why is this the only project in crypto that cannot pump off hype?
Because they want frogposting autists to sell before allowing it to pump.
>>60937840Someone else on biz a few months ago said it perfectly. Chainlink is like the white dude who goes to school and gets a high paying job and raises a family and is a net positive to society. Nobody bats an eye.Altcoins are like niggers. If they can somehow manage to not murder or steal something for 20 minuites, they get heaping praise. Monuments are raised in their honor.
>>60937840>have to know how blockchain and smart contracts actually work>have to believe that they will actually be used>has to align with your worldviews, enough to buy it at least>try to learn more about protocol, find nothing but suppression from influencers paid off by pyth,band,redstone,flare,xrp.>finally find real link info>hour long powerpoint from a guy with a monotone voice on youtube, videos with less than 5k views>replies filled with racism>well shit now i can't talk about link to other people or else it outs me as a racist (not a problem now but from 2017-2023 it was)>ok i now know about link and am invested>*good news releases*>dumps>wtf.jpeg>*keeps holding because they know anything else would be up 25% from said news*>*more news*>larger dump>*sells*>tell other people that link is shit because news doesnt matter>people now believe the news is fake because the price doesnt go up off the good news>ff years later to today
because they don't sell coffee
>>60937840Because no matter how hard you try you can't explain to some low IQ normalfag retard what Chainlink is and the what value of oracles are. You can explain to a retard in simple terms why NVDA is valuable. You can't with Chainlink.
>>60937840We are up over 400% so far this cycle. You DID accumulate in the obvious zone between 5-9 dollars, right? Add in your staking rewards, and STX airdrop and you should be doing pretty well.
Chainlink sold tokens to do what real businesses do: hire employees, reinvest in the business, get partnershipsIt's easy for scams to pump quickly for a month because all the hype and effort goes into the chart But they dump because there's no business behind the scam
>>60937868>has to align with your worldviews, enough to buy it at leastI think it's safe to say that Chainlink is diametrically at odds to the worldview of the majority of anons here, we just want to get rich.
>>60937939Then how come it hasn't happened? Instead we see /biz/raelis chasing memecoin pumps acting as exit liquidity for cabalists, PM hoarders buying the tippy top of the chart and investing in dogshit miner companies, and Gamestop enthusiasts who have gone full rabbit hole schizo
>>60937954it took over 10 years for SWIFT to outcompete Telex and become the central bank standard, and another ~5 years for it to be used for securities. it's probably going to take that long, maybe a little less time, for chainlink to achieve the same level of adoption.
>>60937840because its unironically too high iq to pump and because sergey doesnt hire competent marketing people.
>>60937913>stx airdropi'm a burger
I get that it's the backbone of tokenized assets but, so what? TCP/IP is the backbone of the internet, doesn't mean there's something worth investing in there. The closest equivalent might be a company heavily involved in that backbone, like Cisco, but they're still DOWN from the dotcom bubble, despite the internet being a hundred times more widespread and important in 2025 vs 2000.Maybe 2021 was your dotcom bubble, and you'll spend the next 25 years becoming more and more important to DeFi while somehow not seeing any value from it.
Token. Not. Needed.
>>60937913You're down 90% vs btc lmao
>>60937840there isn't hype retardthe only people who care about the banking and tokenization narrative are brainlet fucking retards who are clinging to ripplenobody knows what these guys dothey just know one worddatadatadatait won't pump based on retailit'll pump due to institutional requirement of collateral rebasing but not till that momentit's a fucking $10,000+ token that has yet to reach maturity, but the clock is ticking.if anyone's seen what we've seen from Swift (ignoring every other narrative like DTCC, which we'll put aside for now), this is it. it's game over for everything else.the narrative is simplemy own dlt needs to interoperate with others and smart contracts can't trust a centralized data source for both data placement on chain as well as upkeep (keepers)
>>60937868>>60938334these are basically the answers to your question OPill just add to it I guesslink is not trying to larp as a currency, so it will never see the level of speculative retail FOMO that other coins peddle while promising that the entire financial system will just magically swap to their peepeedollars with no real other benefits (and usually quite a few security risks) because reasonslink will provide an unprecedented level of collateralized, decentralized fidelity to data not just moving on / off-chain, but between chainsit enables entirely new ways to use smartcontracts and interact with legacy systems, which in turn enables entirely new foundations for business agreements to operate onit's just not something that a crypto moonboy or guy throwing his beer money around has the attention span to dive into - even in the better interviews with Sergey, the interviewers clearly don't understand the implications of what is actually being laid out before themsmart short term plays have been shitcoins, as proven by link's dogshit price action - but the writing is on the wall at this point and I'm very glad to be in link regardless
>>60937840Because it's surpressed
>>60937954I'm going to let you in on a secret anon, almost everyone here owns some link. The /pmg/ /gme/ and other general thread schizos are a tiny fraction of the board, and the shitcoin threads are almost entirely astroturfed and botted with very organic human interaction, the only real discussion here is link threads. And even there, most of the fud no matter how much they will deny it is just frustrated holders who despise the idea that a latefag redditor can still accumulate a decent stack.If it isn't a link thread, 90% of the other posts on this board are q anon tier boomer schizos, indians, and bots. And if it isn't on this website, 98% of all crypto discussion is jeets and bots that just want you to buy bags, its just brute force astroturfing, which works (sort of) because the market is still tiny and almost completely unregulated. The best way to picture it, crypto is a tiny pond. There's a massive dam holding it back from tradfi integration, and it is in the current crypto cabal's interest actually to keep that dam in place, as once the big fish enter, they are going to get swallowed up and shitcoin/memecoin casinos will go the way of penny stocks in tradfi. Whether they'll admit it or not, the scammers who have profited off crypto are pretty much all aligned against chainlink, maybe not directly as an alliance, but indirectly in the sense that link is not in any of their interests.
>>60937939Highly disagree. >be politician >campaign for wanting x y z policy>voters: oh you want that? ok lets make it into a smart contract that automatically starts on inauguration day if you winyes we are a decade away from that happening but the point still stands
>>60938571>he thinks the electorate/general population are going to be allowed to dictate public policyOh sweet summer child
>>60938592who cares if LINK makes you extremely wealthylet the peasants be peasantsenjoy your life, that's all you need to do.
>>60937939Chainlink is what was necessary to bring banks and financial market infrastructure in alignment with Satoshi's ethics and values. And in a world where people cannot discern AI-generated content from reality, we will become increasingly dependent on Chainlink DECO attestations which say that a living, breathing human observed a particular event. Chainlink is necessary for our survival as a species.
>>60938597interdastingi don't even care for that fucking narrativei'm more interested in DECO being used for corporate actions
>>60938592>He doubts Sergeygrim. If he wants something he will get it.https://youtu.be/TPXTmVdlyoc&t=3306
Retail is not in Chainlink to any meaningful degree which means price is primarily determined by market makers, whales and institutions. The number of Chainlink wallets today is equivalent to the number of Ethereum wallets in 2016 when the price of ETH was about $10. We are still largely under the radar. If retail remains disinterested then only genuine usage will pump the price.
>>60938641
>>60938644Insane how this is ignored, they literally showed how CCIP is orchestrating it in the background and how it is implicitly linked with the future swift payment system
>>60937840Because it's the only project in crypto whose hype gets dumped on every single time by Bitcoin.That's literally the only reason.
>>60938334>the only people who care about the banking and tokenization narrative are brainletlol and what about the Defi narrative?
strong incel manifesto vibes itt
>>60938571>smart contract donations to politicians that payout on promises fulfilled>politicians actually start having to follow through on their populist rhetoricHmm, not sure how I feel about that desu.
>>60937913>We are up over 400% so far this cycle. You DID accumulate in the obvious zone between 5-9 dollars, right? Add in your staking rewards, and STX airdrop and you should be doing pretty well.you're one of those cucks that when someone shits in their mouth they are happy that they got food, even though its literal shit
Because token not needed
>>60938223>I get that it's the backbone of tokenized assets but, so what? TCP/IP is the backbone of the internet, doesn't mean there's something worth investing in>they're still DOWN from the dotcom bubble, despite the internet being a hundred times more widespread and important in 2025Actually a decent take.
2 months left of the bull run lads! Hold the line - we're at a solid $24 16 months post halving so should EASILY see a $26 peak.
>>60938223But this TCP/IP requires a fee paid in LINK to perform and validate state changes across the network. Imagine if every TCP/IP packet which resulted in a database change cost 25 cents. If you think the fee is superfluous or that it can be removed then you're radically failing to understand the technological revolution taking place.
>>60937865>Chainlink is like the white dude who goes to school and gets a high paying job and raises a family and is a net positive to society. Nobody bats an eye.bahahahahahahahahahahahahalook how desperate you've all becomei feel second hand embarassment reading these pathetic rationalizations
>>60937901>duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude i'm in a STHHHHECRET the funny part is this guy actually believes what he's sayingyou idiots realize your coin already went 200x, and you think you're early >>60937913>Wegamestop 2.0 >up over 400% so far this cyclenah you're down 50% before even counting opportunity cost>>60937932>Chainlink sold tokens to do what real businesses do: hire employees, reinvest in the business, get partnershipsyeah you funded chainlink labs ltd business with your donations, congrats>But they dump chainlink dumped 90% following the last bear market
>>60938359>but the writing is on the wall at this point the boyscouts have been parroting this bullshit for yearsyou can tell they don't even believe it anymore people on this board were warned for the last few years that link is a dead alt and you didn't listennow you've missed this bullrun and are in denial about itTHE Cuckolds of crypto
>>60938223>>60939711the comparison to tcp/ip is an interesting one, if inapt imo1A. tcp/ip was academic/open source. It scratched an itch and it was designed among academics and researchers to standardize network comms (unify) and build in necessary reliability etc considerations (handle dropped packets, routing, partitions, etc).1B. tcp/ip was in a pre-monetization era, the internet was limited in size, the consumer internet did not exist, and the ability of the internet to make money was in question until dotcom 1, and even during and after dotcom 1 many still could not wrap their head around the concept because it was so foreign. [The monetization of "eyeballs" by companies not (yet) selling product was as far as I know unanticipated and categorically new. It didn't matter that you weren't selling product because the massive scale meant you could do anything basic after the fact, and it was more profitable to grow at almost any cost.]2. A more favorable comparison is with cable broadband companies. These in effect were the monetization of tcp/ip as toll roads. They basically enjoyed locality-based monopolies because of cost barriers to entry, and made a fortune. Link will enjoy this except globally, unlimited in locality, and with network effects.the game is over dude. it's no longer a theory, it's won, and now cl simply has to turn the crank and lay infra and capture inflows. it could take five years or more to play out. sit and wait for it to rip or don't.> muh price newsobvious brainrot, will not be responding to anon's who industry take consists of looking backwards at charts. charts are the tail, not the dog. literally don't care.link 2017 was an iq test. so is link 2025
>>60940144>>60940148>>60940161Meds
>>60937939you're retarded
>>60940749How do you figure?I thought his comment was 100% accurate
sergey sells every pump because he needs more burgers
>>60940749thank you for saying i thought i was the only one who thought tht
im not sure exactly what you guys are fighting aboutbut the description of chainlink as keeping political promises honest and "gentlemen, let us compute (transact)"/full trustworthy and reliable business as all smart contracts is a lot like the description of btc as cypherpunk that's going to free us from government shackles and upend the world ordera little bit of truth (inflation protection, alternative currencies) mixed with a lot of wishful thinking (it's necessarily been co-opted by world governments and industry and will more or less kowtow to the needs of industry from now on)i'm not sure i guessit will probably enable richer categories of contract (layered/contingent options and so on, business "parlays") but most contracts (business arrangements) are still going to function better off chain. don't get me wrong, smart contracts will still be a towering category. it's just unlikely to impact daily life any more than international shipping does, in invisible wayssupermajority of the inflows seem very likely to power low level stuff like price feeds, interop, what they're doing now. some contracts will obvious get complex, like existing NFT or DEX contracts for instance, any kind of complex on-chain programmatic contract address, but this is sort of different from what people think of as a negotiated business contract made smart. it's more akin to powering cryptographic apps, and then buy-in is adhesion, not a "meeting of the minds" contract.i suppose as things get monitored there will be more opportunity to peel off strips of contract (you delivered x widgets on such date payment is delivered automatically). but this is hard to predict. primarily such information is already single-source and hackable (usps reports, my company's quality control of your shipments). so you might expect oracular information to lean towards publicly-available stuff like weather, stock prices. which gives you an interesting sandbox, but not an all encompassing one.
>>60940460>tcpip this comparison they always use is hilariouscould you imagine back in the 80s that you had to pay an obese russian and his army of incels who talk about their secret revenue a few bucks everytime you went to an internet addressi actually feel bad for the guy who invented tcpiphe was some wagie who didn't even monetize the invention meanwhile chainlink founders have been given billions for an idea that isn't even functioning yet...incredible
>>60940460>> muh price news>obvious brainrot, will not be responding to anon's who industry take consists of looking backwards at chartsbahahahahahha >duuuuuuuuuude i can only take you serious if you draw a chart prediction to the mooooooooooon >literally don't care.i think you do... and you should unless you hold equity in chainlink labs ltd to get a piece of actual business operations, price is all that matters
honestly, adem, what the fuck is wrong with you
>>60941248COMPLETELY MINDBROKEN FROM THE PORN AND SHITTY PRICE ACTION
>>60940749>Ad hominems Not an argument
>>60941283Based logical argument enjoyer
>>60940913>could you imagine back in the 80s that you had to pay an obese russian and his army of incels who talk about their secret revenue a few bucks everytime you went to an internet addressThis was what happened with internet in the 80s, except the fat russian was fucking AT&T
>>60940144>>60940148>>60940161>>60940913>>60940917oh hi ademstill not doing too well on the wife / kids front? just a guess judging from these effeminate, reddit spaced rants that you typed outi'm going to guess that you're probably here after a 4 hour session of feeling suicidal while watching other dudes rail women that you find attractive on pornhubmight want to focus on that instead of throwing the usual tantrums on hereso go on, git out of the basement and go have a cry on bram's shoulder, might as well share the shame with someone who cares
>>60939711>Imagine if every TCP/IP packet which resulted in a database change cost 25 cents.That is a world where no one would be using it. Imagine paying $0.25 for each packet sent and received. It todays world you'd have a $85 billion dollar bill at the end of the week. Really retarded comparison. >>60940460>ChatGPT the post. >missed the target
Charging for data seems like it goes against the very ethos of crypto
>>60941652We're not talking about charging people 25 cents to update a private MySQL database though. Do you understand that things can be similar in some respects while differing in other respects? Do you understand that analogies have limitations? Are you intentionally missing the point or are you actually that stupid?
>>60941652>That is a world where no one would be using it. Imagine paying $0.25 for each packet sent and received. It todays world you'd have a $85 billion dollar bill at the end of the week. Really retarded comparison.this was literally - to the price - what happened to consumers when phones first supported texts, which were sub-packet length. and consumers paid a bill about that size annuallyobviously that changed, but telcos are still raking it in, to the point they had to split up attyou don't have the historical contextyou lack the capacity to contextualize it when presented to you>ChatGPT the post.so starved for oc it reads like babble when you come across it>missed the targetone of the nice things about 2017 was fuddies were at least midcurvers so they knew enough to disappear when their assholes got blown opensee >>60941822
>>60941431>This was what happened with internet in the 80s, except the fat russian was fucking AT&Twe were talking about tcp/ip brojust stay out of the convo if you aren't knowledgeable about this stuff>>60941440damn kid 5 lines on that oneisn't it crazy you originally came to this board for investing and you ended up tracking random dude's beating off lmfao
>>60942585>duuuuuuude chainlink is just like insert technology here that actually existed
>>60942585>this was literally - to the price - what happened to consumers when phones first supported texts, which were sub-packet length. and consumers paid a bill about that size annually...and the following years prices of sms plummeted to the point where today a single text costs like a fraction of a cent, not to even mention that they have been superseded entirely from chat appseven back then, people actively avoided texting different carriers or opted for unlimited plansamazing comparison, linkies are truly the mental midgets of crypto
>>60937840It pumped on hype 4 years ago. It's a dinocoin on its 2nd cycle. 3rd if you could the late 2017 Binance listing. There are no more low float and what ifs to hype up the price. It's a heavily saturated coin doing boring real use crapto stuff.
>>60937840> TOP was 2020> 5 years of bleeding to BTC> 5 years of bleeding to ETH> 5 years of losing $$$ to inflation
>>60942955lmfao, back to the drawing board for the cult my prediction on their response:>something something duuuuuude we're building a moat... more buzzword babble, duuuude land grab...duuuuude the railroads took years
>>60942914>just stay out of the convo if you aren't knowledgeable about this stuffYou are by far one of the dumbest fudders, so why not follow your own advice kid?
>>60942955lol whatWithout a plan, basic domestic text messages still cost 10 to 25 cents depending on the provider etc.Exactly like in the early days.
>>60937840>because corporate loyalty token Link is irrelevant to the success of the business
>>60943015No, that's XRP.
>>60943011> $0.50 per SMS in 1990s even WITH a phone plan> phone plans didn't include unlimited text> some carriers charged you even for incoming messages
>>60937840Because the team keeps dumping on you kek, I will rather buy more UTK than keep holding LINK
>>60942585>obviously that changedYeah, it became UNLIMITED & FREE when a 3rd party hardware decided to bypass the networks. It completely killed the pay-to-text model and texting became the normie thing (only after becoming free). >you don't have the historical contextIronic that you'd say that while cherrypicking historical "context" & pull out "b-but texting". Link must be charging alot huh? Retard. Go ask chatGPT again.>>60941822>analogies have limitations? Are you intentionally missing the point or are you actually that stupid?Pure irony.
>>60943051> SMS - used by 5.9 billion people every day> LINK - used by 0 people every dayI am not the one comparing LINK to SMS retard
>>60943049>> $0.50 per SMS in 1990sThe first provider to actually charge for text messages is Vodafone, and they asked 10p per message in the UK, which is around 0.20 USD adjusted for inflation.And you said text messages today cost "fractions of a cent".In reality they cost between 10 and 25 cents.>>60943051>it became UNLIMITED & FREEPaying a flat fee is not the same as shit being free, retard.>Link must be charging alot huh?Apparently.Just ask Charles Hoskinson.
>>60943115>> LINK - used by 0 people every dayYou mean used by all of crypto every day.You're thinking of XRP again.
>>60943125> centralized crypto price feeds for shitcoin casinos > valued at $15 Billionreal usage lol. I wonder why LINK has lost value to inflation since 2020 despite HUNDREDS of more bullshit partnerships?
>>60943178>Defi isn't reallol> valued at $15 BillionWhile securing over $60 billion
>>60943205biggest financial products> Insurance> Commercial loans> MortgagesDeFi> trading shitcoins
>>60943249>Chainlink bad because crypto badAnd best of all, Chainlink is the number one candidate among crypto for breaking through in tradi.
record of the past is a prediction for the future
>>60943263> fails to show any real world usage> fails to show any need for the token> fails to show any real world financial products in "DeFi" shitcoin casinosmuh, LINK will break through and moon because the whole world will be using it. So just like XRP cult
>>60943280> fails to show any real world usageShow me any real world usage for any crypto.> fails to show any need for the tokenLiterally all of Chainlink's code.
>>60943289>Show me any real world usage for any cryptoso literally a speculative gamble like everything else in crypto. but a very bad gamble that has zero demand and lose money to USD, BTC, ETH, Gold and every other asset over 5 years. fucking genius
>>60943280How many time will fuddies loop the argument back to "Chainlink bad because crypto bad"? We all know it's a bad argument, otherwise you wouldn't be on /biz/. Get some new material.
>>60943313>so literally a speculative gamble like everything else in cryptoagain, "Chainlink bad because crypto bad".And no, it's not anything like the rest of crypto. Nobody has anything like Visa, Mastercard, JP Morgan, the US government, Swift, ... all lined up to start using them virtually exclusively.The closest thing is ETH, and they are almost always used alongside other private and public chains.
>>60943331>all lined up to start using them virtually exclusively.First off, SWIFT stated link is not exclusive, their partners are free to use any current or future competitors to link. >EXCLUSIVE Kek. Second, the "US GOVERNMENT USED CHAINLINK" is the most retarded hype we have seen. They uploaded files "on network" of already public & free data. They are only using it for redundant data storage of word documents. Great.>>60937840>why is this the only project in crypto that cannot pump off hype?Because all it's hypetard holders being intentionally misleading and overselling the hype with nothingburger news over the last 8 years.
>>60943392>SWIFT stated link is not exclusiveSwift reps only one oracle network: Chainlink.On the other hand Swift reps an infinite amount of chains, both public and private.Same with Visa, Mastercard, JP Morgan, the US government, ...>the "US GOVERNMENT USED CHAINLINK" is the most retarded hype we have seen. They uploaded files "on network" of already public & free dataNope, Chainlink is literally the gatekeeper for the US government.If your chain doesn't have a CCIP connection, you're not getting the data officially.See pic.
>>60943409>Swift reps only one oracle networkLets me fix this for you: SWIFT currently* reps only one oracle network, and stated all of this partners are free to use current and future competitors.* >>60943409>Nope, Chainlink is literally the gatekeeper for the US government.It's not. It's already public data, they(the government) even publish it for free. Crazy right? It's almost insane. >If your chain doesn't have a CCIP connection, you're not getting the data officially.So is the "official" data different from the free to view data or... >DON'T COPY AND PASTE MY NFT JPG>YOU DON'T OFFICIALLY OWN THAT JPGkek. >>60943392>Because all it's hypetard holders being intentionally misleading and overselling the hype with nothingburger news over the last 8 years.What i said here still stands.
>>60943477>thisTheir*
it's the same schizo shill spamming the same stale material for 5+ yearsyou'd think that if LINK was such an amazing investment, he would have made it by now, instead of being stuck shilling on dead shitposting board
>>60943477>SWIFT currently* reps only one oracle networkkek sureWhatever helps you sleep at night.>It's not. It's already public dataTell it to the ADAfags, XRPfags, etc.
it's the same schizo fuddie spamming the same stale material for 5+ yearsyou'd think that if LINK was such a terrible investment, he would have sold by now, instead of being stuck fudding on dead shitposting board
>>60943506>Tell it to the Telling it to (You) the linkfags. Who spam the board with word salad overhyped nothingburgers.
>>60943534You're a xerpie upset that XRP didn't make the cut with the US Gov data lol
the sad thing is you guys don't even fud very well. I could fud link 10x as good just from having to do all the research and understanding the bear casei don't get spending this much time shitposting and having no idea what you're talking about. looking at chart snapshots is like saying mom's car isn't going to go to work in the morning because it's been parked in the driveway for 12 hours
>>60943560>the sad thing is you guys don't even fud very well. I could fud link 10x as good just from having to do all the research and understanding the bear casePlease do share. I'm actually interested as a baggie myself.
>>60943540>Gee, i wonder what other crypto i can deflect to when my retarded logic falls apart? Hmmm.>You're a [Insert crypto user] upset that [insert crypto] didn't make the cut with data!!Great argument. Anon, I'm tired of the 500 different 10 post & dead threads about the shitcoin link that's made everyday shitting up catalog.
>>60943591>Anon, I'm tired of the 500 different 10 post & dead threads about the shitcoin link that's made everyday shitting up catalog.filter threads dumbass
>>60943560Same. I even authored a few popular fud angles myself in the past few years. It's bizarre how little fuddies actually understand, I practically had to force feed them the angles before they understood the implications. >"hurr t0kn not needed" >Have you considered that even though the t0kn IS needed for the network to run, Chainlink has been developing products that don't use the network at all? >"what do you mean? T0kn not needed! Shill!" Then again, you need to be a special kind of stupid to hold something and then fud it, or NOT hold something and then spend so much time obsessing over it (without actually reading what it does). Adem duuuuudeposting all over this thread is a good example. Spamfilter.
>>60937840a hyped scam is still a scam
>>60943591>>60943534Where's XRPL bro?The data is public right?
>>60938539I started fudding link out of frustration this year.never understood it before, but it's a little bit of fun and a way to vent
Making fun of you isn't FUD
>>60943249>> Insurancechatgpt now calling out the lies lmao
>>60943560>the sad thing is you guys don't even fud very wellvery passive aggressivewhat you're really trynig to say is comments about reality are bothering you>looking at chart snapshots is like saying mom's car isn't going to go to work in the morning because it's been parked in the driveway for 12 hourshahahahahahahahah look at this guy trying to overcomplicate it here it is for you in simple words: you're not making money and you missed the bullrun
>>60943731Next they’ll be posting the CPI data to the turdchain. Fraud at the speed of electrons!
>duuuuuuuuuuuuuuude i i its just so COMPLICATED>duuuuuuuuuuuude you need to study more RESEARCH papers>duuuuuuuuuuuuuude don't believe your own investment balance, y y you're WINNINGleft is rightup is downgood is badwater is dryand link holders are winning
>>60937840It went from 0.11 to 53 so obviously it's able to. You only think it can't because you compare it to XRP, but that's not fair cause XRP has an army of paid influencers shilling it to retards
>>60937865Best answer I’ve ever seen. >t. been in link since .46 cents
>>60944111CHECKEDALL THE FUDSTERS HOLD LINK. ITS JUST A WAY TO BLOW OFF STEAM, LAUGH ABOUT THE HORRENDOUS PRICE ACTION, AND SHOOT THE SHIT BEFORE 1000 EOY
>>60944662we know you're a ripplefag, fag
>>60944690YOU'RE WRONG, CUPCAKEALL IN LINK
>>60944662Fix your keyboard, numbnut
>>60944295It's so funny seeing ripplets and fuddies outsource thinking to LLMs. Must be hard, being sub 90 iq.
>>60944722WHAT'S AN LLM?
>>60944735Language Learning Modules. Does Google not work on your 2001 Gatway?
>>60944772OH, THAT'S RIGHT. I WAS THINKING OF LLC FOR SOME REASONI USE YAHOO
>>60944735Long Lasting Myopia.
>>60944772posting with my broken 2001 gateway until link reaches ath
>>60937840also chainlink is going to be one of the first crypto companies to expand into real capital marketswhile eveyrone else trades nfts Chainlink will be tokenizing stocks, funds, real estate...
>>60944323damn, adem's really chucking a tantrum todaydid someone message his family and friends again, or is this just the usual post goon shame lashing out
>>60938334S-Sergey??
>>60944323We've already won. The rewards will follow.
>>60946539pssst, hey kid>chubby weirdo waddles around slowlycheck this out: 5 year performance (Sept 15 2020)$BTC: 906%$LINK: 51%$ETH: 942%$SOL: 4840%$BNB: 3871%$DOGE: 8101%$XRP: 964%$TRX: 1083%
>>60937840Chainlink cannot ever have a monopoly on the idea of oracles, therefore it's easily replicable, substitutable, and with lots of competition. I CANNOT PUMP!
