/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>24818037
this is how u know crypto is immature. sergey is the only real man in crypto

The responsible thing to do would be to admit failure and integrate a working solution.

Insiders at Maker must be planning an attack on some contract within Maker's system and make off with hundreds of millions in Ether

They dont want a solution because they are the people making money

MKR is trash-tier anyway. who cares

He's fighting hard for his job, so good on him. What I'd like to know is what happened to Mario Conti who seemed to be hinting for sometime that Maker would integrate Chainlink and then suddenly disappeared.
Maybe lost the internal battle and left?

Chainlink has already won. Everything else is cope.

Makes was using oracles while Chainlink wasn't shat into the world by Sergey. They can't even dare to make a proposal to be used by Maker because they know they will be humiliated. That's the problem with DAOs, you can't bribe their founders into using your piece of shit centralized oracle.

>>24818185
it's clearly stated in that specific thread that they intend to monetize their own MKR oracle feeds. makes sense that they're so defensive.

just wondering why nobody has forked MKR and just slapped LINK oracles on it. it'll be another Sushi eats Uni scenario.

>>24818209

https://forum.makerdao.com/t/11-25-20-oracle-outage-post-mortem/5547

>>24818209
>just wondering why nobody has forked MKR and just slapped LINK oracles on it
I like that idea hopefully someone does

>>24818201
Mm actually there is he is that the Maker thread (user name: nanexcool) oddly saying "praise Sergey"???

>>24818219
>I agree, the Oracle Team strives for 100% uptime as goal. Our entire design philosophy is built around optimizing resiliency through redundancy. Even with this incident, the Maker Oracles have a 99.9% uptime record which is better than Chainlink can say about their Oracles after their Black Thursday outage (and doesn’t include other outages that they haven’t publicized).
isn't it the opposite? maker crashed on black thursday while link kept updating by paying a shitload in gas

>>24818242
SOMEBODY CALL ANDRE

>>24818253
Chainlink did fail on Black Thursday, see here: https://medium.com/aave/crypto-black-thursday-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-7f2acebf2b83

>>24818249

>>24818308
>In particular, the MakerDAO oracle reported an invalid ETH/USD price for many hours, while oracle operators were trying to unravel the tangle of stuck transactions created by the increased demand on the network. This caused a lot of confusion for multiple actors of the system (users, keepers, refinance apps) that ultimately contributed in Maker losing 4M+ USD of collateral to 0 bid auctions (more on this later).

>The Chainlink oracle infrastructure held up relatively well during the crisis. Specifically, prices of the Chainlink reference data contracts were stuck at the beginning of the event due to operators not being able to push their transactions through. Operators had to unwind the transactions previously submitted using normal gas prices and push emergency transactions to keep the fees updated, with extremely high fees. Nodes remained stuck for approximately two hours, while prices were slowly being submitted.

what kind of mental gymnastics is that tard doing to spin this as maker's oracles being better when it's another example of them getting rekt lol

>>24818037
lol the absolute hubris... it's wonderful to see. I can't wait for their oracles to fail again. Same with compound. The egos on these guys are massive.

>>24818308
That article you posted specifically says chainlink didn't fail it was the ethereum network that failed by being too clogged. That same article also specifically says Maker DID fail.
What kind of retard are you? Did you even read what you linked to?

>>24818376
Holy shit not even comparable MKR got fucked

>>24818428
They’re unprofessional and are arrogant.
They’ll learn the hard way, for sure.

>>24818133
this basically. It's becoming increasingly obvious that groups militantly unwilling to adopt ChainLink are bad actors deliberately causing these failures to make off with the cash. The ridiculous fanboy "For YEARS" response is even more of a red flag

>arrogant
>blinded by contempt
>stuck in their ways to the detriment of their users
maybe not straight to 0 but to 0 nonetheless
many such cases

>>24818308

Absolute bullshit. The chainlink feeds did not fail. They were the most up to date of all the oracle solutions on that day, the node operators just got RAPED by fees. However the fact they were willing to get raped to maintain their reputation (future profits) shows the game theory at work perfectly in link and why it is the most sybil resistant and resilient solution.

>>24818130
Sir gay? Sounds like a poofta

>>24818415
Right, they both failed. Chainlink for two hours.

>>24818466
Here's your demigod CLG explaining the failure: https://twitter.com/ChainLinkGod/status/1238974092847378432

>>24818585

I dont give a fuck about twitter and i dont give a fuck even more about that abaolite fucking cringe normie faggot.

Go back to twitter and stop sharing it here bitch

>>24818466
> the fact they were willing to get raped to maintain their reputation
How far we have come from our days in the desert my Christian brothers!

>>24818608
I've held LINK longer than you, I just don't get why it's bad to admit that Chainlink failed there. They've learned from it though, not the end of the world. Just like the xau/xag thing, live and learn.

>>24818444
same with that leshner fuck, gonna be found lying in some minecraft ditch with his knees shattered if he doesnt wise up

>>24818635

It was a failure on eths behalf you cret. Thats the bottleneck. The other oracles failed because they were shitty solutions. Link kept up extremely well, and the only bottleneck was ethereum.

Hence the race to make Tsigs and roll out abritrum. Both which were in the plan long before this date. Link in a beta incomplete form literally did better than every other oracle solution combined that day.

>>24818308
Chainlink didn't fail. About half of the nodes just went offline after spending thousands in gas costs and running out of ethereum. The feed kept updating on the remaining half of the nodes.

This is a problem of ethereum and not LINK. upcoming Arbitrum mainnet solves this.

>>24818037
Ego

>>24818635
how long you been holding?

>>24818695
>>24818697
Yeah, I get it, I get it.

>>24818770
Sept 2017 but was a student then so I only have 20k :(

>maker solution has massive design flaws
>these are features dude lmao
>Chainlink has solved this flaw
>but but Chainlink only just implemented aggregation! We're still better!
the cope and deflection is tangible. What the fuck are these onions cucks actually doing?
Fuck maker.

>>24818037
This Nik Kunkel faggot has such a punchable face.

>>24818037
>overburdening in-house devs with oracle duties instead of outsourcing them is a FEATURE!!

Holy shit what a butthurt little ninny.

>>24818037
This wasn't the first time the Maker oracle shat the bed, btw. See pic.

Their oracle system consists of a handful of secret oracles, and only two people at Maker know who they are.
It's a shitty untransparent and centralized system at best, and a disaster waiting to happen at worst.

>>24818201
Maker oracle failures:
>multiple

Chainlink oracle failures:
>zero

Yahtzee, your move.

>>24818253
>isn't it the opposite? maker crashed on black thursday while link kept updating by paying a shitload in gas
Literally yes.
See pic related and pic here: >>24819280

>>24818585
>>24818554
>>24818635
>>24818308
The Chainlink oracles did not fail. At all.
Congestion exploded, so ETH was slow to relay the oracles' transactions.
That was literally it.
A bunch of Chainlink nodes went offline because the gas costs were above their limit, but a bunch of them remained online and paid out of their own pockets to keep things rolling.

Meanwhile Maker's oracles actually failed.

>>24819376
>>24819319
ChainlinkGod.Shane is that you?

>>24819413
Is Shane CLG's first name or something?

>>24818308
>Chainlink did fail on Black Thursday, see here:

Buddy, your own article explains how Chainlink did not fail, but ETH failed to transfer their transactions.
Maybe it’s better if you delete that link from your bookmarks so you don’t embarrass yourself like this again in the future.

>>24819293
>switches AG with AU price
nothin personal kid

>>24819550
Contract writer failure.
Nothing to do with oracles.

>>24819537
Did Chainlink fail to provide the correct prices for a period of time? Yes.
My point is that the team has learnt from this. Node operators are prepared for this situation occurring again etc.
I understand that the nodes _themselves_ didn't fail.

>>24819602
Not through their failure.
ETH failed, not Chainlink.

Read your own damn link.

>>24819602
>Did Chainlink fail to provide the correct prices for a period of time? Yes.
Because of ETH.
Chainlink did not fail.

>I understand that the nodes _themselves_ didn't fail.
That's what you implied by "Chainlink did fail".
And Maker's nodes DID fail. That's the difference.

>>24819628
The blocks were still being produced right? The nodes didn't adjust and increase their gas/ran out of ETH. Clearly the Ethereum network is the underlying issue but at the end of the day the feeds run by the team failed to set the price correctly.

>>24818037
>>24818133
Why do they even have to pretend they're getting hacked? aren't people going to be pissed off enough to go murder them regardless of any assbackwards shallow narrative they're trying to sell?
Grug don't give a fuck who din du it, he just wants to punch someone.

>>24819433
Checked, you tell me

>>24819705
>The nodes didn't adjust and increase their gas/ran out of ETH.
Some of them, which is entirely attributable to lack of scaling on ETH’s part nonetheless.
They probably had a hard gas expense limit set.

Many nodes did keep up with the exorbitant gas fees, and still couldn’t get their transactions through.

>>24819705
>but at the end of the day the feeds run by the team failed to set the price correctly
They set the price absolutely correctly, but the L1 failed to actually deliver them.

>>24818133
>Insiders at Maker must be planning an attack on some contract within Maker's system and make off with hundreds of millions in Ether
This.

It's the only way to explain their stubbornness about using their extremely intransparent "secret oracle" system that has had multiple failures already.

>>24819999
Nice quads, but wasted

>>24820018
tNikKunkel has entered the chat

>>24818037
>it's not an optimal design
>anti-pattern
this guy should go back to doing webdev with microservices inside 5 layers of vms

>>24818466
This is only possible because burger boi subsidizes everyone, it's not real

>>24820208
Sergey is the contract operator (the only one at this early stage of mainnet), and contract operators are supposed to be the ones paying the nodes.

And the end users are supposed to pay the contract operator (if the two are different parties); which they do, see pic.

Having seen Chainlink's resiliance, reliability, ease of integratiom (and even CL team offering to help); refusing to consider using Chainlink at this point - following numerous attacks on defi platforms - is either colossal stupidity and arrogance on their part, or a conscious decision as bad actors to cream off money from their users. There's no way this isn't a huge red flag. They could possibly mitigate it by providing a proper reason for not using CL, but instead they provide this ridiculous "for YEARS" response which is even more of a signal to run for the hills. They'll get away with it though because there's just such a lack of understanding about above from their users, the final comment in the OP screen shows a fundamental lack of any understanding of how oracle problem relates to decentralisation.

>>24820259
This.
I'm guessing the bigger the project, the bigger the ego.

Pic related, Compound's oracle failure from late November.

>>24818308
I don't really see why Chainlink lied about this. The Chainlink feeds went down that day because the gas price updater was capped at 50 gwei. See the commit and its date:
https://github.com/thodges-gh/cl-gas-updater/commit/50abd21b38a17c2ca6420f5a51e2e07a513ba632
So all data feeds went out for multiple hours because Chainlink couldn't foresee that Ethereum gas prices could exceed 50 gwei. Simply increasing this parameter didn't solve the issue instantly because the transaction queues of node wallets were already congested with hundreds of unconfirmed transactions and they didn't know how to clear that.

I think it's perfectly fine that such an event has occurred, but I find the lies and deception around it unacceptable.

>>24820672
Exactly. It's just like the xau/xag issue where they didn't have enough parties checking the contracts prior to deployment. They've learnt from it and we can all move on.
Good to be learning this stuff with DeFi of course. The perfect testing ground.

>>24820722
No they didn't learn anything, which is why this happened soon after https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/76986/chainlink-nodes-attack-eth
I can blackpill you about what has actually happened here too if you want.

>>24820672
>I don't really see why Chainlink lied about this.
When did Chainlink "lie" about any of this?
Post source.

>So all data feeds went out for multiple hours because Chainlink couldn't foresee that Ethereum gas prices could exceed 50 gwei.
It's not about an inability to "foresee" high gas prices; it's about an unwillingness by some nodes to pay too much because of ETH's lack of scaling.
And a number of nodes did keep paying the gas fees out of their own pockets.

>>24820722
The only thing to "learn" from black Thursday is that ETH needs scaling.
Chainlink performed perfectly while lesser oracles (like Maker) shat the bed.

>>24818037
Nik sounds salty and sour, almost comedic.

>>24820762
Let me clarify: Chainlink told all node operators to use the application that I linked. They all did. They all went out because of that and then they couldn't fix it because they didn't know how to. No one was able to pay their way out of this.

>>24820782
>They all did. They all went out because of that
Wrong.

>>24820835
1- I don't care about what shills say, Chainlink users would rather go down with it. My information is first hand.
2- You need at least 14 oracles to be up to do an update. So it doesn't matter if 3 nodes (at least that's how I remember it) were able to respond after an hour, they can't trigger a data feed update.

>>24820761
>https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/76986/chainlink-nodes-attack-eth
The oracles never stopped working, you dolt.
The attackers stress tested the network, and showed its resilience.

>>24820880
So you want the blackpill?

>>24820894
Blackpill me please desu senpai

>>24820879
>I don't care about what shills say
That guys is from Aave.
And they're not the only ones saying Chainlink did keep working.
There's also other users like bZx, see pic.

>You need at least 14 oracles to be up to do an update
Ideally, yes. But this was an ETH congestion crisis, anon. Circumstances were far from ideal.

>>24820894
you:
>haha Chainlink failed

reality:
>Chainlink kep working perfectly

you:
>h-had enough?

lmao

>>24820761
what has actually happened

>>24820931
>T. pic related

>>24820957
The nodes were spammed with useless requests.
They paid the extra gas fees to deal with these requests while finding a way to stop the spam, and the network itself didn't even hiccup.

>>24820894
spill the beans

>>24820971
Yes.

The Maker oracle is unironically the reason why I NEVER use DAI
If they switch to Chainlink I might start using it.

>>24818037
And now Chainlink should pay someome to manipulate their oracle properly

>>24820920
Happy to oblige you anon. A Chainlink oracle node has to respond to a request with a minimum of 400,000 gas limit (though it's set as 500,000 at the node)
https://github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink/blob/develop/evm-contracts/src/v0.4/Oracle.sol#L17
This is because you don't really know what the function that you will be fulfilling will be, it can be an aggregator or anything else. So as the oracle node, you have to make sure that you make the transaction with a large enough gas limit so that it doesn't revert.

The problem here is that 500,000 gas * 250 gwei (for example) is much larger than anything you can reasonably ask for a request (say 0.1 LINK). So what oracles did until this attack was to cross their fingers and hope that the requester doesn't use too much gas, and Chainlink data feeds were built using such oracles.

There are two incentives for such an attack:
1- Bring down Chainlink data feeds
2- Have oracles mine gas tokens

Luckily for Chainlink, the attacker was aiming for 2. If they aimed 1, it would 100% bring down all Chainlink data feeds for multiple hours exactly because of this >>24820672 Node operators can't be expected to fix problems fast. The solution was closing off all nodes to public requests and only whitelisting requester contracts. The problem is that there is not even a node API for doing this, so node operators had to connect to their node databases directly, run some SQL scripts and restart their nodes.
In summary, what Chainlink did wrong this time was that they couldn't foresee that they would be the target of an attack.

Now production Chainlink oracles can't receive requests from the public anymore because of this and this can't be fixed without changing the whole protocol. This is probably fine for Chainlink because they are not planning for their protocol to be used by anyone but themselves, but there is also this smokescreen about "muh stress test" which is disguising a serious existential problem.

>>24821071
ok burak

>>24821071
>what oracles did until this attack was to cross their fingers and hope that the requester doesn't use too much gas
You do realize the requester is Chainlink itself, right?

>Luckily for Chainlink, the attacker was aiming for 2.
Nice headcanon.

>exactly because of this >>24820672
To use that angle of attack, the attackers would have to take down ETH like black Thursday did.

>>24818190
He's gone anon. He dumped all his Maker and left.

>>24821152
You can receive requests from the public unless you put ALL of your jobs behind a whitelist

>To use that angle of attack, the attackers would have to take down ETH like black Thursday did.
What I mean is even when provided with instructions it takes hours for the majority of the node operators to fix the issue

>>24821212
>You can receive requests from the public unless you put ALL of your jobs behind a whitelist
>It is, however, worth noting that whitelisting is the temporary solution

>>24821212
>You can receive requests from the public unless you put ALL of your jobs behind a whitelist
Yes, but we're talking about Chainlink network jobs.
Chainlink is the sole contract operator at this stage of mainnet, and the only requester when it comes to the Chainlink network.

Gas prices were already high at the time the attack started, and were in fact the reason why the attack happened.
The spamming is what drove up the gas price even higher.
This wasn't a matter of the requester simply "using" too much gas, he was ramping up gas cost with ETH congestion.
He was exploiting ETH more than Chainlink.

>What I mean is even when provided with instructions it takes hours for the majority of the node operators to fix the issue
This happened in the dead of night for the vast majority of operators, and the issue was still resolved in two hours.

This was a stress test which Chainlink passed with flying colors.

>>24820259
>resilience
chainlink has none of it. it's a centralized system that hasn't been tested by the things decentralized blockchains are guarding against, government interference/censorship etc.
>reliability
this is chainlink's strong point right now. during years of growing pain for smart contracts, relying on a centralized service that markets itself as decentralized will beat building actual decentralized services
but if you're building for the long run, or CLAIM to be building for the long run, it's counterproductive to put all your eggs in a shoddy thirdparty basket. objectively most defi projects fall into the later half, so the chainlink vs the world is a bunch of scammers on both sides hoping to outscam each other

>>24821258
Yes, the current solution is using flux aggregators, which requires mutual trust between the oracle and the aggregator contract owner. The problem right now is not being able to do public requests.

>>24821295
>it's counterproductive to put all your eggs in a shoddy thirdparty basket. objectively most defi projects fall into the later half, so the chainlink vs the world is a bunch of scammers on both sides hoping to outscam each other
based and chainlink-is-dogshit-pilled

>>24821296
Won't this be solved or at least mitigated by ocr / tsigs?

>>24821295
>chainlink has none of it.
Anon, Chainlink was the absolute best-performing oracle during the March gas crisis.
Chainlink also resisted multiple attacks against it with flying colors.

>Chainlink is centralized
Chainlink was launched with three independent nodes each calling a different source.

>it's counterproductive to put all your eggs in a shoddy thirdparty basket
Chainlink is a collection of many third parties.
And it's the only oracle solution that hasn't ever shit the bed, unlike the in-house oracles of Maker, Compound, bZx, Harvest, Value, ...

Cope.

>>24821296
Chainlink had been rolling out the flux aggregator contract for months already before the spam attack.

>>24821409
>Chainlink was the absolute best-performing oracle
dude, reading comprehension, he's talking about decentralized protocols:
>it's a centralized system that hasn't been tested by the things decentralized blockchains are guarding against

>Chainlink was launched with three independent nodes each calling a different source.
There are no independent node operators servicing any data feeds. They are all hand-selected by Chainlink and have a Slack channel and regular meetings. Top lel.

>Chainlink is a collection of many third parties.
Who do you think are the third-parties here? Node operators? You aren't an independent third-party if you're selected and ordered around by a central authority (Chainlink/Sergey).

>Cope.
No, sire, your post is pure cope.

WE

>>24821071
You’re basically saying that the whole Chainlink oracle network is currently permissioned by the core Chainlink team through this whitelist? So I need to email papa Sergey and get his ok if I want to use any Chainlink oracle?

The absolute state.

>>24821644
checked and yes. when people say chainlink is centralized, it's not a meme at all.

>>24821525
Yep.
iExec oracles are the best.
SGX/TEE/Staking enabled.

>>24821644
>the whole Chainlink oracle network is currently permissioned by the core Chainlink team through this whitelist
the gradual shift to more decentralization as the networks grows was communicated like this since day 1 retard. the goverance tokens are all meme school projects, with some whales acting on the behalf of their own financial interests 1st. sergay builds it and hands the control over to a technocracy like group of node operators

>>24821874
>the gradual shift to more decentralization as the networks grows
>1st. sergay builds it and hands the control over to a technocracy like group of node operators
actually believing this makes you the retard, sir

>>24821495
Sergey won't ever hand it over. Sergey will make a megacorp out of it. What's the control of the network through which all secure data in the world is transferred worth? Trillion. Sergey will be the richest person in the world in 10 years time.

>>24821898
YOU HAD 3 YEARS
to either buy or fuck off.
i would have taken the bait if you posted this in may 2018 but now
go solve the oracle problem yourself or buy BAND or something

>>24821495
>dude, reading comprehension, he's talking about decentralized protocols:
He literally said Chainlink has no resilience.
Reading comprehension lmao.

>There are no independent node operators servicing any data feeds.
All node operators are independent.
They always were from the very beginning.

>They are all hand-selected by Chainlink
>You aren't an independent third-party if you're selected and ordered around
Chainlink is the contract operator, they're supposed to hand select the nodes for their contract(s) and set the parameters.

God damn you're dumb.

>>24821898
You are the retard thinking decentralization is as easy as turning on a button peepoo

>>24821644
>>24821658
>>24821665
>>24821898
>>24822029
Right now the only contracts on mainnet are the ones run by Chainlink as the contract operator.

And contract operators are supposed to select their nodes and set the contract parameters for the nodes to live by.

>>24820672
I'll tell you what the takeaway here is. Chainlink will migrate over to a brand new chain that scales (probably Avalanche) and absolutely BTFO all the Ethereum cucks.

>>24822138
Chainlink is actively working on 9 chains right now, and just launched off-chain reporting.

>>24818037
This will be the death of chainlink. Projects are realizing that it's useless in addition to token not being needed

>>24822154
so how is chainlink going to transition into being decentralized (as the other anon above >>24821071 explained, its centralized right now)

>>24822175
>Maker's in-house oracle craps out
>"this will be the death of Chainlink"

>>24821380

Yep and its literally the biggest fattest elephant in the room that every fucking cretin like>>24821295
>>24821212
always ignore for the past year or so of chainlink post mainet.

They never ever ever acknowledged that chainlink is literally a beta product atm, and it still more reliable a solution than all these competitors. The same faggots continue to ignore the fact that from day one chainlink has set out to have a more complete network than it is now and they aren't finished yet, and those last parts nullify all their arguments, so they just pretend that it will never complete.

>>24821071
You're the classic example of a charlatan. Lmfao.

>>24822179
>its centralized right now
The contracts are obviously meant to be centralized.
Contract operators choose the nodes they want, and set the parameters.

Stop being this colossally stupid.

>how is chainlink going to transition into being decentralized
By enabling third-party contracts on mainnet.
They will probably do this once things like staking, reputation, TEEs, ... allow for non-KYC nodes.

>>24822227
>They never ever ever acknowledged that chainlink is literally a beta product atm, and it still more reliable a solution than all these competitors.
This.
Even in its absolute most basic form, with only aggregation being live on mainnet, Chainlink was already by far the most reliable and resilient oracle out there.

>>24818037
You can't expect someone on their "Oracle Team" to not defend his very job.

>>24822233
this, it's unironically api3 fudding here

muh air nodes and github with 600 commits, fuck off

>>24822275

If defending your job means childish rants and attacks on competitors what does that say about the necessity of your work?

>>24822275
yeah, the actual founder of Maker is very much in favor of using Chainlink, see pic.

Maker's in-house oracle devs have massively overinflated egos and apparently too much power for Maker to simply switch to Chainlink. And it's costing them.

>>24818037
they are moving over to Tellor anyway some time in the future

>>24820259
we're still in the phase of misleading users. Users in which, in all honesty, shouldn't be apart of the decision making process so early on. Investors are poisoning their own projects.

>>24819628
>>24819693
>>24819602
Chainlink did not fail - certain nodes failed. If a node you used failed because they charge less and dont pay when there's network congestion, then you should pay for a better node.

>>24822435
>certain nodes failed
Not really.
They simply weren't willing to pay the higher gast costs.

>If a node you used failed because they charge less and dont pay when there's network congestion, then you should pay for a better node.
Exactly.

Pee pee poo poo
Pee
Poo
Poo

>>24821071
...except that wouldn't bring down chainlink data feeds at all, and there's no incentive for making the oracles "mine" gas tokens
holy fuck the lack of technical literacy by fudders is amazing at times
A+ for effort, F- for actual content

I REPEAT.. HOURLY, NO MINUTELY FUCKING REMINDER: NO PRICE ACTION FOR YOU LINKLETS THIS MONTH (December now kek) OR EVER
>mfw biz fell for the assblaster, landlord link, and drunkanon LARPs
>mfw Gonser brought on board to NDA the office harassment victims on the blockchain
>mfw Keenan Olsen "community manager" has a OKR about biz content (KEK?)
>mfw years, no DECADES will go by before R&D produces a working prototype. 3 years in, still not a final whitepaper
>mfw uptrend inevitable for chink coins BAND, DOS, and DIA that are months, no YEARS ahead in terms of development
>mfw brainlets don't realize they're being dumped on, or (MY FUCKING SIDES) think it's a good thing
>mfw linklets admit they know it's centralized finally but think it will magically become decentralized overnight even though IT HAS BEEN THREE YEARS AND THEY STILL HAVEN'T GOT A FINAL WHITEPAPER
mfw
MFW
MY FUCKING FEELINGS WHEN

>>24823410
Nostalgia

>>24818037
Chainlink is a scam. No legit company use them.

The Google partnership has been proven to be fraud. So was Swift, Oracle, Docusign, etc. Why won't you accept that Chainlink is a fraud and that no real company will actually work with them?

>>24824007

>>24818037
LeL

They never learn

>>24822324
I don't care about the underlined parts but what's nice about the post you screenshotted is that it's a good and real-world example of why to use the LINK token for oracle payments/staking, instead of just eth.

could somoene spoonfeed like im 5
whatis this thread all about? i own 100 link which i've bought at 0.25$

>>24826586
>i own 100 link which i've bought at 0.25$
so close, yet so far away

>Silently climbs higher and higher
be a sentinel

>>24826630
i sold 90% and left only 100link at 18$+ and bought XRP & XLM.

was best decision ever.

you didn't sold? SAD!

>>24818037
how do i check the oracle price feed? we should start fucking it up until people leave or they switch

Lol. LINK fags will do anything they can to get more partnerships to keep their scam going. This entire thread is pure cope.

>>24827485
I'd absolutely love to one day see what the person behind comments like this actually looks like/

>>24827729
weird thing to say. wish granted, I guess.

>>24828080
Thanks for making dreams come true

>>24827485
>LINK fags will do anything they can to get more partnerships
Yeah, including forcing Maker to use their own shitty in-house oracles lmaooooo

>>24819602
>learnt
Remember that you are low IQ before posting again please. It’s not just embarrassing for you.

>>24824007
Needs new fud.

>>24818308
are you able to read anon? you are clearly wrong lol