/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>16814339
Then dont? There's a serious answer but it involves basic economics and 80 iq intelligence, so easier answer is "buy BSV very good satoshi real creg"

>>16815460
LP says they cover errors from their take, I guess hypothetically with a major error it could liquidate them and then Idk what. But the reality is penalizing shouldn't be a big factor, and will only come into play with complete service failures (server down/power loss with no backup, etc).

CL makes it so the transferred data is tamper-proof, so there's literally no way to spoof or inject malicious data as a node. Compromised data is much more likely to be at a data provider level, which is the sole responsibility of the requestors to pick multiple and solid providers...there is no recourse to nodes.

Again, you'd only really get dinged for uptime in practice...whatever small percentage is decided. You won't get cleaned out of a 5 million dollar stake (because the other 5,10,100+ nodes would aggregate and come to consensus without you/overrule you/in your absence)

>>16484912
>namefag
>retarded
Don't know what I expected.

AWS "leaked" like a week ago, again. Salesforce, DocuSign. IBM supply chain. ISDA already has working demos from Consensys (openlaw)...SWIFT and almost every major euro bank separately working on projects and proofs.

Pretty much anything and anyone that can use blockchain or "does" tech/blockchain work has quietly confirmed. But it's like announcing what road you're going to drive your new ferrari on; you don't really announce it in a press release, you just use it.

>>16392923
We get it OP, you're one of the (many) co2 tree/reforestation meme betting startups

That's fucking gay and a strong sell signal if you're all the Oracle 50 has left.

>gravelcoin was unironically the top
Fuck