/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>17838074
Simple. Chainlink is a scam

>>17838074
these tokens can be 1/100 of their value and NOTHING will change for them. so why would that not happen?

>>17838103
>these tokens can be 1/100 of their value and NOTHING will change for them.
Same is true for any crypto, gold, stock, ...

>>17838074
wrong, chainlink oracles failed and synthetix had to shut down:
>>17837891

>has huge exploit during recent stress test; users lose nearly 5 million USD
which had literally nothing to do with oracles. This is all fud designed to conceal the failure of chainlink.

>>17838074
Simple. Chainlink is held by emotional spergs on this board and there is no liquidity

>>17838074
Chainlink has been massively overvalued, while MKR has been massively undervalued.
ez to understand if you are not a tard

>>17838144
Wrong, see pic.
After one hour of ETH congestion (which was unavoidable), about 5 Chainlink oracles kept soldiering on (at a loss to themselves btw).
If Synthetix experienced more than one hour of delay, it's because they had their threshold set above 5 oracles.

This is different from Maker's oracles, which failed outright for an extended period of time.

>>17838281
>>17838144

>see pic

>>17838281
>This is different from Maker's oracles, which failed outright for an extended period of time.
Any source for that? All I have seen are twitter posts
>>17838298
that's aave not synthetix, synthetix uses different oracles.
It's also the same fud that ignores the fact that maker has a deliberate one-hour delay in oracle prices. No shit they are not accurate during rapid crashes. That's a different thing from malfunction.

>>17838331
>Any source for that?
See pic.

>that's aave not synthetix, synthetix uses different oracles.
Aave has a variety of oracles as well.

>It's also the same fud that ignores the fact that maker has a deliberate one-hour delay in oracle prices.
See pic again.

>>17838381
well that's the first source that is reliable
>Aave has a variety of oracles as well.
synthetix uses feeds for fiat prices like eurusd, and they were the ones that failed.

>>17838144
>huge exploit
>which had literally nothing to do with oracles.
This all happened in the same context, and the oracle failure did impact the exploit.

>>17838402
>synthetix uses feeds for fiat prices like eurusd, and they were the ones that failed.
The ETH/USD feed for instance had 5 oracles working the entire time, I watched them fire myself.

>>17838298
> Chainlink can't predict the future
Oh no no no

>>17838465
>This all happened in the same context, and the oracle failure did impact the exploit.
it didn't, the problem was lack of dai liquidity.
>>17838465
>The ETH/USD feed
So one feed functioned, and other chainlink feeds failed. That's not "performed beautifully"

>>17838529
>it didn't, the problem was lack of dai liquidity.
The oracle issue was part of the same exploit context, which is why it's included in Maker's blogpost about the exploit: https://blog.makerdao.com/recent-market-activity-and-next-steps/

>So one feed functioned, and other chainlink feeds failed
No they did not.
ALL feeds kept firing at a somewhat reduced oracle count. Even the smaller feeds like Mana/Eth or Zrx/Eth.
Synthetix simply did not modify the oracle count threshold. That's their choice.

>>17838613
Passing the blame? That's not what God Emperor Spergy teaches

>>17838074
>Chainlink oracles perform beautifully during recent stress test

Anon, I...

>>17838645
>Passing the blame?
Are you talking about Synthetix not modifying the oracle count threshold?

That's their good right; if security to them involves X amount of oracles, then that's what they should stick with.
However, you cannot expect everyone to be willing/able to operate at a loss, so there is no blame to pass to the Chainlink nodes either.

>>17838119
So what's your argument exactly?

>>17838681
>Band_jedi
Anon, I....

>>17838702
That you can't use an argument that applies to literally everything to explain why Chainlink dumped more than others.

>>17838613
>The oracle issue was part of the same exploit context
that's bullshit speak for "ok you're right but I can't write that"
>ALL feeds kept firing at a somewhat reduced oracle count
that's another bullshit speak for: the network partially failed

the irony is that you're comparing a network that was valued at 6.3% of the entire ethereum two weeks ago to a minor part of the biggest defi dapp on ethereum.

>>17838681
>Band_Jedi
>"p-pls recheck"

>>17838698
So being cost effective is problematic for all involved? Threshold signatures and the rest of the new features will solve this right? Maybe they need to be more flexible when dealing with extremely volatile market conditions.

>>17838754
>still holding on to and trying to save this scamcoin

Anon, I...

https://cryptobriefing.com/chainlink-experiences-6-hour-delay-eth-price-feed/

>>17838853
Can't wait to hear what Ari Juels solutions are to this problem

Is this related to Tellor Oracle who are partnered with Maker?

MakerDAO
>grassroots project born out of experimentation
>actual dapp with a product people want facing all the difficulties of decentralization
>decent basis for underlying token: governance + fees
>flawed but worthwhile

ChainLink
>get rich quick scheme conceived at peak ICO bubble by a russian new yorker serial entrepreneur with a history of failed ventures
>expensive yet centralized oracles marketing themselves as decentralized
>dubious tokenomics with the team holding most of the supply and KYC barriers
>propped up by memes but unironically useless

>>17838844
No, having incentive is important for function.
Also, being transparent is extremely important.

With Chainlink, I could see for myself what was happening during the congestion crisis; meanwhile Maker themselves don't even know yet what went wrong with their in-house oracles.

>>17839096
>Chainlink
>get rich quick scheme

>>17838853
>>17838891
There were 5 oracles working the entire time on the ETH/USD feed.
It's just that the feed had a 14 node threshold.

You could still use the working oracles.

>>17838074
>>oracles perform beautifully during recent stress test
Kek. I bet you believe everything sergey and link shills post on Twitter. Literally only thing that propped it up was node operators probably all in on the project anyway paying out of their pockets jacked up transaction fees. How many people do you think would be willing to do that for a token of dubious value every time it undergoes some stress?

>>17839360
>I bet you believe everything sergey and link shills post on Twitter.
I also believe the actual Chainlink users like Aave and bZx.

>>17839360
>Literally only thing that propped it up was node operators probably all in on the project anyway paying out of their pockets jacked up transaction fees.
You mean nodes were willing to temporarily pay out of their own pocket to protect the integrity and reputation of the network they're operating and invested in?
In other words, that they were motivated to do well?

No way anon!

>>17839465
>he still can’t spot the cracks
>thinks a project can rely on the faith of a few of its operators forever
>thinks something like that can or would ever see wide scale adoption when some stress could literally make node operators unable or simply unwilling to keep propping it up
>surprised or impressed that people probably more or less all in on a project devoting even more time and resources than your average link hodlers will do whatever they can to desperately keep it going
And you still think that chain link provides real, significant added value as a price/data puller?

>>17839657
>he still can’t spot the cracks
ETH scaling is a problem, yes.

Good thing there are many solutions in the pipeline (even involving Chainlink), and that Chainlink will work on any blockchain.

>>17838074
the oracles went fucking offline, lol.

>>17839711
No, ETH transactions did.

See >>17838298

>>17838074

>Stainstink is actually at $1,77

AHAHHAAHAHHAAHHAHHHAAHHA FUCK YOU STINKIES EAT SHIT AND DIE!

>>17839246
Incentive structures sure but what about the network congestion on eth this is the same crypto kitties shit from 17. Will threshold signatures and tees help?
Without a doubt maker is going to implode unless they fix their shit. 1700 eth liquidate right? Even a Jews arsehole would clench

>>17840428
>but what about the network congestion on eth
see >>17839698

>>17839358
Could you name them? I would like to see which have more skin in the same than the rest. This was a good way to stress test the system. Before it was smooth sailing which is total bullshit in a production environment.

>>17840428
>Without a doubt maker is going to implode unless they fix their shit.
Chainlink worked beautifully, and is imploding harder than Maker.

>>17840464
>Could you name them?
I think it was a bunch of the main ones, the ones that worked across the largest amount of feeds.
Don't remember off the top of my head, and I'm phoneposting right now.

>>17840442
>>17840507
That's okay. Thanks for the information anon I'm sure it's just fear in clown world that has caused chainlink to decrease. They're trying so hard to maintain legitimacy which is good but tough with all the scams. Eth had early issues too and still does but the difference is people accept them as limitations. This will come to link too with time.

>>17840617
>Eth had early issues too and still does but the difference is people accept them as limitations.
>This will come to link too with time.
Well there was no limitation on Link's end, this was once again down to ETH.