>most people still think staking 1.0 hasn’t started
>imagine believing SWIFT and other major players are going to wait until the public rollout to test a global-scale security layer
>they’ve already been testing it
>quiet coordination is how trillion-dollar systems launch
>nobody rolls out global infrastructure in the open first
>that’s not how high-stakes games work

>retail thinks SmartCon will be the start
>for the institutions, SmartCon is the announcement of what’s already done
>by the time you hear it, it’s too late
>the validators will already be selected
>the collateral already in place
>and the rest will FOMO in to secure what’s left

>they’re not waiting for you
>they’re making sure the system doesn’t collapse under its own weight
>and that requires price adjustment through coordination, not hype
>they need security guarantees, not speculation

>you’ll look back and realize they were never going to tell you early

>>60672005 (OP)
just boughted earlier

>>60672005 (OP)
Are you sure though? Really?

>>60672015
>really? are you sure?

yes anon, 100%

>you think SWIFT and $1–2T in tokenized value is gonna wait until November to start testing validator slashing?
>you think they’re gonna coordinate 11,000 banks in public?
>you think Chainlink Labs is gonna roll out staking live with no dry runs?

this isn’t some degen defi rug
this is a global security substrate

>they’re testing right now
>they’re staking in private
>they’re simulating slashing in controlled validator environments
>they’re preparing LINK to collateralize trillions — and they NEED price to rise

they can’t afford failure
they can’t risk under-collateralization
they HAVE to get this right

>SmartCon 2025 isn’t the start
>it’s the reveal
>by then, all the pieces will already be locked in

game theory 101: if you wait for the announcement, you're the exit liquidity

>>60672005 (OP)
umm you know the yield on link staking is 4.32%? thats lower than a 10 yr treasury bond. You can buy a treasury bond and roll coupons into link and outperform the people who are in the pool

>>60672026
>“you know LINK staking only yields 4.32% bro, just buy treasuries”

and miss the point entirely? classic

>treasuries give you fixed yield
>LINK staking gives you *exposure to the infrastructure layer*
>you're not in it for yield
>you're in it because LINK is becoming the security collateral for global finance

>4.32% is the surface layer
>underneath it is access to validator priority, future staking tiers, reputation score, protocol voting, and eventual ownership of CCIP throughput
>and that’s before reflexivity kicks in and LINK reprices

>you don’t stake LINK to beat bonds
>you stake LINK because you understand what happens when the world starts verifying trillions through a slashing-based oracle network

meanwhile the coupon chasers will still be trying to arb 40bps while the collateral base re-rates 20x

stay small if you want
but this isn’t about yield
this is about position

>>60672029
>my le fake internet tokens are actually le magical unicorn pixie fairy dust bro!
You people are in for a rude, rude awakening.

>>60672019
>No staking for plebs
Will the number go up at least?

>>60672031
>le internet tokens are just pixie dust bro!
>you’re all gonna get rekt!

bold claim from someone posting on a finance board where literal banks are integrating tokenized settlement layers

>SWIFT is onboarding Chainlink
>DTCC is integrating smart contracts
>BlackRock is tokenizing funds
>and you're still crying about magic internet money like it’s 2017

this isn’t dog coins and jpeg season
this is infrastructure migration

>you think it’s a meme until it’s the rails under your mortgage, your bond desk, and your central bank digital currency

but sure, call it fairy dust
while the validators accumulate, the rails activate, and your definition of “real” gets rewritten in Solidity

stay mad

>>60672032
>No staking for plebs

correct
you’re not running infra for trillion-dollar banks
you’re not securing CCIP channels with slashing conditions

but that was never the point

>you don’t need to stake to benefit
>you just need to front-run the repricing of the collateral base

>the system requires LINK to hit escape velocity to secure tokenized finance
>staking demand + validator lockup + CCIP usage = price appreciation
>you’re front-running the global security budget reallocation

the real game theory is:
>institutions stake to secure throughput
>retail front-runs the collateral curve

number go up?
yes
and if you’re asking now, you’re still early

>>60672019
Will 0.2 stakers get a window to move, or you think they’re going to shove us in the gas chambers

>>60672035
>number go up
Eh, if number high enough, I content

At this point, i believe, swift could publicly state the'yre integrating chainlink into every system they have. Chainlink stakers will make 1$ per link everyday. That Sergey is satoshi and the second of Pythagoras. Yet I don't believe the market would care, and xrp fags would still find a way to make it bullish for them somehow.

>>60672019
>November
4 more months of these unhinged advocates spamming the board with their inane bs. Thanks for the heads up.

>>60672037
>will 0.2 stakers get a window to move
>or are they gonna gas us

no gas chambers anon, just economic natural selection

>staking 1.0 is being built for security, not charity
>they’ll fill the validator slots with institutions, nodes, and whales first
>because they HAVE to, the system’s securing trillions

you’re not getting priority, but
>retail will get pooled access eventually
>delegation, staking tranches, middleware

think of it like ETH staking:
>early was whales and validators
>then came RocketPool, Lido, restaking wrappers, etc

same here
>you’ll get a chance to move
>but by the time you can, price probably won’t be $22 anymore

they’re not gassing you
they’re just building the ark before the rain

>>60672043
>nothing will make the market care
>xrpfags will cope regardless

correct
until it’s already happened
then they’ll say they “knew all along”

>>60672044
you’ll vanish when it plays out
we won’t remember you

>>60672005 (OP)
how do you still have energy for this bullshit anon?

>>60672051
>you’ll vanish
Ill make fat gains you turboretard.

>we won’t remember you
Such a normie thing to say.

>>60672057
>how do you still have energy for this bullshit anon?

it’s not about energy
once you’ve seen who’s already testing and what’s locked in for Q4, the rest is noise

>>60672058
>i’ll make fat gains you turboretard

you won’t
but you’ll think you did right up until the real move starts

>normie thing to say

says the guy chasing dopamine on a Taiwanese puppet forum

The worst thing about AI is how, even if someone is not using AI to write, they will be influenced by the cadence of AI writing (it's not this – it's that) so even human writing will often more closely resemble AI slop, as in this case.

>>60672005 (OP)
>imagine thinking these guys wanted you to share in the rewards
yes. thats what we've been telling you for 7 years. They didnt want us in this club. Thats why there was so much fud, so much price suppression. Thats why those who held will deserve every cent of their generational wealth. Muh shadowfork fud from 2018 isnt going to change that now.

>>60672070
>you won’t
Is november happening or not?

>chasing dopamine on a Taiwanese puppet forum
Ah yes thats why I make this LARP thread on said forum.

>>60672083
OP is definitely AI posting

>>60672090
> is nov happening
november is happening for you, but for them it’s already happening

> larp thread
sometimes people go against their own interest, say a job, because they understand people knowing something is more important than not

comprende?

>>60672109
What amount of link would you guesstimate is necessary to make it?

>>60672113
doesn’t matter
just own it

in reality, LINK will pump 20% in the weeks before smartcon after getting outperformed by the rest of the market for 3 months, tom zschach will congratulate chainlink on their efforts in a moderated keynote and vaguely project that oracles will be important for the future financial system, and then LINK will dump like it does every smartcon and cycle end (both of which correspond this year)

>>60672109
>november is happening for you, but for them it’s already happening
aren't they going to chop down the orchard again, my tree included?

>>60672133
checked
and still wrong

this time isn’t for retail
it’s for the ones who’ve already integrated
you’ll notice after it’s irreversible

>>60672109
>knowing
We all know. So far all similar posts have been nothing but disappointments.

>>60672138
>aren’t they going to chop down the orchard again, my tree included?

they’re not chopping trees this time
they’re fencing the land and turning it into infrastructure
if you’ve rooted in early, you’ll bear fruit long after the harvesters leave

you fucking fag

>>60672045
>you’ll get a chance to move
>but by the time you can, price probably won’t be $22 anymore
Who cares what the price is then? It doesnt affect anything

>>60672142
>all similar posts have been disappointments

that’s because none of them were the endpoint
this one is

>>60672147
>who cares what the price is then?

you will
when access, opportunity, and upside are all locked behind it

>>60672086
finally someone gets it
they never wanted you in
but if you endured all of it and you’re still here
you were never supposed to be and that’s exactly why you’ll make it

>>60672154
>you will
>when access, opportunity, and upside are all locked behind it
You dont make any sense. Il just take my linkies that i have been staking and plop them to the new system. I dont care if the price is 1 dollar or 1 million.

This larp is retarded. Even after running a poc and pov they will want public audits and real world deployments to battle test. Staking 1.0 hasn't been audited or battle tested.
A serious alliance will only use tested and tried technology. Given swift also operates over private networks majority of the nodes will be obfuscated behind a few select entry points/cross connects via ccip.

>>60672171
you’ll care

>>60672179
>they’ll wait for audits and battle testing before going live

anon
you think trillion-dollar actors are waiting for a GitHub PR and a Medium post?
they're doing the testing now, privately, with real data, under NDA
when it goes public, it's because it's already been battle-tested behind closed doors

>majority of nodes will be obfuscated

correct
because it’s not DeFi
it's infrastructure

>>60672181
ok fag

>>60672197
Saying you don't care if the price is 1 dollar or 1 million so long as you can stake is retarded.

>>60672197
>>60672206

>>60672189
Yes a public alliance of banks who is subject to stringent international compliance and audits is pushing out NDA's to silence people on deploying a non existent staking protocol.
t. Regularly interacted with swift for work

Understood, and makes sense. Thank you.

>>60672217
>nonexistent staking protocol + NDAs = larp

SWIFT literally published their CCIP integration progress
they’re not theorizing they’re operationalizing
you think they put out joint announcements just to test in public later?

this isn’t about hiding failures
it’s about proving quietly before signaling loudly
the NDAs are standard, the infrastructure is already moving

>>60672181
what will sergey do with 332 million unsold tokens if the price is too high? surely his betrayal knows a bound.

>>60672230
>sergey has 332M tokens, price goes up, surely he’ll dump

he doesn’t need to
the higher the price, the more strategic the unlocks become
those tokens aren’t exit liquidity they’re leverage over integration and control

betrayal isn’t selling
betrayal would be letting the system fail before securing global throughput
and he’s too deep in to fumble that now

>>60672238
it's rare i can ask questions and not get a faggy response. what got you into /biz/ and holding chainlink?

>>60672250
>what got you into /biz/ and holding chainlink?

saw the 2017 clown show, realized none of it could connect to the real world
LINK was the only project solving that bottleneck
not sexy, not fast, just inevitable
stayed quiet, kept stacking, watched the rest chase candles

>>60672256
>eventually you learn to just buy and hold
i read a phrase in the cult of the black cube i really liked
>The text also says that his power is slow, but this suggests the relentless, grinding power of a glacier - it does not move quickly, but there is nothing which can resist its momentum.
and got really into the esoteric side of chainlink and i'm honestly hooked. have you noticed any
>God is preparing you spiritually
or changes after buying?

>>60672086
they will do an IPO and you will cry like a little girl

can we please do something about AI slop? It's getting tiresome

>>60672256
You think there will be a chance to buy cheap LINK in the bear market or will there be no bear market for LINK anymore?

>>60672206
It doesnt stop me from staking as this fag is trying to claim

>>60672229
At what point, if ever, do the banks start betraying each other and jump to accumulate in spite of their ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ to suppress price and information. You’d have to think that a bank that feels behind or late to the party would betray the others, they are competitors after all

>>60672392
>LINK in the bear market
link is currently in a bear market

>>60672005 (OP)
2018 repost

I fucking HATE how these retards keep using GPT to create posts now, even Bubbafox. As much as he bullposts about link I just hate the constant obvious AI slop on my timeline, and the emdashes like ffs

Anons, I'm also a retarded marine, but please, for the love of god, if I have to read another:
> This isn't X
> Its the Y
I'm going to have a fucking aneurysm

MARINES, REPORT TO DUTIES AND STOP USING AI TO POST

>>60672454
If you can’t tell that his posts aren’t ai then you are retarded. I hope you morons are trolling, but if not here’s a hint: every sentence is all lower case and there is no punctuation

>>60672465
>generate me a green text using all lower case and no punctuation, 4chan style
there's a pacing that is AI. the posts have that pacing. Even if he's not using AI, he's writing like an AI, which is arguably even worse.

>>60672256
What can you tell us about the FUD cucks that spam this board?
Any leads on that? It'd be nice to pay them back for all their hard work unsuccessfully trying to shut down all discussion of link on here when this is all done. Are they based from a scam or shell company in the Netherlands?

>>60672465
OP's posts are 100% AI slop you literal imbecile

>>60672474
>>60672545
>his slightly poetic cadence reminiscent of a typical 4chan larp post means it’s AI! Please focus on that and not the actual content
Kill yourselves

>>60672569
follow your own advice, midwit

>>60672113
what is your make it number?
how many link do you own?
how much do you think link will be worth?
adjust your stack accordingly

I just want single digit LINK next couple years so I can buy more

>>60672576
the majority of ops 19 posts are objectively not ai

>>60672465
>>60672569
>>60672654
retards

>>60672654
all of them are objectively ai you moron, he either asked chatgpt to change up it's format or he edited the respinses himself

>>60672686
>>60672698
he has a couple posts formatted that way and the rest are normal posts

>>60672686
>fudcucks have actual proven bots spamming the board with fud posts around the clock
>encounter a non fudpost and start kvetching and projecting about inorganic posting
You should go drink some drain cleaner and lie down in a landfill somewhere, subhuman pos.

>>60672005 (OP)
>>60672035
>>60672019
wow, really cool! let's check the chart!
....
oooohh...... oh............ oh noooooooooo!!! oh nononono noOoooO!!!

>>60672029
Delusional buzzwords that is either written by ChatGPT or a person with no clue how the world works

>>60672710
everything is formatted in the same retarded AI slop format you illiterate nigger

>>60672005 (OP)
Even this post is predicated on the deluded hopium that the link network, token or staking will ever be used in the service.

>>60672717
Price.
Chart.

>>60672686
Go on ChatGPT and try to recreate a converation of this thread. You'll waste more fucking time trying to get the bot to give you these answers than you writing this shit out yourself.

there’s no reason to get purposefully de-railed because you don’t articulate your thoughts, and when presented with thoughts from someone who does

> cries

>>60673032
thanks chatgpt

>>60672045
So what was the point of 0.1 and 0.2 allowing community stakers if we will be abandoned eventually? I've been staking maximum amount since first minute of staking being enabled, will big Serg just dump me like he dumps 750k linkies per week?

>>60672035
>this isn’t dog coins and jpeg season

aka

>duuuuuuude just buy any other coin if you want gains

in order to preserve their ego, chainlink boyscouts have had to convince themselves that not making any money is some noble pursuit in a made up long term plan they keep changing

obviously they have to say this to save face

pride can be costly

>>60673374
their hubris was their downfall

>>60672492
anytime you get personally offended about an investment you hold it's a sign you got too emotionally attached

>>60673391
what exactly did you expect by THE cuckolds of crypto, dude?

>>60673391
>t. dude who has spent years crying about chainlink every day

>>60673414
tell em, queen

>>60673429
thx sis

>>60673445

>>60672005 (OP)
>you're not invited
nice "decentralized" finance you got there kek

>>60673414
do they give you a defender badge when you hit post milestones

>>60673656
yea it’s pretty sweet. jealous?

>>60672045
so sirgay is going to spiritually betray pool enjoyers? but where will me and my little stack go? i aint swimming in no LPL filth with my mainstack

Its gonna dump isnt it. Whenever a really good post comes along, the price dumps

>>60672005 (OP)
The VPN is what got me. I can't remove my proxies. People could be on my network.

>>60672005 (OP)
>>60672019
literally word for word an old XRP copypasta but with SmartCon swapped for Ripple Swell, and Chainlink swapped for Ripple, and LINK swapped for XRP

>>60674194

>>60672019
bros
what if there really is fucking AI making biz posts holy fuck, on my fucking LINK threads...
This reads similar to if someone told ChatGPT to write a biz post.
>It's not X, it's why
>make sure to make every sentence start with a lowercase!
>they're A, they're B, they're C, they're D
>highly formatted greentext, with breaks in between to explain the greentext as if each set of lines is a section of text in a response from ChatGPT
>smartcon isn't X, it's Y

Holy fuck man

>>60672238

i got you guys a present for your new apartment

>>60672379
Why do you keep coming back to this thread? Does it anger your masters that there is a positive Chainlink thread getting bumped?

>>60672043
>Chainlink stakers will make 1$ per link everyday
Is this even possible? With 40.875m in the pool, that's $14.9 billion/year going to the stakers.
I only have a 1k stack in the pool which I figured wouldn't be much, but that would be life changing. So life changing that I have a hard time believing it could happen.

i think it's hilarious that linkies talk about "real staking". everyone knows the last minute ditch effort to release a piece of shit so one of the hundred managers gets to tick off "release staking this" for a big fat bonus was just another dud on the year long dud streak

Fuddies came running ITT lmao discord on damage control over a positive Link thread

>>60674775
He's saying that if all those things happened and were confirmed, price would drop -2%. >>60672043's poor grammar skills are messing you up.

>>60675012
>you have to oversimplify because retards can't read between the lines
>what do you mean your story isn't green text

>>60674775
>I only have a 1k stack
You'll be poor forever. Maybe by 2040 you will make it, but ehhhh.

>>60672005 (OP)
Not happening this year, cuntflap. You're gonna rope this fall.

>>60675012
I got that it was in service to make a point, but I have never heard the idea of $1/day for each link staked, and I was just curious if it was possible.
>>60675036
>You'll be poor forever
Link is only 2% of my portfolio

>>60673360
To silence the basement dwellers. A cookie to make them stfu

>>60674547
Hi. Still the only anon posting these slop memes.

>>60674949
It is what it is.

>>60672005 (OP)

>>60675091
The planned max size for the community staking pool is 75M tokens. A dollar a day means $365 a year so -> $365*75M =$27,375M = $27.375B a year. Dude that's fucking nothing compared to what they're out to accomplish. Right now, the 4.32% APY for the community staking pool is powered by token emissions, aka Chainlink paying out from their own wallets directly. They eventually want the APY be powered by the revenue generated by the network.

Let's assume 5% of the yearly network revenue generated is $30B, meaning the network generated $600B a year. Let's say the Chainlink Network fees for the upcoming RWA market is 0.01%-> that means the RWA is $60T in marketcap. This... is unprecedented. That being said, Chainlink has been eyeing tokenizing the derivatives market from Day -1 which is over a quadrillion dollar market. Even outside of the that, right now the crypto market cap is just under $4T USD. Banks will most certainly bring in more value and the speculation will go through the roof. But hitting $60 Trillion without derivatives... yeah I don't think that would happen.

>>60676477
*Assume 5% of the yearly network revenue generated is routed to power the APY for the Community Staking Pool

>>60676477
>meaning the network generated $600B a year
Idk visa is an international payment processor used literally everywhere and they only pull 35.9B/year in net revenue. I guess if chainlink is successful they will be bigger, but 20x revenue bigger? That seems hard to believe...
>Let's say the Chainlink Network fees for the upcoming RWA market is 0.01%-> that means the RWA is $60T in marketcap. This... is unprecedented. That being said, Chainlink has been eyeing tokenizing the derivatives market from Day -1 which is over a quadrillion dollar market
Actually maybe it's not so hard to believe. Holy shit.
But can they actually capture fees for tokenizing assets/derivates/RWA? Would the fee be to tokenize it or transfer it?
If they can actually get fees like that and pass them to stakers this would be insane.

>>60676534
>But can they actually capture fees for tokenizing assets/derivates/RWA? Would the fee be to tokenize it or transfer it?

My dude, you need to capture one of Sergey's talks in the past year. Tokenized real world assets are NFTs, but they are constantly in synch with the real world to reflect its real world counterpart. This is only feasible with Chainlink.

This NFT 2.0 needs
> A proof of Reserves feed to accurately describe its counterpart
> Needs to cross chain connectivity so you can do something with it, aka trade. And everyone has their own blockchain so you need to move it over to your trading counterpart's blockchain to trade

Only Chainlink has all these services on a single platform.

>>60672103
AI <
AI agents >>

>>60676558
>This NFT 2.0 needs
> A proof of Reserves feed to accurately describe its counterpart
> Needs to cross chain connectivity so you can do something with it, aka trade. And everyone has their own blockchain so you need to move it over to your trading counterpart's blockchain to trade
And the link staking pool provides the feed and secures cross chain connectivity?

>>60676602
Oh yeah, there needs to be the data feeds, especially if the asset requires information on other assets and commodities. The staking protocol provides extra security for various chainlink jobs.

>>60673360
I’m never staking I don’t trust them

>>60675098
winner

>>60676693
Actually let me re-phrase that. I trust them I just don’t trust lending it.

I’ll rent out my link for someone else to stake and they can take a %

77% huh

>>60677068
Smartcon 2025 in other words

>>60672035
are you saying the average retail LINK holder (under 100K LINK) is better off selling repricing event (singularity) rather than holding onto their LINK tokens for 10+ years hoping to utilize their LINK tokens in some way such as staking?

>>60677149
no. you’re not reading.
you’ll make money off the repricing.
you can sell, but this will indefinitely go up.

>>60672005 (OP)
That's great and all but... one small problem champ... price...???.... chart.
Didn't read btw

>>60677204
I bought a fat LINK stack in 2018 hoping to make my stack work for me to make more money passively. Can I change my hopes and aspirations from using LINK to potentially get more LINK to only thinking of my LINK stack as sell as I need the money instrument? Since utilization of LINK tokens is not realistic for people who are not large enterprises?

>>60677068
I almost positive Tom has posted here before

>>60678292
I’m*

>>60672029
Hahaha ha I can't wait for the next bear when link is sub $3.

>>60676477
>A dollar a day means $365 a year
If it happen 1 LINK would be worth at least $7000, it seems a bit excessive no?

>>60678384
I remember a time btc at 1000 was deemed excessive
We are dealing with a new asset class here that doesnt correspond to old valuation tools
And dont forget link is hardcapped so it'll behave exactly like btc, after that there is 7 link for every person in the wealthy swift nations, while on here there are anons with 100k stacks who are never selling, you do the math on that