/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>18500231
Each token is divisible to 18? places. We have a way to go before 5 whole link is an unheard of fortune.

The real fud is that (especially with derivatives and swaps markets) the process of using SCs is so much faster and streamlined compared to normal. I'm more worried that the first few trusted oracles will be able to gain and retain a significant portion of the useage we have speculated the network getting. Yes, there will be the 150mm+ transactions...but at present those take 2+weeks to process from start to end. CL turns that into a couple minutes. So while the useage switches, the overall capital tied up doesn't need to be nearly as high...allowing the same 5 (or whatever) node operators to handle the daily transaction volume effectively back to back with only the total cost of a transaction or two 150mm-500mm in stake.

This should, in theory, allow for more frequent trading to be profitable...but my worry is the boomers will stick to their 5 known b&m node operators (google, oracle, ey, ms, nyse/ice) and never spread the calculated roi (approx 350usd per link per year) from it.

There will still be less profitable opportunities like weather data for shitskin farmers crop insurance, but those won't be nearly as nice as the 1k/5 mins pricing that trading firms will gladly pay.

Here's hoping that the obfuscation methods promised (mixicles) and regulatory bodies/buy side participants require more nodes or "decentralization".

>>17713781
It's quadrillions you dumb fag. Taking their 1% savings, say a third of that to node fees, means just under 400usd per link per year alone.

Ignoring the obvious growth turning a 2 week manual trade into seconds freeing up margins to make more trades...and knocking a bit off the top, link is 250-500 usd a year in staking. Which is basically where I've guesstimated it without having to be a billion dollar fi-tech startup.

Oh yeah and those numbers are all fully diluted, so double them if sirgay doesn't release all the free tokens at once. 1k isn't the price...it's the annual return per link!

*AHEM, AHEM, AHEM*

FUCK NIGGERS
FUCK JANNIES
FUCK KIKES
FUCK WAGIES
FUCK ROASTIES
FUCK LINK
FUCK SIRGAY
AND FUCK YOUR MOM

>>16504024
>>16504085
>Tfw was OP of that rambling drivel and 20 other followups of same length
>took a deep breath to phonepost effectively the same thing, again.
Glad I decided to check replies kek. Basically it boils down to what the shit it's replacing pays for current services (I usually calculate 50% savings/cost reductions) then a small multiplier for boomer "muh investment".

Basically bare minimum annual return is 200-500 at full market use/saturation (not factoring the 2-3x for most segments stemming from SC tech), at highly reduced costs. Then it's a question of how much an asset that returns that amount per link per year with slight deflation (bad addresses/lost private keys) is valued at. Boomerniggers and stock retards would cream at 10% right?

>>16315336
I shouldn't bother replying to this jumble of shitskin broken English and poor fud...but check to link for what happens when companies "do it on their own" (or in this case, had to because CL wasn't available yet).

https://www.google.com/amp/s/cointelegraph.com/news/sophisticated-trading-bot-exploits-synthetix-oracle-funds-recovered/amp

Billions of dollars lost. Not factoring the development costs compared to the 5 minute OpenLaw CL stack. Premade legally binding and attorney reviewed contract, fill in a couple variables, pick your 5-20 oracles based on cost, rating/reliability, and available collateral...and you're done, with no way to lose billions of dollars.

Businesses aren't broke ass street shitters that have to use soda cans to steal wifi to poopost on here. They have rules, regulations, boards, and risk management departments. This new technology is already cutting costs 90% in most industries...are they really going to risk billions to shave another 1 or 2% in tax write-off expenditures?

>>16224099
Should've used a better op pic imo