What's with all the FUD? It's really getting in a new level...

I don't know. It's honestly getting annoying. They just repeat the same moot point over and over again no matter how many times they get btfo'd by logic.

Post source

So we wish. I'm diversifying out of Link, leaving 10% in

You love Chainlink too much. Smart money is already in Mobius.

chainlink-docs.smartcontract.com/#anatomy-of-an-assignment

>no matter how many times they get btfo'd by logic.
And you expect brainlets to follow logic? senpai I'm holding since ICO, I've seen countless LINK threads, and it's always the same.
brainlets gonna buy when it mooned already and then they're gonna say "oooh how did I miss it blabla I didn't listen" and post pink wojaks.

Sergey is fuckien lier, all link investors are going to get fucked in the ass

when i bought link the fud was even heavier than this, good for you for not falling for

>link was 15 c

Not really. I can't feel any true commitment in the Mobius team - solving the oracle problem is something that will make Smart Contracts something /actually/ relevant and not some technological curiosity, and the Mobius team is just like "get ready for moon bois!". They don't understand what they're doing.

Besides I'm diversifying in REQ and ICX.

Also obligatory
>buy mobius sir

Just bought 2.5k because of all the FUD I saw on Veeky Forums

What is this shit supposed to do? Pls explain thanks.

Smart money understands that mobius is inferior to chainlink as a blockchain data provider and they aren't even technically competitors.

So how is not being paid in link for operating a node supposed to affect the price?

I can't even tell if it's true or fud

I find Mobius inferior technically. The way they provide data to the Blockchain is by accepting calls on a centralised API. So data requests to the Blockchain have to originate off-chain. Its solution is poor compared to what CL is planning for the initial implementation IMO. I wouldn't class Mobius as a direct competitor desu. Their implementation has a lot to be desired in my opinion. I agree with the people who say they're trying to do too much.

To expand on what I said, my personal issue is with their API:
mobius.network/docs/#buy

So to buy data and create an Ethereum contract to use it, you need to go a centralised API and centralised BE what manages it. In practise, this means that even though the data retrieval is decentralised, the management of that data is completely centralised.

Chainlink will be completely different. To request the data, it can originate from on-chain or off-chain. The API for requesting the data is also each individual node, which then propagates that request across the network. So even though Chainlink will have a centralised FE which makes it easy for people to use it, it means that the requesting of the data and the management of it all, is completely decentralised.

Also keep in mind that the retrieval of data into Ethereum is just one aspect of Chainlink, the aspect included in the initial implementation. There's also BTC/Hyperledger and what CL can do there, The BTC/Hyperledger functionality will be completely different to that, and creates a whole new aspect not yet seen in any other Oracle projects at all.

You shouldn't put your money on something you don't know what the tech is about - at least you shouldn't for a long term hodl.

Look up the Oracle problem. That's what it solves, and the Oracle problem is the main reason Smart Contracts aren't nearly as useful as they currently are. Because they require a third party to feed data to the contract, there's a few risks here such as trusting a dishonest oracle (which ChainLink solves by using the LINK token) and the extra cost for developing a custom API which is, in many cases, not compatible with other APIS.

And because the management of data is centralized mobius is vulnerable to Sybil attacks. Chainlink is not.

>aren't nearly as useful as they currently are
aren't nearlly as useful as they *could be*

Autofixed.

Anons selling and now trying to erase cognitive dissonance by preaching the end of times. Most people here bought into the HODL meme and so don't understand how to trade across weeks or months, instead opting to make one large decision that should be true forever.

I was going to make a thread like this when I got home from work.

I have noticed that the uptick and quality in ChainLink FUD is going way, WAY up. The FUD used to borderline on childish and comical, but now it's like big guns are coming out and actual intelligent FUD is finding it's way to Veeky Forums. I still notice that it gets shot down, but if I were someone of weaker hands I could see selling.

Either LINK holders are finding better FUD to try to keep the price down before main net or some connected people don't want us buying.

Pls respond

Why would it matter if you're not always getting paid in link since you still need link to get good contracts running nodes?

It'll still hit 1000, right guys? Right?

>The currency is configurable based on the networks that the oracle operates in. Currency amounts are always specified in the lowest possible denomination of the currency(Satoshis, Wei, etc.).

Try harder.

I think people are just getting bored to be honest. I bought lots at $0.18 during the FUD and this is stuff is nothing.

So are we still gonna get paid in link or no?

This is all happening before mainnet release. They want to get cheap link before mainnet I suspect.

The fudders probably missed out on 17 cent link because they fell for the fud. Now they want to claim cheap link. I never see people shilling mobius without fudding link. They never just shill mobius.

Yeah it still seems the token is used for other things even if it's not necessarily needed for payments. The network was supposed to be build around the token, it was supposed to be the internal currency, now it seems that may not be the case and we could see other functions able for external currencies. This would make the "they will ditch the token" -meme reality. Depends on if the users demand it I think

Damn.

Can someone contact Rory in slack and ask him wtf is up?

Oh my god i hate this fattie

I don't know how you interpret this, but I read it as: If the oracles are providing data to Neo you can pay the nodes with Wei, if your node operates in Bitcoin platform you can be paid in Satoshi

And if they want they COULD pay in Link but there is not any point to do that.

Link will be max 10$

I hope you're right.

SOMEONE ASK RORY WHAT IT MEANS

lmfao thats it boys moon missions over

This is the first time in months I am actually scared, wtf someone explain please

Seriously this is the only thing that actually has me worried about Link.

What the fuck is the point of the link token if it's true? Did we all get ripped off? Why are you doing this Sergey?

SOMEONE PLEASE CONTACT RORY AND ASK HIM TO CLARIFY

Explain what? I think that's a pretty straightforward explanation.

HE CANT DO THIS TO US

and youre not being ripped off faggot, but the claims of a token that will be used by node operators (most of which will be bought from chainlink directly no some exchange) will hit 50 or 100 dollars are deluded

I AM LITERALLY SHAKING RIGHT NOW

Chainlink FUD is a huge buy signal

KEEP HOLDING LINKMARINES

Whoa what this turned into to?

Let's make one thing clear: nothing was ever said about "being paid in LINK to run a node". The point of the token is meant as a form of node reputation, you won't simply get paid LINK for running a node. And yes, you could run a node without tokens, but that's pointless really - no one will trust some random guys' node with no tokens.

That's just FUD, albeit it can scare newLINKers.

Thanks user! Highly appreciated

>I can still bet on a 5x or 10x

>Opportunity costs of being in LINK means that you've already missed GURANTEED 5x, 10x, and even 20x

that doesn't say LINK will be worth anything, it just says you should've known what to expect

I know, that's why I am not all in on LINK. I don't think I have to explain the importance of diversification.

Could be this too lol

>github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink-docs/commit/ef7f554f54476fc9592a0807d94a0eafebd23162#diff-d30d91dbcd59693b69f9242acb4630c5
The part was added on November 2016, so it's very old.

So, you need LINK to have a reputable stake, and then your node can be paid off in ETH, BTC, NEO, or LINK itself?

No it's old code.

I'm going to keep believing, but it is indeed confusing.

>Listen to a dozen of Sergey's talks before I'm conviced.
The dude is interested in the raw tech.
Gives me rock solid confidence but I don't like how he fetishizes intel SGX, especially given the recent meltdown debacle, showing us yet again that they're absolute morons and SGX shouldn't be trusted.

The network can work without SGX at least but Sergey makes it out to be louder than he has to.
Assume some network hardware is compromised to ensure you can tamper proof it from every angle rather than just pass of the issue to a proprietary enclave and call it solved.

My only beef with the idea.
Holdan moon or bust.