/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>22352097
He Just looks straight at the camera and yells "never" for over 3 minutes, until he passes out and the rest of the 40 minutes of the video is Just him unconscious

>>22352157
Bullish.

>>22352097
Just want to point out that /biz is dead and twitter + discord is better for crypto and link discussions.. that's all.

>>22352097
timestamp for steak comment?

>>22352097
He looks like some kind of non bald Jeff Bezos

>>22352097
tried asking him about making a discount for those of us who discovered link late, he got so angry and screamed “you had three years” at me. What is wrong with this community?

>>22352175
you couldn't like the LINK "marine" bullshit thats infected twitter, surely
so cringe

Thomas said treshold signatures this year i guess das gut

>>22352176
4:55

>>22352254
timestamp?

>>22352400
15:30

Imagine doing the presentation fighting off diarrhea

47:33 is good for a kek. The question is with Chainlink Labs being a thing, will there be some kind of formal roadmap released?
>Imagine if we had come out with a roadmap in 2017. Uh, you know, sticking us with that direct model. We either, you know, would have had to change it -- and uh, our community is really loud about things like that. or we would have to, uh, stick with it and miss DeFi

Imagine listening to this and not being all in. i just don't get it.

>>22353077
Checked and indeed, very comfy. The Hodge has always been /ourguy/.

Last question was around SWIFT integration and ISO20022 standard. Did Thomas say they are positioned to be involved? Don't get it

>>22353304
Havent gotten there yet but Thomas seems extremely bullish imo as a whole so far

>>22352447
When will threshold signatures be ready ?
>I would say definitely this year


OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>>22353597
What are threshold signatures? Please explain. I will market buy $10k worth of LINK right now.

>>22353597
Are tsigs even needed now that there's arbitrum?

>>22353646
https://blog.chain.link/threshold-signatures-in-chainlink/

>>22353674
yes, multiple arbitrum nodes playing the same game with eachother will publish state to eth as an oracle network.

>>22353597
yeah i did not said and of year

Can we pool together some money to get Thomas to record him reading the white paper so i can listen to it every night when i go to sleep? His voice is comfy af

>>22353304
banks do not just implement willy nilly whatever they just think might be good and see how it turns out
swift worked with a base system from the 80ies just to see how slow they move
if they transfer into a new system it’s years of research and different banks making poc with projects to evaluate what they want and what does work
positioned to be involved is as bullish as you can get statement at this point
since it will be years until full launch

>>22352097
He basically said staking is done & they're just figuring out what payouts should be. How long can that take? My guess is overall they'd want to see 2-3 months of activity so probably Q4 2020 or Q1 2021 staking is realistic.

>>22352097
Jesus christ staking contract is just 10% of the work needed the hard part is getting the economics right and that's where research is being done.
So we will never get staking?

>>22353888
2-3 months activity from when? Now? Why does now make sense as a starting point? Main net has been live for over a year.

>>22353888
Checked. Yes, he specifically said coding makes up about 10% of the work in doing steaking. The research component is what they need to focus on. Enter Ari Juels.

>>22353304
It didn't seem like it. His answer was a bit hard to interpret but it seemed like there was a disconnect with having to be connected to a specific bank that made them processing SWIFT payments unlikely right now.

It also made it seem very clear they're not directly working with SWIFT on anything.

>>22353888
you guys are delusional his tone implied it is a lot further out than people expect.

>>22353741
But the whole point of arbitrum is to only write solution or challenges to eth. I don't see how tsigs can help there.

>>22353917
I think 2-3 months from when nodes are processing contracts, which I think has only begun recently. The vast majority of the node work since main net has been price feed data.

>>22353941
He said they can already do what swift is asking, did you listen to a word he said?

>>22353909
Two more years fren.

>>22352157
I was worried about him and kept sending ninjets hoping the sound would wake him up. How do i bill the chainlink team for them?

>>22353975
He literally said the coding is easy and only 10% of the work you retard. The other anon is right. Staking is done. They just need to figure out how to use it

>>22353888
How the fuck do you infer 'staking is done' from what he said lmao. He said they're in research phase still

>>22353941
>It didn't seem like it. His answer was a bit hard to interpret but it seemed like there was a disconnect with having to be connected to a specific bank that made them processing SWIFT payments unlikely right now.
>
>It also made it seem very clear they're not directly working with SWIFT on anything.

>>22354115
His answer implied the coding part was done but the research part needed more time to run to figure out what the economic inventives could/should be

>>22354295
This

>>22353996
He said Chainlink can follow the protocol but that people doing SWIFT payments need to do it through a bank, and that's where the rub for Chainlink is. That's also why he brought up their integrations with Paypal and Dwollo as non-bank payment transfer options.

I am pretty high IQ, you shouldn't challenge me.

>>22353975
Theoretically (and based on his answers around Arbitrum), staking will need to be implemented at least for them by Q4. But he essentially directly said staking is coded and they're just feeling out payments right now. I don't think that's going to take a very long time, they just need the data. Arbitrum itself should speed that data up immensely so even if they only release Arbitrum related staking at first, a few months later generalized staking should be ready - so Q1. Q2 would be the absolute latest I imagine staking on nodes, unless Chainlink really has no other adoption.

>>22354439
I wanna believe

>>22353941
He tactfully dodged elaborating on any specific SWIFT x LINK relationship, typical modus operandi for chainlink over the past 3 years. You can't infer that there isn't a relationship from this.

The toastertecc stream is all we need regarding this matter, if you know you know.

>>22352157
Based

>>22354565
What was said during the stream? I remember that it was that fireside chat with Ari and Sergey or something, but I can't remember anything relating to SWIFT...

>>22352373
That was correct. I thought it would be a fart or something.
Thanks anon.
That’s a good response too.

>>22354565
Nevermind, I see it in the archive. For anyone who wants to save time and not deal with these "if you know you know faggots":

I will tell you faggots one more time.

CHAINLINK + SWIFT partnership was confirmed by Sergey himself after Lauren Toaster asked him about it directly. Flannel Man stated “In regards to our partners and what we are doing with them, I generally like to respect their timelines.”

Now you know too and you're not a little faggot who thinks he holds secret info.

>>22354806
If you shit on the street, it's curry you eat.

>>22354439
So how would one explain this ( just asking )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHQ3hk_Nu_g&feature=youtu.be&t=46

If they weren't working with SWIFT why are they still using their name and logo in a way that implies some sort of working relationship. Wouldn't that look really bad if the only work they did was during the POC.

>>22353836
Yeah you’re right swift is very slow to adapt

Now this is the kicker: faster players with better tech are coming to market ie Ripple. They have to adapt, and adapt fast.

>>22352097
cant dodge the hodge

>>22354913
No, it wouldn't "look bad." It could also just imply that they are familiar with the architectures of using the APIs and Software of those large companies.

If you all look back at old posts relating to link, it becomes very clear that basically NO ONE has any idea what they are talking about relating to chainlink. We know so much more about the project than we did two years ago, and the people talking about chainlink in 2018 and 2019 sound like retards trying to talk about smart contract APIs and shit.

The same thing will happen now. In two years, everyone talking about Link now will look like a retard because they really have no idea about the nature of the project or how it is going to be used. There are very few people in the world who have an idea about how this tech will be used and none of them are sitting around on biz waiting to talk about it with you.

>>22354115
They are research payments/penalties. They technical aspects for staking and providing a payment and pr ally are likely completed.

Staking for link is completely different than other crypto. There won’t be a set % payment. The penalty/reward applied to the node for their data can very depending on the contract/use case. Is it a strict pass/fail? Are there different penalties based on % deviation? Providing data that is 1% off may be inconsequential in some cases and cost billions in others.

My guess is staking will be rolled out in phases for set use cases, arbitrum likely to be one of the first

>>22352097
LITERALLY DODGED THE SWIFT QUESTION LMAO THIS FUCKING SCAM GETS FUNNIER AND FUNNIER

LINKTARDS WILL BECOME XRPSCHIZOS 2.0 LMAO

>>22352541
Best team on earth, can’t wait to watch the hodge

How can someone so soft spoken be such a cold hard killer

>>22354806
Based deep lore spoon feeder

>>22354439
>I am pretty high IQ, you shouldn't challenge me.

Sergey has already said out of respect for the company, he'll never confirm a partnership until the other party is ready.

>>22352157
I got a bit spooked at 2:34 when one of his eyes poped red.
Surely bullish for link.