>b-but muh always do the opposite of Veeky Forums says
Veeky Forums SHILLED YOU ETH Veeky Forums SHILLED YOU NEO WHEN IT WAS JUST A STUPID FUCKING ANT Veeky Forums SHILLED YOU OMG WHEN IT WAS UNDER A DOLLAR Veeky Forums SHILLED YOU LITERALLY EVERY SINGLE GOOD PROJECT BUT YOU WERE JUST TOO STUPID TO CAPITILIZE ON THAT
ARE YOU GONNA MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE NOW AND MISS THE TWO BIGGEST MOON MISSIONS OF 2018?
I truly hope the Req team decides to use another team other than the shitty Link garbage. They need a more reputable team instead of that stupid cultist meme.
Sergey is a well respected person in the community tho, who gives a fuck about autistic memes?
Can Sergey even code?
LINK is the only blockchain agnostic decentralized oracle. There is no competition there.
I personally believe infrastructure will be more valuable in the long run than normie friendly “crypto PayPal” like Req.
But yeah if I wasn’t all-in on LINK I would buy some req. maybe next time I get Fiat
He’s a CEO you brainlet. It’s normal for companies to have a CEO (big boss man) and a CTO (tech boss). It doesn’t matter if he can code because that’s not his job, and besides, if you listen to Sergey talk it’s clear he has an excellent conceptual understanding of all the intricacies of smart contracts and oracles. WEAK FUD
This makes no sense. REQ using LINK's oracles to access fiat is just one use case for LINK's oracles out of thousands. LINK has to moon harder.
They may be brothers put REQ's fiat release is dependent on LINK. Not the other way around. No matter how much that hurts salty REQ marines feelings.
I don't understand this logic. It's not about whether REQ will suddenly switch oracles. No matter what oracle they use (and it's obvious they're using LINK) they have to wait for that oracle to be running first.
And this here is a brainlet.
I guess its true anything biz touches looks tainted.
>No matter what oracle they use (and it's obvious they're using LINK) they have to wait for that oracle to be running first. When is req mainnet? Q1? Does this mean that LINK mainnet must coincide?
And this is why REQ is going to dump hard as shit April 1st.
All these buyers don't know shit.
The REQ mainnet release is only for ERC20 tokens. Absolutely nothing else. They literally cannot access fiat without LINK being released first.
Check the roadmap on REQ site. It says fiat being added Q2.
REQ doesn't really really need LINK, it's just the most likely solution to one of their problems. In any case, maximum potential years down the line, buy some dips, take some profits.
Lol scams because they can potentially replace link as an Oracle for one of the biggest projects of 2018, BTFO retard
>They literally cannot access fiat without LINK being released first. Without literally any Oracle company being released first* Nobody is going to wait for LINK to get their asses into gear, first come first served.
Technically you're right. They could find another Oracle, but you do realize how much that would delay the REQ roadmap?
And REQ has given every indication they're using LINK.
Which is why longterm it's better to hold LINK.
Even if Mobius wasn't a scam. LINK is getting first mover advantage.
How is EOS releasing after ETH?
Lol that's not how coding works..REQ wouldn't simply throw out months of work with LINK.
But this doesn't even matter because LINK has for the longest been planned to release Q2 2018.
So a...salty.. So.. so... a salty negro..
Do they actually need the oracles to be decentralized to offer fiat conversion? Wouldn't a centralized oracle be a sufficient stop-gap measure until a fully functional decentralized oracle is available i.e. achieving complete decentralization of the the entire transaction?
>months of work/coding with link you're delusional, they are in TALKS with link, not fucking working with them you absolute goon. Are all Linkies this delusional?
Then why did they have around 7k link in the request wallet?
Exactly correct, a regular api would work absolutely fine until something better came along. They are not going to delay their roadmap until everything is absolutely 100% ideal
In one of the REQ updates, they specifically said they want an immutable ledge.
That's not a lot of link. Idk how that could mean anything.
You guys realize that LINK doesn't need to be up and running 100% before REQ works, right? They responded to a similar question where they were asked "Wait, wouldn't REQ's progress be delayed because they need KNC and LINK to be fully functional first?"
Their answer was no, since they have early versions of their stuff. I'm sure they're working with whatever LINK has right now and testing it to make sure they can get it to work well enough by Q2.
The other fact of the matter is that even if LINK is working which is what enables REQ to shine, people aren't going to start buying LINK because that's not the main product. It's a backend system. You might definitely get smart investors buying up LINK, but the most obvious play here is to buy REQ because of the token burn from normies using the network without even needing to know what the REQ token is.
They will be buying REQ without knowing what it is.
LINK is a more long-term play than REQ for that simple reason.
this makes more sense I feel like fomoing into req now I guess I’ll just dump my binance link into req for now
At least the volume has picked up a little over the last week... Well on binance anyway.
1 - Would you rather hold what normies are buying your versus what smart money is buying up?
2 - What you said at the end there could be applied exactly the same way to LINK. LINK nodes will be used by projects(like REQ) without normies even knowing. If REQ releases an app similar to CashApp. In background the app will be using both REQ and LINK tokens, so I don't know why you're acting like it's just REQ.
>1 - Would you rather hold what normies are buying your versus what smart money is buying up?