/biz/ - Business & Finance

you realize the link posters, fudders and shills are bots. since December '22 likely more than2/3

>>55279645
No idea about that, but its a question Ive asked before a while ago and no one answered it. I understand a bank or bank services company like Swift buying the tech, but not the role of necessary token that can go suddenly 1000x in price in a bull market and affect the cost of all their operations that use that tech

>>55279606
>le LINK can be denominated on 18 decimals so high price won't matter
>ETH fees won't matter as well, since Chainlink will have figured out scaling by then
now, regarding the price
>2 more weeks CCIP imminent
>much undervalued
>market is retarded, whales are retarded, VCs are retarded, everybody apart from linkies are retarded
>we're being suppressed!
>anyway, it's a 15 year hold so we should see some REAL GAINZ by then
>if you don't like that, you're a low time preference retard
I summed up every possible answer bagholders will give you OP, you're welcome

>>55279645
If price increase it would take less chainlink to make a transaction

>>55279606
>what happens when the token moons in prce
then they buy 1/16th of a Link token.

>>55279702
bonus excuses:
>fud on 4chinz is clearly hurting LINK's enterprise adoption
>holders aren't positive enough, they need to shill harder
>price is dropping because people are overly critical, what about muh ETH???

>>55279730
If the cost of the use of the token is always kept at the same dollar value (or other peg) then what would propel the price of Link higher?

>>55279767
Demand for it. Eventually, even at sixteen decimal places, you can see that demand would ensure that the price would not be kept at a stable dollar or other peg value for those using the network, and, your initial premise is ultimately correct. The price would begin to rise, inexorably, and would eventually become quite large indeed. It would of course behoove those seeking to acquire tokens for use later on to buy them now instead, before that risk was realized.

>>55279606
why is he so big and rotund

>>55279823
subhuman genetics

>>55279810
>It would of course behoove those seeking to acquire tokens for use later on to buy them now instead, before that risk was realized.
But those will run out and they will be left with a tech that requires an unfeasibly expensive token to use it. The banks must know this so they might investigate the basic tech but would absolutely avoid this future scenario of an unpredictable token price, since they just want interoperability between networks and chains.

>>55279823
He should not have skipped calf day

>>55279860
There are a billion tokens, each denominable to sixteen decimal places. There is a LONG time before this becomes a realized risk and there is a shortage of LINK on the market. Even assuming bullish scenarios for smart contract adoption on an industrial scale equalling the second and third industrial revolutions and the adoption of coal, its unlikey that we'd see a LINK shortage to the effect that companies could not get hold of 0.00000000001 LINK for the cost of their contract (thousands of dollars?) in our lifetime. We have to be realistic here.

To paraphrase some other anon, asking a team steeped in legacy finance how to solve this is like asking a master mechanic how it's possible to change the oil in a car. There's plenty written about how derivatives contracts may handle things when the value of collateral changes.

>>55279606
They pay Sergei USD and then he converts to link

>>55279898
Isn't it simply a question of contract risk? Or of assigning that by smart contract by reference to a stablecoin peg? One party may win and the other lose depending on fluctuations whilst a smart contract is being executed, but I think the anon was asking rather what would incentivize adoption of LINK if it became prohibitively expensive to secure a contract in the first place?

>>55279606
A lot of jobs already cost 0.1 Link
As other anons have said, you will continue to pay fractions of a link (juels) as the network grows.
The point of the link token rising in price is for it to be properly used as collateral.

>>55279606
They can specify it in fiat if they want instead, so itll just convert between values in link regardless of what the actual price of link is at the time. There's a reason link has 18 decimal places.

>>55279606
The process will be priced in USD and LINK token conversion will happen under the hood. So if for example the process costs $3, you will always only be charged $3 in LINK value.

>>55280069
This

>>55280069
So why would Link's price go up? CLL could just charge the company in $ for the service and bypass the token.

>>55280069
>>55280036
>>55279957
Is there actually proof that cost to use Chainlink is denominated in $?
I've seen that Clients pay the Contract Operator (aka Chainlink) some value in USD, and then the NOPs are paid in LINK but do the NOPs themselves charge their services by $ or LINK? It's got important ramifications for the token price.

>>55279702
>>ETH fees won't matter
You don't know what CCIP is even for lmao

>>55280217
*(aka Chainlink Labs)

>>55279606
Your question is as stupid as asking "how can people pay with Bitcoin if they can't afford to buy one Bitcoin???"

You're stupid, a legit idiot.

>>55280217
Literally everything is denominated in fiat.
Even the number 1 supposed alternative to fiat, gold, is denominated in fiat.
You won't find a single goldbug out there who accept gold payment that is one single cent below the prevailing spot price.

>>55280239
The question is why is the token even needed if the cost is not based on the token price, but some other value, eg US$

>>55280262
>Literally everything is denominated in fiat.
As a counterexample, Ethereum gas fees are denominated in gwei...

>>55280263
Why is Bitcoin needed when you can only use it to buy things based 100% on its fiat value?

Holy shit you're dumb.

>>55280286
Gwei is literally ETH you jackass.
It's 0.000000001 ETH.

>>55280303
>Gwei is literally ETH you jackass.
Congratulations retard, you understand my point that not everything is denominated in fiat.

>>55279606
16 decimals.
i.e. banks are paying a flat fee, the amount of link that is will vary

>>55279606
>>55279702
>>55279739
hello OP,

LINK can be denominated on 18 decimals so high price won't matter.
ETH fees won't matter as well, since Chainlink will have figured out scaling by then also with crosschain smart contracts basically the ETH shitcoin is rendered obsolete.
ccip is coming up in 2 weeks, and the token is extremely undervalued just look at any shitcoin like uniswap that pumped on a nothing burger v4 announcement.
market is retarded, whales are retarded, VCs are retarded, everybody apart from us, you know it, I know it, we know it, the fudders know it.
chainlink is a 99999 years hold there is no point in selling it...at all, since you will be soon enough capturing a % share of all bank transfers through ccip.
if you don't like that, you're a low time preference retard.
fud on 4chan is clearly hurting LINK's enterprise adoption; but it's more accumulation for us.
as a holder, we need to be more positive, and shill harder.
price is dropping because people are overly critical.

best regards,
kisses and huggies

>mfw fuddies know link betetr than us

>>55280361
>ETH is denominated in ETH
lmao

>>55279606
>>55279645
>>55279695
>>55279767
>>55279810
>>55279898
>>55280170
>>55280466
I think I’m not the only one on here that realizes that the Chainlink discussions here aren’t organic at all.

A complex mix of paid shills and bots post memes and start conversations. Real anons browsing /biz/ think these convos are real and start making convos themselves. Then when things die down, the bots and paid shills start again to capture new bagholders.

>>55280490
are you human? [ x ]

>>55280474
The transaction fee on Ethereum is denominated in gwei aka ETH. It is not denominated in fiat eg. USD. I don't understand what point you're trying to make; I assume you're just trolling with enhanced ignorance.

>>55280490
You don't think the question I asked is a legitimate question to ask on a board where a shitload of Link posters lurk? I may not know much about the specifics, and maybe it has been discussed here before a lot, but no idea why you are so paranoid that cannot tell a real post and subsequent conversation when you see it

>>55280546
>The transaction fee on Ethereum is denominated in gwei aka ETH
ETH itself is literally priced in fiat.
You can't buy a single thing (including ETH-based tokens) using ETH without adhering 100% to its current fiat price.

>>55279957
this. and htne sirgay betray with trannay.

>>55280558
I'm not sure what exactly is the gas price, so for an example I'll just say it cost 0.01 ETH to run a transaction. It doesn't matter how much ETH costs in USD (it could be $1k or $10k) - you will pay exactly 0.01ETH to do your tx (eg. the fiat cost will vary minute by minute).

Now for LINK: is the cost to use the service denominated in LINK or fiat? It doesn't matter if LINK itself is denominated in fiat, since the actual fiat value is changing minute by minute.

>>55279898
picrel is DTCC building where sergey did in the lastest video streaming

>>55279997
stop posting dumb questions...
if link was $50,000 each, then it would only cost like 20 link to secure a contract
if link was $5, then it would cost 200k link
not complicated

>>55280680
Link to video?

>>55280680
I was surprised not to see any autists speculating about the new room he streamed from. was anyone able to identify the painting atleast?>>55280764
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqooR3wdQiQ&t=376s

>>55280263
The nodes accept link for their tasks only. The token creates alignments and incentives for the network and carries an additional transfer and call function.

Just reprice things constantly like every other company, ez

>>55280626
>It doesn't matter how much ETH costs in USD
It matters 100%, gas prices are set by supply and demand according to fiat.
No different from how ETH itself is traded on exchanges.

>>55279606
what does 18 decimals mean to you?

>>55279898
>>55280680
https://twitter.com/SergeyNazarov/status/1668350147560964097

No its not. Sergey is clearly behind slabs that are in a staggered brick formation. Those ones at DTCC are also not random pieces, they form a larger slab that it was cut from, hence why the pieces are not laid in a brick formation

>>55279606
They use oracles to peg the price to USD or Euros or whatever fiat currency. The fees become programmatically variable in LINK and fixed in fiat so long as prices don't get so fucked that eventual settlement on a layer one chain becomes prohibitive.

quit responding to this loser who shits the board up daily pretending to be sincere. ignore the shill quit being dumb and falling for his cope bags that can't pump

>>55279823
Healthy growing young man.

>>55280170
Because the service will require the token. The amounts they buy will just be set in usd rather than link

>>55279695
banks make money from asset values fluctuating

>>55280466
always nice to hear the affirmation though

Token not needed. Ignore the shills who are heavily biased, and financially and emotionally invested in getting others to buy their heavy bags from them

>>55280520
why the [ x ]?

>>55280551
schizophrenia or more likely too much time on /pol/ which happened to me
my mental health skyrocketed after the 2020 election when it was stolen and I realized nothing matters I may as well enrich myself and came here
too much time there.

>>55279728
How? The block size or density changes with the price? Explain how this works?

I have the same question as OP. I know these threads are not organic and I already bought and sold all my Link for a reasonable profit years ago but this question is legitimate if the token is actually needed. If its needed then the cost of it mooning prices endusers out of participation in its ecosystem at worst and at best open the door for a cheaper competitor, doesnt it?

>>55285656
bro if you dont understand that
> If price increase it would take less chainlink to make a transaction
youre in trouble
just buy and hold and never look back...
like I spoonfeed people but that question is so low IQ that I doubt I can help you.

>>55280741
Isn't a highly volatile asset a terrible source of security/collateral on any meaningful contract? Especially an asset that has the demonstrated ability to drop over 90% in value compared to the most commonly traded asset in the world (USD).

I know we like to meme but do we even know when fees are due and how much is actually paid when CCIP is used, and how much collateral is needed if any at all? If you look at DTCC for example, they basically do the clearing for literally all US securities. They facilitate transactions worth quadrillions each year. They have like 2 trillion worth of assets in custody, and yet they actually don't make that much money. Check their financial statements, they made like 300 million of profit in 2022 i believe. That's not that much honestly

>>55279606

This guy is making a lot of sense I don’t know guys

>>55281143

Indeed what is a juel? And how does this affect pricing of the token?

>>55280036
Every erc20 shitcoin has 18 decimal places

>>55285871
And just think when they use Chainlank they will be making even less because Chainlunk saves them money

>>55281162
wtf bros... this guy is our main connection to google?

>>55280170
Demand pressures from fee conversions followed by the compounding economic security requirements produced from LINK staking.

>>55287177
Checked
Based anti-semite anon

>>55286156
Noo it is a special Chainlink feature. Sergey thought of everything.

Not gonna sell.