I'M actually more qualified to talk about this than most

Question

I'M actually more qualified to talk about this than most

anons.I'm employed with a cyber-techno machinations company, I do a lot of security analyst programming type work. Open source, decentralized, APIs, partnerships, you name it. We'd be one of the first companies in line for something like Chainlink, if the decentralized smart contract space had more value over traditional data exchanges. There's a catch though, an underlying flaw more deeply embedded in the bedrock of LINK than the very code itself. The flaw is with the concept, and it's this: Companies won't actually go through the hassle of trusting their data API's through crypto.

Now I can already hear your keyboards going frantic, but hear me out. crypto hates banks. But actual companies, businesses, and investors do not. There's an old saying you might have heard of: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!". The idea that any of our bosses would give us the go ahead if we approached them to put our companies valuable data in a smart contract on a cryptocurrency called Chainlink, that they've never heard of, we'd be laughed out at best and fired on the spot at worst. We already have API data buyers and providers we trust.

'But Chainlink is trustless!' I hear you cry, but is that really a good thing? Just listen to the sound of it. Businesses don't want to spend millions of dollars on something that is trustLESS, they want something trustFUL. 'But the reputation system!', doesn't that defeat the whole point of your coin? If companies only trust nodes with high reputation, what's the difference between trusting banks and data providers that already have reputation, but in real life not on a computer screen.

The fact is, LINK is going to share the same fate as ETH will. A lot of 'real world application' hype, with a lot of 'crypto world application' reality. Only, this billion supply coin isn't going to come close to the $1k that Etherum hit.

#blockchain #cryptocurrency #english #link

0

16.10.2023

7 ответов

14 просмотров

Kaib

Out of curiosity since you’re in this chatroom, do you own link? If so, what parts of it are you bullish on?

0

16.10.2023

T⬡kenized Автор вопроса

Kaib
Out of curiosity since you’re in this chatroom, do...

Chainlink is a blatant scam, let me explain you why: LINK's javascript has been hacked and now all the nodes are being affected, meaning they will go offline one by one. But here's the real trick; every node that goes offline first has to be validated by other nodes, Thus the first node won't go offline until EVERY SINGLE NODE has verified it actually has gone offline LINK will be in an infinite javascript loop. Maybe if you're a programmer you will recognize FOR and WHILE loops. Well.. This is a FOR loop that NEVER ends. The price will TANK to at least 50 satoshi. Maybe even lower when the nodes are actually verified being offline. Sergey is now busy setting up extra nodes to undo this process. Called contra-hacking. He has injected some GO-language code, pseudo-offline code, into the ChainLink network. This means nodes will appear the be online, while they are struggling to go offline, but in the meantime they cant because it isnt verified yet. Neat trick if you ask me, but it wont last long before the other nodes will know whats really going on. Get into something else now

0

16.10.2023

03330

T⬡kenized
Chainlink is a blatant scam, let me explain you wh...

As a former RuneScape dev - I can confirm this

0

16.10.2023

S3xyDutchm4n

T⬡kenized
Chainlink is a blatant scam, let me explain you wh...

DR;NS

0

16.10.2023