/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>20604865
People really out here thinking chainlink about to save swift from getting killed off huh

>>20604897
Sell signal detected

Its an erc20 scam the sooner you realize the better, doesn't mean price won't go up just realize its all a gamble

>>20604865
You had three Earth orbits of the star commonly known as Sol.

>>20604865
youre obviously a newfag so ill point you in the right direction and you can choose to educate yourself or not

>it is highly expensive to validate your LINK
https://blog.chain.link/threshold-signatures-in-chainlink/


>Chainlink is essentially acting as a trusted 3rd party, individually picking their node operators
https://medium.com/linkpool/staking-with-chainlink-b58eb3de6f1b

>>20604865
i'm not going to buy your ripple bags you gay retard

>>20604865
By virtue of Chainlink's potential, Ethereum 2.0's launch will be a bigger day for Link than it will ETH.

>>20604986

>it is highly expensive to validate your LINK
https://blog.chain.link/threshold-signatures-in-chainlink/

Interesting concept, I have read about threshold signatures. From a cost perspective, if it will be CHEAPER to send requests to link, it is completely counterintuitive to the node operators, as they have high gas/electricity fees. they want to obtain link. To there is an inherent conflict of interest that is left unresoled.

https://medium.com/linkpool/staking-with-chainlink-b58eb3de6f1b

>Chainlink is essentially acting as a trusted 3rd party, individually picking their node operators
https://medium.com/linkpool/staking-with-chainlink-b58eb3de6f1b

Staking only indicates that more people can participate and earn link -- it has nothing to do with the amount of actual nodes running in a network, and the amount of actual decentralized data providers.

>>20604865
Because one of the biggest telecoms in the world says so:
https://www.t-systems-mms.com/en/expertise/archive/smart-contracts-made-reliable-and-useful-with-the-real-world-data.html

>>20605048
>Staking only indicates that more people can participate and earn link -- it has nothing to do with the amount of actual nodes running in a network, and the amount of actual decentralized data providers.
oh I see, youre retarded

>>20604865
Also, threshold signatures fix the gas issue

>>20604865

Oracles will be useful, but Chainlink is not. It's just a fashionable meme now, like decentralization was in 2015.

Tellor is the true oracle solution.

>>20605048
>From a cost perspective, if it will be CHEAPER to send requests to link, it is completely counterintuitive to the node operators, as they have high gas/electricity fees. they want to obtain link. To there is an inherent conflict of interest that is left unresoled.
you literally have no idea what youre talking about, yikes.

>>20605059

>Because one of the biggest telecoms in the world says so:
https://www.t-systems-mms.com/en/expertise/archive/smart-contracts-made-reliable-and-useful-with-the-real-world-data.html


Large enterprise companies have been wrong about many things and also lose billions of dollars every year making mistakes. Just because a large telecom company wants to participate as a node operator doesn't mean that chainlink's model is automatically validated.

>>20605048
>Interesting concept, I have read about threshold signatures.
you are so painfully pic related. because you can't make yourself magnitudes smarter, just try to be dumber. don't try to understand, just follow.

>>20605108
Apologies, I meant that it will be cheaper for gas fees. But the point still stands that LINK will be expensive to use, because node operators will always want to maximize the amount of LINK they receive, while requesters using the smart contracts will always wants to minimize payments in LINK.

>>20605183
Amazing how a civil conversation can turn rude so quick. Why would you say something like that to a stranger you don't know?

>>20605103
humble phoneposter here can someone photoshop cl themed space elevator in the background and a dirty tellor logo on the old man.

>>20605183
OP is thinking things through...

This facilitates productive conversation and we all learn.

>>20605380
You're like a child that wanders into the middle of a movie. You're asking questions that people figured out a long time ago. You seem to think you know more than everybody else. It's frustrating.

>>20605103
Tellor "The Oracle of DeFi"
>Litterally powers 0 defi applications

have fun bagholding with 0 liquidity faggot

>>20604865
>Chainlink is essentially acting as a trusted 3rd party, individually picking their node operators
This is simply untrue. Anyone can run a node. Anyone can fill jobs. It's up to a node operator to network and actually get jobs. The network is 100% decentralized in the way that competitive business is decentralized. You just have to offer incentive for people to use your node, be it cheaper prices, premium data, a higher staked collateral, etc.

>Furthermore, it is highly expensive to validate your LINK. Right now it costs 0.1 link PER REQUEST
This is of course adjustable and just a completely unimportant number used currently. Anyone can charge any amount they want, and it will likely be in USD value, not LINK value, in the future. The network is not in its final form right now.

>On top of that, everytime a node operator wants to fulfill a request, they have to spend a SHIT TON (around $5 depending on gas fees)
threshold signatures, arbitrum, off chain computation.

Yes, ETH fees technically will cause increased payment prices. But it's not as bad as it could be without the aforementioned solutions. Also chainlink is blockchain agnostic and if ETH isn't the chosen one, thats fine. 52 other blockchains have pledged to use chainlink.

>>20605562
oh and to the gas fees point, everyone is of course assuming that ETH will have scaling solutions at some point.
whether thats a layer 2 solution like zkrollups, matic, OMG, etc. or whether thats ETH 2.0
at some point, ultimately ETH will scale and gas fees will drop substantially and , hopefully, permanently

>>20605473
So asking questions and having an honest conversation about an open source project is frustrating?

I suspect anything that goes against your beliefs are "frustrating" since you are highly emotionally invested inside LINK.

These questions hasn't been answered.

How will chainlink remain decentralized if they are individually cherry picking their node operators?

Why will node operators use LINK if there is an inherent conflict of interest between the people using LINK as an oracle (they would like LINK fees to be cheap), and node operators want them to be high?

Furthermore, currently if you are a dev, you have to hardcode the LINK value when you send a request.

requestId = sendChainlinkRequest(req, 1 * LINK);

At such a high volatility for the token, why on earth would any developer use this? It currently costs 0.1 LINK which is standard across all nodes. If t he price of LINK goes to $10 --> it comes to $1 per request.. probably around 10000x more expensive than traditional data providers.

>>20604865
linkies are so deluded its astounding. All the link threads are a big circle jerk of delusion where 50% of them are new fag redditors that honestly believe in $1000 eoy. Oracles are a problem but there is nothing special about chainlink and there are many competitors popping up. Ones that dont have a massive stack premined waiting to be dumped on by deluded bag holders

>>20605599
>Why would anyone pay money for LINK oracles
Because it's worth it. Chainlink has developed the most robust, tamper-proof oracle design to date. Out of any solution in history.
If you implement a mock-oracle with a single API, you are expecting that API to have complete accuracy and never act maliciously.
If you use multiple APIs, congrats you've basically recreated chainlink but a much shittier version that doesn't scale to infinity because of the decentralized network aspect.

A smart contract that handles millions, billions, trillions of dollars, will very easily shell out 70 cents for a proper data feed to the contract, which ultimately determines the behavior of that contract, and therefore who is profiting from the contract.

>>20605599
>How will chainlink remain decentralized if they are individually cherry picking their node operators?
Anyone can run a node/set up an oracle of nodes. Smart devs just choose the node Chainlink picks

>Why will node operators use LINK if there is an inherent conflict of interest between the people using LINK as an oracle (they would like LINK fees to be cheap), and node operators want them to be high?
Free market. See question 1

>Furthermore, currently if you are a dev, you have to hardcode the LINK value when you send a request. requestId = sendChainlinkRequest(req, 1 * LINK); At such a high volatility for the token, why on earth would any developer use this? It currently costs 0.1 LINK which is standard across all nodes. If the price of LINK goes to $10 --> it comes to $1 per request.. probably around 10000x more expensive than traditional data providers.

These are subsidized by other sponsors. Re: feeds.chain.link. That's also why answer #1. Chainlink also subsidizes some of this by paying node operators. Read the white paper buddy.

Is this guy like an XRP holder trying to fud? Frankly, you're not sending your best. Absolutely shameful display of pilpul.

>>20605562
>This is simply untrue. Anyone can run a node. Anyone can fill jobs. It's up to a node operator to network and actually get jobs. The network is 100% decentralized in the way that competitive business is decentralized. You just have to offer incentive for people to use your node, be it cheaper prices, premium data, a higher staked collateral, etc.

It's highly cherry picked. For example lets say I want to run a node on the price of Bitcoin/USD price. They wouldn't allow my node to influence their official price feed.

>This is of course adjustable and just a completely unimportant number used currently. Anyone can charge any amount they want, and it will likely be in USD value, not LINK value, in the future. The network is not in its final form right now.

I agree this is adjustable, but where does the token value come from? It is an ERC20 token, and all of its value is TIED to ethereum. They claim it's token agnostic, but ALL of the token holders are actually holding erc20 tokens. If they wanted to operate on another blockchain, they would have to replicate the tokens on that other chain --> and if this happened, what would happen to all the token holders?

>>20605746
It's an ERC-667 token.

>>20605721
Some people just need spoon-fed because usually when you fall in this range of IQ 70-115 >>20605183 you think you are too smart too read the white paper and are inherently lazy. They what other people to answer their pathetic questions. In other words NGMI

>>20605746
You misunderstand the chainlink network and the chainlink price feeds. Read >>20605701

>>20605788
This isn't even spoon-feeding, he's just flailing his arms around screeching "NOOOO BABY DONT WANT BABA"

>>20605305
You're being oblivious to economies of scale. Quit thinking like a small business owner.

>>20605746
>It's highly cherry picked. For example lets say I want to run a node on the price of Bitcoin/USD price. They wouldn't allow my node to influence their official price feed.
This is the free market anon. Anyone can spin up a BTC/USD node. Of course any serious smart contract is going to choose LinkPool or Fiews as a data provider over yours. If you developed a robust infrastructure, garnered a social media presence, and provided evidence of your reliability, you would likely get jobs.
Alternatively, don't provide data for BTC/USD like anyone else can do. The cool thing about a free market is that those who can't compete with the best on popular things just fill particular niches.
Maybe provide data for weather in your city, maybe provide data for OSRS GP:USD conversion rate. I don't know. But don't pick something as uncreative as BTC/USD. Again, it's the free market.

>I agree this is adjustable, but where does the token value come from? It is an ERC20 token, and all of its value is TIED to ethereum. They claim it's token agnostic, but ALL of the token holders are actually holding erc20 tokens. If they wanted to operate on another blockchain, they would have to replicate the tokens on that other chain --> and if this happened, what would happen to all the token holders?
Where does the token value come from?
It comes from the fact that LINK tokens will be staked as collateral in nodes for financial incentive to never provide false data. That is the true functional value of the chainlink token.
Nodes put $XXXXXXXXXX at risk in their node, and say if they provide false data they will pay a penalty on that collateral. That is LINKs value. And the fact that anyone wanting to query nodes for data must also purchase LINK to do so.

>>20605824
Chainlink has out of the box oracles that they subsidize for builders that are going to help jumpstart the network. Ie Aave, Synthetix, bZx, MCDEX etc.

Anyone could create an oracle and recruit nodes to feed data to such oracle using the chainlink network and try to market it to dapp builders to use at a cheaper price but the highest of quality nodes that are already operating will say no b/c they are making more on the Chainlink price oracle

>>20605680
This is exactly how sergey speaks. I'm calling it right now this guy is sergey.

>>20604865
Wait for an authority figure to tell you to buy it when it's at $200. This is the Reddit approach to crypto and life in general.

>>20605746
>They claim it's token agnostic, but ALL of the token holders are actually holding erc20 tokens. If they wanted to operate on another blockchain, they would have to replicate the tokens on that other chain --> and if this happened, what would happen to all the token holders?
This isn't a fault of chainlink, but a fault of other blockchains not being far enough along to warrant such a thing. Harmony ONE actually just released early code for LINK tokens on ONE blockchain.
The general idea is that the tokens are locked into a smart contract on ETH, and then unlocked from a smart contract on ONE. Where each contract is 100% accurate relative to the other one. Through open source, verifiable code.

>>20605863
>The cool thing about a free market is that those who can't compete with the best on popular things just fill particular niches.
Maybe provide data for weather in your city, maybe provide data for OSRS GP:USD conversion rate. I don't know. But don't pick something as uncreative as BTC/USD. Again, it's the free market.

Yes anon, 100%. This is actually really good advice and comment. Fill a niche.

>>20605701
>Anyone can run a node/set up an oracle of nodes. Smart devs just choose the node Chainlink picks

So this basically contradicts "decentralization" -- if "smart" people which I assume are most devs.. are essentially only utilizing the nodes chainlink has cherry picked. Chainlink is now acting as the "Trusted Source"

>>20605680
>Because it's worth it. Chainlink has developed the most robust, tamper-proof oracle design to date. Out of any solution in history.
>If you implement a mock-oracle with a single API, you are expecting that API to have complete accuracy and never act maliciously.
>If you use multiple APIs, congrats you've basically recreated chainlink but a much shittier version that doesn't scale to infinity because of the decentralized network aspect.

An aggregation layer of APIs.. acting as a source of truth is an attactive concept... but t given the amount of hype chainlink has created it is still underwhelming. Aggregating data from multiple API sources --> making a decision is not a difficult feat of computer science. It's essentially just acting as a price feed aggregator right now that writes to the blockchain... and it's worth 3B market cap.

>>20605305
>LINK will be expensive to use
>>20605852
>Quit thinking like a small business owner.
THIS

Have you used enterprise software? This is cheap in comparison to say Salseforce. They charge companies ~$10k per head.

1 link feed is probably ~25-50k for the year. Plus your entire smart contract and application depends on it or you lose users potentially millions of dollars.

>>20605939
>So this basically contradicts "decentralization" -- if "smart" people which I assume are most devs.. are essentially only utilizing the nodes chainlink has cherry picked. Chainlink is now acting as the "Trusted Source"

You must not be a dev. Because they choose security first

>>20605939
>An aggregation layer of APIs.. acting as a source of truth is an attactive concept... but t given the amount of hype chainlink has created it is still underwhelming. Aggregating data from multiple API sources --> making a decision is not a difficult feat of computer science. It's essentially just acting as a price feed aggregator right now that writes to the blockchain... and it's worth 3B market cap.
It's less underwhelming when you truly consider the power that data has in a smart contract environment.
Smart contracts execute code. They do not think. They do not feel. They do not reason. They take in data and then perform an action. This data is absolutely critical to the success and utility of a smart contract. Ensuring that data is as reliable as humanly possible cannot possibly be overstated.

The way I see it, Chainlink itself isn't the final form of decentralization, but it is a start. I don't doubt something better will come along, but Chainlink is worth considering until then.

>>20605983
>Have you used enterprise software? This is cheap in comparison to say Salseforce. They charge companies ~$10k per head.

Enterprise software processes billions of transactions a day. At the cost of around $1 per request they would be bankrupt.

>>20605780
>It's an ERC-667 token.

ERC-20/667 both exist solely on ethereum.


> If you developed a robust infrastructure, garnered a social media presence, and provided evidence of your reliability, you would likely get jobs.
Alternatively, don't provide data for BTC/USD like anyone else can do. The cool thing about a free market is that those who can't compete with the best on popular things just fill particular niches.
Maybe provide data for weather in your city, maybe provide data for OSRS GP:USD conversion rate. I don't know. But don't pick something as uncreative as BTC/USD. Again, it's the free market.

So... basically if you're an established company. Which is what already exists. Established companies sell their data directly through trusted 3rd parties -- it works well and is much cheaper than using chainlink as an oracle.

>>20605939


You can peel back any onion far enough to call out some level of centralization. Bitcoin is not decentralized since one user essentially controls the Github repo for instance. However, in many ways Bitcoin is decentralized. Having a true Platonic form of decentralization is not Chainlink’s endgoal, however Chainlink is and will be extremely decentralized.

Chainlink’s price feeds are sponsored by Chainlink and the users and while the responses are restricted to some nodes currently it will likely not always be the case, and ultimately when the network is fully functional users can select any node they choose.

There is so much information on all of these topics, check old /biz/ threads in the summer of 2018 to learn more. Most OG’s rarely come here anymore, and most are way beyond feeling the need to spoonfeed someone who’s hostile and thinks they have all of the answers. Try humbling yourself and understand that you might not understand.

>>20606094
>it works well and is much cheaper than using chainlink as an oracle.
For now, what happens when/if chainlink is cheaper? Now established companies can own their data and save money

>>20606094
>So... basically if you're an established company. Which is what already exists. Established companies sell their data directly through trusted 3rd parties -- it works well and is much cheaper than using chainlink as an oracle
refer to my post here >>20606018
Yes, cheaper, less secure solutions may exist. But the security and reliability of the data fed into smart contracts is the one single missing piece to allowing enormous amounts of trustless operations to be facilitated via smart contracts

>>20606094


The LINK token is already being used on other blockchains through an external initiator and there is also a second plan made back 3 years ago or so to lock LINK up on Ethereum that unlocks LINK on other blockchains.

Learn more if you care: https://medium.com/@smartcontentpublication/accessing-all-blockchain-environments-through-a-single-chainlink-integration-92c64a2fb541

>>20606158
no one and no corporation wants that tho

>>20606116
>>20606116
>You can peel back any onion far enough to call out some level of centralization. Bitcoin is not decentralized since one user essentially controls the Github repo for instance. However, in many ways Bitcoin is decentralized. Having a true Platonic form of decentralization is not Chainlink’s endgoal, however Chainlink is and will be extremely decentralized.
>Chainlink’s price feeds are sponsored by Chainlink and the users and while the responses are restricted to some nodes currently it will likely not always be the case, and ultimately when the network is fully functional users can select any node they choose.
>There is so much information on all of these topics, check old /biz/ threads in the summer of 2018 to learn more. Most OG’s rarely come here anymore, and most are way beyond feeling the need to spoonfeed someone who’s hostile and thinks they have all of the answers. Try humbling yourself and understand that you might not understand.

I don't mean to be hostile so I apologize if I am coming off that way; however, I disagree that Chainlink is and will be extremely "decentralized" -- oracles have a completely different to solve than something like bitcoin, which can exist in a decentralized form independent of any 3rd party verification. Once the real world starts becoming a dependency, "decentralization" is hardly achieved since there can be many bad actors --> and cases can happen when multiple nodes achieve a monopoly on a data source and collude --> have these issues been addressed by LINK?

>>20606146
Did this guy read the news today?>>20606094

THats why T fucking Mobile is running a Chainlink node. To monetize this data, wow some people i just want to say dont bother. Your measly $1000 buy wont make a difference. Enterprises, banks, governments, and the largest DeFi/Gaming platforms are what make the link price. We don't need non-devolper derps.

>>20606238
Don’t bad actors get penalized by losing their stake on link collateral as well as reputation damage? There is literally an incentive to provide true and accurate data.

>>20604865
>why everybody thinks this
Everyone? Noone thinks this. Realistically. There are ~170k chainlink wallets. This is pretty much "noone" in the scheme of the world.

>>20605680
S-Sergey?

>>20605887
Sergey doesn't swear.

>>20606238

Chainlink does cover possible attacks and bad actors in the whitepaper, including Sybil attacks.

I’m saying that Bitcoin in many ways is decentralized, and in many ways is not, the same will apply with Chainlink. There will naturally be people who have more data than others or unique data etc. the main goal is to get as many unique sources as you can that have a proven track record of reliability.

To learn more I recommend reading this:
https://blog.goodaudience.com/chainlink-the-missing-piece-to-the-god-protocol-fd455dde92ab

It’s dated but should give you a base knowledge. From there you should read his other articles and the Chainlink blog on 44 usecases.

>>20606292
Yes, but isnt the penalty mechanism pre-programmed into the protocol? If node operators are colluding and they are all coming to a consensus based on collusion --> there will be no deterministic penalty, and the chainlink team will have to interfere if they are "caught"

>>20605626
you literally just described every shitcoin in existence

>>20604897
Not just swift. Chainlink is literally creating a world in which any company not using chainlink will be obsolete.

>>20606352

Actually they’ve come up with really interesting ways to solve this problem where nodes don’t even know what contract they’re answering to in some instances, or don’t know the other nodes involved, or don’t necessarily know the intent of the contract creator

This is a worldclass team of literal geniuses solving complex computer science and philosophical issues and trust me if you have a question based on your cursory research they’ve thought about it and answered it and likely implemented solutions already

>Nooooo a product can't function when the producers wants to maximize profit but consumers want to minimize cost! That's a CONFLICT OF INTEREST!
>Noooo it's impossible to run a node without Sergey's blessing because I say so. I have no idea how to generate valuable data, so the only viable node ideas are existing price feeds!
>Nooooo staking won't have any impact on the number of viable nodes!
>Noooo ignore staking, decentralized reputation, and TEEs! The only possible source of trust is CENTRALIZED approval by Sergey.
>Nooooo chainlink tokens cant be deployed on other blockchains with a simple lock and release contract! Eth bottlenecks are game over for this erc-20 token.
>Nooooo threshold signatures aren't a viable solution to eth gas fees! I don't understand the difference between gas fees and node payments, therefore node operators will be SCREWED.
>Noooo you can't have dynamic payments to node operators based on market conditions! Fees are locked at 0.1 link forever because it's HARD CODED.

>>20606352
Why is anyone trying to convince this guy?
The answers to all his questions are out there if he but took the time to look into it himself.
Who gives a shit if he buys?
If he's too dumb to figure this stuff out for himself, sucks to be him.

>>20606352
This anon >>20606339 kind of breaks it down. The more node operators you have, the less chance that collusion can occur. The only way that can happen is if they all receive data from a faulty provider. Without going into it too much, I suggest that you read section 5 of the white paper, it explains what a sybil attack is and what they do to combat it. But simply put, the more node operators you have providing data from multiple sources with reputation and finances on the line, the less chance there will be for collusion.

>>20604865
I think this is honestly the BEST thread I've ever read on here.

>>20606497

Just bored but done now. To be fair we all got help at some point.

It’s up to him at this point though.

>>20606447
Fucking kek this

>>20606497
Normally I would say this to one of those “link price eoy prediction”/“is x link enough to make it” but the Honest Linker namefag is actually initiating a solid discourse for the newfags that are lurking this board and only seeing Link but not knowing what the fuck it is. If they want answers, I highly suggest they tune into this thread.

>>20604865
we needs oracles

imagine u gonna fuk som ho and she lik u payin up front and u dont wanna

so u set up a smart contract, she gets the money when your nut hits her skin nom sayin?

but how the smart contract know wats good?

orakles

>>20606447

>Nooooo a product can't function when the producers wants to maximize profit but consumers want to minimize cost! That's a CONFLICT OF INTEREST!
I concede to this point

>Noooo it's impossible to run a node without Sergey's blessing because I say so. I have no idea how to generate valuable data, so the only viable node ideas are existing price feeds!

Most publicly accessible data is controlled by few entities. What kind of data would you generate? Lmao

>Nooooo staking won't have any impact on the number of viable nodes!
It doesn't have an impact on the number of nods generating DATA.

>Noooo ignore staking, decentralized reputation, and TEEs! The only possible source of trust is CENTRALIZED approval by Sergey.
It's been 3 years and staking isn't live yet for use.

>Nooooo chainlink tokens cant be deployed on other blockchains with a simple lock and release contract! Eth bottlenecks are game over for this erc-20 token.
I'll look into this.

>Nooooo threshold signatures aren't a viable solution to eth gas fees! I don't understand the difference between gas fees and node payments, therefore node operators will be SCREWED.
They are screwed if it costs more to operate a node than the profits they are taking from LINK.

>Noooo you can't have dynamic payments to node operators based on market conditions! Fees are locked at 0.1 link forever because it's HARD CODED.

Check the documentation. It is hard coded and you have to specify it in the parameter when you build the request.

Alright anons. I'm a dApp developer. I want to be open to Chainlink, having custom data feeds into smart contracts would be amazing. But after looking at it it just doesn't feel...right? I guess? Like some of the information that ChainLink feeds just feels like injecting data rather than doing actual hooks or anything useful.

For games, I make it's already hard to make things as cheap as possible. It doesn't help that if some of my user flows have to be broken down into two or more steps (say I need multiple data feeds) that each time they interact with the contract they have to submit 2-3 transactions or I have to do a ton of complex logic (think big state machine) to handle that. Coupled with the fact that I now have to figure out how to pump LINK into my pipeline just to run the requests? It just is tough. That's why I feel bearish about it. It's a neat idea for sure but, I can't use it if it won't work for me.

>>20606622
My dad works at nintendo and he says you're a fag

>>20606656

Okay anon good talk.

>>20606622
Then you either
A) Have no off chain data in your dapp or
B) Run the risk of malicious data providers you hand pick to disrupt the integrity of your dapp

It’s your choice anon, but most serious dapp devs hold data integrity in extremely high regard

>>20606676

Yes, but, the classes of apps that LINK will work for is pretty much secluded just to Defi and MAYBE some commerce. I can imagine hooks to Paypal and other services working (god knows if they'd ever allow it). I actually don't particularly care except in specific circumstances if the data is 'agreed upon'. Most connections NEED to be from existing APIs and signed to be valid by that API creator. That would be a huge step in the right direction.

I don't think Chainlink really does this? I'm not sure. But if I could put in an Order to Ebay from a smart contract or get a customers open orders and verify that it Ebay actually sent it via some signature, that'd be perfect.

Make smart contracts work smartly by working with existing infrastructure and push companies to sign API responses so that my smart contract can tell if its valid or not.

>>20604989
That it took this long and has no you's shows how many redditfugee niggers there are here. Fuck off faggots.

>>20604865
Listen here, I have a tested IQ of 85 and I just know Link is going to be huge.
Join us or be left behind.
Stupid midwits.

>>20606787

Just to add, I don't want to just assume ChainLink is giving me the correct data I rather have the API provider have a method for saying that they actually were the source of the request with replay attack prevention and blah blah blah.

>>20604933
you are retarded. you know how many other shitcoins get spammed on this godforsaken board and pump to the high heavens only to lose 90% of their value like 2 days later? look at LINKs chart. if that isn't steady natural growth for crypto then literally nothing is.

>>20606841
What kind of data do you need for your game anon?

>>20605048
>provides an argument, genuinely seeking answers
his answers
>>20605086
>>20605108
>>20605183
>all calling him retarded without trying to ask his questions
cayman island scammers on suicide watch

>>20606787
>Most connections NEED to be from existing APIs and signed to be valid by that API creator. That would be a huge step in the right direction.

This is literally Chainlink bro. Please read the whitepaper and their blog.
https://link.smartcontract.com/whitepaper
https://blog.chain.link/
https://blog.chain.link/44-ways-to-enhance-your-smart-contract-with-chainlink/

>>20606986

Well. DESU I don't actually need much data in my games ever but if I could have my API sign stuff and inject it into the game I could do really easy item transfers. Like taking their on-server inventory and moving it on chain.

I thought Chainlink was all by consensus and didn't have signed API responses? Like I want to have a global public key which I can compare a request to on some smart contract provided by the company. I essentially am doing this for my game anyway.

>>20605680
You still can’t solve the problem that data is usually coming from a centralised point, thus chainlink is unnecessary and likely dangerous. The reality is that most data that will be used on blockchain will already be on-chain and trustable and it is impossible for chainlink to verify offchain data sources origins thus negating it’s entire value proposition. That’s why it is a convoluted mess with KYC and struggling to stay relevant despite its delusional following.

>>20607104
Use what is called an external adaptor.

https://docs.chain.link/docs/external-adapters
https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-external-adapters-explained/

>>20607123

Yeah DESU I'd just be happy if major companies had a repository for public keys and had an option to sign stuff. Then there was some service that just ferried the requests back to you and you compared the response signature to the public key repository. Thats it. Could use Protobuffers or Byte...buffer object format thing (Binary JSON even?). Maybe even using their HTTP cert.

>>20607159

I guess this comes down to why should I trust chainlink operators when I can trust a signature coming directly from the source? I rather have that.

>>20607198

>Single point of failure
NGMI

>>20605461
You can learn by digging through the archives like I did a year ago. Put in some fucking effort. The anons before you laid the groundwork and did the hard shit. Now all you have to do is read

Truth is, there's no reason to insure transactions via the most volatile asset ever conceived. All of this staking, running nodes and ensuring processes via a cryptocurrency is a novel idea (might be good at connecting other crypto's together) but is completely ridiculous in terms of a world adoption fantasy. The corporate world is not going to buy your bags.

Smart contracts are nothing but code. Code is nothing more than 'given this, execute that'. This is the crux of the issue. API's don't need to be connected via a blockchain. Connecting entities together requires nothing more than traditional software and coding solutions. Even if the dream of Link is to potentially connect everything, again, adding blockchain into it is nothing more than forcing crypto into it when there is no need for it. It's not as simple as connecting fucking lego blocks or 'chaining' things together. Network infrastructures are ludicrously more nuanced and complex than that. The "oracle problem" is made infinitely more complex by inserting a cryptocurrency. It's also precisely the recipe for a huge speculative market fueled by unsophisticated investors.

>>20607198
Pretty much this>>20607218

I don't know more without more information. Maybe go into the discord and one of the devs can talk it out with your specific use case in more detail.

>>20607218
>NGMI

The entire internet works off interacting with APIs that literally are "single points of failure". Services are "single points of failure". The data I query from SlutHub or whatever is the same no matter who calls it. There is no point of concensus. If I'm getting data from SlutHub let themselves identify as SlutHub via some public key. This concensus model only works in varying data circumstances: see, price feeds.

>>20607274
Except for T-Mobile. Right anon?
https://decrypt.co/36317/deutsche-telekom-subsidiary-operate-chainlink-node

NGMI

>>20606605
kek, yeah I'm a little blurry on how the actual interfacing with the real world "knowin whas good" thing actually works. But earlier in the thread you talked about Chainlink being too expensive to use. Someone here once compared it to using a cell phone in the 80s: Yeah it's definitely too expensive and slow for extremely mass use, say the checkout at a grocery store. But in the beginning it's not really designed for that, it's more intended for low volume, high value stuff. The guys in the 80s with cellphones communications were higher value.

>>20607281

I rather just roll out my own solution and unironically it is the same solution that many other developers are using (speaking in terms of game developers moving assets on and off chain). No mention of Chainlink, they just roll out their own infrastructure. It isn't a single point of failure if literally it is a service that is the master of the data that they distribute.

>>20606520

>Chainlink does cover possible attacks and bad actors in the whitepaper, including Sybil attacks.

The only solution chainlink proposes in its whitepaper towards Sybil attacks are at the hardware level. Currently there is no way to solve the privacy issue as anybody running a node will be able to inspect the request and response from external APIs.

So basically we won't see adoption at large scale until hardware adoption is achieved. Only non sensitive data can be used now via chainlink.

>>20607294
lol you're such a midwit it's fucking hilarious. I am so happy you're not going to buy link.

How high will it go realistically, if it goes high? My guess is 2k for a day or two.

ChainLink cannot even handle OAuth2 tokens as well. So if I wanted to have any sort of session state on the contract side, I couldn't do that (would I ever need to? Probably not. _buuut_, if say API vendors had smart contracts which told their API that the message author was connected to some authentication token...thatd be useful).

>>20607294
Even price feeds could be collated and indexed into a singular api without adding in additional transaction expenses to some middleman pirate. There is no reason for it to occur on chain and it only shifts risk onto the end user and away from data providers.

>>20607342

I'm just a 3 year dApp dev who has wrestled with the horrible landscape that is Solidity/ETH/and ETH chains. I think people get hyped by the idea but in practice it works so so so much differently. I want people to just be aware of that.

>>20607363
THIS. i cant believe how many people here have never even heard of the OAuth2 problem. this is SERIOUS FUD.

>>20607372
Yeah...price feeds. Which are replaced by Uniswap (kinda, still use cases for both). ChainLink isn't meant to only be good for price feeds but that is its main use. WHICH I will concede it does really well. Once it increases the number of nodes.

>>20607363
build an oauth oracle

>>20607387
>Dunning–Kruger effect

>>20607294
>The entire internet works off interacting with APIs that literally are "single points of failure".

And you think the internet works well right now?

>>20607342
>Services are "single points of failure".

kek yes, you don't see this as a problem...? Look at what happened when half the internet went down from cloudflare the other day. Single points of failure wreck normal "comfortable" current life. what chainlink attempts to solve will be like taking the internet from dial-up to high-speed fiber optics. Its laying the pipes for the fourth industrial revolution.

>>20607363
It can though pal.

>>20607363
might be too late actually
https://github.com/chainlink/node-oauth2-server

>>20607459
Was just gonna post this

Imagine waddling into crypto in July 2020 and thinking "Uh Chainlink doesn't make sense doesn't seem sustainable to me".
Yeah well how about you tell SWIFT, Oracle, Deutsche Telekom, Web3, Kaleido, Accord, etc. etc. etc.
LIKE THIS IS EVEN UP FOR FUCKING DISCUSSION ANY MORE. YOU HAD THREE
WHOLE
FUCKING
YEARS
YOU DUMB FUCK

>>20607441
>Dunning–Kruger

You're inclined to believe that. Let's talk though about how to make this all work and find some common ground.

>>20607424

I think that if you're literally getting data from a single source of truth that there is no 'decentralization'. If a service reports "Bill just fucked a tranny" and its the ONLY SOURCE of that information, there is no point in having consensus about it. Except for caching? But that's more of an implementation detail than actually something that is useful.

There will be only one. No one need 1000x blockchains. Link will be useless. BSV dont need 3rd party oracles.

>>20607441
I'm agreeing with you, what I was laughing at is this which anyone with even a beginner understanding of link knows is complete bullshit.
>This concensus model only works in varying data circumstances

>>20607441
> It's laying the pipes for the fourth industrial revolution.

It's surely a contributor in this space, but the reality of is that layer 1 protocols haven't even been solved yet. Tamper proof "oracles" essentially just act as middle men --> who can onboard the most high quality data providers as quickly as possible, which is more efficient from a "centralized" structure.

>>20607459
>https://github.com/chainlink/node-oauth2-server
thanks anon. i fed this imbecile too many links already

>>20607459
>https://github.com/chainlink/node-oauth2-server

"Complete, compliant and well tested module for implementing an OAuth2 Server/Provider with express in node.js"

I don't see your point. This is literally just adding OAuth2 to express. This doesn't solve the problem of user based authentication when they wish to request something. (And most of that information needs to remain private anyway but yeah)

>>20607516

Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm an imbecile. You guys seem really out of touch with what is actually happening in the dApp world. I think it's interesting to see what you guys are thinking so I can understand your psychology more.

>>20607506
I'm agreeing with you too, i was responding to him through you agreeing

>>20607485
That's gonna be a nah from me dog, I'm just here to laugh at you while my link stack keeps going up in price.
But please, do continue to expound upon the problems inherent in link.

>>20607516
>https://github.com/chainlink/node-oauth2-server

Looks like it's a stale deprecated branch that hasn't been touched in 4 years. All it does is spin up a simple express server and that has a few handlers.

>>20607513
agreed. L1 is a major problem. Will be interesting to see how Avalanche and Polkadot turn out and Eth 2.0. All of which Chainlink is a major player and the preferred oracle

>>20607545
>dApp world
haha. this is like the dapp radar fud on speed
no wonder so many halfwit devs are salty at chainlinks rise, they dont understand it

>>20607552
ah, roger that

>>20607513
Layer 1 protocols have been "solved" by moving the computational workload onto Layer 2, which is incidentally facilitated by Chainlink + Arbitrum. The amount of work that can be done off-chain and then bundled, attested and settled on the L1 is immense.
"Just acting as middlemen" now means performing all of the heavy lifting before it is sent to the settlement layer.
None of this is new, Vitalik was talking about it in 2014, but the slow development of L1s has seen alternative solutions run rings around them.

>>20607584

Rising price doesn't mean rising usage. I actually haven't heard of a single project on my radar using it except for exchanges as a measure to make sure their prices don't get rekt ala the recent hacks using flash loans.

Just want to add, by the nature of an OAuth2 token do people really want to put that out there publically. Some bearer authentication based upon your address being verified would be much much better. But you can't really do that I guess in a contract. Hmm.

>>20607313
The way I see from a webdev perspective is an oracle basically replaces fetch in JavaScript. You can't just fetch API information directly in the contract script, because if each node on the blockchain calls the API it might potentially return different results each time. So instead you request the data from the oracle. A job is created and sent out of the chain to the oracle, the oracle executes the job (ie fetching data from an API), then sends the result back into the blockchain. The "client" aka contract then knows the job was completed and it has the correct data, and it can continue executing accordingly

>>20607603
actually, i just heard they only have a 2 man team? im starting to think you may be onto something

>>20607601

If you think Layer 1 protocles have been "solved".. you should check the current gas fees on ETH. Then think about that x (really big number) which will account for the global population. It is not even close to being solved at scale.

>>20607639
arbitrum
threshold signatures
other chains

>>20607568
>OAuth2 tokens
>>20607545
https://docs.kaleido.io/kaleido-services/baf/oauth/
https://market.link/adapters/baf785b4-8ca3-4974-a274-8b8f73717c0a

>>20607652
>arbitrum
>threshold signatures
>other chains

lol. these are proposed solutions that will be tested before layer 1 is even remotely close to being "solved"

>>20607639
That's fair, I was being hyperbolic. More accurately I would say that solutions that reduce reliance on L1s are currently outpacing L1 development, and I see that continuing for the near future.

>>20607603
What projects are on your radar HAHA.

Aave, Synthetix, Polkadot, Avalanche, MXDEX, bZx, the list goes on, shall i continue?

chainlinkecosystem.com

>>20607666

Still the privacy issue persists in chainlink. Anybody running nodes will be able to inspect their network request data and see the data flowing through. This is a huge vulnerability to a "secure" system.

>>20607666
>https://docs.kaleido.io/kaleido-services/baf/oauth/

"youtube: Youtube API, OAuth enabled. Stores OAuth tokens in private database mapped to signing ethereum addresses."

This is good! Guess the issue then is data privacy.

>>20607673
and you know what each does?
your reply implies you dont

>>20607603
Check out DECO & Mixicles

both started with Ari Juels. Chainlink Technical Advisor and creator of Proof of Work

>>20607692

Defi, Defi, L2, Defi, Defi, Defi

So...price feeds...and IDK what polkadot does with it but. are they just integrated?

>>20607698
what are mixicles and town crier

>>20607698
>Still the privacy issue persists in chainlink. Anybody running nodes will be able to inspect their network request data and see the data flowing through. This is a huge vulnerability to a "secure" system.

DECO + Mixicles both Chainlink technologies

Everyone has their own opinions, everyone wants to disect the news and upcoming projects. At the end of the day, it's just fucking charts going up and down. Follow people on twitter that have a good track record and just swing trade.
What's the point of buying a shit ton of X coins and then just sitting on your bag, waiting for it to hopefully explode if everything is true.
Don't sink your balls so deep into an investment. So much stuff happens everyday.

>>20607736
the tools are there to use, if its not being used its an indictment on dapp devs and their projects, not chainlink

>>20607736
L1 with higher throughput. Will allow for more applications. Obviously everything is DeFi right now. That is about all ETH is useful for atm and is starting to become unuseful at doing that.

>>20607719
>Check out DECO & Mixicles


Mixicles only solves contract privacy, but data privacy is not achieved. The node operator will still have to make the HTTP request to the API endpoint and receive a response.

>>20607782
https://www.deco.works/index.html

>>20607771

Yeah its a tragedy really. I can't build anything on ETH anymore, gotta move to xDAI or Matic. Or god forbid, Tron. Tron actually isn't as bad as people say, their API is just commmpllettteee ass and so is their wallet. But the engineering behind their chain is pretty neat and is very helpful for dApp devs since it has no real "gas limit" and consistent block times.

>>20607782
That's what TEEs and sMPC are for.

>>20607738
>what are mixicles and town crier

So I assume the plan is that chainlink will sell crowntier hardware to companies that are operating nodes? Sounds a lot like a centralized company controlling all the resources

See my previous post on mixicles
>>20607782

>>20607798
Matic is really promising for blockchain game development desu. Chainlink is the preferred oracle for Matic.

>>20607757

You w0t mate. There is a whole class of applications that can be made if Chainlink was economical AND handled some niche but important use cases. Hence why I'm here bitching. If Chainlink worked well enough to enable dApps to use it beyond price feeds, they would have done so already.

>>20607818

Yes, Matic looks quite nice. It plays well with existing tooling which is a S+ in my book. xDAI is my favorite but the very low costing blocks poses security problems depending on what you're doing.

bros what if we made onlyfans but with chainlink

>>20607817
It is what makes Chainlink better than the competition in all facets. Also, the capitalist economy is not going anywhere. These large companies want to have something like Chainlink. Re: Deutsche Telekom

>>20607817
>Sounds a lot like a centralized company controlling all the resources
Because it is. People have the most absurd ideas about "decentralisation" being some utopian nonsense where everyone can contribute to the codebase or something.
For Chainlink, decentralisation means greater security and uptime guarantees that arise as a result of an oracle node network, compared to a single oracle. It doesn't go beyond that. It doesn't NEED to go beyond that because all Chainlink need to sell is that their system of executing smart contracts offers better end to end security than the existing system. And it does.
The fact that Chainlink, as a central entity, will be selling the infrastructure for secure second layer and processing and smart contract execution is BULLISH for people who see the size of that market and the position of Chainlink at the centre of it.

>>20607826
Explain what data you want. It sounds more like L1 does not allow for Chainlink to be used to its full capacity which is bullish for Chainlink and bearish for ETH 1.0

>>20604933
erc20 scam coins seem like the future with rich millenials getting inheritances soon.

>>20607826
youve gone to market to price a job?
or waiting to follow in someones footsteps

This was a good thread. Thank you anons for teaching me some stuff.

>>20607917
Likewise, thanks for the solid dev discussion. Don't get that much around these parts of biz XD

>>20607876
Imagine thinking the economic revolution will be headed by some random fat fuck and a horde of neets. This is pyramid scheme top to bottom.

>>20607940
Sloppy job, LBF4/iBZ.

>>20604865
Chainlink is centralized oracles, not decentralized. They don't have a sybil resistant consensus algorithm. They simply use KYC. And most of their partners are fake, for example Google Cloud was fake, radio silence since that one blog post 12 months ago. Swift was fake, radio silence since 2016.
It's a project based on lies and deceptive marketing. That is a fact. People don't like proven liars and fraudsters.

>>20607971
The google partnership was showing a usecase: https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/data-analytics/building-hybrid-blockchain-cloud-applications-with-ethereum-and-google-cloud

Stop coming into these threads and ruining them with your cope.

GOING TO SLEEP YALL. THANKS FOR THE INTERESTING CONVERSATIONS TO WHOEVER PARTICIPATED.

>>20606787
>Yes, but, the classes of apps that LINK will work for is pretty much secluded just to Defi and MAYBE some commerce.

Link works with literally everything. The whole point of the chainlink network is to secure any data feed going to the smart contract whereever it may be (from blockchain A to blockchain B and vice versa, or application A to blockchain C or vice versa, etc etc.).

It's the internet of the blockchains. Thanks to TCP/IP protocol and HTTPS, we never have to worry if I'm reading a different conversation than you are in this very thread. Chainlink Network seeks to do the same for smart contracts when they're connected to the real world.

And look into the cool stuff that people have done with smart contracts,

https://blog.chain.link/winners-of-the-chainlink-virtual-hackathon/
https://blog.chain.link/showcasing-the-winning-projects-from-the-ethdenver-2020-hackathon/
https://blog.chain.link/showcasing-the-winners-of-the-etherlin-zwei-hackathon/

The biggest project I want to highlight is Cereberus Wallet where they integrated 2FA into their wallet. This is MAJOR because of how often people end up getting their private keys stolen.

>>20604897
Unironically just sold. Anyone who talks like this shouldn’t know about link

I've created a discord channel dedicated to having honest conversations around crypto/blockchain and technology in general. If anybody is interested in having genuine civil conversations that are principled and open minded, please join here:

Discord: ETs6AWU

>>20607311
It is NOT T-Mobile, it is T-Mobile-MMS. The one having a node is sub-company with the task of experimenting with tech and creating press releases for marketing purposes. It is not such a big deal. For example: what data are they going to provide and to whom? Irrelevant, they just want the press release and experiment with it.
T-Mobile, the parent company, fucking sucks and loses money btw

Chainlink couldnt save swift if it wanted. Swift is a dinosaur needing a replacement.

>>20607871

Do you mean we should use chainlink for payments? Or we somehow turn the currency itself into a sexual object?

>>20605473
Unironically one of the best written scenes in the history of film

What’s Chainlink?

>>20605473
Unironically one of the best written scenes in the history of film

>>20607940

I mean, isn't that essentially what Marx and his cronies were?

>>20604865
Fuck OP you’ve stumbled upon something here. Quick go and tell SWIFT, T-Systems and Google before they go bankrupt, you’ll be a hero.

>>20605103
this is how i look and feel with 31

>>20605059

>fast follower

>>20604918
>>20608119
>Nigger fudding LINK
>Lmao I just sold
Nice try, brainlets

>>20606864
Steady natural growth fuelled by relentless shitposting and twitter hype

Just finished reading the thread and I have to say: this is one of the rare threads with a good combination of knowledgeable LINK enthusiast and well spoken LINK critics that facilitates good discussion. Threads like these have been very VERY rare since 2018. To any no/nu-linkers lurking that are to lazy to search the archives:

BOOKMARK THIS THREAD AND READ IT CAREFULLY. EXAMINE EVERY LINK POSTED HERE AND YOU MIGHT MAKE IT.

>>20604897
>SWIFT finance cartel
>killed off
>ever

>>20608149
fuck off new fag

>>20610388
let me ruin that by asking this question openly:
how will chainlink verify objectivity in a subjective consciousness/universe?

>>20604897
>save swift from getting killed off huh
Found the xrp cultist.

>>20607471
Swift is using Corda r3 that uses link as an optional plug in (that no institution uses) and Oracle for start ups was a joke and your boy got demoted.

>>20611480
Does it really need to? Could you please elaborate on the point you are trying to make.

>>20611928
no i realised it was retarded after i posted

>>20607898
>It doesn't NEED to go beyond that because all Chainlink need to sell is that their system of executing smart contracts offers better end to end security than the existing system. And it does.
thats a stretch
its basically a gimmick. aggregate API sources are already a thing and as long as your API data still requires trust you don't significantly improve the trust of the overall system with chainlink

>>20611950
Kek, big ups for the honesty. It's an interesting question though, but more from a philosophic point of view. If we manage to build a perfect, omniscient world wide computer (the god protocol), how will it arbitrate on subjective issues? Do we even want it to?

>inb4 KLEROS SIR!

>>20607123
sergey btfo

Band is way better then link. I just sold all my link and bought band.

>>20611990
API quality is another area of focus to guarantee high quality data sources.
But I don't even need to defend Chainlink on this, literally all the big players have validated their solution. We had these discussions in 2018 when there was no indication they would get traction. Now it's all confirmed by literally everyone that matters so what argument is left to be had.
Even if you decide you don't like Chainlink's solution it doesn't matter, because SWIFT, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Oracle, Deutsche Telekom, Kaleido, Web3, Polkadot and dozens of others disagree.

>>20604865
>I have a hard time understanding
Watch and learn:
https://youtu.be/ufVyX7JDCgg

>>20604865
This is true. Link is just a trusted third party and is likely to continue being one for the foreseeable future.
Actual decentralization of oracles is is still too hard and hasn't been solved.
None of this matters though. Utility of token not needed. Price will still go up. because of the hype.

>>20612799
Based bluepilled retard. You will make it.

>>20612882
Talking about utils is secondary anyway. And none of you understand any of the tech anyways.
Only valid position in crypto is: "Number go up?" "People be hype?' Buy bag and profit.

>>20612956
yeah you're dumb as fuck

>>20612973
kek. Not understanding that crypto is just an expanding/contracting ponzi that only has value as a utility token for exchanges to reap the fees from rekt margin traders.

>>20607601
>>20607639
Kadena has solved the layer 1 scalability issue with their dual public/private chains. them and a few other chains will be eating ETH's cake. just wait until smartcon, kadena will shine.

>>20604865

What is this 3 year old FUD day?

>>20607817
Decentralization is only needed for the data processing points. I.e. having a shitload of miners/nodes. Other than that decentralization is not needed. Link is not a currency. It is a good thing LINK is patented, centrally controlled and closed-source. It’s how you get corporate. The whole lolbertatian crypto dream will be stomped out by LINK and corporate blockchains and your every breath will be controlled, analyzed and stored for all eternity. If you don’t have a fat stack, you are fucked.

>>20605048
there are only 2 options at this point:
- you are retarted
- you try to fud when trying to act as you understand anything and it looks fcking pathetic

link 100$ EOY