Serious Chainkink Thread

[No trolls plz No.10592532]

Hey I know a lot of you anons are having a hard time reading the white paper but I'll give you a brief synopsis of the tech and it's use.

Chainlink is a blockchain agnostic Oracle specified for specific API solutions using premier blockchain technology. In the beginning, Sergey saw the land of his fathers, and noticed a fatal flaw in the future of blockchain technology, the Oracle problem. He designed a useful and new solution to cutting edge smart contract data transfer protocols using a new simple technique designed by the ancient Russian shoanese monks, decentralized Oracle network modification rituals. Starting with a small loan of a million dollars, our boy was looking for a team, not just any team, a trained decentralized blockchain agnostic team of initiated illuminated men all with one common LINK, a hunger for a solution to the Oracle problem. Starting with only a dream, Sergey and his team plan to create the largest network of decdntralized Oracle solutions ever conceived of, merging smart contract financial services with real world use case scenarios, creating an on chain network of highly advanced API systems for any blockchain data network. Again, chainlink is a decentralized blockchain agnostic Oracle network designed for trustless external API extension solutions for on chain and off chain exchanges within the network, providing a secure blockchain middleware for smart contract use case scenarios, connecting smart contracts on various data feeds as networks with various on chain and off chain systems involving financial transactions.

[Anonymous No.10592643]

>>10592532
You want to have a discussion about the tech and not just daily price movements? Do you even know where you are, bud?

Jokes aside, I can see a world in the near future entirely powered by link. A literal ancapistan fueled by smart contract Dros.

[Anonymous No.10592646]

What the fuck are you talking about OP

[Anonymous No.10593000]

I'm actually more qualified to talk about this than most anons.I'm employed with a cyber-techno machinations company, I do a lot of security analyst programming type work. Open source, decentralized, APIs, partnerships, you name it. We'd be one of the first companies in line for something like Chainlink, if the decentralized smart contract space had more value over traditional data exchanges. There's a catch though, an underlying flaw more deeply embedded in the bedrock of LINK than the very code itself. The flaw is with the concept, and it's this: Companies won't actually go through the hassle of trusting their data API's through crypto.

Now I can already hear your keyboards going frantic, but hear me out. /biz/ hates banks, and traditional data providers. But actual companies, businesses, and investors do not. There's an old saying you might have heard of: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!". The idea that any of our bosses would give us the go ahead if we approached them to put our companies valuable data in a smart contract on a cryptocurrency called Chainlink, that they've never heard of, we'd be laughed out at best and fired on the spot at worst. We already have API data buyers and providers we trust.

'But Chainlink is trustless!' I hear you cry, but is that really a good thing? Just listen to the sound of it. Businesses don't want to spend millions of dollars on something that is trustLESS, they want something trustFUL. 'But the reputation system!', doesn't that defeat the whole point of your coin? If companies only trust nodes with high reputation, what's the difference between trusting banks and data providers that already have high reputation, but in real life not on a computer screen.

The fact is, LINK is going to share the same fate as ETH will. A lot of 'real world application' hype, with a lot of 'crypto world application' reality. Only, this billion supply coin isn't going to come close to the $1k that Ethereum hit. Happy gambling though anons.

[Anonymous No.10593026]

>>10593000
>LINK is going to share the same fate as ETH will

So, hit $1400, then collapse.

I'll take it

[Anonymous No.10593029]

I'm actually more qualified to talk about this than most anons.I'm employed with a cyber-techno machinations company, I do a lot of security analyst programming type work. Open source, decentralized, APIs, partnerships, you name it. We'd be one of the first companies in line for something like Chainlink, if the decentralized smart contract space had more value over traditional data exchanges. There's a catch though, an underlying flaw more deeply embedded in the bedrock of LINK than the very code itself. The flaw is with the concept, and it's this: Companies won't actually go through the hassle of trusting their data API's through crypto.

Now I can already hear your keyboards going frantic, but hear me out. /biz/ hates banks, and traditional data providers. But actual companies, businesses, and investors do not. There's an old saying you might have heard of: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!". The idea that any of our bosses would give us the go ahead if we approached them to put our companies valuable data in a smart contract on a cryptocurrency called Chainlink, that they've never heard of, we'd be laughed out at best and fired on the spot at worst. We already have API data buyers and providers we trust.

'But Chainlink is trustless!' I hear you cry, but is that really a good thing? Just listen to the sound of it. Businesses don't want to spend millions of dollars on something that is trustLESS, they want something trustFUL. 'But the reputation system!', doesn't that defeat the whole point of your coin? If companies only trust nodes with high reputation, what's the difference between trusting banks and data providers that already have high reputation, but in real life not on a computer screen.

The fact is, LINK is going to share the same fate as ETH will. A lot of 'real world application' hype, with a lot of 'crypto world application' reality. Only, this billion supply coin isn't going to come close to the $1k that Ethereum hit. Happy gambling though anons.

[Anonymous No.10593152]

>>10592646