QUANT (QNT)

Nice copypasta, faggot.
You've been debunked already, stop spamming every QNT thread with this shit and let people make up their own minds.

Idiots.

Never been debunked one time. I'm tired of you Quanties using deceptive marketing.

> Proprietary software will never be a global international standard

Who says it has to? The proprietary enterprise software industry is worth half a trillion dollars. Oracle makes $40 billion a year selling business critical proprietary software to enterprise.

> They think chainlink can't connect blockchains together

Quant currently connects 10 together. Right now. And it handles the gas/transaction fees for all 10 blockchains in a seamless way. Chainlink does neither of those things.

> Muh deterministic services

Sure man that's obvious and it's why no enterprise is interested in Quant. Oh wait, S.I.A the backbone of the European financial system is. Unless you're saying that you, the basement dwelling NEET, has managed to see something that the team at S.I.A have not despite numerous high level technical meetings with Quant. You wouldn't claim something that retarded user, would you?

> It doesn't make sense to use proprietary software to leverage decentralized backends

It does if the enterprise saves millions of dollars, which is all they give a shit about.

> Muh tokenomics model

Quant are highly incentivized to use QNT for licensing as it will make them far richer compared to if they don't. Yeah, maybe they'd intentionally avoid making themselves hundreds of millions of dollars richer, although I'm not sure why.

> Muh backdoors

Well 90% of enterprise systems are run on some kind of closed source proprietary software, including all banks, so the people that matter (i.e. the wealthy ones) don't seem to give a fuck.

> Don't get me started about Shillbert

Okay, I won't.

> Community thinks billions flowing muh

No it doesn't.

Plz explain what Quant does.

Go to the Telegram channel do research. Stop expecting people to spoonfeed you lazy bumass.
I've done my research and now all in at $3.

I already responded to your post and btfo you in another thread.

Suck my Quant cock delusional AION coper

Never once supported AION. You are just upset I'm exposing your precious moon coin

Come here to shill your shitcoin to potential bagholders and don't even want to give them a sales pitch? Lmfao kill yourself idiot, I mean it. You will never make it with that attitude.

Refute this faggot.

LMAO. You're the one that will never make it.
Lazy NuMale.
>can't read whats written in the picture
kek

Proprietary software is great, but you wouldn't use it with decentralized systems, especially when all your value is flowing through it. It's way to big a of a security vulnerability, especially when all the value flows through it like Quant is trying to do.

Chainlink does connect blockchains together and while it doesn't handle gas fees, there will sure be additional services that can if you want to pay for it. Think BaaS and over fiat ramp extensions to make all payments in fiat.

SIA is exploring Quant. That is not the same as the European system running through it. Also, some enterprises are stuck in centralization, which is that same thing that happened when large companies were afraid to adopt the Internet and afraid to adopt cloud technology. Companies do make poor choices user.

You can say Quant incentivizes token use but you literally will have no proof other than their word. You have to trust them and that's a major problem in their model. Their whole pricing model is centralized, which should make it a security. It's also why they will become an STO.

We know Quant isn't a scam......

QUANT IS A SCAM is just meme dude, calm down we all know it's going to go pretty far

You aren't exposing shit, because there's nothing to expose.
This project is the most legit thing in the entire crypto space and will overtake Ripple in market cap by EOY.

You're going to be left behind because of muh centralization and muh bitmax scam.

Retard.

Most legit... the Quant koolaid is STRONG. How come every project is an open source project yet Quant is closed and the entire pricing mechanism of it is determined by the team. Have fun being a security.

Legit project - check
Low market cap - check
570 banks - check
Salty Fudders - check
All in at $4 - check

>will overtake Ripple in market cap by EOY.

Not by EoY, no - possibly a 1bn valuation by EoY if the market moves upwards stronly as a whole, but I would say more likely 300-500mil cap.

QNT is still very new and this market cycle is only just beginning (if, indeed, it has).

There is no doubt, though, that in the next 2-3 years QNT will pass into the strong tens of billions.

>All in at $4

Takes balls and brains to not be upset at missing the 20c prices last summer and still GTFI. This is absurdly cheap, still, and will be looked back upon with nostalgia and disbelief.

Oh, look! A Quant Network patent

Attached: 2019-06-12 17.03.17.jpg (1280x170, 65K)

Sadly didn't know about the project until recently. Missed the price before the bank announcement too. $4 still a bargain, happy with my stack.

>Sadly didn't know about the project until recently.

You must be completely new to /biz and IDEX coins, then? Not meant as an insult, genuinely curious.

>thinks the banks announcement is real
>doesn't realize quant is so scammy they even lifted their icon from something else

You are foolish if you think people who get scammed by literal telegram Indians and steal clipart to market their shitcoin, actually have something legit.

I seriously hope you took profit and cashed out your initial if you rode these pumps.

Quanties BTFO

legitimately going to $10 soon

Fuck off with your constant shilling, brbacquiring

Check Sia.eu.
Cuck

These are the people who sold Quant at $1.98.
Enjoy Poverty faggots.

Why don't you just buy it when I say, and make money? You miscers must be raging that you held VEN and OMG while QNT more than doubled, after you were warned so clearly.

It's NOT too late.

Thanks user for using my previous rebuttal against this basket-weaver as copypasta. If he wants to keep pasting the same FUD post over and over again then we'll all just keep responding with the same BTFO'ing responses to his posts over and over too.

Unironically he doesn't seem to realize that every time he does it the arguments against his points actually make Quant look better. He is effectively helping to shill Quant without realizing it.

you russian?

English, why do you ask?

Do you have the draft for other rebuttals as well?
These spammers are getting annoying, we gotta fight back brotha.
Please post some here if you've got them saved.

He got btfo on my next response and still thinks he won the arguement... QUANT KOOLAID

sure thing immigrant

> You wouldn't use it with decentralized systems

So business critical proprietary software is absolutely fine for all of its current uses in banking, finance, government and all sorts of things, but a "muh security vulnerability" as a middle-layer for decentralized systems despite the fact that most enterprise decentralized systems will eventually have some kind of centralized proprietary input/output anyway. Okay user, whatever you say.

> Chainlink does connect blockchains together

Not 10. And not right now.

> While it doesn't handle gas fees there sure will be additional services

"Muh they'll figure something out for it". Good argument user you're sure btfo'ing Quant on this one kek.

> S.I.A is exploring Quant

So you've somehow figured all of these theories out about Quant's failures with only basic public info, while S.I.A has had numerous technical meetings and then signed an official agreement which has been published on their website. HMMMM wonder who I should trust.

> Companies do make poor choices

So your FUD now is that S.I.A, the company powering the backbone of the European financial system, might have made a bad choice. Uhhh ok?

> Muh incentivization muh no proof

I heard the same thing said a month or two ago about Quant partnerships. "MUH NO PROOF". Then proof came and I doubled my money. Oh damn. How silly of me.

Weren't you the guy that got muted on the Official Telegram for spamming this same shit?
Then, joined with a new account and got banned again?
KEK.

sia.eu/en/media-events/news-press-releases/sia-partners-with-quant-network-to-explore-innovative-solutions-in-blockchain-interoperability-for-banks-and-financial

Yeah, sure seems like they're laughing.

quant.network/blog/quant-network-and-crowdz-announce-partnership/

The CEO of Crowdz seems like his sides are about to burst.

micky.com.au/world-first-blockchain-system-developed-to-secure-australias-national-capabilities/

The guys running the cloud infrastructure system for the Australian Government are having a good chuckle too.

Face it user: You can argue as much as you like, but the fact is that the people, companies, banks and governments that matter, who will have had technical meetings with Quant, are clearly very interested. Meanwhile, you, the autistic Biz incel who is creepily obsessed with fudding Quant on a daily basis with copypasta, thinks it's a bad idea.

HMMMM I WONDER WHO IS RIGHT. THIS IS A TRICKY ONE.

I've never been in the Quant TG (although I've heard much about it), but I can tell for a fact this guy has been banned from the Quant TG at some point. I've been on Biz for a long time and NEVER have I seen a person so completely obsessed with fudding the same project with copypasta over and over.

Kind of proves in a way that his opinion is irrelevant, as his obsession means that no matter what Quant does, he'll always try to find a way to spin it into a negative. And to think people actually listen to the opinions of people like this when deciding what projects to buy into.

It's find to use proprietary software with our internal systems, but blockchains are all about developing infrastructure to handle your business transactions with other parties. So managing your external business relationships. The goal is tamperproof determinism in these external business relationships or else there is no point in using them. So Quant being centralized with all the value flowing through it make absolutely no sense. Any serious CTO would laugh at this.

sia.eu/en/media-events/news-press-releases/sia-partners-with-quant-network-to-explore-innovative-solutions-in-blockchain-interoperability-for-banks-and-financial

Yeah, sure seems like they're laughing.

quant.network/blog/quant-network-and-crowdz-announce-partnership/

The CEO of Crowdz seems like his sides are about to burst.

micky.com.au/world-first-blockchain-system-developed-to-secure-australias-national-capabilities/

The guys running the cloud infrastructure system for the Australian Government are having a good chuckle too.

Face it user: You can argue as much as you like, but the fact is that the people, companies, banks and governments that matter, who will have had technical meetings with Quant, are clearly very interested. Meanwhile, you, the autistic Biz incel who is creepily obsessed with fudding Quant on a daily basis with copypasta, thinks it's a bad idea.

HMMMM I WONDER WHO IS RIGHT. THIS IS A TRICKY ONE.

Quanties think they are the next TCP/IP to rule the world, yet a proprietary software that you need to pay a license fee for will never be a global international standard.

They think Chainlink can't connect blockchains together... but it can and so can so many other protocols with much more determinism, less trust, and cheaper.

The whole point in using a decentralized backend like a blockchain is to get deterministic services, yet they think using a trusted software to run all your transactions through is logical. In fact, it ruins the entire value proposition.

They think of themselves as the connector of all blockchains yet it's proprietary software and you need to pay a license to use. Again, it doesn't make sense to use proprietary software to leverage decentralized backends.

There is also a major problem in their tokenomics model. There is no way of actually knowing how the token is used since everything is negotiated behind closed doors. They say you have to hold it to get a license fee, but how can anyone prove it? They say you pay to sign data like transaction fee but no one can prove that either. There are no on-chain metrics to prove anything unlike all other protocols. Essentially, they have central control over the pricing of the entire protocol. For all we know they could be doing a freemium model with these companies to test out to see if they like it. Also, with it being proprietary, how do we know that there are no backdoors built in? Quant is simply not compatible with deterministic systems.

Then don’t get me started about Shillbert always hyping up the coin and nothing to show. If Quant is so big, why is he shilling all the time to neets? Look at Chainlink and then look at smug Gil taking pictures in his “fancy” meetings. All these partnerships are exploratory, yet the community thinks billions are flowing through the network. There is zero transparency about what's actually going on since it's proprietary. They should be an STO.

Companies do exploratory meetings all the time with companies. Just because they are exploring with Quant doesn't mean they are using it. Also, these big institutions are often behind on the times so they are more resistant to the coming reality that decentralized trustless systems are the way networks will cross communicate. Quant requires a ton of trust and is proprietary. They will find better technologies or learn the hard way.

It's the same when companies who were resistant to the Internet and cloud infrastructure spent tons of money on their own internal systems only to back track and go with the trend. They lost a ton of time and money because they made the wrong choice, which might not have been as obvious to them year prior.

This pasta again?
Fuck off.

> is proprietary

No one cares except you.

> Quant requires a ton of trust

It's end-to-end encrypted with dual-chain hash verification, so no it doesn't.

> Big institutions are behind on the times

Thank you, poverty Biz incel with zero business experience and/or life achievements, for giving us this insight into what these multi-billion dollar companies and institutions are getting wrong. They should make you CEO instead.

> Decentralized trustless systems are the only way networks will cross communicate

No they aren't.

Quanties think they are the next TCP/IP to rule the world, yet a proprietary software that you need to pay a license fee for will never be a global international standard.

They think Chainlink can't connect blockchains together... but it can and so can so many other protocols with much more determinism, less trust, and cheaper.

The whole point in using a decentralized backend like a blockchain is to get deterministic services, yet they think using a trusted software to run all your transactions through is logical. In fact, it ruins the entire value proposition.

They think of themselves as the connector of all blockchains yet it's proprietary software and you need to pay a license to use. Again, it doesn't make sense to use proprietary software to leverage decentralized backends.

There is also a major problem in their tokenomics model. There is no way of actually knowing how the token is used since everything is negotiated behind closed doors. They say you have to hold it to get a license fee, but how can anyone prove it? They say you pay to sign data like transaction fee but no one can prove that either. There are no on-chain metrics to prove anything unlike all other protocols. Essentially, they have central control over the pricing of the entire protocol. For all we know they could be doing a freemium model with these companies to test out to see if they like it. Also, with it being proprietary, how do we know that there are no backdoors built in? Quant is simply not compatible with deterministic systems.

Then don’t get me started about Shillbert always hyping up the coin and nothing to show. If Quant is so big, why is he shilling all the time to neets? Look at Chainlink and then look at smug Gil taking pictures in his “fancy” meetings. All these partnerships are exploratory, yet the community thinks billions are flowing through the network. There is zero transparency about what's actually going on since it's proprietary. They should be an STO.

>> Proprietary software will never be a global international standard
>Who says it has to? The proprietary enterprise software industry is worth half a trillion dollars. Oracle makes $40 billion a year selling business critical proprietary software to enterprise.
>> They think chainlink can't connect blockchains together
>Quant currently connects 10 together. Right now. And it handles the gas/transaction fees for all 10 blockchains in a seamless way. Chainlink does neither of those things.
>> Muh deterministic services
>Sure man that's obvious and it's why no enterprise is interested in Quant. Oh wait, S.I.A the backbone of the European financial system is. Unless you're saying that you, the basement dwelling NEET, has managed to see something that the team at S.I.A have not despite numerous high level technical meetings with Quant. You wouldn't claim something that retarded user, would you?
>> It doesn't make sense to use proprietary software to leverage decentralized backends
>It does if the enterprise saves millions of dollars, which is all they give a shit about.
>> Muh tokenomics model
>Quant are highly incentivized to use QNT for licensing as it will make them far richer compared to if they don't. Yeah, maybe they'd intentionally avoid making themselves hundreds of millions of dollars richer, although I'm not sure why.
>> Muh backdoors
>Well 90% of enterprise systems are run on some kind of closed source proprietary software, including all banks, so the people that matter (i.e. the wealthy ones) don't seem to give a fuck.
>> Don't get me started about Shillbert
>Okay, I won't.
>> Community thinks billions flowing muh
>No it doesn't.

>Proprietary software
>doesn't require trust
Pick one
>thinks businesses make perfect decisions when revolutionary changes happen that affect them
I'm not sure you understand history

T. Retard who thinks he knows better than SIA

Yes big companies always make perfect choices & never fail.

This guy is based and redpilled

No, which is why they want OverLedger, which makes it easy for them to try any blockchain they want with esse.

Will I make it with 3500 qnt?

probably, most of the QNT fudders on here couldnt even afford 100 of them so ur good

I got 3700, we're both gonna make it

fucking double dubs confirms

Yes and checked

Yes and checked

any non brainlet can see this user just BTFO all of QNT bagholders. the cope by them ITT is hitting new levels. quanties are like the normie retards who buy LTC instead of BTC. just buy LINK you absolute mongs

>2019
>Buys inferior alt at 400m MC

LOL

Oh boy, you're going to regret falling for the weak FUD instead of doing your own research on this one, user.

I love this. This guy has absolutely no idea what he is talking about yet here he is, spouting complete bullshit.

He thinks he knows the truth unlike us "quantards"

I'm balls deep in Quant and actually like Chainlink too but this sums it up for me. Far, far greater potential upside for Quant than Chainlink, whichever way you look at it.

Quant is going toe-to-toe with XRP in terms of fintech, and the best part is that it doesn't have to be one or the other. Banks and institutions can use both.

The absolute delusion in this post is some next level Quant Koolaid

Chainlink is both more functional, offers far greater security guarantees, and has substantially better token economics. Quant is a moonboy coin with zero transparency about anything they are doing with hypeman Gil trying his best to pump it with all his fancy pics.

Also, Ripple isn't going to make it but there is no way you will be at their current marketcap. You guys haven't done anything with any type of verifiable proof. Exploration doesn't equal adoption.

11 posts by this ID.
All FUD.
Eat my dick low life scum faggot.

Tell me user, in a technical sense, how does Chainlink connect to an external data feed in a way that is 100% immutable with no possibility of a man-in-the-middle attack? And how does it know that the data it's being fed is genuine?

I await your answers.

Thrashold signaniggers

Brainlet

You achieve determinism the same way bitcoin and eth do, decentralized computation. You can choose multiple oracles, data feeds, or using a trusted execution environment which keeps oracle queries confidential. Town Crier, which they purchased, gives attestations to ensure that the oracle did not tamper with the data. So you could either use alot of decentralization, use trusted execution environments, or use a combination of the two with Town Crier. Town Crier was invented by arguably the greatest cyber security expert in the world in Ari Juels.

So your answer is muh decentralization?

I'll ask again, user. In a technical sense, how does Chainlink connect to an external data feed in a way that is 100% immutable with no possibility of a man-in-the-middle attack? And how does it know that the data it's being fed is genuine?

I already gave you an answer, but must of gone over your head. You could also go with certified nodes too if that was of your concern. Or take advantage of threshold signatures, using hundreds of nodes would be too expensive to attack the network. Also using a TEE, the oracle cannot see or tamper with the oracle service.

It doesn't answer my question. I want to know how Chainlink connects to the external data feed and guarantees that nothing can intercept the data transfer and change the data prior to the oracle receiving it. I also want to know how the oracle can verify that the data arriving from the external feed is 100% genuine.

You talk about verifiable proof, more functions, greater security guarantees and more transparency. Well, if Chainlink has all this, then you must know how it exactly works on a technical level. After all, you're fudding people for believing what Gil says about Quant, so surely you aren't doing the same thing by believing what others say about Chainlink without you knowing exactly how it works yourself on a technical level. You're not doing that, are you user?

Now you're just talking non sense. You got all the answers already that show you how this is done plus there is plenty of open source documentation for you to go read and check their independent security audits.

Don't forget Quant health, cybersecurity etc.
Unironically the next ETH.

....So you don't know.

The guy who is fudding people for not knowing all the technical details of what Quant is doing, and claiming Chainlink is so much better, doesn't actually know how Chainlink works.

You simply believe what other people say about it, and accept all these generic terms about nodes and signatures and "trusted execution environments" as the truth, when you have no idea how they're actually going to work in a way that answers my questions.

Well ain't that funny.