Question about LINK

[Anonymous No.10676251]

>anons are expecting LINK to have a singularity
>anons aren't considering that every single LINK holder will want to sell if they see that their portfolio has mooned by 100x or greater overnight
>anons can't into basic supply and the man

why won't the price dump right back down to less than $1 right after the singularity?

P.S.

>how will you guys d-deal with Sybil attacks?

[Anonymous No.10676269]

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 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 Etherum hit. Happy gambling though anons.

[Anonymous No.10676278]

>>10676251
A lot of people bought Bitcoin at $1. A lot of people sold it at $100. Some held to $1000. Some held to $10,000. If you sell on a 100x, good for you. That doesn't mean it won't 10,000x. People will be there to buy at all prices up to $2,500.

[Anonymous No.10676279]

[Anonymous No.10676318]

If it hits $3 I sell 10% and quit my job, it can go to 0 if it wants afterwards.

>how will you guys d-deal with Sybil attacks?
Literally read the whitepaper unless you want to make your question more clear.

[Anonymous No.10676381]

>>10676251
thats a qt pic op

chainlink chan

[Anonymous No.10676402]

>>10676251
Ethereum mooned for an entire year except for some cool-off periods. The announcement of the EAA caused that. ChainLink is going to need something like that if it’s getting past $5-10 this year. Two possible things are going to need to happen 1) mainnet launches and everyone formally acknowledges partnerships with smartcontract.com or 2) everything stays hush-hush but stakers see the network is being used by big players with big & voluminous transactions and the price swells. Either way, I think 2019/2020 will be LINK’s time to shine. If something similar to those two scenarios happens, expect us to be at $50-100 within 3-6 months.

[Anonymous No.10676404]

>>10676318
>If it hits $3 I sell 10% and quit my job

damn you must have like a 5 million chainlink if you can quit your job at 10% at 3$

im gonna start selling chunks of chainlink at 25$ - 50$ - 100$ - 250$ etc

unless i need to pay for some bills IRL

[Anonymous No.10676431]

>>10676251
i hate 4chan man she looks like a child you fucks are so fucking weird

[Anonymous No.10676528]

>>10676251
I'm setting my sell order at $999.99, duh

[Anonymous No.10676567]

>>10676431
Kill yourself desu!

[Anonymous No.10676576]

>>10676269
Damn, you know your shit.
I appreciate the research you've put into this, and thank you for sharing it. I hope others seriously consider your warning.

[Anonymous No.10676578]

>he doesn't know that linkies never sell

[Anonymous No.10676630]

>>10676576
It's a copy pasta

[Anonymous No.10676671]

>>10676404
Not as many as you think, not impossible I go back to work somewhere else later.

[Anonymous No.10677327]

>>10676630
Damn, you know your shit.
I appreciate the research you've put into this, and thank you for sharing it. I hope others seriously consider your warning.