[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance


View post   

File: 13 KB, 512x512, qvSHhRyC.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16239835 No.16239835 [Reply] [Original]

Forget the pump for just a little bit since we don't even know where it's coming from or where it's going, and let's have an intelligent discussion.

I'm all in LINK, so this isn't an attempt at fud, but 2 years later after I thought I was comfy with everything I know, Tezos staking has made me think more about LINK staking since it's just around the corner... and now I'm unsure of a very basic question.

Where does the LINK for rewards come from?

Since the token is capped, it is technically feasible for all of the tokens to be locked up in nodes for staking. Then where the FUCK do staking rewards come from when nobody wants to give away their stinkies and EVERYBODY expects to get MORE from collateral/staking.

It seems to make more sense to me for rewards to be paid in USD/FIAT or some crypto without a cap (i.e. ETH) yet I'm pretty sure I read rewards will be in LINK.

Someone please explain for a brainlet.

>> No.16239901

https://link.smartcontract.com/whitepaper

>> No.16239918
File: 39 KB, 567x712, 1573648343871.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16239918

>>16239835

>> No.16239919

>>16239901
>Intelligent discussion
You either didn't read my question or didn't read the white paper. Try again.

>> No.16239933

>>16239918
If you can explain it I'll believe that's not a picture of you. I don't think I've seen ANYONE on biz actually talk about this and I've been here since before LINK ICO and have been in since ICO.

>> No.16239959

Here, I'll rephrase my question since only arrogant low IQ's are answering so far:

How do you pay a LINK Node Operator in LINK if there are no LINK to be acquired/purchased because they're all owned by Node Operators? And even if you COULD buy the LINK from the node operator (which it DOESN'T SAY IS PART OF THE SYSTEM IN THE WHITEPAPER), why would a node operator sell you some of their LINK?

A "lending" system maybe makes sense but again then node operators and stakers would have to be paid in a different currency, NOT LINK tokens.

>> No.16240055

>>16239901
FPBP

Op is a faggot unable to read or research, therefore a normie. Kys op

>> No.16240065

>>16240055
Literally not a response and I don't think you can explain it. The default "I don't know" response is this, which is fucking pathetic.

>> No.16240079

>>16239901
>>16240055
this

>> No.16240087

>>16239959
>How do you pay a LINK Node Operator in LINK if there are no LINK to be acquired/purchased because they're all owned by Node Operators?
Link is divisible by 18 decimal places so assuming link does reach high values, only a fraction of a link will be paid for rewards; in addition, a scenario where every single link is out of circulation is not a remotely realistic scenario.

>> No.16240094

>>16240079
JUST so you fucking RETARDS who have NEVER read the whitepaper stop posting in my thread, I'm putting the ENTIRETY of the token usage section here:

>The ChainLink network utilizes the LINK token** to pay ChainLink Node operators
for the retrieval of data from off-chain data feeds, formatting of data into blockchain
readable formats, off-chain computation, and uptime guarantees they provide as operators. In order for a smart contract on networks like Ethereum to use a ChainLink
node, they will need to pay their chosen ChainLink Node Operator using LINK tokens,
with prices being set by the node operator based on demand for the off-chain resource
their ChainLink provides, and the supply of other similar resources. The LINK token is an ERC20 token, with the additional ERC223 “transfer and call” functionality
of transfer(address,uint256,bytes), allowing tokens to be received and processed by
contracts within a single transaction.

Now I ask AGAIN. HOW do you pay a node operator in LINK if you can't ACQUIRE LINK?

>> No.16240101

>>16240087
TL:DR, there will always be link in circulation, same reason why there is always btc in circulation even when it reached 20k or the same reason Jeff Bezos is not hoarding all AMZN shares...traders will always be a part of the asset market, which insures that there will always be link or similar assets in circulation.

>> No.16240103

>>16239959
>but again then node operators and stakers would have to be paid in a different currency, NOT LINK tokens.
2017 fud is coming back, the cycle is closing again.
You are the arrogant asking to be spoonfed when the first post already pointed out the best resource to seek an answer to your question. Read the fucking whitepaper.

I'll answer in a minimalistic way because your attitude pissed me off: High scarcity, high demand, high price, stakers cashing out. Also erc 677.

>> No.16240114

>>16240087
It doesn't matter if it's divisible by 18 decimals if all the LINK are locked up 18 decimals of 0 is still 0 meaning you have 0 LINK to pay the collateral and rewards.

And why wouldn't that scenario by realistic? In every mining/staking situation it has become a race to acquire resources. Why wouldn't EVER major LINK node operator be doing all they can to acquire LINK tokens so that they can handle as many jobs at once as possible? Why wouldn't more and more node operators pop up acquiring their own LINK until the available pool is depleted?

Do we expect 100s of Fortune companies to be fighting over 18 decimals of a few LINK that some biz brainlet decided to sell on the open market?

>> No.16240120

>>16240094
>LINK if you can't ACQUIRE LINK?
Also remember, many stakers will be cashing out staking rewards, not being able to acquire any link is like saying not being able to acquire any btc despite btc having a smaller capped amount.

>> No.16240128

>>16239959
I’ll sell a fraction of my 25k stinkers since I can divide it by 18 decimals, should last me a while at 100000000000000000$/link

>> No.16240129

>>16240114
>biz brainlet decided to sell on the open market?
In your fantasy scenario, do you honestly think stakers will never cash out staking rewards?

>> No.16240135

>>16240129
To put this another way, gains are nice...but they are not true gains until they are realized aka cashed out...there will always be link in circulation.

>> No.16240138

why is OP retard?

>> No.16240139

>>16240103
Stakers cashing out is a one time event per staker, so either they cash out and that's it or they don't cash out - over time these events will disappear altogether.

transferAndCall has nothing to do with this so idk why ERC 677 is relevant here.

>>16240101
The problem is while I'd agree with you if the only value of holding a LINK token was a dividend, for a node operator holding LINK tokens is their entire business. Holding contracts of stock is nobody's business so it doesn't make sense to accumulate all the contracts, but a node operator has an interest in accumulation.

>> No.16240144

>>16239959
Are you an idiot?
Supply and demand.
Demand exceeds supply, price sky rockets, selling pressure has now increased, supply meets demand.

>> No.16240158

>>16240139
As other anons have stated, natural supply and demand in the market will always ensure there is both incentive for buying as well as incentive for selling...nobody holds assets forever in a vacuum, markets don't work that way.

>> No.16240170

>>16240114
1billion tokens. 65% owned by one fat Russian

You really think fucking 21 node operators will buy up the whole supply?

>> No.16240172

>>16240139
>but a node operator has an interest in accumulation.
And what do you think happens when supply exceeds demand? The incentive for accumulation will lessen while the incentive for selling will rise...and vice versa. Like other anons have stated, it's the natural ebb and flow of the market.

>> No.16240173

>>16240144
>Demand exceeds supply, price sky rockets, selling pressure has now increased, supply meets
That doesn't really make sense as a system where there's a constant need for LINK tokens though - if there isn't supply to meet demand for even a little bit of time, then who will continue to use a system which is often "down" because of supply issues

>>16240135
I guess this made me realize the one thing that makes sense is node operators will want to cash out and it'll be in their best interest to do so regularly to help meet demand... still seems like a tricky balance to meet, though. Individuals selling out their staking rewards makes some sense as well though that'll be far less predictable in terms of quantity and cadence so seems like less of an ideal solution for the problem. The ecosystem essentially hinges on node operators creating balance.

>> No.16240194

>>16240173
>still seems like a tricky balance to meet, though
The nice thing is this balance will be reached depending on smart contract adoption as well as other usage that follows...it's honestly something that is beyond anyone's control.

>> No.16240206

>>16240194
To add to this, it's important to remember that supply and demand is NEVER static, it always changes like a seesaw teetering back and forth...as stated before, the natural ebb and flow of the market will always ensure that link remains in circulation.

>> No.16240231

>>16240139
>Stakers cashing out is a one time event per staker, so either they cash out and that's it or they don't cash out - over time these events will disappear altogether.
Rewards are a regular source of income for stakers (those using a pool) and node operators. You can expect most business (node operators) participating in the network to cash out at least once a month, because business NEED that cash flow. You are understimating the potential size of the network within the next years. Also you are a nigger, a faggot, a retard or all of the above.
>transferAndCall has nothing to do with this so idk why ERC 677 is relevant here.
Of course it has something to do you fucking faggot. You suggested that Chainlink operators might get paid in other currencies when that is not possible. LINK is hardcoded in the oracle contracts as the only accepted currency to be deposited, and erc677 allows to efficiently manage part of the deposit / penalty functionality by depositing and executing a contract in a single transaction

>> No.16240247

>>16240173
If there isn’t enough supply to meet demand then price continues to rise until the supply can reach demand.
This is seen through every single facet of business.

>> No.16240321

>>16239835
What is the difference between staking using chain link nodes and staking with lets say crypto.com?

>> No.16240353

>>16240321
>What is the difference between staking using chain link nodes and staking with lets say crypto.com?
Crypto.com is a scam. They provide a lending service. You lend them your LINK and they pay you a certain interest. To stake with chainlink you either join a pool or run your own node

>> No.16240388

it gets mined you fucking retard, what do you think miners are for, nulinkers ARE RETARDED

>> No.16240401

>>16240353
how is it a scam though?

>> No.16240406
File: 451 KB, 1920x1080, 1571890801699.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16240406

room temp op
kys, unironically you don't deserve it

>> No.16240447

>>16240401
You have to TRUST they don't exit scam, is not trustless, while with Chainlink nodes, you only have to trust the code, which is open source, audited and available for everyone to see

>> No.16240497

>>16240139
>Stakers cashing out is a one time event per staker, so either they cash out and that's it or they don't cash out - over time these events will disappear altogether.
This is entirely incorrect. Stalkers never need to "cash out", they will keep staking and getting rewards. If I am staking 10k link and getting 5%/yr (500Link) I can sell 500 link per year without "cashing out" a single link from my original stack. These events will never disappear. I will be in a perpetual state of staking AND cashing out. Did you think about this for a second? Why do people always look at crypto like you buy in once and then sell everything once all at the same time? You didn't think about this for 5 seconds

>> No.16240511

>>16240321
>staking using chain link nodes
https://link.smartcontract.com/whitepaper
You'll be able to stake your LINK tokens in a node to be used as collateral. (More collateral = more usage, at least with high value contracts) The node will be rewarded with LINK for providing correct data and lose it's collateral for providing false data.
>crypto.com
You give the LINK to crypto.com, who pay you compounded interest for it. This has nothing at all to do with staking using Chainlink nodes.

>> No.16240515

>>16239919
Maybe you would stop shitting on the street if you read the Toilet Whitepaper?

>> No.16240588

>>16240511
why would you lose your collateral unless you were covering someone’s tangible losses, that doesn’t make sense to me

>> No.16240590

>nobody willing to sell LINK
>companies people desperately bidding higher and higher for LINK
>LINK's price at $100k
>Sell 10 LINKs from my 20k LINK stack
OP is a faggot and a brainlet

>> No.16240597

>>16239835
steaking rewards are measured in fiat.
let's suppose that a 10k stack generates $1000 in node payments per year (which will never happen, but whatever).
at $1 link, you woul get a profit margin of 10% per year. this is a very good roi, so you're incentivized to keep your rewards and stake more.
at $5 link, you would get a profit margin of 2% per year. this is still acceptable, but at this point, riskier investments like stocks may be the better option for you if you don't dislike risk.
at $50 link, you would get a profit margin of 0.2% per year. this is just abysmal, and every rational investor would sell their stack and buy something more profitable.
after speculation weans, the token value of link will be solely determined by network usage. it's that simple.

>> No.16240611

>>16239959
>because they're all owned by Node Operators

yeah okay, make it believable next time

>> No.16240654

>>16240497
Sorry yes I thought we were talking about a total cash out, I do understand some people staking will choose to cash out their rewards for passive income.

>> No.16240691

>>16240114
What do you not understand about 18 decimals.
1 link token could be litterly be split between 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 people

1 ÷ 0.000000000000000001

>> No.16240722

>>16240170
Wrong. Half of those tokens are to incentivize node operators and are not owned by the team.

>> No.16240731

>>16240588
>why would you lose your collateral unless you were covering someone’s tangible losses, that doesn’t make sense to me
What about it doesn't make sense to you? If you provide false data, you lose your collateralized LINK.

>> No.16240817

>>16239835
staeking 2morrow be prepared.

>> No.16240818

>>16240731
that premise doesn’t make sense, if the data doesn’t lead to monetary loss due to operator failure then what are you covering by giving up your collateral? who gets that free money? “false” data is also a misnomer, incorrect data can be returned without malicious intent, and link loss from merely being in the minority means consensus can be gamed for monetary gain. Isn’t a reputation hit enough of a penalty, whether it’s warranted or not?

>> No.16240846

>>16240731
>If you provide false data, you lose your collateralized LINK.
wrong.
you lose your collaterized link if your data deviates from the average.
if the majority of the other nodes provide bad data (by using the same faulty all, for example), you're fucked.

>> No.16240859

18 decimals

>> No.16240923

>>16239835
Holy shit youre dumb

>> No.16240954

>>16240818
>that premise doesn’t make sense, if the data doesn’t lead to monetary loss due to operator failure then what are you covering by giving up your collateral?
You are collateralizing LINK to ensure that the data provided by your node is correct. Deciding the amount of collateral (if any) will be up to the requester.
>who gets that free money?
The requester of the contract.
>“false” data is also a misnomer, incorrect data can be returned without malicious intent, and link loss from merely being in the minority means consensus can be gamed for monetary gain.
From the whitepaper: "Result Aggregation: Once the oracles have revealed their results to the oracle contract, their results will be fed to the aggregating contract. The aggregating contract tallies the collective results and calculates a weighted answer. The validity of each oracle response is then reported to the reputation contract. Finally, the weighted answer is returned to the specified contract function in USER-SC." If the data differs from this calculated answer, it is considered false data and you lose your collateral as a penalty.
>Isn’t a reputation hit enough of a penalty, whether it’s warranted or not?
No, that way there would be far more incentive to provide false data. If the penalties were only a hit to reputation, there would be far more incentive for the nodes to provide false data.

>> No.16241619

>>16240954
Looked back and read how the SLA will work and how nodes will post a pre-defined penalty payment, now I understand how the collateral system functions. Thanks anon

>> No.16241690
File: 153 KB, 434x500, sergeylambo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16241690

>>16241619
You are welcome. $1000 EOY

>> No.16241902

>>16239959
You're suggesting a hypothetical that will happen in probably hundreds of years the network matures and becomes fully saturated. LINK is divisible by 18, there will always be a seller, people have expenses to run a node I'm sure and they will ultimately sell some LINK to meet those demands.

>> No.16241925

>>16240094
Why would you be unable to acquire link? Node operators want to cash out their holdings.

>> No.16241939

>>16240173
>seems like a tricky balance to meet, though.

it's literally supply and demand you absolute mong

>> No.16241958

>>16241902
This, it's insane to think that there would be no one willing to sell even 0.000000000000000001 LINK.

>> No.16241970

OP really splitting atoms in this thread

>> No.16242008

>>16241970
Actually his yet to be proven wrong.
If link really is a success then OPs hypothesis will evntually become a reality, which is why, ofcourse, the project will fail.

>> No.16242050

imagine answering seriously to OP's obvious bait. Only >130 IQ bizraelis are all in LINK

>> No.16242070

>>16242008
No. OP's entire premise is based on the assumption that node operators will never sell any Link. There is no reality in which that would be remotely reasonable. There isn't even an argument to prove wrong.

>> No.16242116
File: 83 KB, 550x543, 5433453.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16242116

>>16239933

>> No.16242185

>>16240139
>Stakers cashing out is a one time event per staker
are you fucking trolling or are you really this fucking dumb
holy shit
and you have the arrogance to call other anons unintelligent?
you don't even deserve to be a shoe shiner

>> No.16242234

>>16241958
Dr;ns

>> No.16242248

>>16242234
Kek, why didn't I think about that.

>> No.16242257

>>16239959
You’re a fucking retard

>> No.16242300
File: 171 KB, 1529x1229, A7672943-1BA1-4CCB-BF7E-D98938E62BF3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16242300

>> No.16242309

>>16242300
Checked!

>> No.16242318

>>16242050
Im like 98% in LINK, because theres a 2% chance this is all just an elaborate ruse to steal my shekels.

>> No.16242343

>>16239835
Back to plebbit. You had 2 years.
>inb4 not an argument
Read the white paper

>> No.16242367

>>16242008
>>16242008
Good because that means the price will undoubtedly rise to insane prices first before "failure" if we can't dispute his hypothesis

>> No.16242438

>>16242070
to be fair its solid logic, why would they sell link if the price is just going to keep appreciating on top of their staking rewards.

>> No.16242451

>>16239835
1. you're stupid if you dont understand, its in the white paper and has been talked about in blogs/meet ups.

2. you dont need to know what staking does anyway unless you have 10k link anon which im guessing you dont.

just hodl

>> No.16242457
File: 185 KB, 1080x1080, rfy4so4q4jx31.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16242457

>>16242367
I can assure anyone bothered by this fud I guarantee I will sell one of my many thousands of LINK to provide market liquidity/function if and when the time comes.

Might sell a whole 5 and buy an island country tbqh.

>> No.16242469

>>16242438
Operating costs, brainlet. Why don't gold mining companies just never sell and stockpile until infinity?

>> No.16242782

>>16242050
In all fairness I made it as realistic as possible to help educate nulinkers, it's the best way to spread the lord's good word. I really thank the anons who played along and I appreciate everyone in this thread, even the people who actually didn't know the answers and wrote mean things.

>> No.16242840

>>16242782
don't you think /biz/ is a little saturated with fucking fudders

>aww man shucks why couldn't you see my ruse in a sea of fud ;) if only you were more clever ;)

>> No.16243609

sir gay and the gang give 350 mil tokens to the node operators and the node ppl give that to the stakers.

>> No.16243714

>>16242782
Fucking knew it

>> No.16244334

>>16242457
reminds of a coffee truck in Raleigh, NC. Nice gimmick, shitty coffee