/biz/ - Business & Finance

I don´t believe in the tech either.

It has some good pump and dump stuff going on in the future though. We even might see $0,5 soon in few weeks when it is again time to sell. Linkies have been practically funding my Satoshi Vision for the last few weeks

Cringe and bluepilled

Yes, and I tried to fund a contract on ropsten and it was a horrible pain in the ass. The docs are out of date. I had to go read the actual Solidity from their github.

One of the functions takes 2 arguments in the docs but only 1 in the actual "cut and paste this" code. This had me all fucked up for like 2 hours.

In the end, after struggling hard, I sent the ETH, I sent the chainlink, and no real world data was ever returned from the ETH/USD contract that was supposed to work.

Seriously made me lose some faith in this project. I waited approx 30 minutes for a response and got nothing.

I had thousands of dollars in this. If I knew it was going to be such shit, I'd have invested in something else.

I won't even shill another token here. I'll just tell anons to seriously go try and use this garbage and report back with your results.

I'm just saying that I wish it was easier and since it's not, you shouldn't put all your eggs in this basket.

>>11921851
Prove it wrong. Protip: you can't. LINK isn't the be all end all.

There's so much that goes into this. It's going to be hard for the average person to do anything with it. You think companies are going to pay some programmers to come on and "fix" their already working APIs to be "decentralized"?
Why fix something that's not broken?

"Because muh SGX, because muh oracle" -- No business of any size without money to burn actually gives a shit. No one wants federated oracles/smartcontracts yet and likely won't for many years.

I don't think we'll see mainstream adoption for a while, so I'm out of it for now. I'll buy back in once they get something working reasonably well and normies can into smartcontracts via either ZepplinOS or some other "block based programming" service.

Also, you can't refute that no one in their right mind is going to want to pay (<current price> * n-nodes) USD per API call.

"Hey boss, I made this awesome decentralized app that only costs us (0.3 * 50) USD per day, even though we already get our data from a reputable source like bloomberg or factset... but it's GUARANTEED to be secure and correct AND ITS DECENTRALIZED" ... why would any manager say "good job"?

Don't get me wrong, I believe in LINK long term, but short term it doesn't make sense. Not until smart contracts are approachable by the layman through a LINK partner.

Don't talk to me about "Cryptlets" or Blechley or whatever. They are using proprietary smart contracts that Sergey helped develop but that have nothing to do with LINK.
It's all rumors and shilling.

Hope you've made it an absolute pain in the ass for yourself to sell because weak hands will get shaken out. Once they do, I'll come back into this project because I _do_ actually believe in it, but until then, I'm not losing money for no reason.

Seriously, good luck and God bless.

>>11921815
Reputation service can and will be provided by multiple entities. The performance data is public after all.
Data correctness can be proven by utilizing Intel SGX

>>11921874
>complains about an unfinished product

>>11921887
Youre forgetting about Hyperledger and other private smart contract platforms, all of which needs secure, reliable and trustful input.
Youre also forgetting about potential killer apps made possible by Chainlink, which in turn will drive smart contract adoption

>>11921998
>(tip: It's new pasta)

>>11921887
>>11921998
In addiotion, LINK and Chainlink is not meant to be used by the layman
Just as Stripe is not meant to be used by the layman, but is implemented in hundreds if not thousand of services on the internet

>>11921998
>Data correctness can be proven by utilizing Intel SGX

How does this work? And doesn't that seem like a lot of extra hardware? Who's buying that shit? It seems like Chainlink is going to be jumping through too many hoops when there are easier solutions.

>>11922044
No point in arguing with these fudders

>>11922093
Its an optional thing that nodes can provide if they have the capability of it and you state that you want the additional security (ie. you only choose oracle nodes that utilizes it).

Its not a lot of extra hardware, Intel SGX is included in some modern Intel processors. Im not entirely sure of which, consult Google if youre curious.

Look into TownCrier if you want to know how works

But I guess you were correct about the lack of a cryptoeconomic incentive. However there are other economic incentives, such as the fact that people choose to use your node / service if you provide incorrect information (ie. your answers deviate from the rest of the oracles).

>>11922093
>>11922251
Also, which easier solutions are you referring to?
Theres a bunch of smart people putting a lot of time and research into this

>>11922269
Easier solutions in the sense that Oraclize is ready to use and generally works just fine. If Chainlink is really NEEDED for smart contracts, that playing surface is so small. Who really needs this degree of security? Banks? They already have a trusted system. They just trust each other.

> God Protocol my ass.

What did you expect from a Russian philosophy major. He conjured up chainlink while reading crime and punishment by dostoevsky

>>11922440
They dont. Theres always a middleman between them

At least it's solidity compatible and triangulates truth but yeah um it doesn't solve the oracle problem, unlike town crier.

>>11922440
If you ever want a smart contract that can manage millions of dollars, you cannot rely on a centralized oracle like Oraclize.

Oraclize would be the sweetest honey pot for hackers, because if they could break it they would be able to redirect large amounts of value.

>Hey InsuranceX
>Can you provide me insurance against bad weather?
>Sure, lets make a smart contract and connect it to Oraclize to that it checks the weather at date Y
>Proceed to hack Oraclize and give yourself the payout no matter the outcome was

Do you see the problem? Theres hundreds of use cases, this is just one of them. Smart contracts is all about programmable money after all. And as long as you have money involved, there will be an incentive to tamper with the data feed (the centralized oracle in this case) that controls it

Discord faggots realized spamming the same retarded copy paste fud wasn't working I guess.

>>11921815
Thanks this FUD is top notch.
You need to be a seasoned veteran to dispute this.

>wearing pants

>>11922526
This is unironically 100k stack FUD coming at you.

>>11921887

Actually most of the LINK holders want to play the hype card to get rich, but since crypto is dead for 3 or 4 years to come, hype alone won't drive the price up and news won't either, it will hit at most 1 or 2 usd by news alone and no normie hype

>>11922440
it's not just about trust it's about availability and what you can do with it
oraclize only supports the most basic data calls and has proven downtime

>>11922526
The person who caught this image of naked sergey is a god

>>11921815
where are that quotes from?

>>11922503
>Oraclize would be the sweetest honey pot for hackers
that's why you use 3 centralized providers and choose the majority answer. Problem solved.
No need for chainlink's neet node network

>>11924096
You do realize there are cost savings with decentralization you fucking gook mong faggot.

Centralized oracles will get priced out

>>11924273
Using several centralized oracles = decentralization.
Chainlink badly solves a problem nobody cares about - 'how to build an oracle system based on neets'.

>>11924285
Lmao right over your head. The centralized oracles will have higher infrastructure costs overall and will be priced out from a decentralized oracle network that will automatically create cost efficiencies from competition.

Wow you’re retarded

>>11923574
m8 don't quote "dev"

>>11924313
>The centralized oracles will have higher infrastructure costs overall
wrong, they will have lower costs because of repeated business. There's no room on the market for more than a dozen or so oracle providers.
>a decentralized oracle network that will automatically create cost efficiencies from competition.
what a meaningless buzzwordy sentence.
Nobody is going to use unknown anonymous nodes. Known public nodes = centralized oracles.
Chainlink has no use case.

>>11924376
FUCK he is right! We are doomed! Not only that, but I an afraid he is both based and red pilled! An unbeatable combination!

>>11924389
This but unironically

>>11924376
>decentralized oracles won’t have “repeated business”
lmao are you fucking retarded. And a more appropriate word would have been duplicated

I’m arguing with a 3rd grader nigger. wew

>>11924096
You basically just described Chainlink.

You can do the same with Chainlink, pay for 3 "centralized" oracles which collectively checks for your answer.
Or you could pay for oracles 100 if you want that. Or 300 oracles, split into three groups where each group checks a different data source (E.g. 100 oracles checks the price of BTC at nomiebase, 100 for bitfinex and 100 for binance)

It just depends on how big your tinfoil hat is

>>11924376
>Known public nodes
>implying the nodes of the Chainlink network wont be known and public

>>11924376
They won’t be unknown they will have reputation values similar to high-class hookers, which you would know about if you weren’t a broke bitch.

No one will need to know who owns them anyway if the system works - it’s called trust less. Have you even heard of bitcoin or blockchain?

>durr my bitcoin transaction is invalid because I don’t know the miner who confirmed it.

Brah you’re embarrassing yourself. Just stop and educate, read, learn. Buy link $1000 EOD

>>11924413
The point is chainlink isn't needed for it. If you select providers manually there's zero added value from using link. There's no 'network', just n responses from n oracles.
>>11924442
>Have you even heard of bitcoin or blockchain?
Have you heard about proof of work?
>durr my bitcoin transaction is invalid because I don’t know the miner who confirmed it.
no you dumb retard, I can validate a block locally and see if it's correct. There are financial incentives not to 51% attack the chain. There's no verification of truth in chainlink and no incentive to provide correct answers. It never, ever can be trustless, trust can only be distributed.

>>11924500
See this newfags? This is a man who can see through the Link deception. Take his advice and prosper.

sergay wants us all to make money. he just wants to win.

>>11924500
Centralized services cost more than decentralized ones due to consolidated infrastructure costs. Do you even know the point of all this, or you just fall for the store of value meme.

There aren’t financial incentives to not attack the network you fucking idiot. There are financial incentives to play the game as intended, which is entirely different. You’re the dumbest motherfucker on biz. You even got a 500k net worth?

>>11924500
>No incentive to provide correct answers.

Do you even know how all this works, link nodes will get paid in link, which is more valuable than gold, for providing correct answers. Whew

why do you fucking retards argue over FUD on biz when you can literally ask these questions in the official Telegram? If any of you Link holders sell because of shit you read on biz you deserve to stay poor.

>>11924564
>Centralized services cost more than decentralized ones
LOL centralized anything is always cheaper. Dumbest sentence in the whole thread.
>>11924596
>for providing correct answers
No, for providing answers that don't diverge from the majority answers too much. The majority answer can be incorrect - nothing verifies the actual truth, it's impossible.
That's not trustless, that's distributed trust. It's fundamentally different.

>>11924413
Stop feeding these FUD trolls

>>11924619
I’m just making poor fag fudders stay poor. I’m doing god’s work. Now fuck off.

>>11924500
True, you dont need link. You could use a bunch of centralized oracles instead. But please, give me a list of tens or hundreds of oracles that I can use today

Hint, you cant. Chainlink will spawn this network of oracles faster than a network of 100 independent centralized oracles can go into business

>>11924630
Centralized infrastructure always cost more to the individual party than in a decentralized infrastructure.

The network is trustless you don’t need a single third party to rely on, only the distributed network. It’s trustless the same way you don’t need to trust a sole bitcoin miner, only the entire distributed network to act faithfully because there are financial incentives to do so, and negative consequences for acting maliciously.

>>11924665
Lmao exactly my point the infrastructure cost for a centralized party like Oraclize to provide 100s or even 1000s of independent nodes to provide data will be astronomical. They will have to charge so much for data just to cover their costs. A decentralized network will easily undercut them. This retard can’t comprehend and was so stupid to call this concept the dumbest thing in the thread.

>>11924665
>But please, give me a list of tens or hundreds of oracles that I can use today
There's no demand for oracles which is another problem for chainlink.
Maker uses an internal price oracle and axa airline ticket insurance does the same. Anything new is likely to follow the pattern.
>>11924686
>Centralized infrastructure always cost more to the individual party than in a decentralized infrastructure.
No. Centralized = one server
Decentralized = N servers duplicating work
Cost is higher N times. It can't be fixed.
>>11924706
>Oraclize to provide 100s or even 1000s of independent nodes to provide data
what is even this bullshit about lmao

>>11924727
Centralized party = 100s or servers and nodes.
Single member of decentralized network = 1 server 1 node.

Who has the higher costs and thus must charge more revenue for data to stay profitable. Do you even own your own biz or are you a wage cuck. I think I already know.

>>11924727
>muh theres no demand
Do you think there was a demand for cell phones before they even existed? Go kys faggot

Youre also assuming that the cost is N times higher, but youre in the same statement implying that the cost is taken by a single party.

In addition, you will obviously have to pay for additional trust (multiple oracles). This is the case even for multiple oracles similar to Oraclize.

The last sentence doesnt make sense, true. He meant multiple nodes controlled by independent entities.

>>11924777
>Centralized party = 100s or servers and nodes.
More like 2, max 3 for redundancy. One server can easily handle 100k requests per second. Only mega sites like facebook need server farms today.
>Single member of decentralized network = 1 server 1 node.
A customer has to pay all nodes that he uses. "single member" * N
>>11924804
>but youre in the same statement implying that the cost is taken by a single party.
The whole point of 'decentralized' chainlink network is that the same data is provided by N nodes, which means you have to pay the base cost (+ profit) N times.

>>11924837
Thats true, but the data is in turn more reliable and trustful

>>11924837
Oraclize will need to run 100s of nodes and incur much higher costs to support it vs a decentralized network that will cost much less per avg node. The power of decentralization glad I was able to educate you.

>We want 100 nodes locking 20k USD in LINK in our contract that moves 100k at a time.
If 50+ nodes are malicious they'll make the contract maker fail a 100k tx with their 1 million + in LINK in contracts is proven non trust worthy. Instead of sticking around for some 2000 100k USD tx to get the 100k anyway.

But hey that's still weak I know. What about a police contract that has a ton of nodes representing a major part of the LINK supply in total who are to solve disputes between contract makers and nodes. The police contract's verdict-ability would be in all other contracts and the node's consensus would be made public before it locks into the smart contract so it can be disputed.

The base cost will be drastically lower with decentralization.

>>11924804
>>11924858
>Do you think there was a demand for cell phones before they even existed? Go kys faggot
There was always demand for a portable communicator, they just didn't exist.
Oracles exist, but there's close to zero demand. Maybe that changes at some point.
>Thats true, but the data is in turn more reliable and trustful
Lying is publicly verifiable post-facto, which means a company would lose its business.
The only real risk is hacking, which is why using data from three oracle companies would be enough.
>>11924905
>Oraclize will need to run 100s of nodes and incur much higher costs to support it
No they won't, I have no idea what dumb misconception you have to think that

>>11921887
The average person also doesn't know how to build a web app on AWS yet billions of people use them every day. This is not a consumer product. I hope this is bait.

Chainlink fudders are some the most short sighted people on the internet. Chainlink will forever be engrained in your mind, whispering to you daily, driving you to the brink of suicide knowing you could have gotten deep into an infrastructure that will shape the future.

>>11922440
Oraclize is fine for unimportant shit like crypto kitties but that's about it. Look into the connection between PSD2 and chainlink before you start talking about banks.

>>11921874
Maybe you’re just a retard?

>>11924630
You have no idea what an oracle even is. The source of the data is not the oracle. And you can have the oracles use multiple sources if you're concerned about the actual data source being corrupt or inaccurate (which again, is not the oracle's job).

>>11924376
I stopped reading this guys arguments here. I should have stopped at "why not just use multiple centralized Oracles in case one goes down?" But I wanted to amuse myself a little more.

Stop replying to this fag. He's not here to change his opinion, his simply here to validate his own skewed view of this technology. We don't need to convert or convince people to join and invest with us, everyone browsing this board but not currently invested in this project at this stage of development can go fuck off and die for all I care.

>>11921815
>it just punishes not providing data at all
>depends on semi(?)-centralized reputation service provided by chainlink itself

Both of these are wrong, and you would know that if you had read the white paper that's been out for well over a year now.

>>11925143
I can guarantee you that every single person fudding Chainlink in this thread is all in on Chainlink.

>>11925422
Checked and 100% correct

>>11924564
Yeah centralized is cheaper. That’s not the point of this it’s about social scalability

>>11924928
>Lying is publicly verifiable post-facto, which means a company would lose its business.
>The only real risk is hacking, which is why using data from three oracle companies would be enough.

Thats also the case for Chainlink, where you could view a single node as an independent company.

Chainlink will just provide the tools and market place for people to set up oracle nodes. Instead of having each individual develop the tech and brand themselves

>>11925368
Gettin sleepy guys

>>11924686
You’re wrong about the centralized costing more. You need to fix that in your arguments since your basing your claims off that “fact”

>>11921874
> all fucked up for like 2 hours.
> trying to give two arguments to a function which takes only one.

Imagine being this retard

>>11925527
Prove that it is with multiple concrete, verifiable, and substantive evidence.

Pro-tip: You can't now buy link you fuck.