Ok faggots, I'm back to do another spoonfeeding thread. Ask your technical questions...

If chanlink wants to be blockchain agnostic will it still be erc-20?

Not OP but that copypasta is a meme

i bought about $100 under $3 hopefully it stays around $3 for 3-4 days

No clue.

It's literally just random buzzwords.

I don't even know where this "cup of coffee" thing came from. Maybe I missed a week or two.

And for a sybil attack, the team has been taking all of the correct steps to prevent any sort of sybil attack from happening. When building a decentralized oracle (which has never been done before, mind you), sybil attacks are a serious threat. However, chainlink has taken every single step possible to eliminate any possibility of a sybil attack getting through while still maintaining the decentralized aspect of the oracle.

>when moon sir?
July 20th, 1969

Dude. Come on. Yes, it will still be ERC-20, as long as it doesn't get downgraded to ERC-10.

A functional decentralized oracle. The value will depend on how often that oracle is used.

You had two years, literally.

Do you think Assblaster's estimations for 100-150 were too low or too high? Obviously not asking for exact but maybe estimations even assuming the entire 1 bil supply eventually is out in circulation

Yeah, so? I'm here now.

Attached: 1542175617550.jpg (819x1024, 240K)

What do you know in regard to Cryptlets?
I'd imagine it is limited in your scope if you aren't aware of token usage or not.
Which would lead me to wonder, why haven't you researched Cryptlets/Bletchley more?

not a big grab, but a grab

Nobody knows what the price will be. If no one utilizes the decentralized oracle that is chainlink, LINK will be worthless. If a shit load of people utilize it (specifically for derivatives), then 100-150 is extremely low.

Alright, well welcome aboard faggot.

I'm not a bread crumb finder. And too be completely honest, I haven't looked too much into Cryptlets myself. I haven't because I honestly believe chainlink will be an industry standard, regardless if microsoft wants to play along or not. LINK isn't some shit coin that needs partnerships to succeed. If Microsoft came out and said "Hey nerds, we're going to use Chainlink!", it would affect the price temporarily do to speculation. However, the only real value from LINK will be from usage on the network.

Does link need to have 1 trillion market cap to reach 1000 eoy?

Noted.

Attached: D3Z_C72W0AAxN8q.jpg (330x600, 53K)

Multiply 1,000,000,000 by 1,000 and you tell me

Have you looked at iexec's go at decentralized oracles? Are they just Frenchie scammers or a form of legitimate competition?

Do you have examples of centralized oracles? It doesn't need to be blockchain related.

Total yes...

But the real amount of links available to purchase on exchanges will be *much* lower than the total, with a network that is being used.

At this point, it's stupid to even consider link within traditional crypto mcap barriers. Link will be the first crypto with an actual working product, that is being used by big players and therefore generating real revenue.

>The hashrate transaction speed
>Off chain integer market
Kek

Anyone can build a decentralized oracle, but the one that gets adopted will be the ONLY one that succeeds. Having two decentralized oracles is completely pointless, and only serves to weaken both. You have to ask yourself, which is further along and which one has a higher chance of succeeding?

A centralized oracle can literally be any data source that is controlled by a specific party or parties.

Now, let's not get ahead of ourselves. I've been holding for two years, but if holding LINK becomes more profitable than staking it, it will be pulled out and sold.

>it will be pulled out and sold.
Yes. This will more or less occur this btc halving cycle. Hype will win out, with normies fomoing over smart contracts after learning about them for the first time. Link will most likely crash after the peak in 2021 or so (probably not as hard as ETH did in 2018 but we'll see). I don't think we'll begin to see a mature network from chainlink until at least 2023 at the earliest. Only then will circulating supply start to plummet. But that's just my guess.

But this isn't the point. Anyone planning to sell all of their link in the next 2 years has no foresight. Cryptos with real adoption will moon harder than scams/memes.

>Link will most likely crash after the peak in 2021
Absolutely. Speculative price will always be higher than the real value of the asset. However, it is important to remember that the crash that will follow will put a floor on LINK much higher than the current $3.00 valuation.

How can LINK have a higher market cap than ETH when it's just a token?

>bought another 2.1k at $2.80
as lewis hamilton would say
#blessed

It will have to if it wants a decentralized option, but I'm fairly certain it was built from a centralized use case first.

Is there a rule stating a token must be worth less than ETH?

>Speculative price will always be higher than the real value of the asset.
This is only true in the short term for link, but I think that's what you mean.
With real adoption, it will only continue to moon endlessly as it becomes more scarce over time. The speculative peak this cycle will look funny in comparison to its long term growth pattern.

>will put a floor on LINK much higher than the current $3.00 valuation.
Obviously. It will crash but I think it will recover quickly because people have a real belief in it, and depending on the results we see by then, we'll know whether or not it will succeed for certain.
I don't believe it will crash like ETH mainly because ETH had a specific set of circumstances (everyone unloading ETH after ico craze, etc).

Attached: 1562019667797.png (1584x444, 303K)

He was way off and doesn't list half the use cases we know now.

Lots of cryptos already work.

No, but you can literally clone Chainlink and run it on the Ethereum network. You can't replicate the Ethereum network as easily.

Yes, but largely with other cryptos or are limited in their real world usage.
Absolutely none come close to link's vision. Crypto will never see the true real world usage it deserves without a decentralized oracle.

You can also clone the Amazon website. Good luck getting their sales.

100% agree with everything my dude.

Attached: 1531259273110.gif (442x480, 3.22M)

Not a good comparison. Amazon has a ton of infrastructure that you can't clone.
Chainlink right now it's still pretty much just some code. Why would companies spend billions buying Link instead of spending way less for a clone?
The whole high value Link idea doesn't make much sense to me.

>much just some code

WRONG. You can't code your way to a secure, decentralized network. Read pic related. The value of link does not come from its code.

No matter how much money you have, you can't instantly replicate what link is doing. The industry standard meme was not a meme.

Attached: 1562625804561.png (1898x809, 233K)

Really dude? How new are you? The cup of coffee thing was originally BAT fud and has been used now for many other coins in an ironic fashion.

Left Jow Forums early 2018, just came back.

The code isn't the valuable part.

If you would sell most of your linkies, following what strategy would you do it?

I've been figuring out tons of laddering (10, 20, 30 or 50, 100, 150, etc) but just can't figure out when to sell what amount.

I mean, I could sell half at 50, but it might just well stagnate at 44 and then crash for months.

>but it might just well stagnate at 44 and then crash for months.
Who cares? If the chainlink network gets enough usage to hit $44, then it will inevitably hit $100. It's only a matter of time. I'm in no rich to be extremely wealthy. Compared to other people my age, I'm very well off. If any of us were to invest in boomer stocks instead of LINK, imagine how fucking slow it would be. Just be thankful it will take you only a few years for a couple hundred grand at least, instead of 50+ years.

Well, I would, since it will be money I've never seen.

But mostly, I'm just afraid of repeating the mistake of not selling anything like early 2018.

I don't really get this mindset, if people not only held through 2018 until now and maybe even bought more when it was under $5K they would still have significant profits.

Where does this "missing out on gains" myth come from unless you don't think BTC will eventually be worth over $20K again. Even if it doesn't it was over $15K for only a week or two if I remember right. This missing out on profits mentality only really applies to pump and dump shitcoins that will never recover, not to projects that have an actual use

What's your take on the recent discovery that reputation is essentially centralized with a third party? How does a node know it's being fed valid data in the first place? Starting to sound like it is very prone to sybil attacks.

Attached: 1562902596978.png (1184x1855, 494K)

Because Link is an anomaly here. Most alts got absolutely slaughtered. And even if you held BTC, you could have made MASSIVE profits by selling near the top and buying back a few months ago.

>Starting to sound like it is very prone to sybil attacks.
It would be, if the team wasn't allocating 350,000,000 LINK to other companies to run nodes. By not releasing the majority of the LINK supply, they have ensured that their netowrk will be decentralized, as long as the remaining locked LINK is given to enough nodes to operate. A sybil attack is only viable if it is cost effective. Because all nodes will not have the same reputation due to the LINK token, it will be VERY FUCKING EXPENSIVE to conduct a sybil attack. And even then, only 35% of the supply of LINK is available to any attackers. Meaning they literally CANNOT acquire enough LINK to conduct an attack.

To add to this, the pic your posted is correct in the sense that a decentralized network is indeed prone to sybil attacks. However, the larger the network, the more secure it is. Therefore, you would have to be a madman to actually believe that the chainlink team hasn't thought this through from the beginning.

The only mistake people made in 2017 was rushing out to buy shitcoins that inevitably dropped off a cliff never to recover. You could have bought bitcoin at ATH and you’ll be happy you got in so low by 2025

If there were two things I learned in 2017-2018, never buy ATH, and never sell on a dump. Sometimes it works out, but most of the time you're fucking yourself short term.

When can I stake my linkies user. Timeframe?

>When can I stake my linkies user
docs.chain.link/docs/running-a-chainlink-node

>Timeframe?
No idea. I'm not an insider, just an autist.

So you mean to say that in order to prevent Sybil attacks, the staking requirement should be so expensive that only big companies can afford to run nodes? So the answer to the Sybil resistance problem is to centralize the network, got it

you are a MANIAC

Yeah I don’t sell. I bought btc when it peaked at 1k and it’s given better returns than any other asset class. You only lose when you start freaking out about buying high

Not at all. I'm saying it's a mixture between the amount of nodes, and the amount of reputation each node has. Read the fucking whitepaper, page 18. The information is right in front of you.

>docs.chain.link/docs/running-a-chainlink-node

someone needs to develop a plug/play solution like bitters did with casahodl for the LN.

Give it more time.

Do you have any sell targets or will you hold forever and just sell off gains from staking?

If I do sell, I'll probably sell about 10% at $50, another at $100, then the rest will either be allocated to nodes or sold and transferred into traditional boomer investments. It all depends on boomer markets though, no way I'm buying that shit until it crashes.

How much do you hold?

Anything to help me learn what chainlink is, and why Jow Forums is crazy over it?

>Ok faggots, I'm back to do another spoonfeeding thread. Ask your technical questions, and I'll answer them to the best of my ability.

so the pump is fading quickly, what's the dump price?

Read pic here They have thought this through so much that no one will even think of sybil attacking, trust will be implicit from the start.

This was answered so many times, go back in the forums if you actually care about the truth and not what some schizo OP who posted 50+ times in one thread has to say.

I think all the talk about a sybil attach is FUD

Chainlink needs node operators to sing a $1MM contract to operate a node, and if they find out someone is carrying out a sybil attack the they will lose their deposit. What do you think?

You think $1k+ is a meme, or is it possible with chainlink becoming the standard protocol to link the real world to the blockchain?

it's all about adaption. If a lot of people use it then even 1k is FUD, if no one uses it then even $0.1 is a meme

How do Oracle providers get paid? What kind of marketplace will exist to sell api data to the node operators?

Attached: 1562536371568.jpg (250x233, 8K)

the get paid on the link token you faggot. That's the whole purpose of the token. do you want to pay them in boomer money?

LINK is a dead end. I applaud you if you've made money, and maybe you'll make more, but the oracle problem hasn't been solved and never will be.

Democratizing inputs means turning the "truth" into plebbit. Upvoting and gaining reputation to determine what events have occurred. It's a horrible system, and it's ironic that the community of "go back to plebbit" misses this. Link might go higher as a speculated penny stock, but as a legitimate technology it's garbage.

Trips of Truth

cope harder!

Amazon, Facebook etc use the input method to push things, but they are centralized. if decentralized nodes can input this data then it's more reliable because the nodes have to be true, if not they will not be trusted. They want to be trusted because if they are then they get used more and make more money

Attached: 9257701.png (464x198, 33K)

i never got that.
how do the nodes even verifyvthat the information is truthful when the node operator doesnt vote manually.
its all supposed to be done automatically.

This FUD is pretty funny, good one user

who is this fuck meat

Explain.
Also, did you help defend the pixelcanvas cube last year?

Attached: coincidence.jpg (1074x817, 162K)

cope hrad

Why do the faggots on this board keep saying google partnered with chainlink, when in reality, google made multiple blog posts about multiple potential use cases for multiple crypto, none of which they are currently actively using?

based maniac

somebody with high IQ explain please

how was Iexec able to create decentralized oracles in 3 months when it took Sergey 5 years? I know Iexec has 5 phD's but Sergey had 32 million so he could have hired the best team. why is he so incompetent

>How does a node know it's being fed valid data in the first place?

Thats not what chainlink is solving. But to address that, chainlink is a project built ground-up for financial institutions/ industries, not for anonymous neets. The majority of node operators would be known/legit entities that have every incentive to provide proper data.

listen up, fag!

the crypto sphere is not about who writes the best code for the system, or who has the better algorithm. All you need to have is a working system, AND a lot of people using your system. Bitcoin is not the best, but it is what it is because people are buying it and a lot of people hold bitcoin. To replace bitcoin with another coin which is functionally much better we will have to crash bitcoin, and that money will flow in thebetter coin. It is impossible to do, and the big boys won't let this happen. So go with the flow, crypto is us, not the code. We can make api to cover up any flaws of the coin/token, but you can cover up adaptability.

cope

Decentralized oracles =/= forming a decentralized oracle NETWORK.

>I don't even know where this "cup of coffee" thing came from
I swear to god, I'm the guy that came up with that late 2017, maybe early 2018. I wish I had the original copypasta saved (I need to look), but it caught on. It's kind of hilarious.

Why don't you fucking stop nigger? All the good things that came from biz were created primarily thanks to the lack of spoonfeeding which generated the wild autismo. You're making this place worst thread by thread, all in the name of a fake personal social media relevance. Disgusting, unironically go back

breadcrumbs

The whole marketed purpose of smart contracts is in their ability to mimic/replace real world contracts. That includes things like placing bets, which rely on an interpretation of real world events.

Plebbit is the perfect analogy for this type of system because, in democratizing truth you're simply asking what the herd believes at that time. This actually empowers propaganda rather than weakens it, and makes contracts worse rather than stronger. What happens when the smart-contract executes because Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, but then ten years later the consensus has changed to "no they never did?" You can't forego immutability, so you're fucked. And that's just one major flaw.

There is no automated solution to the oracle problem. Period. Niche use-cases can only exist in a purely virtual environment, where inputs are binary (but even this has its own set of problems). However they can never be used to determine real-world historical events, which is what the majority of contracts are actually built on.

you are talking about two different issues. executing smart contracts, and trusting the nodes
> That includes things like placing bets, which rely on an interpretation of real world events

this is done by a personalized api for the tasks. the bets will be placed on the app, and the money will be transferred on the completion of the bet. this is where chainlink comes in the picture, it will take the real world data 'the outcome' and put it on the blockchain. Think of 'autopayments' for insurance premiums. WIth chainlink the autopayments can be done for any event and with crypto money, out of your crypto wallet

> There is no automated solution to the oracle problem. Period. Niche use-cases can only exist in a purely virtual environment, where inputs are binary (but even this has its own set of problems). However they can never be used to determine real-world historical events, which is what the majority of contracts are actually built on.

This is the reason we have chainlink. It will take the realworld data through sensors, viz an api and process (validate) it through the nodes, execute the order in the real world

In another thread someone mentioned the terms 'szabo's god protocol
wef's 4th IR'.

could you elaborate just a bit (LINK supporter here, don't own LINK because of poorfag though)

Attached: 1562714503353.gif (500x338, 3.62M)

I understand the implementation but the problem is that it can never actually be trusted. Either events are confirmed socially by user inputs (reference plebbit for what a failure this is) or through sensors, which mean A) the sensors are subject to spoofing and tricking, and thus require massive redundancy and security and B) that everything associated with any contract needs an ungodly number of sensors (which are subject to glitches, failures, and wear, among everything else).

In either case, the system is unworkable. The best thing they've come up with is to use "authoritative content" to verify events. Is it any wonder why Google is giving LINK PR shoutouts? It's a step backwards.

you fags are dum as fuk… I will be investing in Iexec instead since they are far more advanced and they have a stellar team.. they are the leaders in decentralized oracles

it's still in infancy. The things that you talked about are godtier and it will take some time to implement them. Chainlink will only be useful when blockchain currency is sued because it works on the chain.

I think they with launch smart payments, smart rent, smart transfers and those kind of buzzwork 'smart' crap first before going into the deep stuff.

why 44$?