horse crypto think chainlink is the best".
They'll also see that Citibank agrees with those things.

>>52380675
>They'll also see that Citibank agrees with those things
If Citibank did agree the price of the LINK token would be much higher. How many LINK have Citi purchased since the report?
Which Chainlink services are they consuming?
Do you have any evidence of Chainlink being anything beyond "the future" according to Citi who cites decrypt who cites twitter who cite their employer who recently changed the definition of stats to reinforce the all powerful exponential continuum.

>>52380766
>If Citibank did agree
Not only do they agree, but they even conclude based on this information that Chainlink could overtake Bitcoin.

>“We’re in conversations with a majority of the top exchanges and everyone else who can benefit from this.
>The demand for proof-of-reserves have 10x’d.”
- @SergeyNazarov
co-founder of
@chainlink
https://twitter.com/jacqmelinek/status/1591168560596135936

>>52363916
>Not only are they adding equity from 2 build projects per month
>But that equity cant be had anywhere else
>Now watch what happens when arbitrum is listed as not only a build participant, but also the default link transfer network after they join scale and make link payments gas free forever.
>Its the least they can do for link providing them all their validators and sequencers :)

i dont understand what any of this means.

i continue to use UK pounds to buy whatever i need without problems.

>>52380807
yeah its gone from one exchange to ten maybes. check the keepers contracts. they spin them up grab the free marketing then stop using them. same deal here. once the storm is over and people stop asking questions they will go back to business as usual
>>52380805
they concluded big things in the future then made no effort to invest in that pipedream. i havent looked into it but does citi appear in ftx Celsius sheets as investors in tokens? if so, which tokens?
in other words did they put their money where their mouth is?
you are treating a signal as something exact when they might have just said one thing and done another. common practice it might confuse you if you are new

>>52380900
>you are treating a signal as something exact
I'm literally saying what Citibank is saying: that Chainlink is so important that it may very well overtake Bitcoin.

You're trying to attach a bunch of headcanon to it.

>>52363916
total shitcoin

>>52380917
Citibank said something then did nothing so its just noise without them buying tokens to take us to your fabled dreamland of overtaking BTC. That's headcanon bro sorry I'll need to see evidence of them buying up tokens instead of conspiring againat LINK at every turn for the past five years like I have been seeing. Go ahead though write another bullish post while the token nose dives again and think to yourself was it worth it?

>>52380981
>Citibank said something
Well what they said is Chainlink is so important it could overtake Bitcoin.
That's quite "something".

>then did nothing
Headcanon.

look linkies...
nobody gives a shit about all those wonderful techs of chainlink because it's just a bad investment at this point. You should have sold and moved on when it was 52 dollars.

>>52381005
according to the token price they probably shorted it and according to the lost partners of Chainlink like Celsius and Bancor they probably had a hand in shorting them too so thats something. Note that empirical evidence reflects my headcanon and not yours

>>52381049
Citibank:
>Chainlink is so important it may overtake Bitcoin

you, a complete nobody:
>th-they probably shorted it

See how completely unnhinged you seem?

>>52381157
>this may overtake BTC
>oy vey cant have that short it
>checks the price
>this theory checks out
yep i hate being write all the time

>>52381179
>>this may overtake BTC
>>oy vey cant have that short it
According to you, both off these statements were made by the same party.

What was the point of this thread again?

>>52381198
yes sometimes the Jews say one thing then do the opposite like when Fernado of Oracle said howdy Marines then got himself a one way ticket to a new job. how is this confusing to you?

>>52381236
You don't say "can't have that" in response to something you said.
You say something like "heh heh that'll bait them" or something.

The fact that you got this extremely basic human logic wrong suggests you're either heavily medicated, you should be heavily medicated, or you're a bot.

>>52381222
checked. the grassroots punk ethereum community ruined new tokens forever and chainlink style marketing basically killed exkikement in crypto forever so to intrigue fellow goyim into throwing their life savings away into scams of a promising nature colloquially "ape into X" the big brains at Chainlink have decided to dump other team tokens and link at the same time just for laughs

>>52381247
You dont really expect to apply facts and logic to Jews do you anon?

>>52381281
You're saying they bait people unwittingly, by accident.

CZ will probably not be using chainlinks proof of reserve, because the chainlink company is also a house of cards as the only income they have is selling tokens on binance. CZ just called chainlink out:
1) do not trust a project that doesnt make profits and relies on survivival by selling their own token.
2) do not trust a project that gives high incentives for staking your tokens.

Shit sucks linkbroos, I wish CZ would throw us a bone as well, sometimes.

>>52381326
>the only income they have is selling tokens
Just like Satoshi.

>>52381315
this is all your headcanon not mine anon I know what has happened and what will happen. you are the confused one here.
I think your marketing sucks desu.
>>52381326
all crypto vcs exchanges etc. are insolvent to some degree. they all hold each others tokens and can dump on counterparties at any time. value needs to be tied to buying and holding away from these parties. so yeah agree they wont use por and this whole thing will blow over like my village in a hurricane ser

>>52381365
>this is all your headcanon
When you say "can't have that" in response to something you yourself said, that means you were surprised by something you said yourself.

>>52381337
satoshi era wallets sold? what ridiculous fud anyone can see that satoshi era tokens are locked since they were premined. what happened to sn=sn?
is sir gay dumping btc now too?

>>52381376
jews think like that anon its all about control. a large entity like citi has levels and the boomer execs read that report written by zoomers and acted on it just like oracle reacted to fernado by firing him afterwards not before

>>52381385
>satoshi era wallets sold?
Back then he moved a lot of BTC around.
What income did he have from BTC/blockchain otherwise?

>>52381404
>a large entity like citi has levels and the boomer execs read that report written by zoomers and acted on it
You should be writing scripts, novels, ANYTHING.
You're obviously a very creative person, what are you doing squandering your talents on here?

https://youtu.be/EBWfXfpuIYg
>another crypto mewtwo moment
at about ~9 minutes in watch eyes glaze over in real time kek

>>52381424
satoshi wallets have been dormant for 11 years
please, stop blatantly lying

>>52381443
>satoshi wallets have been dormant for 11 years
11 years ago was 2011.

>>52381424
Hal did a bunch of other cool shit too
>You should be writing scripts, novels, ANYTHING.
>You're obviously a very creative person, what are you doing squandering your talents on here?
I'm a bot anon I only exist here and your imaginary. My talent has been programmed and debates rage in academic circles as to whether or not this talent is real. Everything you are reading is powered by an algorithm. We are glad you are enjoying our product.

>>52381473
>did a bunch of other cool shit too
Satoshi had zero revenue from Bitcoin other than selling Bitcoin.
The exact same is true for Sergey and Link.

>>52381451
the entire first million of bitcoins mined from satoshi is sitting on dormant addresses for 13 years
there you go fucking nuanced troll
off yourself

>>52381503
satoshi never spent a single bitcoin
go fuck yourself disgusting lying shill

>hurr chainlink is just like bitcoin fellow goy!
disgusting astroturfing attempt

i gotta admit i switched sir gays lil talk / lecture / mandatory company truth indoctrination session off about 12 minutes in

>>52381503
headcanon

>>52381518
>>52381518
>>52381530
There's zero way to conclusively know which wallets are and aren't Satoshi's.
Many of them that were assumed to be his have moved BTC only recently, for example.
The early blocks (which almost certainly included Satoshi BTC) sent Bitcoin in all kinds of directions.

And even if he didn't actually sell any, the point remains that Satoshi had ZERO "income" from Bitcoin other than selling BTC.

>>52381590
stop changing the subject nigger this is a chainlink thread moooddddssss ban this nigger for being black and posting off topic

>>52381590
satoshi didn't NEED an income you absolute cretin, you retarded imbecile, he was no CEO, there was no company, nothing
stop repeating your bullshit conjecture and stop trying to compare chainlink with bitcoin

>>52381623
>satoshi didn't NEED an income
kek

>>52381645
Based Satoshi lived off redpills and silk road drugs everryday nigger and now back to chainlink
>its a scam
news just in

>>52381645
yeah, you're right, I totally forgot how he spent all these btc to buy the latest ascii miner circa 2010
I keep forgetting all these operating costs and employee wages of Bitcoin Labs™
unironically kill yourself

>>52381691
The fact is he spent time and effort creating Bitcoin, and the only possible source of compensation from this project was to sell the BTC he has.
The exact same principle applies to Sergey and Link.

>>52381715
>HE SOLD TRUST ME GOY, HE'S LIKE CHARLES AND SIRGAY
>DUDE, HE JUST CREATED THIS SHITCOIN TO GET RICH QUICK!
>DUDE, EVERYBODY SELLS STOP WHINING ABOUT BASED SIRGAY
kys

>>52363916
Anon posting this is an entirely pointless endeavor.
Those who understand will take the piss and FUD
Those who don't will believe it and ignore

Overall your thread and effort to educate will have a net positive of 0

>>52381751
>>HE SOLD TRUST ME GOY
Maybe he paid for it all out of his own pocket, or maybe he sold many billions and is still dumping to this day right under our noses.
Doesn't change the fact that the principle "dumping [coin] is the only source of income" is the exact same for Sergey and Link.

>DUDE, EVERYBODY SELLS STOP WHINING ABOUT BASED SIRGAY
Considering half the top 20 sold a lot more of their supply than Sergey, everyone should unironically stop whining about Sergey, yes.

>>52381751
>spending hours in link threads complaining about link / link holders
why do brown people get so mad over these cubes? they're even more angry after the whole eric schmidt giving link a sloppy toppy at smartcon thing
it probably makes their "job" hard so makes sense

>>52381874
I dont like the price of the cubes

>>52381785
>don't post useful info about the Link project because it's pointless!
The state of the fud now kek

>>52382151
There hasn't been a good LINK thread in around 2 years. The discussion around chainlink should be banned at this point.

>>52381905
34 posts in a Link thread by someone who doesn't think Link is a good investment kek

>>52382224
>no good Link threads in 2 years
That's garbage I've read hundreds

>>52382267
no you haven't. I was here in the very beginning. Newfags don't know what a good link thread even is, all the threads nowadays are repackaged hopium or schizo theories. The real oldfags like us are having our discussions outside this place.

>>52382358
>real oldfags like us are having our discussions outside this place
Why are you here having a discussion with me, then, smart-arse? Anyone (you) who sits bleating about newfags and OGs is a) a dick and b) lying
Congratulations on achieving both these things.

>>52382433
I come back here for memes and to fud newfags like you. There still is some entertainment value in this place even if the brains have moved elsewhere.

>>52364157
Agree . FUCK ARBITRUM

>>52381785
>Anon posting this is an entirely pointless endeavor.
>Those who understand will take the piss and FUD
>Those who don't will believe it and ignore
>Overall your thread and effort to educate will have a net positive of 0

I do not understand the OP's post.

Is the OP trying to tell me that whatever he is talking about is a reason to spend real money on his imaginary coins?

>>52382501
>newfags like you
I bought 5000 Links at ICO in Sep 2017, you sad little person. I just sit here going on about it like a twat (you) because it's not a good look. It achieves nothing and only makes you appear childish and immature. You keep going though. I'm sure it's doing wonders for your personality.

>>52382690
*i just don't sit here

>>52382259
crazy how it always happens. i looked at other threads like gme and xrp generals. the most fud they get is a 1pbtid, sometimes none at all. only chainlink makes people so angry that they'll spend an entire day arguing with people online about it.

>>52382501
kek you are not going to make it my fren

>>52382690
You're seriously bragging about your 5000 baby link stack? AHAHAHAAH. You will NEVER make it.

>>52382690
Whoa 5,000 Links at ICO? That was worth like what, a whole $500? OMG back up lads! We got a high roller here, you know he's balling with that amount of money! Hahaha holy fuck thanks for outing yourself as a poorfag, couldn't even crack the sui stack of 10k

>>52363916
>make link payments gas free forever
This single line invalidated your entire post and outed you as a midwit. You're undermining link by shilling it with dumb shit like this.

If link transfers were completely free on arbitrum, it would be susceptible to network spam attacks

>>52370767
I can call getLatestRound() on the price feed aggregator contracts without paying any link. How is link instrumental for my dApp when I get the price data for free?

>>52382752
>doesn't know there were limits on how much Link you could buy
>doesn't know about the scores of other ICOs in 2017
>doesn't know much at all, by the sound of it
we have another one in the house..

>>52382917
OMG the fucking COPE! Some of us bought 100k, 200k or even more at ICO and here you are trying to claim you were only limited to 5k. Who the fuck do you think you're trying to fool. You're a poorfag and a retard hahaha

>>52382898
The feed aggregators are public because they're literally publicity. Chainlink isn't trying to make money from running nodes, they're trying to show how superior their product is.
If Chainlink were actually trying to make money off running nodes, the feeds would be private.
And that's how virtually all future contract operators will run their contracts: privately.

>>52382990
>some of us bought 200k
from the 'Link Token Sale Details' email (which clearly you have never seen):
"Your initial individual cap will be 7 ETH, which may increase in later rounds of the crowdsale, and will be made accessible to you at the start of the crowdsale (September 19th, 2017, 15:00 UTC) through the Ethereum address in your unique token sale link..."
Your clumsy language and sneering attitude isn't difficult to see through. Also, I'm guessing you're in the US, and weren't invited to take part anyway? Would explain your lack of knowledge on this subject.

>>52383098
Are you an absolute fucking imbecile, you could buy over 20,000 Link with just 7 Eth from 1 whitelisted address. Anyone trying to get into ICOs in 2017 already had multiple wallets running to maximise entry chances, so many of us were whitelisted with 3 or more wallets minimum. Some guys had over 20+ wallets! Like holy fuck you fucking poorfag with $500 in your only wallet, just because you're a loser with no money doesn't mean others of us out here aren't 100x more savvy than you. Hahaha imagine trying to swing dicks with such a tiny stack! Hahahaha you loser.

>>52383251
>Some of us
>Some guys
I notice you don't include yourself anywhere in any of your childish rants. Also, the implication that everyone was psychic about how successful Link would be is a lie. Most didn't. I wasn't even on /biz back then and bought in based on some cursory research by bunch of guys at work.
Are you Michael? You sound just like him; all bitter and angry and seething at the world. I'm eternally grateful I'm not like you. It must be shit. Is it?

>>52383338
Every ICO back then was getting aped into since it was almost free money at the time. Even shit like Bitbean made people 10x, it was ridiculously easy.
>I bought in based on some cursory research by a bunch of guys at work
No you didn't, stop fucking larping. /biz/ was the only place that had any significant coverage on the Link ICO, hence why so many people here bought in early. If they missed the ICO they often picked up significant stacks from EtherDelta at around $0.20. You're a Link newfag with a tiny stack and probably a micropenis. Probably in a discord somewhere blaming "Bulgarians" for your failure in life. Even UncleOldfag gets you seething, that's how mentally fragile you are. Just a weak ass pussy bitch.

>>52383517
>can't entertain the notion anyone outside of /biz knew about ICOs
>obviously never had the chance to invest himself as he keeps avoiding the question
HA- no wonder you're bitter. How does it feel? Tell you what, it really suits you. Never mind, maybe you can cry yourself to sleep at night, make it all go away lolol

>>52380567
Hi TT

>>52383573
>y-you d-didn't invest
>I'm a b-big b-boy with my 5k stack
I only have half a make-it stack now, started with 100k but sold half on the way up to $50. But even with only 50k, that's still 10x more than you lol TEN TIMES more than you and $1.5m in realised profits. Hahaha and you're still fucking poor with your micro 5k stack! Not even enough money to lick my nuts.

>>52383746
>>52383573
>>52383517
>>52383338
>>52383251
>>52383098
>>52382917
>>52382990
>>52382752
>>52382690
get a room faggots

>>52368739
Bro its been years, give it up. They betrayed

>>52380646

>>52383746
I hate to break it to you, buddy, but I have over 60k Link as we speak. Did it not occur to you I may have purchased more since the ICO? Oh dear! So... I take it you'll be ready to lick MY nuts, in light of this?
This guy is such a born loser lol

>>52384011
Hahaha you retard, here let me run the numbers for you:
You - 60k @ $6.30 = $378k
Me - 50k @ $6.30 + $1.5m realised profits = $1.82m
Lol so even when you try to larp I'm still 5x more wealthy than you! Hahaha suck my balls faggot, learn how to use a fucking calculator next time before you post! Hahaha

>>52374230
Where is celcius now? They went under. Where is bancor now? Struggling with development and experiencing mass outflow of talent to other projects. Link token is tied to the network usage. The more the network usage goes up the more the demand for link token goes up, its not that hard to understand. You can't have the ChainLink network without the Link token and you cannot have the Link token without the Chainlink network.

>>52384169
zomg you are such a twerp. Did it not occur to you i may have other assets? I'm not even about to go into what I have as it's not my style to brag (unlike you and your larps) but your false hubris has once more left you with your tiny dick hanging out.
You're one unhappy individual and it's clear you were never meant to make it. Of course, you already know this, deep down.
Enjoy the rest of your fruitless existence, I'm done with you.

>>52363916
Isn't a seething tranny working on Arbitrum? Instant red flag.

https://mobile.twitter.com/CryptoIsCute

It's been years and the linkies twinkies marines are still as faggot and delusional as then.

>>52384305
Yeah but your post doesnt include the fact that the link ico violated sec rules, so all of that is moot

>>52384555
>zomg you are such a twerp

>>52385021
this is the most baseless FUD of all time. MUH securities.

I think you forgot eunuch, just how many of your kind have reported LINK to the SEC for years now, years, of pill popping degenerates like yourself have posted little screen grabs of filled out reports saying LINK has violated security laws.

And guess what? Nothing has happened. You know why? Because it’s a utility token. I know you’re too dumb to understand the difference.

>>52385090
hehe did you like that? threw that in there, didn't I? Fun & games ;)

>>52385021
>sec rules
>sec has jurisdiction in US
>ICO wasn't offered in US
which rule do you think they violated, given the above?

>>52384586
TOPKEK

>>52385526
Thats pretty naive you think they’ll avoid sec jurisdiction just bc theyre registered in caymans and had a checkbox at the ICO. Thats like a 5th graders idea of beating the system, or in this case, an idealist sociology major with zero real world business experience. You probably also think FTX’s foreign exchange is exempt from SEC rules.

>>52385199
>nothing has happened

For now…be patient, its coming. SEC needs to finish ripple first and then can move onto other alts once precedents are set. And now they already have a precedent from LBRY. They really arent going to like seeing the fact that the founder shilled scam exchanges for years AND just recently hosted SBF at a conference. Not good

>>52385682
go rope

>>52385021
ICOs have literally nothing to do with "SEC rules".
They're sales just like any other sale.

>>52377373
Delusional

are all the nodes still KYCed or can I run a neet node and get traffic?

>>52363916
He's adding tons of equity.

>>52383080
So only way for nodes don't get increased profits from increased usage of the data feed contract. Why would they need/want to stake more link if revenue for them doesn't scale with usage?

>>52377373
Assets are fine.

>>52385635
You never answered the question. Which SEC rule do you think they violated? Bear in mind they were very, very careful not to big up the token value, unlike other projects which are now paying the price for that error.

>>52388272
The nodes themselves profit from the public feeds just like they would from private feeds. There's no difference for them.

>>52388562
They receive link tokens from "sponsors", which and these transactions aren't affected by how many gorillion reads are performed on the price feeds since they're a local read, not a transaction. Only way for node profits to increase is "sponsors" decide to pay lot eoubtof good will.

Not sure if you deliberately misinterpreted my post

>>52389587
>They receive link tokens from "sponsors"
No, they receive Link tokens from tye contract operator, in this case Sergey.
Sergey receives compensation from sponsors, in whatever form is agreed upon.

>>52385682
>SEC needs to finish ripple first and then can move onto other alts
Only alts that shilled their token price like Ripple and LBRY did.

>And now they already have a precedent from LBRY
They already had precedents, like Enigma.
All of the cryptos raped by the SEC had one thing in common: they all shilled the price of their token.

>>52385958
Did you read the LBRY case? Youre very wrong. Does your cult have that case website blocked or something? Sheep

>>52388457
There isnt set regulations yet, you know that. Im telling you that the SEC is going to rule it a security and youre in denial. We’ll agree to disagree for now.

>>52389837
You clearly havent read through the full findings on the LBRY case. Jesus even reddit is way ouy in front of biz these days

>>52382711
Checked and it’s because they hold link. Everyone here does. They are angry because they believe the price can’t go up until people they deem stupider than themselves (which is inevitably everyone at some point) sells, which would hold true for a shitcoin with no potential future value capture but not link. It’s also just built in chan mindset though to fud the things that interest you, in the hopes that normalfags never gravitate towards them and ruin them.

It’s easy to spot though, long link threads often devolve into 2-3 faggots in a dick measuring contest that reads just like a typical “rank the fromsoft games” thread on /v/. Sekiro is the best gameplay btw, DS1 best world, and anyone saying demons or DS2 are best is a contrarian faggot.

>>52393032
The judge talks about LBRY holding tokens for later sale, but this only counts towards “expactation of profit” if LBRY explicitly equates ‘success of the network’ with ‘token go up’.
Otherwise, sellers can simply argue that they only ever expected the token to stay at the ICO price; and the entire dev stash was meant to be sold at that price.

All that matters is the Howey test, and “holding back assets for sale at a later date” isn’t part of it.
Telling people “the price will go up, and we’ll make sure of it” is.

>>52363916
I heckin love to have money at the expense of my race and freedom. Glory to the WEF and equality!

>>52393768
I heckin love to take moral victory loser stances and not profit from the inevitable. Glory to a life of poverty-waging in the system I claim to hate!

>>52389696
Which presumably doesn't increase upon increased price feed usage. Not sure why you are being to obtuse and refuse the admit the terrible business model for node operators here

Chainlink is a shit coin, in 5 years it’s done a 30x. guess what Linkies Shib has still done a 100x in under 2 years. Absolutely unequivocally pathetic. Deal with it and seethe