/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>10821704
Remade thread because of an error.

https://www.theswiftcodes.com/australia/ctbaau2s/

CBA does indeed work with SWIFT's protocols (like basically almost all banks).

Literally shaking right now.

https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/?symbol=CBA-AU

CBA, the bank that's doing this bond with the World Bank, is partnered with SWIFT.

Such bonds require an oracle.

SWIFT completed bond POC with smartcontract.com/Chainlink

Put two and two together

To FUD or upboat?

*tips fedora*

https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/9a0533/the_world_bank_just_issued_a_bond_that_relies_on/

https://smartereum.com/30318/world-bank-to-settle-blockchain-bond-worth-73-million-this-month/

>On Thursday, CBA confirmed to Reuters that the bond worth $100 million AUD ($73 million USD) will be transacted via blockchain on August 28.

Bondi-I is a two-year designed to yield a 2.25 percent return and is part of the $50–$60 billion in bond sales the World Bank issues every year to combat poverty and improve back economic progress in developing countries. It will be the first bond by the World Bank to be settled using blockchain. CBA will solely arrange and issue the bond. It will do this through a blockchain network it has built on ethereum platform

>>10821774
reckon you're saying right now they're using a smartcontract brand smart oracle and intend to migrate to chainlink?

How could they be using ChainLink if mainnet isn't up...?

Does really some no brainer fall for this shill stupidity?
How does this kind of deluded scam posts affect the price?

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/24/world-bank-exceeds-expectations-with-world-first-blockchain-bondcba.html

>>10821926
If this actually involved Chainlink, it would unironically be the most significant thing to happen for a blockchain/token project ever.

But seeing as Chainlink still isn't a finished product, I'm not sure what the excitement is...? It just shows that bonds are being issued without decentralized oracles. Can someone fill in the: "and here's why this is a good thing"

>>10821920
SWIFT did it without Chainlink mainnet

>>10821822
Fud, because we need normies for that extra Singularity boost. The shilling needs to be all at once, so now is not a good time if mainnet isn't even out.

>>10821967
See
>>10821974

Also - https://www.computerworld.com.au/article/645714/world-bank-blockchain-bond-raises-110-million/
>The bond-i is based a platform developed by CBA’s Blockchain Centre of Excellence and infrastructure for the bond runs on Microsoft’s Azure cloud service.

>>10821974
Wouldn't that imply that they don't need mainnet for a lot of functions then and that we are holding useless shitcoins?

>>10821704
>Ctrl + F chainlink
>0 results

>Bond-I, however, will not totally rely on blockchain. The actual payments will be made off-chain through the existing SWIFT system. Blockchain will be used to automate the issuance process.

https://smartereum.com/30318/world-bank-to-settle-blockchain-bond-worth-73-million-this-month/

What I think this indicates is that SWIFT's existing systems are used for payments right now. But when Chainlink mainnet goes live they will be able to use blockchain for the payment part too - because LINK can also make off-chain payments, as we know. So it seems like this is an unfinished setup for the bond issuance. However... If *only* the issuance of the bond is on blockchain, that would also require an Oracle.... Wouldn't it?

>>10821999
This. The link delusion continues. Imagine being the person who believes that a gypsy russian with a philosophy degree and no programming experience is going to instantiate a global, paradigm shifting economic system where banks and other entities are going to willfully funnel hundreds of billions of dollars into and sit around idly while said gypsy russian and his family of neet fags take profits.

Now imagine being the person who believes that the worlds banking cartels, with arguably some of the most brilliant computer scientists out there, are going to sit by and let a gypsy russian take profits they could have had by using a simple JSON parser.


Consider this snippet from the following article:
[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10736960/High-frequency-trading-when-milliseconds-mean-millions.html]

"No wonder that Spread Networks, the company building the fibre-optic connection, proudly boasted: “Round-trip travel time from Chicago to New Jersey has been cut to 13 milliseconds.”

And HFTs were willing to pay through the nose to use it, with the first 200 to sign up forking out $2.8bn between them."
These fucking jews spend billions of dollars just to get a 13 millisecond improvement so their algorithms can get the data faster. So you're telling me that if there was any money in the chainlink area these guys wouldn't be all over it? Get the fuck out of here.

So explain to me why this is going to work again? Or is it just a PnD like 99% of other crypto's out there.

>>10821999
Chekkt

But that's always the case. Probably no mention of the brands of computers used to set up the process either.

>>10821996
SmartContract.com already provides oracles brainlet.

>>10821999
I can't wait for these posts to age terribly and nolinkers to mass suicide. I will laugh and laugh.

A king's time as ruler rises and falls like the sun. One day, Simba, the sun will set on my time here, and will rise with you as the new king.

>>10822035
I mean, any developer could make their own oracles. The point I'm making is that if large entities are going ahead and issuing bonds on the blockchain...and not using decentralized oracles...perhaps they aren't concerned with using decentralized oracles. This would make Chainlink tokens not that valuable and decentralized oracles only used in sparse situations...

>>10821967
>https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/24/world-bank-exceeds-expectations-with-world-first-blockchain-bondcba.html
there's oracles already. smartcontract can be used as an oracle bro. a centralized one. how do you think they have done their poc's with swift?
the decentralized network is just a gigantic step over the solutions we have today. but it would make perfect sense that we do testing like this through centralized controlled solutions.

>>10822083
Sergey has talked at length why a decentralized oracle is the best option for very large smart contracts/transactions, such as exactly this kind of thing, ffs. $100 million would require the best oracle possible - a decentralised one. Not to mention SWIFT, a network of 10,000 banks, is WORKING WITH CHAINLINK to presumably achieve exactly that.

>>10822093
SmartContract.com is the leader in centralized oracles anyway. You think they used Oraclize? kek

>>10822093
That's the point I'm making. Everyone has already been making their own oracles for blockchain applications for months. Everyone has been implying that no one would ever trust large financial transactions like this without decentralized oracles. Well, $100MM is pretty large, and there doesn't appear to be any issue with their use of a centralized oracle...so why would they make a big deal about it going forward...? If they felt insecure in this method, they wouldn't have issued $100MM worth of bonds...

>>10821704
the anon the other day hinted about connection to JP Morgan and yankee bonds. there's already the hyperledger and chainlink discussion. all 3 together could be Quorom?

https://www.jpmorgan.com/global/Quorum

>>10822129
Yet, clearly, they didn't use a decentralized oracle. Unless they're using testnet or some sort of shadow network to handle $100MM of people's money. Seems unlikely. Seems much more likely they just made their own oracle which would be trivial for whoever developed this...

I'm honestly not trying to FUD...I'm hoping someone can tell me why I'm incorrect in viewing this as potentially really bad...

>>10822205
they didnt make their own oracle. smartcontract has been providing centralized oracles since 2014. except now they have gone the decentralized route and are implementing the new network as the poster above stated.

>>10822205
Stop shitting on streets, pajeet. You are a filthy specimen. Die.

>>10822222
Careful with those digits fren

>>10822146
They are issuing the payment with an existing SWIFT system? not with blockchain.
Pic related.

Nolinkers - it's staring you in the face.
Only the issuance is blockchain.

>>10822205
The issuance of the bond was done with existing SWIFT systems, faggot. And SWIFT wants to use LINK. See >>10822264

>>10822242
I'm not a pajeet. I'm being fucking serious. I hold a lot more Link than you do faggot. Why do you think I'm concerned and they only one trying to discuss this while everyone else is thinking this is great.

A regular oracle is a lot easier to implement than using a decentralized network or oracles. If a precedent is being set handling $100MM of bonds on blockchain using a regular oracle...it seems like those involved weren't too concerned with the potential security issues of using a regular oracle with such a large sum...

>>10822222
Kek is telling us to not be over confident and be more humble in receiving our gifts from him?!

>>10822286
100MM is a drop in a bucket for SWIFT

>>10822317
It's issuance of bonds...

>>10822222
Wasted

>>10822047
Dude, it's pretty clear you are all going to get scammed. I hope you lose your money you fucking prick. Anyone with half a brain would sell now while they're still making a profit

>>10822363
and pajeet?

>>10822388
found the brainlet who sold the bottom

>>10822286
mainet is live, we just don't know it. 650mil token duh

>>10822392
You're clearly a 20 year old retard, stop wasting everyone's time

>>10822413
>waste of everyone's time
>starts fudding because he sold the bottom.
>doesnt even know how decentralized oracles work.
kys faggot. no one cares about your lunch money stack. step up ur game.

>>10822404
Never bought LINK in my life. Knew something was fishy the second it was getting shilled to fuck on /biz/

Bet you probably might've though

>>10822448
i dont care if you did or didnt ever buy link. stay poor for all i care

>>10822448
>Never bought LINK in my life
Some people have a natural self-sabotage mechanism to keep them from attaining wealth. It's nature's way of making sure that we always have worker drone NPC's to maintain society

>>10822444
Holy shit I envy you. ZAR is down because of the land expropriation getting a 7000 stack was hard as shit. Not that it matters ZAR is always shit.

>>10822462
>>10822459
Keep shilling faggots, this shitcoin is going to drop in a month or two. The more you invest, the more thankful i'll be that I wasn't as retarded as some of the people on this board

>>10822286
Does it say anywhere that a centralized oracle was used anywhere in this bond issuance trial? I think people just spun themselves up on the idea, but most likely they used the Blockchain system for auditability and record keeping, and manually settled the actual payment. No way in hell did anyone trust a centralized oracle to manage settling of $100m

>>10822492

You can't even call it a token? Fucking brainlet.
You must be invested in Nano?

>>10822505
How do you suppose they input data into this application?

>>10822481
sorry to hear that anon

>>10821904
This?

>>10822533
Its okay anon. Seems America has had us in the news recently ANC government is freaking the fuck out about Trump's tweet.

>>10822546
I would hope so...but there is no implication as to this and everything is touting this bond issuance as a great success

>>10822565
Please know, Anon, there are Americans out here who sympathize with you. If there was something we could do, we would. Glad to see POTUS making this an issue. His tweet has forced our news media into a massive frenzy - when previously they were completely ignoring the issue - and has consequently increased dramatically the awareness among normies of such issues.

>>10822531
I think these are big fucking institutions who have made it their life’s mission to be studious recordkeepers. We have a tendency to get lost in a sea of trustlessness in crypto land but those guys don’t need trustlessness, they need a better faster cheaper way to keep their records. I think their little test used a Blockchain as the core ledger and the inputs and outputs were handled more or less like they have been doing it for generations. You don’t NEED an oracle to do those ins and outs, you would (hopefully) choose to eventually because it saves you time and money. Oracle infrastructure isn’t there. It just isn’t, centralized oracles are a joke, at best a beta test. No real money will ever depend on a centralized oracle

>>10821704
Thanks for posting this news, fren.

I take this as GENERALLY good news for chainlink EVEN THOUGH this does not appear to need or use chainlink or any other oracle.

1) A reminder that the point of the oracle is to provide OFF CHAIN data. So, e.g. you set up a smart contract derivative that will pay off based on the price of copper on October 1. THAT smart contract needs some way to obtain the price of copper on October 1. That's what an oracle is -- it is a method for validating that the price is correct.
2) THIS smart contract, by contrast, appears to be paying a SET interest rate on a set schedule. "Bondi-I is a two-year designed to yield a 2.25 percent " So, it does not appear that it NEEDS an oracle. you just set it running and it pays a certain amount to a list of ethereum addresses on a set schedule
3) This is STILL, imho, good news for chainlink. Here's why. Because it shows and supports the GENERAL trend of moving financial assets to smart contracts. If this succeeds, then there will be more interest in moving more financial assets to smart contracts. many of these financial assets WILL need an oracle, even if this PARTICULAR bond does not. And as these OTHER financial assets move to smart contracts they are likely (maybe very likely) to turn to chainlink for their oracle solution.

INB4 "ctrl f chainlink 0 results" or "the absolute state of stinky linkies"

If you want to refute -- put up an argument, don't just fud.

>>10821704
>World Bank issues $100 million bond

Guys, how much collateral would you have to put up for a smart-contract like this? This 1 bond is bigger than LINK's whole carpet cap. How could LINK handle 1000's of these bonds if there's only $100 million worth of LINK in existence and node operators have to put up collateral for every contract?

LINKIES BTFO

>>10822222
Damn nice quints. LINK $.25 eoy confirmed.

>>10822693
Thank you for this response Anon

>>10822665
Thanks anon appreciated.

>>10822670
>but those guys don’t need trustlessness, they need a better faster cheaper way to keep their records
Agree with your general point that they are MOSTLY focused on "better faster cheaper" BUT I would add that part of the reason current systems are slow and expensive is that the various institutions DON'T trust each other, so EACH has to maintain their own records of each transaction and then go through a somewhat laborious process of reconciling institutions A's records against institution B's. Given the VAST number of transactions, this is inevitably a slow, expensive process. Some kind of distributed ledger would --ASSUMING THAT THEY TRUST IT -- allow them to GRADUALLY scale these labor intensive reconciling of transactions.

BUT, again totally agree with -- what I take to be -- your general point that these guys are interested in this for very hardnosed, short term, cost saving (including reducing costs of errors that occur in current labor intensive processes) not for "muh new world of trustless utopia"

>>10822693
Thanks Thomas

>>10821704
this is cool but can we find the transaction on ropsten or the eth testnet?

$100 million bond. Only 1 billion LINK. if LINK were $1 that's already 1/10 of its supply accounted for in this bond. and this is just the first of many. the only way LINK can service this market is if the singularity is real.

tick tock nolinkers.

>>10822723
Actually one of the most bullish posts itt

>>10822129
>is WORKING WITH CHAINLINK
no they're not you fucking retard. They won a contest

>neet gets a contract to retrieve data to issue a bond
>node fucks up
>loses his house

>>10822264
wanting and being are two different thing shithead. I want 1 million dollars

>>10822958
Pajeet

Do you remember those IBM hyperledger engineers who were discussing oracle solutions in those emails? Where were they based again?

...Anonymous (ID: 7deZAwVK)
08/25/18(Sat)00:49:45 No.10822980
Public ChainLink network is nowhere to be seen. SWIFT issuing bonds on blockchain. I wonder if they'll be using the public neet-node network or the SWIFT smart oracle network like mentioned in the official smartcontract.com website? I assume they will have an adapter to connect to the public ChainLink network once it goes live. They'll use it they need to connect to outside of their internal system. What do you guys think? No answer to this when I tried discussing this the other day. I saw someone post about this on reddit, but he had misunderstood. I'm not saying institutions will build their own network, I'm saying smartcontract.com is offering a tailor made version for them. A private network with parties incentivized to act honest by mutual financial interest in managing a system they all benefit immensely. In these system the current frauds are not made by the parties involved, the SWIFT messaging network is attacked from the outside, this is what they need to protect from. They can trust each others and will trust each other's nodes in the private network provided by the ChainLink team. Refute this if you can please

An exchange recently added link, where was it based again?

Where is sibos taking place this year again? Is commonwealth Bank doing a conference with ic3 partners hyperledger and jo Morgan about blockchain?

Blythe masters said one country would experiment before all the others would follow and adopt, which was it again?

>>10823060
do you not know what country it was or are you trying not to spoon feed too much?

>Australia

>>10823091
Where is Melbourne

>>10822982
>>10823060
this is cool and all that but theres a video going around where sergay is shooting the shit with money skelly. How the fuck is he doing all this shit when hes literally doing nothing

>>10822915
and the team has said multiple times that the relationship is ongoing. how many times does this have to be said? get it through your heads. if they were the winners of the challenge and successfully met the needs of SWIFT, don't you think it would make sense for that to be the case? that they would continue working together? i swear to god some people

>>10823025
I'm not saying this to fud, but to manage expectations. If what I say is the case, it's still bullish for chainlink. Right now we're prizing in swift partnership in the sense that if it's not happening it will be a disappointment. We shouldn't hype it up too much. If it ends up be true it's so huge everyone in crypto and finance will hear about it anyway. I propose we should manage expectations and have critical conversation about the case between ChainLink and SWIFT. For banks, what are the benefits of using public ChainLink network instead of the theoretical private swift smart oracle network by ChainLink team? This network would also push out the European open banking API data. Calling for link og's from the discussion era

>>10823275
you're making assumptions. Typical stinker

>>10823351
doubt you'l get an answer to that one. it's been mentioned a few times in the past that smartcontract.com
(Chainlink Enterprise Oracles) and the chainlink decentralized network are separate entities, and it just gets called FUD.

>>10823726
uh what?
can you tell me more pls

>>10822935
Headline from Oct 2021:
>Retard Runs LINK Node, Fucks Up World Economy

>>10823726
Yeah been going on about this for hours in a couple of instances without a single intelligent effort to refute this. It sucks cause us and the team could use it as a selling point "industry proven tech, we provided a secure network for 11.000 banks, now you can have access to the identical public network", but right now biz is possibly preparing everyone for a disappointment. For those who see some truth in what I say: diversify

>>10823863
LINK is still a good gamble just based on the team, their professionalism and their insane connections. like you said, just maybe lower our expectations on how wide ranging the use cases are initially, and the time scale of mass adoption. having smartcontract.com doing business with enterprise clients simultaneously is still extremely bullish for LINK.

>>10823351

Why would those companies create their own private oracle network when they can join the decentralized one and be more profitable/harder to attack.

>>10823863
6/10 level FUD.
Will confuse newcomers but anyone who has really thought about the basic value proposition of LINK will know that this is total drivel.

>>10821822
Shill after mainnet launch and few big partnerships drop why before makes zero sense from a expected value perspective. +EV to not shill at this time.

>>10822723
Guess there's only one direction to go then...

>>10821822
Finally I can sleep with comfy thoughts. The shill begins. Thanks frens!

>>10823960
Agreed. Also thanks for showing up, I was losing hope on biz, still not very convinced it's worth lurking anymore
>>10823986
At this point I'm not sure if you're trolling or not, have a (you) for that

>>10824123

By LINK being worth 1T market cap.

>>10824202

Kill yourself faggot.

>>10823863

smartcontract.com uses LINK . SWIFT just likes to call their stake enterprise level.

$0.25

>>10823996
you're not saying anything but calling it fud

>>10823863
My arguement would be that in order to stay relevant they might need too. I know right now they are fine and this would take time, but taking advantage of something like this now could keep their business model sustainable into the digital/peer to peer technological age. Why even need banks in the future. They could set up the most powerful node structure, especially since they will have a huge head start advantage and are being handed this on a silver platter by sergey.

Also, Sergey does talk stongly that banks need to get their systems ready for what is coming with dlt and blockchain technology. I think he knows this is very important for banks to address and use if they want to be around long term in some form of power capacity. He talks about how the eventually will have to give up control.

>>10824441
They might do this as well. But in order to do this they don't have to get neets involved in their bond payments network (also future use cases in private). Like I said above, I believe we will see SWIFT and other large institutions using a private network by ChainLink team with an adapter to push/pull information to/from the public network and between each private networks including private cl networks and other private ledgers. I'm convinced this is the case

>>10822723
With an exorbitantly high token price. We'll start at $2500 and reassess in 2019

>>10824510
Also, ChainLink between interbank payment systems might not even be the biggest use case. Data providers wanting to sell their data to anyone who needs it for smart contracts can setup oracles on link meaning they have to go through them in order to get the api feed. Also, they might post a U.S. dollar price for using the service, but Link is used in the background and swapped to usd in a dex. The people using it would never interact with the tokens but they would be at work in the background.

>>10824889
I agree. I think this is what SAP is about to do, which actually is another scenario where neet-nodes wouldn't be used, in this case the link token would be used tho. Anyway, my point is about not pricing in SWIFT using neet-nodes or neet-link token before it's reality.

Banks are kind of like selling data in a sense too as in access to bank accounts so the same model could apply. Each bank could run a node as an access point to their data (payments from customers) but be paid out in whatever payment they want. Link is just a background function

>>10825085
Agreed. Had not thought about this. Nodes used for aggregation might be SWIFT smart oracles, but data pulled out would have to be paid in link.

>>10825085
Thanks anon

>>10822444
a millionaire at $5 link? definitely made it

We gonna make it bruhs?

>>10822693
Why you capitalizing random words. Looks fucking weird bruh

>>10823863
Smartcontract has stated they believe a decentralized oracle solution is a better in the long run. But diversify? Nah.

>>10821822
FUD it

>>10821704
Nothing very interesting about this, every bank runs with SWIFT, the only real question is the supposed chainlink swift partnership and the role of the LINK cyber voucher itself in that. If we can meme a ripple XRP style correlation the board gets rich, the problem is SWIFT is never going to push this token like ripple and should this one and only 'partner' load the private chain fud we crash with no survivors.

Friendly reminder that we shilled this project as a joke on late adopters, but my dream is always for this board to make money, good luck gentlemen.

>>10822146
Why do you insufferable gaggles say 100MM? Why can't you just say fucking 100 trillion

>>10822462
Never thought of it that way. I've been shilling this bartender soooo hard. He gets it hit won't do it. And he can easily afford 500$-1,000$

We need people to serve us.

Unironically it's the liberals who are the white supremacists. They advocate for illegals to come because who is going to pick muh fruit and lettuce for my Caesar salad. And have no problem with them being exploited for the slave labor they provide

>>10821822
Downvoted with 8 alts and fudded in comments.
All marines should do the same

>>10825533
checked

>>10825508
jews aren't white, mordecai. gas yourself.

>>10826122
checked