/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>51086790
Can you ask who will be able to stake and how much in v0.1. The blog post wasn't clear at all, what does long term holders mean? How much allocated to them? What is the alarm system, how will retail run this will there be a dedicated software?

>>51086805
That is a very good question, I'll ask something in this direction for sure if it isn't asked by someone else. I just fear that he'll probably shrug it off by saying "We'll post more details when we're closer to release, soon" or something

>>51086870
Yes maybe attack it from the technical angle. Like "people elligible to stake/alert will need to be prepared so they don't mess with the whole project, who are they, do they need to learn how tu run a node, learn go or sol, etc...?"

>>51086887
Good strategy. I think this can be applied to all questions. Even if you ask something purely economical like total supply related, which I'm also thinking about a question but not sure exactly how to formulate it, still try to weave it into something relating to the security of the network or a technical aspect. It's not even because Sergey doesn't like to talk about price, he's been briefed a thousand times how to word shit just to not get any SEC attention.

>>51086790
Can you ask
> Why is the token not needed?

ask him if the rumours about him knowing Vitalik from World of Warcraft are true

how can I invest in offchainlabs like the other vcs? is it possibly to invest directly in chainlinklabs? what is the preferred method of investment in oracles?

>>51086956
>well, uh, fundamentally, you can always just buy the token
>laughs

>>51086790
Call him a fucking nigger

If anyone does actually get a chance to ask Sergey a question, I would love for someone to ask him if he has any statement on the questions around OFAC compliance that gave arisen in the wake of the Tornado Cash arrest.
It’s something that even if he chooses not to offer a response, that’s still a response.
Whereas if you just ask wen staking or wen 1k he can easily deflect, but it would be very, very interesting to know where Chainlink stands in regards to OFAC. Massively important, actually. If Chainlink said they’d support a censored protocol layer then that’s huge.

>>51087033
this

>>51087033
Good question. Especially now that they can't use the blockchain agnostic excuse since they stated they won't support pow forks

>>51086790
>Tough and hard questions regarding tokenomics
... for the one project with arguably the best tokenomics in the space.
You're a retard.

>>51087054
To defend Chainlink on that, they're still blockchain agnostic. They don't have infinite energy to provide technical support and development for every chain that exists. Also in this case they had to give a statement, because all the DeFi and active contracts will be forked and that includes contracts that rely on Chainlink price feeds. It's smart for Chainlink to say "you're on your own, were not taking any blame if you fuck up", Chainlink can still be used by every chain but some are so irrelevant that they have to keep up with adapters and integrations themselves.

>>51087033
I agree this is a very interesting and hard question. I'm sure Sergey has put thought into this and I'm looking forward to hearing his answer.

>>51087054
>they stated they won't support pow forks
So write your own adapter for pow forks, dumbass.

>>51086790
Ask them how they will secure funding after their tokens run out. Maybe ask them directly if going public is in the cards. Side question: How big are the operating costs every year? They hired quite a lot of people.

>>51087096
>>51087126
this

>>51086790
Can you please ask what's the catalyst for moving from v0.1 to v1.0 staking?

>>51087096
Yes that's why it's a good question, if there's an OFAC/uncensured fork they will have to choose. This is very relevant

>>51087185
It's clearly described in the blogs; they're going to add more feeds and features like slashing as time goes on, just like how they expanded mainnet.

>>51087185
oh good one

>>51087126
Lol why are you this agressive over this ? I just stated what they did I don't give a fuck. It's just now they've set a precedent that they will be choosing between forks

>>51087192
So your interpretation is that it will be a gradual transition to v1.0, instead of a sudden transition?

>>51087201
>Lol why are you this agressive over this ?
I'm not a aggressive, you're just a dumbass.

>they will be choosing between forks
For their own feeds, yes. Not for the protocol.
You can build whatever feed you want on whatever chain you want.

>>51087189
I guess it is interesting but now that i think about it, it's not like Chainlink will or can shut itself off from chains. It's created in a way where any chain can use it, again it's just about whether the Chainlink foundation actively helps with development and trouble shooting and updating. Theoretically you could spin up your own rogue chain and use Chainlink feeds yourself if you want, without ever interacting with someone from the team directly or asking for permission

>>51087216
From the actual blog:
>After sufficient validation from in-production usage and community feedback, a v1 release will introduce additional functionality such as the slashing of stake for stronger cryptoeconomic security and the incorporation of user fees as rewards.
>Furthermore, a v2 release will explore introducing loss protection to help protect participating sponsors when a supported oracle network deviates from its SLA.

>>51087218
>>51087220
Yes. The question to Sergey is which fork will Chainlink Labs support? This is relevant. I think you've been broken down by years of fud and get very defensive over tiny things, yes you can build on any chain but this is an opportunity to ask Sergey about what they will provide support to.

>>51087242
>The question to Sergey is which fork will Chainlink Labs support?
They already told you: the PoS version. You acknowledged this yourself earlier itt.

God you're dumb.

>This is relevant.
Maybe. To some.
But it changes nothing about Chainlink being blockchain agnostic.

>>51087261
So you just didn't read. The question is "in the event of an OFAC compliant vs uncensored fork, which one would CL choose to provide support to? “

See, you're so worried someone is fudding you don't even read the posts you're replying to.

>>51087242
don't bait yourself. they support paying customers who support themselves. post merge eth and dapps will be no exception

>>51087285
I was replying to you saying Chainlink isn't blockchain agnostic.
And do you really think he's gonna just ignore US regulations on the matter?

>>51087231
Thanks anon.

>>51087315
I would like to hear him answer this question. Sometimes his way to answer questions is surprising and interesting. Not always, sure.

>>51086790
this gay ass coin will moon in ten years time when the illuminati bankers are ready and you've sold, "silent mode" or whatever it is on steroids
insane price appreciation of the token is actually detrimental to the security of the network
>t. block 478

>>51087354
>I would like to hear him answer this question
"So what we at Chainlink have decided is to completely ignore US regulations on the matter, it's just good business".

Great question, bro.

>>51086940
This is actually a pertinent question lmfao. We need this for the lore.

>>51087362
Just you framing validators not censoring txs as being not legally compliant shows how a midwit you are. I'd rather here an answer from him on that

>>51087380
If a certain fork/chain is not compliant, then Chainlink will probably not be using it for their feeds. What do you think?

>>51087388
Who said an uncensored fork wod not be compliant, compliant to what? You have it all figured out uh genius maybe you should run chianlink

>>51087410
see >>51087033
>ask him if he has any statement on the questions around OFAC compliance

>>51087362
It’s not as simple as that. The thing with truly decentralised infrastructure is that once it is out in the wild it can be literally impossible to rein in. You can fuck with rpc endpoints and front ends until the cows come home, but something like Univ2 will exist in an immutable form for as long as the Ethereum Network exists.
Chainlink has a lot of influence, and a lot of scope to indicate where it plans to fall on the spectrum. From the enthusiastic boot lickers/profit maxis like FTX and flashbots, all the way to the decentralisation maxis who are currently working to engineer their way around every attempt at government coercion.
That’s not even a binary decision, there are a huge number of nuanced stances along that spectrum, and as of now it’s very unclear where Chainlink would actually choose to land. I’m sure they know that their decision on this has monumental significance for all of Web3. It’s one of the reasons some devs see Chainlink as one of the great existential weaknesses to crypto along with AWS and infura. Because so much relies on it.

>>51087422
Not my question retard god you're retarded
See >>51087285
>The question is "in the event of an OFAC compliant vs uncensored fork, which one would CL choose to provide support to? “

>>51087440
Chainlink the protocol can be applied to any chain by anyone.
Chainlink the contract operator has to be compliant.

>>51087442
Do you really think Chainlink the contract operator is going to just ignore OFAC compliance?
Also, I'm pretty sure OFAC compliance doesn't apply to entire chains, but to transactions involving listed wallets.

What timezone is that in and do I need a twitter account to watch?

>>51087459
>Do you really think Chainlink the contract operator is going to just ignore OFAC compliance?
I’m saying there’s a huge amount of nuance in terms of how Chainlink both reacts and frames its reaction to the Tornado Cash sanctions, such that their response will be very interesting and impactful on a level that is far more sophisticated than the binary outcome of whether they comply or not.

>>51086909
rolling

>>51087482
How? They literally can't do anything but do whatever they can to comply.

>>51087493
Take FSS for example. Do DONs scan for OFAC compliance when they do transaction ordering? Is that the responsibility of that role? What if Chainlink say that credible neutrality and privacy are fundamental components of transaction ordering and that if FSS dons censor then bad actors, and good, will just go elsewhere? Does Chainlink broadly comply with OFAC but build open source tools that can’t be controlled in that sense? Do they enthusiastically adopt OFAC and tell others to fall in line?
My whole point is that there are a huge number of hypotheticals that will be answered just by Chainlink being asked, regardless of their reply or lack thereof.

>>51087639
> Do they enthusiastically adopt OFAC and tell others to fall in line?
This is such a bullshit loaded question lmao
As if anyone has a fucking choice.

>>51087665
Like talking to a fucking brick wall…

>>51087467
I think this shows my time zone so CET. And I have never seen non account listeners in spaces so yeah you probably need to make an account, it's audio only tho and will probably get covered live by biz

>>51087054
Disagree here. In order for Chainlink staking to be live, it needs to also be a validator or a node within the mainchain it’s operating on. If Chainlink launches on a POW network, then it’s nodes on that network will also have to be POW, which turns Chainlink from being ESG compliant and “green” and it would essentially double the amount of energy consumption for example if it was on ethPOW. ETH as a POS network becomes green and by default so does Chainlink. This would also play into the role of CCIP. Considering the role of CCIP is to be a communication protocol between chains, meaning there must be validators active on the mainchain, and this turns Chainlink into the most scalable, secure, modular and cheapest “chain”.

>>51087691
Thanks, will keep an eye at it

>>51087665
>we don't talk to exchanges
>partners with celsius
why would you trust anything they say regarding ofac compliance? of course they will serve lip to full legal compliance, regardless of intent. however, incentives lie toward strict compliance on a customer by customer basis. random dapps can probably get away with it. enterprises, not so much.

>>51086790

>>>/b/884496981

go to b and explain to them what chainlink does and what is effect of ayylmaos on blockchain technology

congress supposedly admitted that aliens exist or someshit heck if i know

its an interesting thread if nothing else

>>51087691

pls decode this shizo post, the heck is this

>>51087687
Except he's right.

>>51087033
probably just saying it’s opensource and while there isn’t and can’t be official support if someone chooses to use his own don there is nothing to stop them
(they just wont have reliable pice feeds)

would be good if someone records it as doesn't look like the chainlink social media guy running it does so normally
>>51087459
right, they can claim independence as anyone can set up a don. but yeah, for the dons they sponsor and curate they can fall into line. meh
as for questions
1) what relationship does chainlink have with the ethereum foundation? (some big names at smartcon now, would be good to get an early indication)
2) can you expand on the Partner Growth Program (PGP) from the june staking blogpost? what projects are involved? https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-staking-roadmap/

>>51086790
Ask them about their relation with their enterprise sponsor

>>51086790
Ask him what happened to Mixicles, Town Crier, DECO, CCIP, Staking, Enterprise deals.

Ask him where the money went if Chainlink is profitable and why he resumed selling?

ask what his favourite burger is

What music does Sergey listen to

Sergey, if you and I are involved in a threeway and we were spitroasting a woman (male) and we locked eyes would you look away or stare me down?

Ask him about the diversity makeup of his devs and how many black bvlls are actively involved in writing code and creating ideas. Berate him for being a racist and not doing more to ensure that the dev team is thoroughly blacked

Oh, can you ask him if it's true that the staking release was dependent on the Merge? It's a moot point by now, but still we're curious.

>>51087710
>we don't talk to exchanges
Said no-one at Chainlink, ever.

>>51088631
newfag detected the community mods would always say exchanges list LINK of their own volition

>>51086790
Fuck off back to Twitter faggot

>>51086790
honestly your best bet at this point? ask him if he is satoshi nakamoto and pray that he says yes. nobody cares about tokenomics or staking or CCIP or any of that gay crap. if you want the price line to move. you need to try and generate hype for this project because at the moment this thing is totally dead in the water.

>>51086790
>um excuse me good ser why did you shill celsius and talmudnomics bancor to all of our OG link holders that lost all their money? please promise to us that you are never going to give us bad advice again when 3% apy staking gets released in 900 years.
yeah no, fuck this coin man im sick of this gay shit and every coper in here thinking that smartcon is going to save them needs to immediately rope

>newfag detected

>>51086940
but for real ask him what kind of games he used to play, then hint at vitalik playing wow

>>51089251

>>51089251

This is so tiresome. When will it end? I guess I'm left with nothing but to wait for a fucking eternity.

>>51089251

>>51089251

Can someone record it, it’s at 4am for Ausfags and I’m not staying up for this shit

>>51088188
Don't worry anon, I'll send in my resume when I'm worthy of working for them.

2 things:

1. Can someone please record the talk? Twitter doesn't do it natively.

2. With CCIP, protocols will trust it to transact and custody their tokens. Given that this shows the protocol is trusted, does he forsee a future where CCIP acts more like a bank with electronic funds? I.e. rather than transferring tokens each time across a bridge, that protocols would query CCIP to verify and transfer user's funds? As a user, if you trust your tokens to the protocol, why not custody them there? Protocols could theoretically even leave funds on CCIP and permission them there, drastically lowering gas fees.

chainlink is a jewish scam to steal peoples money. the main guy is a jew scheme operator robbing people . thats it

Wonder what they mean by “demo” here. Since it’s Ari I can’t but be a bit skeptical and think it’s just going to be another round of a PowerPoint with Alice and Bob with some arrows pointing to Chainlink nodes and some other bullshit. No actual working implementation.

>>51086790
I want to know what happens when we stake with what seems to be a credible company but they turn out to be a bad actor. Terms say that person loses all staked linkies. So is there a chance thousands of us stake with some shifty organization and get Lehman Brothered to oblivion?

>>51086790
One thing I am wondering about is the SmartCon advertising we are currently seeing.
I have never been to a crypto event and don't really have a network of people in this field, but at the same time I am only an investor at the moment.

There are a lot of high profile speakers in this SmartCon and it would be interesting to see what they have to say, but it's difficult to justify spending a lot of money to travel there while being in a bear market and I initially planned to watch the live stream instead.

Would it be worth it to still try to attend the real event this year?
Did Sergey have a similar experience the first time he went to a crypto event on his own of not knowing what to expect?

All the advertising we are seeing makes me think we are reaching a critical moment for Chainlink and it will become a lot harder to attend their future events for those who miss this one.

>>51090321
What advertising? I haven't seen any.

>>51090269
Yeah this is a good question.
Who's going to stake if we have a chance to randomly lose 100% of our Link? It's no safer than staking on Celsius or Bancor then.

>>51088954
That’s very different from saying “we don’t talk to exchanges” you dimwit.

>>51090350
>but what if there’s a chance something bad happens????
Buddy an airplane could fall on your head right now.

>>51089919
> With CCIP, protocols will trust it to transact and custody their tokens.
>this shows the protocol is trusted
By this logic, Bitcoin and blockchain itself are trusted as well.
This place is just filled to the brim with complete morons.

>>51090410
Yeah, odds are low something like this could happen but what if it does.

>There's a clause that says bad info will lead to you losing your link
>Wh...Why is the clause ther...
>Don't worry about it, it'll never happen.
>But why is the clause there though?
>Don't worry about it, blah blah, plane could fall on you.

Yeah, fuck that noise, i'm going to worry.

>>51090511
The clause is there because bad info is bad for the end users lmao
Are you having some kind of mental issue?

>>51090528
And bad info will possibly lead to me LOSING MY LINK. So I want to know more about that. Are you dense?

frud kike sells fraud crypto to suckers on jewish propganda site selling fraudulent ad rates to gambling d buyers who always lose. arent you guys sick of the jew bullshit? run them down run them out incinerate them in totality

>>51090540
>And bad info will possibly lead to me LOSING MY LINK.
Yes.
That's how staking was described back in 2017.

>>51090540
Isn't there going to be some kind of loss protection/insurance in v2.0, so eventually you won't need to worry about this kind of thing too much.

>>51090511
>>51090540
Buddy here doesn’t understand what collateral is.

>>51090540
just stake with a node operator that has been doing it from the start, and guarantees covering any slashing loss. thats what ill be doing

>>51090540
Well the solution is to run the node yourself. You need to understand that if you’re staking with someone else’s node all bets are off in terms of guaranteeing your staked tokens. Do you not understand that you are agreeing for the node operator to take your tokens for staking and you’re entrusting them with the security and performance of the node? This is why it’s going to be critical for Sergey to hurry the fuck up and make it permissionless, white listing nodes to bootstrap the network was ok, but it cannot be a permanent solution.

>>51090582
So they're promising unlimited Link to cover any losses, don't worry about it anons stake with us.

But i'm the one whose dumb for worrying.

>>51090643
who's. Inb4 some grammar nazi.

>>51090643
You're worrying about something that is an inherent part of collateral as a concept.
You must be underage, there's simply no other way.

>>51090643
ya you should worry about more things. better just stay at home and stay safe. do you eat food that you dont grow yourself? i'd worry about that

>>51090662
Getting attacked like this for a basic question is very telling.

Whatever, bro, go dive cock first into staking with whoever. We'll compare notes in a few years.

>>51090692
Protip: you're not getting "attacked" for worrying about losing your Link when you stake.
You're getting attacked because this is something that seems to be surprising to you.

>>51090730
im starting to think that anon is actually a women

>>51090730
I know what fucking collateral is. I just want to know how fucking safe my link is staking with different providers.

>>51090774
Like what happens if someone's info is bad unintentionally, a glitch or transcription error or something. Am I the only one who gives a shit about stuff like this?

>>51090730
>>51090692
I think what he's getting at is the fact that protecting against slashing of your stake isn't discussed very much here. Sure it's well known that the protection against nodes misbehaving is the threat of getting their link slashed, but that's developed largely from the node perspective. As someone who purely stakes, how are we supposed to know what a node's motivations are? I guess you could go off a node's reputation. Either way, if a node is running largely off staked link provided by others, don't they have less incentive to behave, since the penalty only affects other people's link?

>>51090774
>I know what fucking collateral is
No you don't.
Earlier you were wondering why there's a clause saying "bad info will lead to you losing your link".

>>51090796
>I think what he's getting at
No.
See >>51090803

The very idea of losing his collateral in case of default is what got him so bad.

>>51090803
Did I say that, brainlet? Read my fucking original question. How are we protected against bad actors we don't know are bad actors? Furthermore, what if the info is unintentionally bad?

>>51090862
>Did I say that
Literally yes.

>>51086790
Will average retail link holders have any method of staking in v0.1?

simple as.

Ask that fat fuck for an official apology for shilling celsius

>>51090890
Literally in the blog.

>>51090818
Ah I get it, you're just one of those spergs that likes to power trip when you finally get a chance to say someone is wrong. Must not happen very often for you lol, have fun with it

>>51090907
You reek of reddit.

>>51090907
Samefag harder lmao

>>51090888
Your lack of reading comprehension isn't my problem, slick. That was a response to an anon saying "Yeah the clause is there, but don't worry about it because it'll never be used."

Try to keep up. Or fuck off, no skin off my dick either way.

>>51090907
tits or GTFO

>>51090947
OK, are you going to sell your link, then? What's your plan if you're too pussy to stake it?

>>51090963
Damn, you're right, that's what it is.

>>51090947
You were literally (LITERALLY) asking why that clause was even there.

>>51090928
Absofuckinlutely been here longer than you bud. It's not a big deal though, just wanted to have a discussion but this dude is sperging out lol

>>51090906
ok then anon...

What subset of retail link holders will have access to stake in v0.1?

(this is not cleary defined anywhere. just muh "community members" which are not retail investors they are banks, node ops, DTCC ets..)

>>51090979
I was LITERALLY responding to someone saying Yeah, its there, don't worry about it. You understand rhetorical questions, don't you dicklick? Or are you one of those sub90 iqlets i've been hearing about lately?
>>51090410

Keep up. Or Fuck off. Your choice, hoss.

>>51091010
>Yeah, its there, don't worry about it.
That poster didn't say not to worry about it.

And it doesn't change the fact that you were literally wondering why such a clause would even be there.

>>51090988
>Absofuckinlutely been here longer than you bud.
Go back.

>>51091074
Tee hee! I won't, because I never was! And I'm here for ever. And I won't stop typing like that because it makes you so angry! Nigger!

>>51090451
>By this logic, Bitcoin and blockchain itself are trusted as well
Correct. The difference is that Bitcoin and blockchain itself (whatever that means) don't provide a crosschain interoperability mechanism, which is kinda the point. Keep up.

>>51091010
you are literally responding to the autistic circular reasoning link shill that inhabits these threads and goes back and forth with "fudders" for 90 pbtid
harping on endlessly about nuances and semantics is his favorite tactic

>>51086790
Director of Marketing at Chainpool Labs here.

Ok jannys let's shut this one down.

**NOTICE THE THREAD HAS NOW BEEN HIJACKED BY BULLSHIT IN AN ATTEMPT TO DERAIL IT FROM ITS INITIAL PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING QUESTIONS FOR SN**

>>51091109
Yeah, it's occurring to me now i'm basically falling for more bait to shit up a Link discussion thread.

Anyway, anyone else have more questions for Serge? Back on topic, lads.

>>51091109
t. 90 pbtid fudder who keeps getting BTFO

That retard had no idea what collateral was, there’s nothing nuanced about that.

>>51091158

>>51091166
>t. autistic retard on his other id
(((we))) all know who you are retard

>>51091104
Lmao my dude, lmao

>>51091193
I was the first one to call the collateral retard out.

>>51091212
you are the same retard that finally realized he has to switch ids to not get exposed in every fucking thread.
>I was da first
everybody got what he meant except you, fuck off and die

>>51091158
go back >51091005

>>51090786
This. Further, are they going to slash ALL of your staked Link? Like, you could lose 100% of your stack in an instant? Or will they slash just a portion?
Imagine losong everything, no second chances, because the node operator misbehaved (possibly unintentionally).

>>51091239
Literally not how slashing works.

>>51091233
Been here for a while lol
Someone fucked you up good to be this triggered.

>>51091280
>triggered
ironic coming from you, rushing to respond to my post while it was clearly referring to id V+rDYGDZ
ooops, samefag got triggered and exposed again ;')

>>51091233
>>51091109
Stop derailing the thread with your meta spergery.

>>51091319
>quickly, let me post with my original id!
too late, autistic derailing fag
you are the sole reason the quality of link threads has been dropped to shit

>>51091332
>autistic derailing fag
The projection is off the heckin charts.

>>51091395
each and every time you keep giving me (You)s you only reinforce my point
so by all means, keep these seething replies coming

>>51091407
.

>>51091262
How does it work then? You stake with a node op (ie. offer up a collateral) and then if the node op does something wrong, they get their (and your) stake slashed, right?

>>51091665
Yes. Most nodes have been very reliable and their behavior so far wouldn’t cause much slashing but the risk is there. Probably will be insurance at some point.

>>51090338
They had a clip on their youtube channel yesterday.
I received a mail a few days ago with their reduced price offer.

>>51092221
Wow. really pushing the boat out. Really enforces your viewpoint.

>All the advertising we are seeing makes me think we are reaching a critical moment for Chainlink and it will become a lot harder to attend their future events for those who miss this one.

who the fuck are you people and why are you in our threads?

>>51092594
Seething Simeon?
How does it feel to miss out on generational wealth because of your ego?

>>51090796
>if a node is running largely off staked link provided by others, don't they have less incentive to behave, since the penalty only affects other people's link?

They stand to damage their reputation and lose all future staking revenue. Which is worth a lot. It’s the concept of implicit staking. If they fuck up and lose $1m of customer’s link, they also are losing out on hundreds of millions in future profit for themselves

>>51092929
This is how they derail every thread and it works

>>51092929
it's their "job" anon
and they're so obvious and bad at it that it's comical

>>51087054
They don’t support state forks, they have no problem with pow forks

Get an official statement from Sergey on the Bancor situation. Why did Chainlink make videos and articles supporting it? Will they support their rugged users they ushered to the slaughter? Is what Bancor did OK?

>>51087054
you have no idea what you're talking about

>>51093012
I hold chainlink. I am not fudding.

It is just not true they have been doing anymore marketing then normal.

>>51092929
>>51093702
This is your brain on /pol/

oh fuck im already cringing way to hard bros help

>>51094339
this. he is basically a tech billionaire talking to plebs to show "community".

lmao

>>51094055
>y-you're from pol
powerful rebuttal
are you the smartest out of all the serbian rape-babies trying to fud on here?

>>51094055
I haven't been on /pol/ since 2016 yet I still believe the subset of anti Chainlink cultists shitting up these threads congregate somewhere outside of /biz/, like Discord for example or a small cityhall in Bulgaria. I also think it's absolutely hilarious how much it makes this group seethe if you call them out.

>>51094837
>a small cityhall in Bulgaria

>>51087231
>loss protection
I'm having Bancor flashbacks someone help

>>51094837
meds

>>51095441
Case in point

>>51095513

>>51095644
I don't. I do have a fat stack of LINK.

>>51086790
Recap

>Staking: missed it

>CCIP: Our goal is not to release another hackable bridge, 1 billion have already been hacked... CCIP's goal is to be extremely security centered. We're working on beta on testnet with users. Goal: secure standard, not rushing it out the door. More at SmartCon.

>Abstraction layer: CCIP abilities to send messages, communications/controls, like TCP IP, not only token bridge. From existing backends to blockchain and between blockchains. Abstraction layer for all backends and for/between all blockchains. Goal: accelerate our industry, creations of new industries.

>DECO: Glad to say we have completed a proof of concept, should be coming out soon. For regulated DEFI, identity data, can also help prove Sybil resistance, expose bots, etc. Goal: to be the most secure privacy-preserving standard. More announced at SmartCon.

>Demand: We provide concrete services with immediate demand. Standard based on security guarantees. With tokenomics, user fees flow to networks participants. Highest goal: Public good/global standard tech such as TCP IP, Linux, SSL underpinning entire systems + capturing economic value by tokenomics.

>Adoption: Financial industry primed for using blockchain. Recent announcements by DTCC, etc. Increasing adoption in pre-production environments, there will be more announcements from banks we're working with to utilize Chainlink... Derivatives, trillions dollars industry.

>SmartCon: A lot going on. Expect more infos about staking economics 2.0, third party blockchains grants (PGP), Ari will demo FSS, etc...

>>51095762
nice to see you, looking forward to your thread later

>>51094545
>>51094837
You are coping /pol/cels. I bet you think the Jews are behind the vaccine and everything else you don't like in this world. And when someone calls you out on your bullshit, you claim that they're paid shills from the Jewish Internet Defense Force. Get lost, chuds. And take your /pol/ coin with you.

>>51096062
Nice headcanon fren

>>51095762
thanks for the recap stinky frog poster

>>51095762
D U M P E E T

>>51096275
>Nice headcanon, fren

>>51090350
I'm sure there will eventually be some sort of smart contract for insurance for things like that.

>>51096884
It is head canon though. I have seen your post evolve these last few days/weeks. Very interesting to see the cute little narrative form in your head

>>51095762
sounds juicy, thanks for the recap frog anon

>>5109689
insurance for just that in v2.0
https://blog.chain.link/chainlink-staking-roadmap/
ctrl-f 'loss protection'

>>51086790
They will carefully choose the questions and who asks them. Getting staged and gay vibes bros

>>51096960
Yet you don't deny any of this. Do you know how many Chainlink memes there are with Nazi shit? A lot. And even more Chainlink threads devolve into people throwing around the N word - essentially indistinguishable from /pol/.

>>51096960
>>51097075
He's not wrong at all. As they say, "niggers, Jews...BAD NEWS!"

>>51097075
That's just board culture on almost all 4ch boards, newfriend.

So what was the point of that talk again? Zero new information, staged questions, more hyping of things to be released “later”. With all the money they have tied up in payroll youd think someone could explain how to manage perception to Sergey.

He goes off on these tangents for 5-10 minutes and completely loses people. Thats great and all that he is brilliant, I dont think anyone is disputing that. But damn man even the moderator of the chat zoned out and wasnt able to tell him where he was when his connection messed up. That is not a good look

>>51087946
Recording of talk here:
https://voca.ro/15mmqEmeESqt

>>51095762
> literally every point is "x is way further behind than you could possible have thought"

>>51097871
lmao you are moving goal posts again where does it say the moderator of the talk has to be awake???

>>51097871
>>51099293
ccip beta is coming soon to public testnet

>>51099349
> "you thought CCIP might come at smartcon?"
> "well lucky for you we hope to get a beta to testnet by eoy!"

I'm actually fucking close to selling. It's not that I think it will never go anywhere but I think it's going to stay in this fucking pit for years at this point.

>>51099379
>smartcon will be a nothing bug burger and you will eat it
and this is enough for the crypto space to host multiple other conferences during smartcon so they can try and drown out any bullish announcements. really makes you think

>>51099379
i mean, beta on testnet by eoy exceeds my expectations, did you expect them to roll it out without a public test first? my assumptions are eth/usd price feed staking will start around smartcon with some kind of test product, ccip beta comes out november or december, then 2023 will see more staking offerings and ccip full release probably late spring or summer, also deco somewhere in there as a compliance/privacy oracle for tradfi bridging into cryptofi

>>51099452
what sort of functionality would a testnet beta release of deco have?

>>51099435
I'm kind of used to smartcon being a let down desu. This is the first I wasn't going to actually watch but I will be honest I had basically believed the "staking and ccip eoy" promise. Because it being 2022 was already way behind any of the estimations. So to find out we're probably just getting v0.1 of staking in december is just unbelievable. Actually shockingly bad.

I just feel like a fucking idiot holding link for so many years and missing out on tonnes of other investments because I was a married bitch to a project. I kind of still am given my portfolio is 90% link but I'm going to begin work to change that and stop being a lazy retard with my money,

>>51099452
I had just privately prayed that they had been running extensive tests of all this shit behind the scenes to explain away the worrying lack of evidence on pivotal or public testnets. I was just coping by believing that obviously.

>>51099512
i too am feeling the opportunity costs of holding link and tuning in to smartcon feels completely dunning kruger at this point. Chainlink are basically the Star Citizen of crypto

>>51090321
Well, I'm going because I want to get an engineering position in the field. We've obsessed over Chainlink and the crypto space for so long, why not contribute to the adoption since we all benefit from it?

>>51099553
Watching the shit is just painful at this point, I honestly can no longer remember the last time I left a chainlink talk feeling good or positively surprised. It's probably at least back in 2018. Some people will cope with the derivatives chart one but that was totally meaningless even at the time, just "one day we hope!" talk.

I'll admit I didn't even listen to this one which is telling when I used to watch talks from utter vaporware projects just because they had some vague chainlink connection.

>>51099610
*2019

>>51099585
why bother when the next generation batch of Illuminati-trained reptilians in fresh skin suits are just waiting to take the next elevator up from their hidden Deep Underground Military Base and change the world in their image

>>51099610
its better to just forget about the space for awhile and do something else or get more involved by building something and connecting with others. this is the chasm do or die. it would be more exciting for me if there was more to this space than shitcoins nfts and lending algos

>>51099610
>>51099875
Thanks so much bros I just sold all my Chainlink I feel….relieved….as if a heavy and terrible burden has been taken off of my shoulders.

>>51100077
checked based and link pilled unironically. wagmi damn those reptilians and their skin suits. also damn dunning kruger the pleb

>>51099875
>its better to just forget about the space for awhile
I recommend fishing. It’s meditative, active, skilful. You see some beautiful nature, and if everything works out you get a big delicious meal.

>>51097075
>Do you know how many Chainlink memes there are with Nazi shit? A lot.

so what? This may come as a surprise for you but the last generation to give a shit about the holocaust was the boomers and their retiring.

Love those events. Added 50 twitter spammers on the link tags to my block list

Bought this shitcoin cus of /biz/ pajeets shilling it every day now I choke on ppls foreskin to pay rent

Sergey deserves jailtime

>>51095762
It's the first time I heard of trade finance when Sergey said they had 5-6 counter parties and derivatives being easier with only 2 parties.
This is what I wanted to hear with more proof of future adoption from the finance industry and Sergey focusing on these topics.

>>51099293
jej

Sergey was reciting from the Book of Truth when the audio faded. He asked the moderator, a feeble weasel of a faggot called Crypto Mew Two, what verse he was reciting and Mew Two stuttered like a RETARD claiming listeners had heard the verse before and reciting from the Book of Truth resulted in no price action.

!!!

The ceremony had to be halted and the digital fibres were cleansed by high order cultists from the Seventy-Seventh Truth Legion. They performed the Ritual of Fair Sequencing Service on Sergey's modern router and the conduit for Truth was blessed again.

Heil Sergey!!!

Praise Truth!!!

Shame the sinner CryptoMewTwo!!!

Sergey expressed faux-surprise at seeing His visage displayed by the many faithful followers at the Holy Space. Akin to the Mithranic doctrine "Mithras is my only Crown", We are all Sergey is a tried and true practice of stripping one's identity away so that only the Leader remains and it is in the Leader's name we shall act. For His words shall be our words and by His words alone we may speak.

Truth>Trust!!!

DeFi is filled with deceitful sinners and We (Us) are the only way forward.

As part of the Seventy Seventh Legion of Truth it was an honor and a privilege to serve you today Sergey by cleansing your Modem Router in the name of Truth .

>>51102800
>>51102810
kek, this is based

>>51100680
hi newfren. ill give u hint. this is how your portfolio should look like: https://etherscan.io/address/0x3f08f17973ab4124c73200135e2b675ab2d263d9

>>51103434
who is this?

>>51095762
>soon (early beta)
>soon (proof of oncept, aka 2 years away)
>token isn't doing shit right now
>soon
>words, words, demo
Fuck it's been 5 fucking years already

>>51103726
Bro you should try tantric masturbation, make it so you need 6 months to coom and then you just have to jerk off 10 times and suddenly it’s 2027 and you’ve made it.

>>51103726
>token isn't doing shit right now
All transactions ever made on Chainlink mainnet required the token. Each and every single one.

>>51095762
Based doing gods work

>>51091109
>>51091193
>>51091233
>>51091313
>>51091332
>>51091407
>posts nothing but ad-homs, not a single word on topic
>accuses others of derailing

The jew cries out in pain as he strikes you.

>>51103762
All these tokens are subsidies minted for free that Sergey owns.
It's just sell pressure, token is utility less as long as there isn't public staking.
I thought I was pessimistic in january when he said "staking this year", expecting nothing for Q1 and Q2 but I had at least expected we would have a deadline for it by now, instead it's still pie in the sky stuff.

>>51104149
There go the goalposts lmao

>subsidies minted for free
Same with mining fees on BTC, ETH, ...

>>51095762
>smart con
>details on how staking will work will be given
>still not actual staking release yet
>no date for release
what the actual fuck?

>>51093702
Riddle me this - how are they bad at their job if they succeed every time? How are they bad at their jobs if LINK is below $7? How are they bad at their jobs if their employer is solvent again at these prices?

>>51095762
nice

The thing that's making me feel bearish about Smartcon is that Sergey seemed to not really know much about it. He kept saying "I think they're trying/going to do [x] at Smartcon. It should be interesting" as if he didn't really have a hand in what's going on and who's speaking. Based on how he spoke, it's like he only knows about the main main guys (Ari Juels, Swift dude, Ed Felton, etc) but not anything else.

>>51102168
Trade finance isn't always so many counterparties though. Quite often you can have as little as 2 or 3.
OTC derivatives generally involve just 2 counterparties, but if you move to exchange traded derivatives (such as Futures) then obviously it increases to 3 or more once you include a broker and the exchange itself.

>>51106104
Yeah I found that fucking weird as well. I’ve got a feelings it’s just kind of how he talks, as in he tends to avoid talking in absolutes because of various autistic reasons but man I really think he needs to be coached a bit on how to promote this shit. If it wasn’t his conference I could understand, but what the fuck man it’s his own show and he seems pretty indifferent about the whole thing.

>>51106104
>>51106601
Are you still wondering why there were 3 rounds of ticket price cuts? There are more than 130 speakers listed on the page and maybe 6 of them are interesting

>>51106749
What the fuck do you know about selling tickets to fill a venue?

You sit at a desk eating chips all day and you think you know how to plan a huge event? Fucking retard

so uuhhhhh what happend to the twitter space? did absolutely nothing happen? noones talking about it

>>51106104
From the first one it seemed like they're hoping it becomes more of a general blockchain/smart contracts conference and less about chainlink. I'd have to double check but i don't know if they've ever actually used chainlink imagery for it,

>>51108804
It's a chainlink talk post 2019, of course nothing of note happened.

>>51107000
Hi Rory

You're still unbelievably cucked

>>51109920
Dont know who Rory is.

This isnt a Justin Bieber concert, they can do anything with ticket prices. Go back to your hole dumb shit.

>>51095762
lmfao another iteration of Sergey stealing intellectual property, tweaking it and using his network of sucking meth dicks to skim some Burger money off the top.

>>51110025
>Doesn't know who Rory is
>Defending Chainlink

The absolute state of /biz/ in 2022

>>51111523
Is 'Rory' your pet name for Justin Bieber?
I like it.

>>51087185
All of /biz/ OGs selling, that's pretty obvious

>>51111555
>Rory Piant Officially Texas
checked.
who is justin bieber?

>>51097075
>the N word
Fuck off

>>51106104
Lmao he was just trying not to reveal anything, he made it clear you needed a ticket to get the alpha. Ofc he sont say shit.

I traded my link for Bitcoin when it was pumping. With tornado cash incident and the merge, I don't see anything positive surrounding chainlink. I'd rather participate in trade fi because Ethereum is looking absolutely worse by far. They lost the script.

>>51114888
Get alliance block
Micro cap trying to bridge tradfi and defi

>>51086790
ask him when he plans to bamboozle everyone relying on link and force them to buy link to keep using price feeds so that link can be worth 1 gorillion EOY