>Q1: In simple terms, how in the world does CCIP help to increase LINK token price?If you can make a convincing argument that it does then I am all on board because LINK is about to make some major adoptions like never before. Problem is, 99% of people don't understand the correlation between ChainlinkLabs success and the LINK token. I certainly don't, do you?>Q2: How will ChainlinkLabs make money to fund its operation once they sold every LINK at their disposal?
>>587737061. You aren't counting in private chains aka the banks2. Chainlink already makes money. If you weren't new here, you would know mr blue shirt said staking wouldn't come out until the company was able to profit on its own entirely from its products. Since that statement we have had updates to staking and updates to the already existing products and a launch of another product.
>>58773716You did not answer my first question.
>>58773720that's because he can'tget ready for a round of semantic arguing and goalpost moving!
>>58773716>1. You aren't counting in private chains aka the bankswhich are not being used and wont be used for another cycle. if it were being used we would see CCIP usage uptick
>>58773706>>Q2: How will ChainlinkLabs make money to fund its operation once they sold every LINK at their disposal?introducing the SecuLink token. it's required for security. you can buy it now
>>58773746Please, refrain from derailing the thread. I don't care if people think it will be used by banks or not. What I want to know is how does CCIP increase the price of the LINK token. It is a very simple and fair question.
>>58773720>>58773742CCIP will need node operators to validate that the transactions can happen. As the network grows there will need to be more nodes and the more node operators there are means the more LINK in the pool, lowering supply.
>>58773706Q1: ccip like all services will have staking. secondly, payment in link is cheaper than other assets which will lead to demandQ2: you answered this yourself in the first question. cll is doing amazing right now, they get paid millions for integrations of their services on new chains, they get paid for their work with banks and institutions and best of all they have 400m link left to sell as they likeonce they have sold everything, they will shift to being a foundation (this has already been setup if you haven't noticed)but just remember that your whole line of thinking is retarded anyway. what we are all waiting for a second speculative wave which will be driven by banks and institutions going to production while in a broader bullrunrevenue, income doesn't matter right now and won't for years
>>58773773Hilarious advocate shill answer. So what I gathered from your response is:1. CLL is doing amazing (I know, we all know), but this means literally nothing for us investors.2. If revenue does not matter then we are in deep trouble.>what we are all waiting for a second speculative wave which will be driven by banks and institutions going to production while in a broader bullrunhahaha, as if this isn't priced in already. You think the market is retarded? We have known for years that Banks and institutions will use Chainlink. How did that increase price?>but just remember that your whole line of thinking is retarded anyway.My thinking is retarded, but your thinking that the market is 3-4 years behind CLL collaborations with the biggest banks in the world is the high IQ take? HAHAHAHAHAWe literally went from>CCIP will pump price, billions will flow through it6 months ago to>it will pump on 4 year old news any day nowI have never seen such flip flopping in my life, the gaslighting is out of this world.
>>58773800how is that a shill answer?i'm literally saying we're fucked, until we aren't, and that could be yearsbut it could be weeks or monthsand that's why you still hold a lot of chainlink, and so do i. it's just a question of if you will go crazy first or if it will move. from your emotion and derangement it's obvious you have too mcuh riding on this token and don't have much else going on in your lifethe best thing you can do is have a good portion of your stack gambling on other shit to keep it interesting. sell some link, you are up 50x+ in usd anyway and just gamble.
>>58773811I've held this thing since late 2017. It fucking sucks.
>>58773800>we have known for years that banks and institutions will use chainlink.uhhh yes WE have, but go talk to your random crypto holder on reddit or twitter and they will AT BEST say "oh yea its that data thing on eth." Sergey was on bankless and real vision podcast and these so called crypto experts had NOT A SINGLE CLUE how link worked. Like genuine shock on their face. Now you have to realize that the masses are looking at those people for their crypto advice. And thats just the people that have an understanding of bitcoin, lets go a step even further and go to random irl people, who barely even know what a bitcoin is let alone a smart contract. Then on the flip side there is the portion of the crypto market that is so hardheaded and so anti government and so anti big corporation that they are btc maxis and truly have no idea that a world of cryptographic truth can exist one day. Now add in the solana maxis that will never touch anything on eth and view it as the worst. I know its hard to realize it because there are 10 link threads here every day, but it truly is not understood outside of a small twitter group and this site.
>>58773819ok to add some nonbias to this sentence>it truly is not understood outside of a small twitter group and this siteit = oracle problem
bank a tokenizes 1 billion worth of assets.bank b tokenizes 2 billion worth of assets.bank c tokenizes 2 billion worth of assets.for liquidity purposes (for retail and for institutional) it's better, theoretically, when these tokens can stay as they are and move across chain, as opposed to become USDT or USDC and move across.everytime these tokens are moved from bank a to bank c or from bank c to bank b, using ccip, then a fee is paid. that fee is either paid in link or converted to link.* no guarantees that banks will actually use a decentralized 'interoperability protocol'
>>58773706check out the link/btc chart. its about to make multi year lows. soon it will never be above 20k sats ever again. These are the last moments above 20k sats, historic moment coming! HOLD THE LINE MARINES!
>>58773818i get it. and i sold a lot of my stack in the last bull run so know it's a lot worse for othersthis pasta is too accurate:>Holding link is like having a normal life, plans and dreams then suddenly waking up in a mental asylum. There's 50 million dollars in a locker with your name on it, in a room full of lockers for all of the patients. The door has a sign saying 'Will unlock in illegible days.' You talk to the other patients, the wardens. Everyone tells you the sign says something different. Some people say the room will never unlock, that the money is fake, that the wardens already took the money. Some say the room doesn't even exist. You talk with another patient who agrees the room exists, but halfway through the conversation he pulls down his pants and runs in circles shitting and crying for chicken tendies. You find out that you can leave at any time, but that if you do you might not ever be able to come back. So you stay, questioning your sanity more and more with each passing day. Was I crazy before I came here? Is the man screaming in the corner that it's all a lie, even though he's still here, right or insane?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a45TWLH73LAthe worst thing about it is that the project could have easily failed. there could have been a stealth insitutional project. but no, chainlink has done very well, it survived, it has so many big names around it, it's giving good staking rewardsand yet the price is completely fuckedif you had told me in 2018 that chainlink would be working out in the open with swift, dtcc and euroclear and the price was $15 i wouldn't have believed youi thought link would be $0.50 and dead (like most 2017 projects) or at $300
>>58773819Link twitter has over 1 million followers.We aren't that special.
>>58773843and their youtube videos get like 3k views and maybe 10 comments. twitter just has a bot problem.
>>58773750im not derailing the thread. how about you just lurk. this shitcoin has been discussed for almost eight years now.
https://www.swift.com/about-us/innovate-swift/swift-hackathonchallenge 2
>>58773819>so anti government and so anti big corporationanon they are greedy and want to profit on insider information. i suspect SBF going to smartcon was sergey finally breaking down and letting kikes in
>>58773706A1: Demand from A2.A2: Providing a staking service to tradfi to secure their bridges. Possibly leasing out tokens at their fiat values that are spent paying for the same bridges.Stop trolling. You know this already.
>>58773856relevant because there's a huge presumption in this thread, that chainlink is definitely going to be adopted
>>58773858ari juels admitted that he doesn't know how to figure out staking. Thats the unspoken thing around the office. They dont know how to implement staking so they are kicking the can down the road>>58773856how does this increase the value of the chainlink tokens im currently holding?
>>58773864when was that admitted?issues with mev, yes. staking? when?
>>58773762>>58773773do we know how ccip will use staking? right now it's just OCR that keeps things relatively secure. I assume at some point the CCIP DON will have to stake LINK so they can be slashed if they do a naughty. But I haven't seen anything indicating when such a system will be ready. Frankly I haven't seen any real movement on staking - namely new service level agreements using the ETH price feed thing as a template, or whatever - since the staking beta began. The next CCIP update doesn't seem to mention it, instead being focused on permissionless pools, which is nifty, but it raises a question of how this hypothetical collateralized-CCIP might work, if random ERC20s are making their own lanes, how do they get collateralized? Maybe they will have to essentially buy the service with an extra fee?
>>58773880all we have is this:>As Chainlink Staking expands over time to support more oracle services, such as CCIP, a portion of the user fees paid for those services are planned to be directed to stakers in exchange for increasing the service’s cryptoeconomic security.staking is not integral to chainlink, it's an additional layer of security (if we act malicious or fuck up then we risk not just being removed from the don but paying an economic penalty.hence why they are moving slow on it. right now staking is really a rewards program for early holderseven with this poor pa, 15k holders are earning $10k a year which is decent passive incomethose complaining most are those with 3-10k as they are long time hodlers but haven't seen real rewards
>>58773880to answer question more fullya node part of a ccip don will put up link (collateral) by themselves or use a service liek stake.link to get link from marketif they are detecting as failing to met performace parameters by alerters then they will be slashedthis is all there in staking now but the parameters are so broad that they will never be triggeredin time, you could have individuals, companies or daos monitoring for extra income but that is probabyl years away
>>58773876>when was that admitted?it wasn't. >>58773864 was lying. straight up , old fashioned lying. the best type. uncomplicated.
>>58773716>you would know mr blue shirt said staking wouldn't come out until the company was able to profit on its own entirely from its products.sergey never said that faggot
>>58773847>twitter is all bots dudeschizo
>>58773887just to put this into context:a 32eth node is currently earning under $4k a year and then they have running costswhales with multiple staked 15k wallets are more than happyit's those dependent on selling their stack for usd that are not happy
>>58773880The idea originally was that for a large transaction you would expect collateral to be staked to protect against malicious activity. For example, you want to transfer $500,000,000. You would expect that or at least some % of that to be put up as collateral against any potential risk -> this would be a variable you could pay for. Want full insurance? Ok, fine, you can have that. What this then necessitates is enough value in staked link to be able to handle collateral for large transactions.What this inherently does, because some transaction windows will of course require billions in staked protective collateral, is necessitate a large amount of LINK staked. With so much LINK staked, the price will naturally go up since supply will be low and demand will always be high for an asset which is both constantly appreciating and providing rewards to stakers (rewards which get paid out via fees which users need to pay). This helps create an equilibrium where basically the price is supported by demand.It's for this very reason that neither $1,000 nor $81,000/LINK token are actually memes. $1,000 should be a given if enough adoption is seen. $81,000 is that "quadrillions" figure that big Serg likes to tout.But this is all theory until we see actual adoption, of which there is none yet.
>>58774038>of which there is none yetwell, Swift announced months ago their platform goes live 12-24 months. does this count as adoption? maybe not, but it's good enough for me
>>58774082You are fucking stupid if you think that it's going live.
They won't. The token is literally not needed, the point is to trick dumb money into speculating on link without knowing this and getting them to buy our bags. Sergey already did it to us, now we must find the greater fools.. now you know why there has been insane levels of shilling for link, while bitcoin doesn't need shilling, link completely relies on it. Notice how low energy link is and it's shills are exhausted, and the price is coincidentally flatlined..
>>58774394link is arguably the least shilled of the top 20, go anywhere but fucking /biz/ and you'll be lucky to see mention of link, the bots/jeets all focus on solana/bnb, doge and memecoins, and reddit is all about ada. gtfo
>>58774400doesnt that prove that link is dead, buried, last years news, old hat, ancient history?
>>58774400Link was designed to appeal to 110 iq above average midwits. People who think they're smarter than they really are. The wider internet is full of drooling retards who go for meme coins and alts. /biz/ has the failures who look down on normies and think they have 150 iq, even though they are just slightly smarter. The real smart geniuses have their insider chats where they actually make a shitload of money. The last time /biz/ made it's users serious money was the eth ico, before that it was bitcoin. Now it's Just meme coins and and dead alts. Links gains were very mediocre and in no way special compared to the broader market.
>>58774456replace link in your post with 4chanthat's what your post isyou are the midwit
>>58774456wow dude you sound so smartyou just got so many internet points with your knowledge
LINK was the token Sergey used to fund his dreams. Rejoice, linkmarines, you are the Templars, the knights of crypto. Your money created DEFI and you did it without expecting anything in return. Your sacrifice will change the world.
>>58773837Me too. Me too. I can't deny, $15 in 2024 is completely mind boggling. I'm selling 10k this bullrun and starting my real life, in whatever form the money allows. My remaining staked link will ride or die to Valhalla
>>58774456brutal, but accurate>>58774649>>58774978>reality ends where my feelings begin
>>58774209Youre just fucking stupid.
>>58774209>You are fucking stupid if you think that it's going livewhat makes you think it won't? Can you show Swift as having a track history of announcing things that don't happen? Can you point to even one? You can't. That's why you lose this one. Thanks for playing.
>>58775535>announcing things that don't happenyes, for starters, there's the ISO 20022 which was supposed to be originally implemented 5-6 years ago, since they've been trying to enforce it upon banks since at least 2015, way before Chainlink was even a thingso yeah, there's that
>>58773706why are these losers still bitching about shitLink? ii.>they'll dump anyways, sooner or later. The real question is will you be the retard who's used as exit liquidity or you'll jump ship and ape into Supra or Pyth with better Oracle solutions.
>>58775554https://www.swift.com/standards/iso-20022/iso-20022-faqs/implementation>fOr sTaRtErSISO2002 has already been released. Its not a light switch moment. Its a slow adoption process, retard. Everything costs money and time to implement.
I'm a fruity fudge packer, and I hold chainlink
>>58773837Someone turned that post into a video? KINO.
>>58776299lol bro the hoba token video is sick but if he really wanted to be based he would have mentioned honey badger token instead the hoba token community doesn't have the same level of dedication that hoba-chad brings to the honey badger world
>>58773819Thought the same when I arrived at Hbar. Oh well. Betting on the oracle this time seems less risky, eh ? Eh eh..eh…
>>58773706Is this an out of season april fools joke? who the fuck cares about link and its technicalities when you can get more profits by copytrading or farming airdrops from the unicorn chain or fucking crypto twitter, your time is up linkies
Is this the fud nowadays? >I DONT KNOW HOW STAKING WORKS
>>58776859the FUD is "it's not teh real stakiiiiing" but the USD entering my account is real so w/e bitch
>>58773811>from your emotion and derangement it's obvious you have too mcuh riding on this token and don't have much else going on in your life/thread gargle my balls OP
I had gay sex with a man in a wig and I hold chainlink
>>58776859I fixed the image for you.
hatin stanks hatin stankshatin stanks is what i dohatin stanks hatin stanksit feels good. maybe you should toohatin stanks hatin stanksmy whole life revolves around FUDand hatin stankies is in my bloodhatin stanks hatin stankshatin stanks hatin stanksyeah. how about you
>>58773837>DiversifyIt was just better for my sanity to not "All in" on one project. I'm still making bank.
>>58778411the linkie curse is that it causes the "link marines" to view every other project as shit. so they all in just because there's nothing else they want. it's a vicious cycle
